THE MULTI-DISCIPLINARY LANDSCAPE OFMID-LATE UPPER PLEISTOCENEARCHAEOLOGY

摘要

Current literature accentuates the continued debate around behavioural and cognitive human evolution during the mid-late Upper Pleistocene (here used informally to demarcate the period between ～40 and 80 ka). For d'Errico and Stringer (2011), questions such as whether certain characteristics are unique to our species, and whether they emerged abruptly, gradually, or discontinuously, are critical to understanding the origins of 'quintessential' human behaviours. Some authors seem to agree that objects, such as the shell beads from Blombos, represent evidence of higher theory of mind, and cultural complexity similar to our own (e.g. Henshilwood & Dubreuil 2011; Gibson 2011). In contrast, others see such personal ornaments and stylistic engravings as potentially requiring basic theory of mind and basic self-awareness only (Coolidge & Wynn 2011; also see Malafouris 2011). Coolidge and Wynn (2011), for example, suggest that this interpretation might better explain the perceived pulsing occurrence of so-called symbolic objects in the mid—late Upper Pleistocene archaeological record of southern Africa. For them, these objects may have provided the scaffolding for the subsequent development of more complex systems of arbitrary meaning. From a cognitive point of view, this implies that it is not commonly accepted that fully symbolic behaviour or advanced cognitive complexity had evolved by the time of the Still Bay and Howieson's Poort.