Dissertation Grant: Evaluating Levantine Early Upper Paleolithic Prismatic Blade Technology

在史蒂文·L·库恩博士的指导下，克里斯托弗·W·克里将为他的博士论文收集数据。这项研究将定量地检验几种不同的旧石器早期石器组合之间的关系，这些组合与早期的艾哈迈利亚石器传统有关。早期的艾哈迈里亚人在地中海东部被称为黎凡特地区的大部分地区都有发现，年龄从25-40,000年前不等，代表着世界上最早的旧石器时代工业之一，也可能是欧亚大陆最早生产棱柱刀片的例子。这种特殊的石器生产方法，用于从一块石头上生产许多细长的去除(刀片)，与早期的石头加工技术有很大的不同，并与大约30-40,000年前发生在整个欧亚大陆的人类行为和人口分散的大范围变化同时发生。尽管有这种区别，早期的阿玛利亚传统直到20世纪80年代初才被承认，当时它有别于旧石器时代的另一个技术传统。这种以叶片元素的高百分比为中心的分离，是对黎凡特旧石器时代晚期变异性的重大贡献。然而，在过去的二十年里，艾哈迈里亚人已经成为许多高度可变的组合的名称，这些组合的唯一共同点就是外观上的“斑驳”。可以理解的是，这样的分类方案使得对早期阿赫马里亚人的分类使用有些麻烦。虽然棱柱形叶片技术定义了早期的艾哈迈里亚人，但基于与叶片制造相关的定量测量的描述很少。这项研究将通过使用定量措施评估叶片生产策略来检查八个不同的早期亚赫玛利亚组合之间的关系。这些组合形成了贯穿西奈半岛中南部、约旦西南部、内盖夫、黎巴嫩中部和土耳其中南部的样带，代表了各种环境和遗址环境。此外，还将检查三个“组外”组合。这些群体外的组合被包括在试图通过将它们与东南欧的棱镜刀片制造和其他被认为与黎凡特地区早期艾哈迈里亚人截然不同的石器工具生产技术进行比较来确定早期艾哈迈尔人刀片生产战略的共同主题。在定量描述与这11个组合相关的叶片生产策略时，一致的比较方法可能有助于区分与当地环境和遗址位置相关的区域差异，以及确定早期艾哈迈里期的共同主题。只有在更好地定义了早期艾哈迈尔人的技术可变性之后，才能在通常与旧石器时代晚期相关的行为和人口变化的更广泛背景下，探索与棱形刀片生产在整个欧亚大陆扩散有关的问题。考古学家知道，最早的解剖学上的现代人首先出现在非洲，随后他们传播到了旧大陆和新大陆。尽管人们可能会认为石器等文化属性也是以同样的方式传播的，但考古学证据远未明确。克里的研究将提供相关数据。它还将帮助培养一位有前途的年轻科学家。

Under the direction of Dr. Steven L. Kuhn, Mr. Kristopher W. Kerry will collect data for his doctoral dissertation. This research will quantitatively examine relationships between several different Early Upper Paleolithic stone-tool assemblages associated with the Early Ahmarian lithic tradition. Found throughout most of the eastern Mediterranean region known as the Levant, the Early Ahmarian ranges in age from 25-40,000 years ago, and represents one of the earliest Upper Paleolithic industries in the world and perhaps the earliest example of prismatic blade production in Eurasia. This specific method of stone-tool production, used to produce numerous elongated removals (blades) from a single piece of stone, differs significantly from earlier stone-working techniques, and is contemporaneous with broad-scale changes in human behavior and population dispersal argued to occur throughout Eurasia circa 30-40,000 years ago. Despite this distinction, the Early Ahmarian tradition was not recognized until the early 1980s, when it was distinguished from another Upper Paleolithic technological tradition. This separation, centering on the high percentage of blade elements, was a significant contribution in characterizing Levantine Upper Paleolithic variability. However, over the past two decades the Ahmarian has become a designation for many, highly variable assemblages whose only common denominator is a "bladey" appearance. Understandably, such a classification scheme has made the taxonomic use of the Early Ahmarian somewhat cumbersome. While prismatic blade technology defines the Early Ahmarian, descriptions based on quantitative measures associated with the manufacture of blades are rare. This research will examine relationships between eight different Early Ahmarian assemblages by evaluating blade production strategies using quantitative measures. These assemblages form a transect through south-central Sinai, southwest Jordan, the Negev, central Lebanon, and south-central Turkey and represent various environmental and site settings. Additionally, three "out-group" assemblages will also be examined. These out-group assemblages are included in attempts to identify common themes in Early Ahmarian blade production strategies by comparing them with prismatic blade manufacture from southeast Europe and other stone-tool production techniques considered quite distinct from the Early Ahmarian within the Levant itself. In quantitatively describing blade production strategies associated with these eleven assemblages a consistent method of comparison may help distinguish regional distinctions associated with local environment and site location, as well as identify common themes within the Early Ahmarian. Only after Early Ahmarian technological variability is better defined can questions relating to the dispersal of prismatic blade production throughout Eurasia within the broader context of behavioral and demographic changes often associated with the Upper Paleolithic period be explored.Archaeologists know that the earliest anatomically modern humans first appeared in Africa and that they subsequently spread throughout both Old and New Worlds. Although one might assume that cultural attributes such as stone tools spread the same way, the archaeological evidence is far from clear. Mr. Kerry's research will provide relevant data. It will also assist in training a promising young scientist.