Critical review uncovers limitations of generic Middle Stone Age terminology in archaeological analyses, highlighting the need for flexible, interdisciplinary approaches across lithic studies.
This paper is a response to the conference session 'Generic MSA: fact or fiction?' held as part of the PanAfrican Association Conference in 2022 in Unguja, Tanzania.It questions the validity of the concept of a 'generic Middle Stone Age' and goes beyond the simple debate of terminology that has persisted for nearly 75 years.Instead, it uses this as a starting point to discuss the past, present and future of lithic analyses, including the history of terminology in the African Stone Age, the current topics of lithic enquiry and the role of lithic analysis following the Third Science Revolution.It highlights the effect of tensions between science versus humanities approaches and provides suggestions for future lithic analysts.Lithic studies remain of great importance but are only one source of evidence in modern interdisciplinary human origins research.The paper contends that there is not a single approach suitable for all sites or regions since analyses are contingent upon the questions being asked.Instead, it emphasises opportunities for multivocality and suggests that despite the focus here on the Middle Stone Age the conclusions reached are more widely applicable to other times and places. RSUMCet article rpond la session 'MSA gnrique: ralit ou fiction?' tenue dans le cadre de la confrence de l'Association Panafricaine en 2022 Unguja, en Tanzanie.Il remet en question la validit du concept de 'Middle Stone Age gnrique', et dpasse le simple dbat de nomenclature qui dure depuis prs de 75 ans.L'article utilise plutt ce dbat comme point de dpart pour discuter du pass, du prsent et de l'avenir des analyses lithiques, y compris une considration de l'histoire de la terminologie de l'ge de Pierre africain, des sujets actuels dans les recherches lies au lithique, et du rle des analyses lithiques aprs la 'Troisime Rvolution Scientifique'.Il met en vidence l'effet des tensions qui existent entre les approches bases dans les sciences dites 'dures' et celles qui touchent plutt aux sciences humaines, et il fournit des suggestions aux analystes lithiques du futur.Les tudes lithiques restent d'une grande importance, mais elles ne
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Basell et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: