fulltext - Simple search

Rethinking the lithic blade definition: towards a dynamic understanding
understood as cultures/societies in an anthropological meaning, which has
led to severe misunderstandings (e.g. Kossinna 1936). In changing the focus
1964; Lemonnier 1990) this methodology reveals and traces technological
and social traditions, as well as individual expressions, whereas traditional
morphological analysis primarily reveals stylistic changes. By implement
ing a dynamic understanding of lithic technology and combining this ap
proach with analysis of other cultural aspects, such as subsistence strategies,
architecture and art, archaeologists are enabled to overcome (problematic)
perceptions of lithic artefacts as undisputed, categorical trademarks of “ar
chaeological cultures”. The advantage of this change can introduce light and
shade into our perception of prehistory.
Conclusions and perspectives
prehistoric human intentions as manifested in lithic sequences. The use of
and social aspects of the prehistoric life.
should relate to human behaviour and cognition rather than to chosen met
rical categories. The crucial focus of future research in lithic assemblages
must therefore be to understand and explain `reasons and purposes´ in hu
numbers and statistics to create more archaeological cultures. One step to
wards this goal is to expand our knowledge about prehistoric technology and
the one put forward in this paper) is that they can enable us to dissolve the
problematic focus on “culture concepts” and favour human behaviour and
cognition. Perhaps the most important advantage of changing our artefact
ties, based on the concepts, methods and behaviour of the people who made
them.
295