Article2011

Forum: Backed Artefacts: Useful Socially and Operationally

Peter White · Sandra Bowdler · Steven L. Kuhn · Ian J. McNiven · Michael Shott · Peter Veth

19 citations0/0 files storedAustralian Archaeology

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

Australian Indigenous Culture and History Pleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology Archaeological and Geological Studies

Abstract

This paper has two purposes. One is to question the adequacy of the current utilitarian explanation for the wide proliferation of backed artefacts in Australia in the later Holocene. The second is to suggest that broadly social explanations for this event need to be given more weight.

Citations in this library

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 19 citations exist upstream.

References

2007Archaeology of Ancient Australia 1999Handaxes: products of sexual selection?1994Technological responses to risk in Holocene Australia 2011Are Tulas and Enso Linked In Australia?2002Cheap, Regular, and Reliable: Implications of Design Variation in Late Pleistocene Japanese Microblade Technology

Cited by

2011Big debates over little tools: ongoing disputes over microliths on three continents 2011Simple stone flaking in Australasia: Patterns and implications 2021Small Signals: Comprehending the Australian Microlithic as Public Signalling 2016Uncertain Evidence for Weapons and Craft Tools: Functional Investigations of Australian Microliths

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.