|
Docente
|
SPINAPOLICE ENZA ELENA
(programma)
Verrà affrontata la Tecnologia litica in tutti i suoi aspetti evolutivi, cognitivi e tecnici.
 Raw Materials and Mobility
- Spinapolice, E. E. (2012). Raw material economy in Salento (Apulia, Italy): new perspectives on Neanderthal mobility patterns. Journal of Archaeological Science, 39(3).
- Féblot-Augustins, J., & Perlès, C. (1992). Perspectives ethnoarchéologiques sur les échanges à longue distance. In APDCA (Ed.), XII rencontres internationales d’Archéologie et d’Histoire d’Antibes (pp. 195?209). Juan les Pins.
- Perlès, C. (1991). Économie des matières premières et économie du débitage: deux conceptions opposées. 25 ans d’études technologiques en préhistoire: Bilan et perspectives, 35-46.
Middle Range Research and Stone Tools
- Binford LR. 1981. Behavioral archaeology and the Pompeii premise. Journal of Anthropological Research 37:195-207.
- Binford LR. 1981. Bones: ancient men and modern myths. New York: Academic Press. 320 p.
- Gifford-Gonzalez D. 1991. Bones are not enough: analogues, knowledge, and interpretive strategies in zooarchaeology. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 10(3):215-254.
- Shea JJ. 2011. Stone tool analysis and human origins research: Some advice from uncle Screwtape. Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews 20(2):48-53.
Typologies
- Andrefsky Chap 4;
- Bordes, F. Typologie du Paléolithique ancien et moyen. Presses du CNRS, 1988.
- Brown JA. 1982. On the structure of artifact typologies. Essays on archeological typology: Evanston, Ill. : Center for American Archeology Press, 1982. p 176-189.
- Debenath A, Dibble HL. 1994. Handbook of Paleolithic Typology. Philadelphia: The University Museum, University of Pennsylvania. 202 p. Chap 1;
- Ford JA. 1954. The type concept revisited. American Anthropologist 56:42-54.
- Spaulding AC. 1953. Statistical techniques for the discovery of artifact types. American Antiquity 18(4):305-313. -Steward JH. 1954. Types of types. American Anthropologist 56:54-57.
- Schiffer MB. 1976. Behavioral Archaeology. New York: Academic Press. 222 p.(Chap 3)
- Shea, J. J. (2014). Sink the Mousterian? Named stone tool industries (NASTIES) as obstacles to investigating hominin evolutionary relationships in the Later Middle Paleolithic Levant. Quaternary International, 350, 169-179.
- Shea, J. J. (2011). Stone tool analysis and human origins research: some advice from Uncle Screwtape. Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews, 20(2), 48-53.
The Bordes-Binford Debate
- Bordes F, de Sonneville-Bordes D. 1970. The significance of variability in Paleolithic assemblages. World Archaeology 2(1):61-73. -
- Barton CM. 1997. Stone tools, style, and social identity: an evolutionary perspective on the archaeological record. In: Barton CM, Clark GA, editors. Rediscovering Darwin: evolutionary theory and archaeological explanation. 7th ed. Washington: American Anthropological Association. p 141-156.
- Sackett JR. 1982. Approaches to Style in Lithic Analysis. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 1:59-112.
- Binford LR. 1973. Interassemblage variability - the Mousterian and the 'functional' argument. In: Renfrew AC, editor. Explanation of Culture Change: Models in Prehistory. London: Duckworth Press. p 227-254.
- Dibble HL. 1987. Interpretation of Middle Paleolithic scraper morphology. American Antiquity Course Schedule and Topics* 52(1):109-117.
The Curation Concept
- Binford LR. 1979. Organization and formation processes: looking at curated technologies. Journal of Anthropological Research 35(3):255-273. -Nash S. 1996. Is curation a useful heuristic. In: Odell GA, editor. Stone Tools: Theoretical Insights Into Human Prehistory. New York: Plenum Press. p 81-97.
- Shott MJ. 1996. An exegesis of the curation concept. Journal of Anthropological Research 52(3):259-280.
- Shott MJ, Sillitoe P. 2004. Modeling use-life distributions in archaeology using new guinea wola ethnographic data. American Antiquity 69(2):339- 355.
- Binford LR. 2001. Where do research problems come from? American Antiquity 66(4):669-678.
- Andrefsky W. 1994. Raw-Material Availability and the Organization of Technology. American Antiquity 59(1):21-34.
- Frison, G. C. (1968). A functional analysis of certain chipped stone tools. American Antiquity, 33(2), 149-155.
- Shott, M. (1989). On tool class use lives and the formation of archaeological assemblages. American Antiquity, 50, 9?30.
- Cahen, D., Keeley, L. H., Van Noten, F. L., Behm, J. A., Busby, C. I., Dunnell, R. C., ... & Movius Jr, H. L. (1979). Stone tools, toolkits, and human behavior in prehistory [and comments and reply]. Current Anthropology, 20(4), 661-683.
- Bleed, P. (1986). The optimal design of hunting weapons: maintainability or reliability? American Antiquity, 51, 737?747.
Technological Organization
- Bamforth DB. 1990. Settlement, raw material, and lithic procurement in the central Mojave Desert. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 9(1):70- 104.
- Milliken S. 1998. The Role of Raw Material Availability in Technological Organization: A Case Study from the south-east Italian Late Paleolithic. In: Milliken S, editor. The Organization of Lithic Technology in Late Glacial and Early Postglacial Europe: BAR.
- Kuhn SL. 1994. A formal approach to the design and assembly of mobile toolkits. American Antiquity 59(3):426-442.
- Morrow TA. 1996. Bigger is better: Comments on Kuhn's formal approach to mobile tool kits. American Antiquity 61(3):581-590.
- Nelson MC. 1991. The study of technological organization. Archaeological Method and Theory 3:57-100.
- Holdaway, S., Douglass, M., 2012. A twenty-first century archaeology of stone artifacts, Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 19, 101-131.
- Riel-Salvatore, J., 2010. A niche construction perspective on the middle–upper paleolithic Course Schedule and Topics* transition in Italy, Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 17, 323-355.
- Douglass, M.J., Holdaway, S.J., Fanning, P.C. & Shiner, J.I. 2008. An assessment and archaeological application of cortex measurement in lithic assemblages. American Antiquity 513-526.
Reduction Sequence and Chaine Operatoire
- Shott MJ. 2003. Chaîne opératoire and reduction sequence. Lithic Technology 28(2):95-105.
- Clarkson C, Hiscock P. 2011. Estimating original flake mass from 3D scans of platform area. Journal of Archaeological Science 38(5):1062-1068.
- Conard NJ, Soressi M, Parkington JE, Wurz S, Yates R. 2004. A unified lithic taxonomy based on patterns of core reduction. South African Archaeological Bulletin 59(179):12-16.
- Tostevin GB. 2011. Levels of theory and social practice in the reduction sequence and Chaine Operatoire methods of Lithic Analysis. PaleoAnthropology 2011:351-375.
- Inizan, M.-L., Reduron-Ballinger, M., Roche, H., Tixier, J., 1999. Technology and Terminology of Knapped Stone, CREP, Nanterre.
- Van Peer P, Bar-Yosef O. 2009. The Chaine Operatoire Approach in Middle Paleolithic Archaeology. Current Anthropology 50(1):103-131.
- Boëda, E. (1994). Le concept Levallois: variabilité des méthodes. Archéo éditions.
- Boëda, E., Geneste, J. M., & Meignen, L. (1990). Identification de chaînes opératoires lithiques du Paléolithique ancien et moyen. Paléo, Revue d'Archéologie Préhistorique, 2(1), 43-80.
Stone Tools and Evolution
- Bettinger RL, Eerkens JW. 1999. Point typologies, cultural transmission, and the spread of bow-and arrow technology in the Prehistoric Great Basin. American Antiquity 64:231-242.
- Bettinger RL. 1997. Evolutionary implications of metrical variation in Great Basin projectile points. In: Barton CM, Clark GA, editors. Rediscovering Darwin: evolutionary teheory and archaeological explanation. 7th ed. Washington: American Anthropological Association. p 177-191.
- Fitzhugh B. 2001. Risk and invention in human technological evolution. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 20(2):125-167.
- Lycett SJ, Norton CJ. 2010. A demographic model for Palaeolithic technological evolution: The case of East Asia and the Movius Line. Quaternary International 211(1-2):55-65.
- Mesoudi A, O'Brien MJ. 2008. The cultural transmission of great basin projectile-point technology I:An experimental simulation. American Antiquity 73:3-28.
- Kuhn SL. 2004. Evolutionary perspectives on technology and technological change. World Archaeology 36(4):561-570.
- Bettinger, R. L. (2009). Macroevolutionary Theory and Archaeology: Is There a Big Picture? Macroevolution in Human Prehistory, Springer: 275-295.
Projectiles or Not
- Shea JJ. 2006. The origins of lithic projectile point technology: evidence from Africa, the Levant, and Europe. Journal of Archaeological Science 33(6):823-846. -Shea JJ, Davis Z, Brown K. 2001. Experimental tests of Middle Palaeolithic spear points using a calibrated crossbow. Journal of Archaeological Science 28(8):807-816. -Shea JJ. 1997. Middle Paleolithic Spear Point Technology. In: Knecht H, editor. Projectile Technology. New York: Plenum Press. p 79-106.
- Holdaway S. 1989. Were There Hafted Projectile Points in the Mousterian? Journal of Field Archaeology 16:79-85. -Solecki RL. 1992. More on hafted projectile points in the Mousterian. Journal of Field Archaeology 19(2):207-212. -Lombard M. 2005. Evidence of hunting and hafting during the Middle Stone Age at Sibidu Cave, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa: a multianalytical approach. Journal of Human Evolution 48(3):279- 300.
- Villa, P., Soressi, M., Henshilwood, C.S., Mourre, V., 2009. The Still Bay points of Blombos Cave (South Africa), J. Archaeol. Sci. 36, 441-460. -Wilkins, J., Schoville, B.J., Brown, K.S., Chazan, M., 2012. Evidence for Early Hafted Hunting Technology, Science 338, 942-946.
- Villa, P., Boscato, P., Ranaldo, F., Ronchitelli, A., 2009. Stone tools for the hunt: points with impact scars from a Middle Paleolithic site in southern Course Schedule and Topics* Italy, J. Archaeol. Sci. 36, 850-859.
Cognition
- Wynn T, Tierson F. 1990. Regional comparison of the shapes of later Acheulean handaxes. American Anthropologist 92(1):73-84.
- McPherron SP. 2000. Handaxes as a measure of the mental capabilities of early hominids. Journal of Archaeological Science 27(8):655-663.
Style and shape
- Hayden, B. (1984). Are Emic Types Relevant to Archaeology? Ethnohistory, 31(2), 79-92.
|
