Experimental futures in archaeology

Experimental archaeology can help to explain human patterns of production and discard from the Palaeolithic to historical periods, and can inform debates on topics as diverse as human migration and diet. When conducted unsystematically and used to support bold conclusions, however, experimental arch...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Antiquity 2019-06, Vol.93 (369), p.808-810
Hauptverfasser: Magnani, Matthew, Grindle, Dalyn, Loomis, Sarah, Kim, Alexander M., Egbers, Vera, Clindaniel, Jon, Hartford, Alexis, Johnson, Eric, Weber, Sadie, Campbell, Wade
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Experimental archaeology can help to explain human patterns of production and discard from the Palaeolithic to historical periods, and can inform debates on topics as diverse as human migration and diet. When conducted unsystematically and used to support bold conclusions, however, experimental archaeology may quickly assume the trappings of bad science. Drawing on experimental and archaeological data, Holen et al. (2017) have argued for the presence of an approximately 130 000-year-old archaeological site in California. In our recent critique (Magnani et al. 2019), we evaluated the experimental data used by the authors to support their claims. In considering Holen and colleagues’ rebuttal (2019), we first draw attention to their openness to quantitative analysis and further experimentation. While this approach is positive, we maintain that more rigorous experimentation should have been performed before publication of the original extraordinary claims.
ISSN:0003-598X
1745-1744
DOI:10.15184/aqy.2019.76