首页> 外文期刊>International Journal of Evolutionary Biology >Clarifying Some Fundamental Errors in Herries' “A Chronological Perspective on the Acheulian and Its Transition to the Middle Stone Age in Southern Africa: The Question of the Fauresmith” (2011)
【24h】

Clarifying Some Fundamental Errors in Herries' “A Chronological Perspective on the Acheulian and Its Transition to the Middle Stone Age in Southern Africa: The Question of the Fauresmith” (2011)

机译:澄清Herries的“ Acheulian的年代学观点及其向南部非洲中石时代的过渡:Fauresmith问题”的一些基本错误(2011)

获取原文
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Herries provides a timely review of the archaeological and dating evidence of the transition from the Acheulean to the Middle Stone Age (MSA) in southern Africa, however, in relation to the site of Twin Rivers, Zambia he makes several fundamental errors of interpretation that demand correction. The stratigraphic sequence of the site is admittedly complex, but it deserves a more careful analysis than that offered by Herries. This detailed response by the most recent excavator of the site addresses Herries critique by placing the site in its historical context and then dealing with the central issue of the association of dated speleothem with the surviving archaeological deposits. Herries is shown to have mistakenly combined the dates from two separate cave passages and to have misunderstood the published sections, plans, and taphonomic assessment of each excavation area. His reinterpretation of the site as being significantly younger than published is based on a conflation of unrelated data.
机译:赫里斯(Herries)及时回顾了南部非洲从阿彻兰(Acheulean)过渡到中石器时代(MSA)的考古和年代证据,但是,关于赞比亚双河(Twin Rivers)遗址,他犯了一些基本的解释错误,这需要更正。该地层的地层顺序固然很复杂,但是与Herries所提供的分析相比,它应该进行更仔细的分析。该遗址的最新挖掘机做出的详细回应解决了Herries的批评,方法是将该遗址置于其历史背景下,然后处理过时的蛇麻草与幸存的考古沉积之间的联系这一核心问题。事实证明,Herries错误地组合了两个单独的洞穴通道的日期,并且误解了每个挖掘区域的已发布部分,计划和塔基学评估。他将网站重新定义为比发布的网站年轻得多,是基于对不相关数据的合并。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号