This paper discusses methods and theories used in Australian stone artefact analysis over the last two decades. It is written from the perspective of someone seeking to study prehistoric human environmental adaptations through the analysis of entire assemblages. From this perspective I argue that the traditional view, that easily definable tool/implement types demarcate 'cultures', is still the major analytical framework used in Australia. Although some important changes have occurred in that 20-year period, I suggest that most of these 'new directions' are restrained within the structures of a paradigm which perceives 'stone tools' as 'cultural markers'.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Peter Hiscock (1983) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: