The Piney Branch site (District of Columbia, U.S.A.) and the significance of the quarry-refuse model for the interpretation of lithics sites

In the 1870s the amateur archaeologist Dr Charles Abbott discovered roughly-flaked bifacial artefacts that he called “paleoliths” near Trenton, New Jersey, which he claimed were artefact types similar to Lower Palaeolithic handaxes being found in western Europe at that time. This interpretation gave rise to what has been called the Great Palaeolithic War, a debate in the United States about the existence of an “American Palaeolithic” that only ended in 1890 when the archaeologist William H. Holmes from the Smithsonian Institution excavated the Piney Branch lithics site in Washington D.C.. On the basis of the bifacial reduction sequence that he reconstructed from the lithics excavated at Piney Branch, Holmes argued that any resemblance of paleoliths to Lower Palaeolithic handaxes was accidental. Holmes believed that paleoliths were discarded elements from the sequential reduction of stone nodules (which he called the “Progressive Series”) by recent American Indian knappers during the manufacture of projectile points. In other words, the Trenton paleoliths, and by implication similar roughly-flaked bifaces, were nothing more than quarry refuse (or “waste”). Since Holmes’ day the quarry-refuse model for the interpretation of large roughly-flaked bifacial implements as “waste” and not artefact types used in other activities, particularly for lithics sties in the arid western regions of the US, has been applied at times without adequate bridging arguments. A review of Holmes’ interpretation of the Piney Branch evidence suggests that his quarry-refuse model, even when applied to Piney Branch, required numerous untested assumptions, and that the model may inadvertently obscure a range of other prehistoric activities not strictly related to quarrying and knapping. As a consequence, the application of the quarry-refuse model today to lithics sites found in North America without careful examination may also fail to identify the complete range of cultural activity at those sites, and should be applied to lithics sites only with due caution and the testing of alternative hypotheses

New evidence for the Palaeolithic in Attica, Greece

Despite Greece’s key geographic position between southeast Europe and southwest Asia, and its potential for documenting hominin dispersals, Lower and Middle Palaeolithic sites are rare. This suggests the need for research to identify deposits that may contain Palaeolithic artefacts. Here we describe 165 quartz and quartzite artefacts with Palaeolithic characteristics (based on technical and morphotypological definitions) from a private collection that was made from erosional lag deposits on the southeastern slopes of Mt. Pendeli and the northern edge of the Spata polje (a large karstic depression filled with terra rossas) in northeast Attica. Artefacts of the same type occur in the region of Ano Souli, another karstic depression. These karstic depressions are of interest because they resemble artefact-bearing deposits found at similar features such as Kokkinopilos in Epirus that have provided datable geologic contexts for Lower and Middle Palaeolithic artefacts. Our study suggests that Attica was frequented by hominins in the Lower and Middle Palaeolithic and that Pleistocene deposits in karstic depressions in Attica may preserve datable contexts for documenting early human activity. The lithic collection described here provides a glimpse of the potential of the region, and we recommend continued archaeological efforts in Attica to investigate the likelihood for buried Palaeolithic sites

Nothing Lasts Forever: Environmental Discourses on the Collapse of Past Societies

The study of the collapse of past societies raises many questions for the theory and practice of archaeology. Interest in collapse extends as well into the natural sciences and environmental and sustainability policy. Despite a range of approaches to collapse, the predominant paradigm is environmental collapse, which I argue obscures recognition of the dynamic role of social processes that lie at the heart of human communities. These environmental discourses, together with confusion over terminology and the concepts of collapse, have created widespread aporia about collapse and resulted in the creation of mixed messages about complex historical and social processes