Dissertation Improvement Grant: The Micoquian, Quina, and MTA: Revisiting the Bifacial/Unifacial Dichotomy in European Middle Paleolithic Systematics

本论文将分析来自法国、德国和乌克兰的12个旧石器时代中期博物馆收藏的石器的尺寸相关形状变化。这些代表了三个先前描述的技术复合体，它们在欧洲大陆的地理和时间上分布广泛（Quina Mousterian，Acheulean传统的Mousterian和Micoquian），并且可以被视为包含了尼安德特人的大部分技术知识。 本项目旨在将生物科学的统计技术应用于石器的形态变化，并将试图测试以前基于描述性方法的分类对石器生产的有效性，并从重新锐化模式的数学分类中得出结论。更具体地说，该项目提出了测试的假设，以双面工具的生产为特征的行业不同的再锐化模式从单面薄片工具占主导地位。 双面/单面二分法目前被认为反映了上述技术的各自制造商之间重要的认知和文化差异。因此，该项目将根据直接索引人类行为的共同过程（在这种情况下是工具维护）比较两种技术上独立的装配类。重新锐化已被用来解释在旧石器时代，古印第安人和澳大利亚的背景下，在某些类别的工具的变化，提出的形态类型代表的阶段，在一个连续的再利用。由于理解组合多样性高度依赖于我们有意义地比较和分类来自不同背景和地区的石器收藏品的能力，因此开发一种跨技术类型学，年代学，地理学和埋藏学类别的方法很重要。特别是，该项目试图建立在所研究的行业中记录的重磨模式的基础上，并根据单个石器的度量属性与尺寸减小之间的几何关系对其进行分析。这些属性将收集的数字数据采集技术的援助，如图像分析和使用三维数字化仪，这两个都是新的考古研究。然后，数据将进行多元异速生长的分析后，在生物学和古生物学建立的协议。总而言之，这个项目将扩大重新锐化理论的范围，超越其作为传统类型学方法的反证。此外，旧石器时代中期的技术多样性传统上被认为对解释与创新和知识的社会传播有关的认知进化具有影响。除了为论文学生提供经验和培训，这项工作将作为几篇文章和一本专著的起点。新的定量技术是为比较目的而设计的，特别是针对可复制性。除了这项研究对欧洲旧石器时代中期的理论意义之外，所采取的方法将有助于建立一个协议，其他人可以用来描述和分析来自其他时间段和地理区域的石器工具。以期刊形式公布结果，并通过网站和光盘公布数据，应鼓励开展更多这类性质的项目。

This dissertation will analyze size-dependent shape changes in stone tools from 12 museum collections from Middle Paleolithic contexts in France, Germany, and Ukraine. These represent three previously described techno-complexes that have a geographically and temporally widespread distribution on the European continent (the Quina Mousterian, the Mousterian of Acheulean Tradition, and the Micoquian), and can be seen as encompassing much of the technological know-how of Neandertals. This project seeks to apply statistical techniques from the biological sciences to morphological variation in stone tools, and will attempt to test the validity of previous classifications based on descriptive approaches to stone tool production with conclusions derived from a mathematical classification of resharpening patterns. More specifically, the project proposes to test the hypothesis that industries characterized by the production of bifacial tools differ in resharpening patterns from ones where unifacial flake-tools are dominant. The bifacial/unifacial dichotomy is currently believed to reflect important cognitive and cultural differences between the respective makers of the said technologies. Thus, the project will compare two technologically separate classes of assemblages according to a common process that directly indexes human behavior, in this case tool maintenance. Resharpening has been used to explain variability in certain classes of tools within Paleolithic, Paleoindian, and Australian contexts, by proposing that morphological types represent stages in a continuum of re-use. Since understanding assemblage diversity is highly dependent on our ability to meaningfully compare and classify collections of stone tools from different contexts and regions, developing a methodology that cross-cuts techno-typological, chronological, geographic, and taphonomic categories is important. In particular, this project attempts to build upon documented resharpening patterns in the studied industries and analyze them in terms of the geometric relationships between metric attributes of individual stone tools and decreasing size. These attributes will be collected with the aid of digital data acquisition techniques such as image analysis and the use of a 3-D digitizer, both of which are new to archaeological studies. The data will then be subjected to an analysis of multivariate allometry following protocols established in biology and paleontology. Altogether, this project will expand the scope of the theory of resharpening beyond its usage as a counter-argument to traditional typological approaches. Furthermore, technological diversity in the Middle Paleolithic has been traditionally viewed as having implications for interpreting cognitive evolution in relation to innovation and the social transmission of knowledge. In addition to providing experience and training for the dissertation student this work will serve as the starting point for several articles and a monograph. The new quantitative techniques are designed for comparative purposes and specifically aimed at replicability. Beyond the theoretical implications of this study for the European Middle Paleolithic, the approach taken will help to establish a protocol that can be used by others to describe and analyze stone tools from other time periods and geographic regions. The publication of the results in journal format and of the data via a web site and a CD-ROM should encourage further projects of this nature.