Advertisement

Steps Towards Operationalising an Evolutionary Archaeological Definition of Culture

  • Felix RiedeEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

This paper examines the definition of archaeological cultures/techno-complexes from an evolutionary perspective, in which culture is defined as a system of social information transmission. A formal methodology is presented through which the concept of a culture can be operationalised, at least within this approach. It has already been argued that in order to study material culture evolution in a manner similar to how palaeontologists study biological change over time, we need explicitly constructed “archaeological taxonomic units”. In palaeontology, the definition of such taxonomic units – most commonly species – is highly controversial, so no readily adoptable methodology exists. Here, it is argued that “culture”, however defined, is a phenomenon that emerges through the actions of individuals. In order to identify “cultures”, we must therefore construct them from the bottom up, beginning with individual actions. Chaîne opèratoire research, combined with the formal and quantitative identification of variability in individual material culture behaviour allows those traits critical in the social transmission of cultural information to be identified. Once such traits are identified, quantitative, the so-called phylogenetic methods can be used to track material culture change over time. Phylogenetic methods produce nested hierarchies of increasingly exclusive groupings, reflecting descent with modification within lineages of social information transmission. Once such nested hierarchies are constructed, it is possible to define an archaeological culture at any given point in this hierarchy, depending on the scale of analysis. A brief example from the Late Glacial in Southern Scandinavia is presented, and it is shown that this approach can be used to operationalise an evolutionary definition of “culture” and that it improves upon traditional, typologically defined techno-complexes. In conclusion, the benefits and limits of such an evolutionary and quantitative definition of “culture” are discussed.

Keywords

Material Culture Archaeological Record Late Glacial Social Transmission Historical Relatedness 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Åberg, N. (1929). Typologie. In Ebert, M. (ed.) Reallexikon der Vorgeschichte. Band 13, Verlag Walter de Gruyter & Co, Berlin, pp. 508–516.Google Scholar
  2. Abramov, I., Farkas, A. & Ochsenschlager, E. (2006). A Study in Classification: Style and Visual Perception. Visual Anthropology 19: 255–274.Google Scholar
  3. Apel, J. (2008). Knowledge, Know-how and Raw Material – The Production of Late Neolithic Flint Daggers in Scandinavia. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 15 (1): 91–111.Google Scholar
  4. Apel, J. and Darmark, K. (2007). Den flathuggna pilspetsens fylogeni. Mellansvenskt stenhantverk ur ett kulturevolutionistiskt perspektiv. Arkeologie4 Uppland-studier 1, pp. 31–65.Google Scholar
  5. Aunger, R. (2006). An Agnostic View of Memes. In Wells, J. C. K., Strickland, S. and Laland, K. N. (eds.) Social Information Transmission and Human Biology, CRC Press, London, pp. 89–96.Google Scholar
  6. Baales, M. (2002). Der spätpaläolithische Fundplatz Kettig: Untersuchungen zur Siedlungsarchäologie der Federmesser-Gruppen am Mittelrhein. Verlag Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn.Google Scholar
  7. Baales, M., Jöris, O., Street, M., Bittmann, F., Weninger, B. and Wiethold, J. (2002). Impact of the Late Glacial Eruption of the Laacher See Volcano, Central Rhineland, Germany. Quaternary Research 58: 273–288.Google Scholar
  8. Bamforth, D. and Finlay, N. (2008). Introduction: Archaeological Approaches to Lithic Production Skill and Craft Learning. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 15 (1), 1–27.Google Scholar
  9. Bandelt, H.-J., Forster, P. and Röhl, A. (1999). Median-joining networks for inferring intraspecific phylogenies. Molecular Biology and Evolution 16: 37–48.Google Scholar
  10. Bandelt, H.-J., Forster, P., Sykes, B. C. and Richards, M. B. (1995). Mitochondrial portraits of human populations using median networks. Genetics 141 (2): 743–753.Google Scholar
  11. Barton, R. N. E. (1992). Hengistbury Head, Dorset. Volume 2: The Late Upper Palaeolithic & Early Mesolithic Sites. Oxford Committee for Archaeology, Oxford.Google Scholar
  12. Beck, C. (1998). Projectile Point Types as Valid Chronological Units. In Ramenofsky, A. F. and Steffen, A. (eds.) Unit Issues in Archaeology. Measuring Time, Space, and Material. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 21–40.Google Scholar
  13. Beckhoff, K. (1967). Zur jungpaläolithischen Kerbspitze. Die Kunde N.F., 18: 8–15.Google Scholar
  14. Begossi, A., Clauzet, M., Figueiredo, J. L., Garuana, L., Lima, R. V., Lopes, P. F., Ramires, M., Silva, A. L. and Silvano, R. A. M. (2008). Are Biological Species and Higher-Ranking Categories Real? Fish Folk Taxonomy on Brazil’s Atlantic Forest Coast and in the Amazon. Current Anthropology 49 (2): 291–306.Google Scholar
  15. Bellwood, P. (1996). Phylogeny vs. Reticulation in Prehistory. Antiquity, 70: 881–890.Google Scholar
  16. Bintliff, J. L. (1999). Structure and Contingency: Evolutionary Processes in Life and Human Society. Leicester University Press, London.Google Scholar
  17. Bisson, M. S. (2000). Nineteenth Century Tools for Twenty-First Century Archaeology? Why the Middle Paleolithic Typology of François Bordes Must Be Replaced. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 7 (1): 1–48.Google Scholar
  18. Björck, S., Walker, M. J. C., Cwynar, L. C., Johnsen, S., Knudsen, K.-L., Lowe, J. J., Wohlfarth, B. and INTIMATE members (1998). An Event Stratigraphy for the Last Termination in the North Atlantic Region based on the Greenland ice-core record: a proposal by the INTIMATE group. Journal of Quaternary Science 13 (4): 283–292.Google Scholar
  19. Bleed, P. (2006). Living in the Human Niche. Evolutionary Anthropology 15: 8–10.Google Scholar
  20. Bloch, M. (2000). A well-disposed social anthropologist’s problems with memes. In Aunger, R. (ed.) Darwinizing Culture. The Status of Memetics as a Science. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 189–204.Google Scholar
  21. Bloch, M. (2005). Essays on Cultural Transmission. Berg, London.Google Scholar
  22. Blockley, S. P. E., Blockley, S. M., Donahue, R. E., Lane, C. S., Lowe, J. J. and Pollard, A. M. (2006). The chronology of abrupt climate change and Late Upper Palaeolithic human adaptation in Europe. Journal of Quaternary Science 21 (5): 575–584.Google Scholar
  23. Blockley, S. P. E., Ramsey, C. B., Lane, C. S. and Lotter, A. F. (2008). Improved age modelling approaches as exemplified by the revised chronology for the Central European varved lake Soppensee. Quaternary Science Reviews 27 (1–2): 61–71.Google Scholar
  24. Bodu, P., Karlin, C. and Ploux, S. (1990). Who’s who? The Magdalenian flintknappers of Pincevent, France. In Cziesla, E., Eickhoff, S., Arts, N. and Winter, D. (eds.) The Big Puzzle: International Symposium on Refitting Stone Artefacts, Monrepos, 1987. Holos, Bonn, pp. 143–163.Google Scholar
  25. Bordes, F. (1968). The Old Stone Age. Weidenfeld & Nicolson, London.Google Scholar
  26. Bowler, P. J. (1983). The Eclipse of Darwinism: anti-Darwinian evolution theories in the decades around 1900. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.Google Scholar
  27. Boyd, R. and Richerson, P. J. (1985). Culture and the evolutionary process. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  28. Boyd, R. and Richerson, P. J. (2000). Memes: Universal Acid or a Better Mouse Trap. In Aunger, R. (ed.) Darwinizing Culture: The Status of Memetics as a Science. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 143–162.Google Scholar
  29. Brew, J. O. (1943). Archaeology of the Alkali Ridge, Southeastern Utah. With a Review of the Mesa Verde Division of the San Juan and Some Observations on Archaeological Systematics. Peabody Museum of American Archaeology and Ethnology, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  30. Brodie, R. (1996). Virus of the mind: the new science of the meme. Integral Press, Seattle.Google Scholar
  31. Brooks, D. R. and McLennan, D. A. (1994). Historical ecology as a research programme: scope, limitations and the future. In Eggleton, P. and Vane-Wright, R. I. (eds.) Phylogenetics and Ecology. Academic Press, London, pp. 1–27.Google Scholar
  32. Bryant, D., Filimon, F. and Gray, R. D. (2005). Untangling our Past: Languages, Trees, Splits and Networks. In Mace, R., Holden, C. J. and Shennan, S. J. (eds.) The Evolution of Cultural Diversity. A Phylogenetic Approach. UCL Press, London, pp. 67–83.Google Scholar
  33. Buchanan, B. and Collard, M. (2007). Investigating the peopling of North America through cladistic analyses of Early Paleoindian projectile points. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 26 (3): 366–393.Google Scholar
  34. Buchanan, B. and Collard, M. (2008a). Phenetics, cladistics, and the search for the Alaskan ancestors of the Paleoindians: a reassessment of relationships among the Clovis, Nenana, and Denali archaeological complexes. Journal of Archaeological Science 35 (6): 1683–1694.Google Scholar
  35. Buchanan, B. and Collard, M. (2008b). Testing Models of early Paleoindian Colonization and Adaptation Using Cladistics. In O’Brien, M. J. (ed.) Cultural Transmission and Archaeology: Issues and Case Studies. Society for American Archaeology Press, Washington, pp. 59–76.Google Scholar
  36. Buck, C. E. (2001). Applications of the Bayesian Statistical Paradigm. In Brothwell, D. R. and Pollard, A. M. (eds.) Handbook of Archaeological Sciences. John Wiley, Chichester, pp. 695–702.Google Scholar
  37. Burdukiewicz, J. M. (1986). Late Pleistocene Shouldered Point Assemblages in Western Europe. E.J. Brill, Leiden.Google Scholar
  38. Burdukiewicz, J. M. & Schmider, B. (2000). Analyse comparative des pointes à cran hambourgiennes du Bassin de l’Oder et des pointes à cran magdaléniennes du Bassin parisien. In Bodu, P., Christensen, M. and Valentin, B. (eds.) L’Europe centrale et septentrionale au Tardiglaciaire. Mémoires du Musée de Préhistoire d’Ile-de-France no 7, Nemours. APRAIF, Nemours, pp. 97–108.Google Scholar
  39. Burroughs, W. J. (2005). Climate Change in Prehistory. The End of the Reign of Chaos. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  40. Clausen, I. (1998). Neue Untersuchungen an späteiszeitlichen Fundplätzen der Hamburger Kultur bei Ahrenshöft, Kr. Nordfriesland. Ein Vorbericht. Archäologische Nachrichten aus Schleswig-Holstein 8: 8–49.Google Scholar
  41. Csibra, G. and Gergely, G. (2011). Natural pedagogy as evolutionary adaptation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 366 (1567): 1149–1157.Google Scholar
  42. Cullen, B. S. (1996). Cultural Virus Theory and the Eusocial Pottery Assemblage. In Maschner, H. D. G. (Ed.) Darwinian Archaeologies. Plenum, New York, pp. 43–59.Google Scholar
  43. Cziesla, E. (1998). Anmerkungen zu flächenretouschierten Pfeilspitzen. Mitteilungen der Berliner Gesellschaft für Anthropologie, Ethnologie und Urgeschichte 19: 115–132.Google Scholar
  44. Darwent, J. and O’Brien, M. J. (2006). Using Cladistics to Construct Lineages of Projectile Points from Northeastern Missouri. In Lipo, C. P., O’Brien, M. J., Collard, M. and Shennan, S. J. (eds.) Mapping our Ancestors. Phylogenetic Approaches in Anthropology and Prehistory. AldineTransaction, New Brunswick, pp. 185–208.Google Scholar
  45. Dawkins, R. (1976). The Selfish Gene. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  46. Dellaportas, P. (1998). Bayesian classification of Neolithic tools. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series C (Applied Statistics) 47 (2): 279–297.Google Scholar
  47. Denton, T. (2007). Yet Another Solution to Galton’s Problem. Cross-Cultural Research 41 (1): 32–45.Google Scholar
  48. Dobres, M.-A. (2000). Technology and Social Agency. Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  49. Eerkens, J. and Lipo, C. P. (2005). Cultural transmission, copying errors, and the generation of variation in material culture and the archaeological record. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 24: 316–334.Google Scholar
  50. Eerkens, J. and Lipo, C. P. (2007). Cultural Transmission Theory and the Archaeological Record: Providing Context to Understanding Variation and Temporal Changes in Material Culture. Journal of Archaeological Research 15: 239–274.Google Scholar
  51. Eerkens, J. W. and Bettinger, R. L. (2008). Cultural Transmission and the Analysis of Stylistic and Functional Variation. In O’Brien, M.J. (ed.) Cultural Transmission and Archaeology: Issues and Case Studies. Society for American Archaeology Press, Washington, pp. 21–38.Google Scholar
  52. Ereshefsky, M. (ed.) (1992). The Units of Selection. Essays on the Nature of Species. MIT Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  53. Eriksen, B. V. (1996). Regional Variation in Late Pleistocene Subsistence Strategies. Southern Scandinavian Reindeer Hunters in a European Context. In Larsson, L. (ed.) The Earliest Settlement of Scandinavia and its relationship with neighbouring areas, Almqvist & Wicksell. Stockholm, pp. 7–22.Google Scholar
  54. Eriksen, B. V. (2000). Patterns of Ethnogeographic Variability in Late Pleistocene Western Europe. In Peterkin, G. L. and Price, H. A. (Eds.) Regional Approaches to Adaptation in Late Pleistocene Western Europe. Oxbow, Oxford, pp. 147–168.Google Scholar
  55. Eriksen, B. V. (2002). Reconsidering the geochronological framework of Late glacial hunter-gatherer colonization of southern Scandinavia. In Eriksen, B. V. and Bratlund, B. (Eds.) Recent studies in the Final Palaeolithic of the European plain. Jutland Archaeological Society, Højbjerg, pp. 25–42.Google Scholar
  56. Felsenstein, J. (2004). Inferring Phylogenies. Sinauer Associates Inc., Sunderland.Google Scholar
  57. Fischer, A. (1985). Late Paleolithic Finds In Kristiansen, K. (ed.) Archaeological Formation Processes. The representativity of archaeological remains from Danish Prehistory. Nationalmuseet, Copenhagen, pp. 81–88.Google Scholar
  58. Fischer, A. (1988). A Late Palaeolithic Flint Workshop at Egtved, East Jutland. Journal of Danish Archaeology 7: 7–23.Google Scholar
  59. Fischer, A. (1989a). Hunting with Flint-Tipped Arrows: Results and Experiences from Experiments. In Bonsall, C. (Ed.) The Mesolithic in Europe. John Donald, Edinburgh, pp. 29–39.Google Scholar
  60. Fischer, A. (1989b). A Late Palaeolithic “School” of Flint-Knapping at Trollesgave, Denmark. Results from Refitting. Acta Archaeologica 60: 33–49.Google Scholar
  61. Fischer, A. (1990). On Being a Pupil of a Flintknapper of 11,000 Years Ago. A preliminary analysis of settlement organization and flint technology based on conjoined flint artefacts from the Trollesgave site. In Cziesla, E., Eickhoff, S., Arts, N. and Winter, D. (eds.) The Big Puzzle: International Symposium on Refitting Stone Artefacts, Monrepos, 1987. Holos, Bonn, pp. 447–464.Google Scholar
  62. Fischer, A. (1991). Pioneers in deglaciated landscapes: The expansion and adaptation of Late Palaeolithic societies in Southern Scandinavia. In Barton, R. N. E., Roberts, A. J. and Roe, D. (eds.) Late Glacial in north-west Europe: human adaptation and environmental change at the end of the Pleistocene. Council for British Archaeology, Oxford, pp. 100–122.Google Scholar
  63. Fischer, A. (1993). The Late Palaeolithic. In Hvaas, S. and Storgaard, B. (eds.) Digging into the Past: 25 Years of Archaeology in Denmark. Jutland Archaeological Society, Højbjerg pp. 51–57.Google Scholar
  64. Foley, R. A. (1987). Hominid species and stone tools assemblages: how are they related? Antiquity 61: 380–392.Google Scholar
  65. Foley, R. A. and Lahr, M. M. (2003). On Stony Ground: Lithic Technology, Human Evolution, and the Emergence of Culture. Evolutionary Anthropology 12: 109–122.Google Scholar
  66. Forster, P. and Toth, A. (2003). Toward a phylogenetic chronology of ancient Gaulish, Celtic, and Indo-European. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 100: 9079–9084.Google Scholar
  67. Fragaszy, D. M. and Perry, S. (2003). The Biology of Traditions: Models and Evidence. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  68. Gamble, C., Davies, W., Pettitt, P. and Richards, M. (2005). The Archaeological and Genetic Foundations of the European Population during the Late Glacial: Implications for ‘Agricultural Thinking’. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 15 (2): 193–223.Google Scholar
  69. Ghiselin, M. T. (1974). A Radical Solution to the Species Problem. Systematic Zoology 23: 536–544.Google Scholar
  70. Gramsch, B. (2004). From the Late Palaeolithic to the early Mesolithic in northeastern Germany. In Terberger, T. and Eriksen, B. V. (eds.) Hunters in a Changing World: Environment and Archaeology of the Pleistocene-Holocene Transition (ca.11000–9000 BC) in Northern Central Europe, Verlag Marie Leidorf GmbH, Rahden, pp. 183–202.Google Scholar
  71. Grimm, S. B. & Weber, M.-J. (2008). The chronological framework of the Hamburgian in the light of old and new 14C dates. Quartär 55: 17–40.Google Scholar
  72. Hahn, J. (1993). Erkennen und Bestimmen von Stein- und Knochenartefakten. Einführung in die Artefaktmorphologie. Archaeologica Venatoria, Tübingen.Google Scholar
  73. Hall, B. G. (2004). Phylogenetic Trees Made Easy: A How-To Manual for Molecular Biologists. W.H. Freeman, New York.Google Scholar
  74. Harmon, M. J., VanPool, T. L., Leonard, R. D., VanPool, C. S. and Salter, L. A. (2006). Reconstructing the Flow of Information across Time and Space: A Phylogenetic Analysis of Ceramic Traditions from Prehispanic Western and Northern Mexico and the American Southwest. In Lipo, C. P., O’Brien, M. J., Collard, M. and Shennan, S. J. (eds.) Mapping our Ancestors. Phylogenetic Approaches in Anthropology and Prehistory. AldineTransaction, New Brunswick, pp. 209–230.Google Scholar
  75. Harvey, P. H. and Pagel, M. D. (1991). The Comparative Method in Evolutionary Biology. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  76. Hennig, W. (1966). Phylogenetic Systematics. University of Illinois Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  77. Henrich, J. and Boyd, P. (2002). Why Cultural Evolution Does Not Require Replication of Representations. Culture and Cognition 2: 87–112.Google Scholar
  78. Henrich, J., Boyd, R. and Richerson, P. (2008). Five Misunderstandings About Cultural Evolution. Human Nature 19 (2): 119–137.Google Scholar
  79. Hildebrandt, H. (1873). Den vetenskapeliga fornsforskningen, hennes uppgift, behof och rätt. L. Norman, Stockholm.Google Scholar
  80. Hildebrandt, H. (1880). De förhistoriska folken I Europa. En handbok i jämförande fornunskap. Jos. Seligmann & Co. Förlag, Stockholm.Google Scholar
  81. Hull, D. L. (1965). The Effect of Essentialism on Taxonomy – Two Thousand Years of Stasis. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 15: 314–326.Google Scholar
  82. Hull, D. M. (1998). A Reconsideration of Galton’s Problem (Using a Two-Sex Population). Theoretical Population Biology 54: 105–116.Google Scholar
  83. Huxley, J. (1943). Evolution. The New Synthesis. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  84. Ikinger, E.-M. (1998). Der endeiszeitliche Rückenspitzen-Kreis Mitteleuropas. Münster: LIT.Google Scholar
  85. Jablonka, E. and Lamb, M. J. (2005). Evolution in Four Dimensions: Genetic, Epigenetic, Behavioural, and Symbolic Variation in the History of Life. Bradford Books, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  86. Jablonka, E. and Lamb, M. J. (2006). The evolution of information in the major transitions. Journal of Theoretical Biology 239: 236–246.Google Scholar
  87. Jensen, J. (1982). The Prehistory of Denmark. Methuen, London.Google Scholar
  88. Keller, C. M. and Keller, J. D. (1996). Cognition and tool use. The blacksmith at work. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  89. Kind, C.-J. (1992). Bemerkungen zur Differenzierung des süddeutschen Mittelpaläolithikums. Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 22: 151–159.Google Scholar
  90. Kjærgaard, P. C. and Gregersen, N. H. (2006). Darwinism comes to Denmark – The Early Danish Reception of Charles Darwin’s Origin of Species. Ideas in History 1 (1/2): 151–175.Google Scholar
  91. Klindt-Jensen, O. (1975). A History of Scandinavian Archaeology. Thames & Hudson, London.Google Scholar
  92. Kozlowski, J. K. and Kozlowski, S. K. (1979). Upper Palaeolithic and Mesolithic of Europe. Taxonomy and Palaeohistory. Prace Komisji Archeologicznej, Wrocław.Google Scholar
  93. Kozlowski, S. K. (1999). The Tanged Points Complex. In Kozlowski, S. K., Gurba, J. and Zaliznyak, L. L. (eds.) Tanged Point Cultures in Europe. Read at the International Archaeological Symposium. Lublin, September, 13–16, 1993. Maria Curie-Sklodowska University Press, Lublin, pp. 28–35.Google Scholar
  94. Kristiansen, K. (2004). Genes versus agents. A discussion of the widening theoretical gap in archaeology. Archaeological Dialogues 11 (2): 77–99.Google Scholar
  95. Kroeber, A. L. (1917). The Superorganic. American Anthropologist 19 (2): 163–213.Google Scholar
  96. Kroeber, A. L. and Kluckhohn, C. (1978). Culture: a critical review of concepts and definitions. Kraus Reprint Co, Millwood.Google Scholar
  97. Kuper, A. (1999). Culture: The Anthropologists’ Account. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  98. Lake, M. (1998). Digging for Memes: the Role of Material Objects in Cultural Evolution. In Renfrew, C. and Scarre, C. (eds.) Cognition and Material Culture: The Archaeology of Symbolic Storage. McDonald Institute Monographs, Cambridge, pp. 77–88.Google Scholar
  99. Laland, K. N. (2004). Social learning strategies. Learning & Behavior 32 (1): 4–14.Google Scholar
  100. Lee, M. S. Y. (2003). Species concepts and species reality: salvaging a Linnaean rank. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 16: 179–188.Google Scholar
  101. Lee, M. S. Y. and Skinner, A. (2008). Hierarchy and clade definitions in Phylogenetic Taxonomy. Organisms Diversity & Evolution 8 (1): 17–20.Google Scholar
  102. Levit, G. S. and Meister, K. (2006). The history of essentialism vs. Ernst Mayr’s “Essentialism Story”: A case study of German idealistic morphology. Theory in Biosciences, 124 (3/4): 281–307.Google Scholar
  103. Lewontin, R. C. (1970). The Units of Selection. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 1: 1–14.Google Scholar
  104. Lipo, C. P. (2006). The Resolution of Cultural Phylogenies Using Graphs. In Lipo, C. P., O’Brien, M. J., Collard, M. and Shennan, S. J. (eds.) Mapping Our Ancestors. Phylogenetic Approaches in Anthropology and Prehistory. Aldine Transaction, New Brunswick, pp. 89–108.Google Scholar
  105. Lipo, C. P., O’Brien, M. J., Collard, M. and Shennan, S. J. (eds.) (2006). Mapping our Ancestors. Phylogenetic Approaches in Anthropology and Prehistory. Aldine Transaction, New Brunswick.Google Scholar
  106. Lyman, R. L. (2008). Cultural Transmission in North American Anthropology and Archaeology, ca. 1895–1965. In O’Brien, M. J. (ed.) Cultural Transmission and Archaeology: Issues and Case Studies. Society for American Archaeology Press, Washington, pp. 10–20.Google Scholar
  107. Lyman, R. L. and O’Brien, M. J. (2003). Cultural Traits: Units of Analysis in Early Twentieth-Century Anthropology. Journal of Anthropological Research 59: 225–250.Google Scholar
  108. Lyman, R. L. and O’Brien, M. J. (2004). A History of Normative Theory in Americanist Archaeology. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 11 (4): 369–396.Google Scholar
  109. MacDonald, D. H. (1998). Subsistence, sex, and cultural transmission in Folsom culture. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 17: 217–239.Google Scholar
  110. Mace, R. and Holden, C. J. (2005). A phylogenetic approach to cultural evolution. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 20(3): 116–121.Google Scholar
  111. Mace, R., Holden, C. J. and Shennan, S. J. (eds.) (2005). The Evolution of Cultural Diversity. A Phylogenetic Approach. UCL Press, London.Google Scholar
  112. Mace, R. and Pagel, M. (1997). Phylogenies and cultural evolution. Evolution and Human Behavior 18 (5): 349–351.Google Scholar
  113. Mace, R. and Pagel, M. D. (1994). The Comparative Method in Anthropology. Current Anthropology 35 (4): 549–564.Google Scholar
  114. Mace, R. and Sellen, D. W. (1997). Fertility and Mode of Subsistence: A Phylogenetic Analysis. Current Anthropology 38 (5): 878–889.Google Scholar
  115. Madsen, B. (1992). Hamburgkulturens flintteknologi i Jels (The Hamburgian Flint Technology at Jels). In Holm, J. and Rieck, F. (eds.) Istidsjægere ved Jelssøerne. Skrifter fra Museumsrådet for Sønderjyllands Amt, Haderslev, pp. 93–131.Google Scholar
  116. Madsen, B. (1993). Flint – extraction, manufacture and distribution. In Hvaas, S. and Storgaard, B. (eds.) Digging into the Past. 25 Years of Archaeology in Denmark. Jutland Archaeological Society, Højbjerg, pp. 126–129.Google Scholar
  117. Madsen, B. (1996). Late Palaeolithic cultures of south Scandinavia: tools, traditions and technology. In Larsson, L. (ed.) The Earliest Settlement of Scandinavia and Its Relationship with Neighbouring Areas. Almqvist & Wiksell, Stockholm, pp. 61–73.Google Scholar
  118. Mayr, E. (1957). Species concepts and definitions. In Mayr, E. (ed.) The Species Problem. American Association for the Advancement of Science, Washington, pp. 1–22.Google Scholar
  119. Mayr, E. (1959). Typological versus Population Thinking. In Meggers, B. J. (ed.) Evolution and Anthropology: A Centennial Appraisal. The Anthropological Society of Washington, Washington, pp. 409–412.Google Scholar
  120. Mayr, E. (1976). Typological versus Population Thinking. In Mayr, E. (ed.) Evolution and the diversity of life: selected essays. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, pp. 26–29.Google Scholar
  121. Mayr, E. (2000). A Critique from the Biological Species Concept Perspective: What Is a Species, and What Is Not? In Wheeler, Q. D. and Meier, R. (eds.) Species Concepts and Phlogenetic Theory. A Debate. Columbia University Press, New York, pp. 93–100.Google Scholar
  122. Mesoudi, A. (2008). Foresight in cultural evolution. Biology & Philosophy 23 (2): 243–255.Google Scholar
  123. Mishler, B. D. and Theriot, E. C. (1999). The Phylogenetic Species Concept (sensu Mishler and Theriot): Monophyly, Apomorphy, and Phylogenetic Species Concepts. In Wheeler, Q. D. and Meier, R. (eds.) Species Concepts and Phylogenetic Theory. A Debate. Columbia University Press, New York, pp. 44–54.Google Scholar
  124. Montelius, G. O. A. (1884). Den förhistoriska fornforskarens metod och material. Antikvarisk Tidskrift för Sverige 3 (8): 1–28.Google Scholar
  125. Montelius, G. O. A. (1899). Typologien eller utvecklingsläran tillämpad på det menskliga arbetet. Svenska Fornminnesföreningens Tidskrift 10 (3): 237–268.Google Scholar
  126. Montelius, G. O. A. (1903). Die Typologische Methode. Almqvist & Wicksell, Stockholm.Google Scholar
  127. Moore, J. H. (1994). Putting Anthropology Back Together Again: The Ethnogenetic Critique of Cladistic Theory. American Anthropologist 96 (4): 925–948.Google Scholar
  128. Morrison, D. A. (2005). Networks in phylogenetic analysis: new tools for population biology. International Journal of Parasitology 35: 567–582.Google Scholar
  129. Nakhleh, L., Sun, J., Warnow, T., Linder, C. R., Moret, B. M. E. and Tholse, A. (2003). Towards the development of computational tools for evaluating phylogenetic network reconstruction methods. Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing 8: 315–326.Google Scholar
  130. Nakhleh, L., Warnow, T., Ringe, D. and Evans, S. N. (2005). A comparison of phylogenetic reconstruction methods on an Indo-European dataset. Transactions of the Philological Society 103 (2): 171–192.Google Scholar
  131. Naroll, R. (1961). Two Solutions to Galton’s Problem. Philosophy of Science 28 (1): 15–39.Google Scholar
  132. Nielsen, S. N. (2007). Towards an ecosystem semiotics – Some basic aspects for a new research programme. Ecological Complexity 4 (3): 93–101.Google Scholar
  133. Nixon, K. C. and Wheeler, Q. D. (1990). An amplification of the phylogenetic species concept. Cladistics 6: 211–223.Google Scholar
  134. O’Brien, M. J. (Ed.) (2008). Cultural Transmission and Archaeology: Issues and Case Studies. Society for American Archaeology Press, Washington.Google Scholar
  135. O’Brien, M. J., Darwent, J. and Lyman, R. L. (2001). Cladistics is useful for reconstructing archaeological phylogenies: Paleoindian points from the southeastern United States. Journal of Archaeological Science 28: 1115–1136.Google Scholar
  136. O’Brien, M. J. and Lyman, R. L. (1999). Seriation, Stratigraphy, and Index Fossils. The Backbone of Archaeological Dating. Kluwer Academic/Plenum, New York.Google Scholar
  137. O’Brien, M. J. & Lyman, R. L. (2000). Applying Evolutionary Archaeology. A Systematic Approach. Kluwer Academic/Plenum, New York.Google Scholar
  138. O’Brien, M. J., Lyman, R. L., Collard, M., Holden, C. J., Gray, R. D. and Shennan, S. J. (2008). Transmission, Phylogenetics, and the Evolution of Cultural Diversity. In O’Brien, M. J. (Ed.) Cultural Transmission and Archaeology: Issues and Case Studies. Society for American Archaeology Press, Washington, pp. 39–58.Google Scholar
  139. O’Brien, M. J., Lyman, R. L., Glover, D. S. and Darwent, J. (2003). Cladistics and Archaeology. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
  140. O’Brien, M. J., Lyman, R. L., Saab, Y., Saab, E., Darwent, J. and Glover, D. S. (2002). Two issues in archaeological phylogenetics: Taxon construction and outgroup selection. Journal of Theoretical Biology 215: 133–150.Google Scholar
  141. O’Hara, R. J. (1997). Population thinking and tree thinking in systematics. Zoologica Scripta 26 (4): 323–329.Google Scholar
  142. Odling-Smee, F. J. (2007). Niche Inheritance: A Possible Basis for Classifying Multiple Inheritance Systems in Evolution. Biological Theory 2 (3): 276–289.Google Scholar
  143. Odling-Smee, F. J., Laland, K. N. and Feldman, M. W. (2003). Niche Construction. The Neglected Process in Evolution. Princeton University Press, Princeton.Google Scholar
  144. Page, R. D. (ed.) (2003). Tangled Trees: Phylogeny, Cospeciation, and Coevolution. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  145. Page, R. D. and Charleston, M. A. (1998). Trees within trees: Phylogeny and historical associations. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 13: 356–359.Google Scholar
  146. Pagel, M. (1994). The adaptationist wager. In Eggleton, P. and Vane-Wright, R. I. (eds.) Phylogenetics and Ecology. Academic Press, London, pp. 29–51.Google Scholar
  147. Pagel, M. and Meade, A. (2004). A phylogenetic mixture model for detecting pattern-heterogeneity in gene sequence or character-state data. Systematic Biology 53 (4): 571–581.Google Scholar
  148. Pagel, M. and Meade, A. (2005). Bayesin estimation of correlated evolution across cultures: a case study of marriage systems and wealth transfer at marriage. In Mace, R., Holden, C. J. and Shennan, S. J. (eds.) The Evolution of Cultural Diversity. A Phylogenetic Approach. UCL Press, London, pp. 235–256.Google Scholar
  149. Pagel, M. D. (1992). A method for the analysis of comparative data. Journal of Theoretical Biology 156 (4): 431–442.Google Scholar
  150. Pigeot, N. (1990). Technical and Social Actors: Flinknapping Specialists at Magdalenian Etiolles. Archaeological Review from Cambridge 9 (1): 126–141.Google Scholar
  151. Pitt Rivers, A. H. (1875). On the Principles of Classification Adopted in the Arrangement of His Anthropological Collection, Now Exhibited in the Bethnal Green Museum. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 4: 293–308.Google Scholar
  152. Pocklington, R. (2006). What Is a Culturally Transmitted Unit, and How Do We Find One? In Lipo, C. P., O’Brien, M. J., Collard, M. and Shennan, S. J. (eds.) Mapping our Ancestors. Phylogenetic Approaches in Anthropology and Prehistory. Aldine Transaction, New Brunswick, pp. 19–31.Google Scholar
  153. Pocklington, R. and Best, M. L. (1997). Cultural evolution and units of selection in replicating text. Journal of Theoretical Biology 188: 79–87.Google Scholar
  154. Price, T. D. (1991). The View from Europe: Concepts and Questions about Terminal Pleistocene Societies. In Dillehay, T. D. and Meltzer, D. (eds.) First Americans: Search and Research. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp. 185–208.Google Scholar
  155. Reader, S. M. and Laland, K. N. (eds.) (2003). Animal Innovation. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  156. Riede, F. (2005). Darwin vs. Bourdieu. Celebrity Deathmatch or Postprocessual Myth? Prolegomenon for the Reconciliation of Agentive-Interpretative and Ecological-Evolutionary Archaeology. In Cobb, H., Price, S., Coward, F. and Grimshaw, L. (Eds.) Investigating Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherer Identities: Case Studies from Palaeolithic and Mesolithic Europe. Oxbow, Oxford, pp. 45–64.Google Scholar
  157. Riede, F. (2006a). Chaîne Opératoire – Chaîne Evolutionnaire. Putting Technological Sequences in Evolutionary Context. Archaeological Review from Cambridge 21 (1): 50–75.Google Scholar
  158. Riede, F. (2006b). The Scandinavian Connection. The Roots of Darwinian Thinking in 19th Century Scandinavian Archaeology. Bulletin of the History of Archaeology 16 (1): 4–19.Google Scholar
  159. Riede, F. (2007a). Der Ausbruch des Laacher See-Vulkans vor 12.920 Jahren und urgeschichtlicher Kulturwandel am Ende des Alleröd. Eine neue Hypothese zum Ursprung der Bromme Kultur und des Perstunien. Mitteilungen der Gesellschaft für Urgeschichte 16: 25–54.Google Scholar
  160. Riede, F. (2007b). Reclaiming the Northern Wastes – An Integrated Darwinian Re-Examination of the Earliest Postglacial Recolonization of Southern Scandinavia. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis. University of Cambridge Cambridge.Google Scholar
  161. Riede, F. (2007c). ‘Stretched thin, like butter on too much bread…’: some thoughts about journeying in the unfamiliar landscapes of late Palaeolithic Southern Scandinavia. In Johnson, R. and Cummings, V. (Eds.) Prehistoric Journeys. Oxbow, Oxford, pp. 8–20.Google Scholar
  162. Riede, F. (2008a). The Laacher See-eruption (12,920 BP) and material culture change at the end of the Allerød in Northern Europe. Journal of Archaeological Science 35 (3): 591–599.Google Scholar
  163. Riede, F. (2008b). Maglemosian Memes: Technological Ontology, Craft Traditions and the Evolution of Northern European Barbed Points. In O’Brien, M. J. (Ed.) Cultural Transmission and Archaeology: Issues and Case Studies. Society for American Archaeology Press, Washington, pp. 178–189.Google Scholar
  164. Riede, F. (2009a). Climate change, demography and social relations: an alternative view of the Late Palaeolithic pioneer colonization of Southern Scandinavia. In McCartan, S., Woodman, P. C., Schulting, R. J. and Warren, G. (eds.) Mesolithic Horizons. Papers presented at the Seventh International Conference on the Mesolithic in Europe, Belfast 2005. Oxbow, Oxford.Google Scholar
  165. Riede, F. (2009b). Tangled Trees. Modeling Material Culture Change as Host-Associate Co-Speciation. In Shennan, S. J. (ed.) Pattern and Process in Cultural Evolution. University of California Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  166. Riede, F. (2010a). Why isn’t archaeology (more) Darwinian? A historical perspective. Journal of Evolutionary Psychology 8 (2): 183–204.Google Scholar
  167. Riede, F. (2010b). Niche construction theory and human prehistory. Using artefact phylogenies and comparative methods to study past human ecosystem engineering. In: García Rivero, D., Escacena Carrasco, J. L., and García Fernández, F. J. (eds.) Clasificación y Arqueología: Enfoques y métodos taxonómicos a la luz de la evolución darwiniana. University of Seville Press, Seville, pp. 175–204.Google Scholar
  168. Riede, F. (2011). Adaptation and niche construction in human prehistory: A case study from the southern Scandinavian Late Glacial. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 366 (1566): 793–808.Google Scholar
  169. Rieppel, O. (2007). Species: kinds of individuals or individuals of a kind. Cladistics 23 (4): 373–384.Google Scholar
  170. Sackett, J. (1999). The Archaeology of Solvieux: an Upper Paleolithic Open Air Site in France. UCLA Institute of Archaeology, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
  171. Sackett, J. R. (1991). Straight Archaeology French Style: The Phylogenetic Paradigm in Historic Perspective. In Clark, G. A. (ed.) Perspectives on the Past. Theoretical Biases in Mediterranean Hunter-Gatherer Research. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, pp. 109–139.Google Scholar
  172. Sandvik, H. (2008). Tree thinking cannot be taken for granted: challenges for teaching phylogenetics. Theory in Biosciences 127 (1): 34–51.Google Scholar
  173. Schild, R. (1984). Terminal Paleolithic of the North European Plain: A Review of Lost Chances, Potential, and Hopes. Advances in World Archaeology 3: 193–274.Google Scholar
  174. Schmider, B. (1982). The Magdalenian Culture of the Paris River-Basin and Its Relationship with the Nordic Cultures of the Late Old Stone Age. World Archaeology 14 (2): 259–269.Google Scholar
  175. Schwabedissen, H. (1954). Die Federmessergruppen des nordwesteuropäischen Flachlandes. Zur Ausbreitung des Spät-Magdalénien. Karl Wachholtz Verlag GmbH, Neumünster.Google Scholar
  176. Shanks, M. and Tilley, C. (1993). Re-Constructing archaeology: theory and practice. Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  177. Shennan, S. J. (1989). Cultural transmission and cultural change. In van der Leeuw, S. and Torrence, R. (eds.) Whats New? A Closer Look at the Process of Innovation. Routledge, London, pp. 330–346.Google Scholar
  178. Shennan, S. J. (2004a). Culture, society and evolutionary theory. Archaeological Dialogues 11 (2): 107–114.Google Scholar
  179. Shennan, S. J. (2004b). An evolutionary perspective on agency in archaeology. In Gardner, A. (ed.) Agency Uncovered: Archaeological perspectives on social agency, power, and being human. UCL Press, London, pp. 19–32.Google Scholar
  180. Shennan, S. J. and Steele, J. (1999). Cultural learning in hominids: a behavioural ecological approach. In Box, H. O. and Gibson, K. R. (eds.) Mammalian Social Learning: Comparative and Ecological Perspectives. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 367–388.Google Scholar
  181. Sperber, D. (1996). Explaining Culture. A Naturalistic Approach. Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  182. Sperber, D. (2000). Why memes won’t do. An objection to the memetic approach to culture. In Aunger, R. (Ed.) Darwinizing Culture. The Status of Memetics as a Science. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 163–173.Google Scholar
  183. Szymczak, K. (1987). Perstunian Culture - The Eastern Equivalent of the Lyngby Culture in the Neman Basin. In Burdukiewicz, J. M. and Kobusiewicz, M. (eds.) Late Glacial in central Europe: culture and environment. Polskiej Akademii Nauk, Wrocław, pp. 267–276.Google Scholar
  184. Tehrani, J. J., Collard, M. and Shennan, S. J. (2010). The cophylogeny of populations and cultures: reconstructing the evolution of Iranian tribal craft traditions using trees and jungles. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 365 (1559): 3865–3874.Google Scholar
  185. Tehrani, J. and Riede, F. (2008). Toward an archaeology of pedagogy: learning, teaching and the faithful replication of complex cultural skills. World Archaeology 40 (3): 316–331.Google Scholar
  186. Terberger, T. (2006). From the First Humans to the Mesolithic Hunters in the Northern German Lowlands – Current Results and Trends. In Møller Hansen, K. and Buck Pedersen, K. (eds.) Across the Western Baltic Proceedings of the archaeological conference “The Prehistory and Early Medieval Period in the Western Baltic” in Vordingborg, South Zealand, Denmark, March 27th–29th 2003. Sydsjællands Museums Publikationer, Vordingborg, pp. 23–56.Google Scholar
  187. Terrell, J. E. (1988). History as a family tree, history as an entangled bank: constructing images and interpretations of prehistory in the South Pacific. Antiquity 62: 642–657.Google Scholar
  188. Thornton, A. and Raihani, N. J. (2008). The evolution of teaching. Animal Behaviour 75 (6): 1823–1836.Google Scholar
  189. Todes, D. P. (1989). Darwin without Malthus: the struggle for existence in Russian evolutionary thought. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  190. Tomasello, M., Kruger, A. C. and Ratner, H. H. (1993). Cultural learning. The Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16 (3): 495–510.Google Scholar
  191. Trigger, B. G. (1989). A History of Archaeological Thought. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  192. Tukey, J. W. (1977). Exploratory Data Analysis. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Reading.Google Scholar
  193. Tylor, E. B. (1889). On a Method of Investigating the Development of Institutions; Applied to Laws of Marriage and Descent. The Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 18: 245–272.Google Scholar
  194. VanPool, C. S. (2008). Agents and Cultural Transmission. In O’Brien, M. J. (ed.) Cultural Transmission and Archaeology: Issues and Case Studies. Society for American Archaeology Press, Washington, pp. 190–200.Google Scholar
  195. VanPool, T. L., Palmer, C. T. and VanPool, C. S. (2008). Horned Serpents, Tradition, and the Tapestry of Culture. In O’Brien, M. J. (ed.) Cultural Transmission and Archaeology: Issues and Case Studies. Society for American Archaeology Press, Washington, pp. 77–90.Google Scholar
  196. VanPool, T. L. and VanPool, C. S. (2003). Agency and Evolution: The Role of Intended and Unintended Consequences of Action. In VanPool, T. L. and VanPool, C. S. (eds.) Essential Tensions in Archaeological Method and Theory. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 89–114.Google Scholar
  197. Wells, J. C. K., Strickland, S. and Laland, K. N. (eds.) (2006). Social Information Transmission and Human Biology. CRC Press, London.Google Scholar
  198. Wheeler, Q. D. and Platnick, N. I. (1999). The Phylogenetic Species Concept (sensu Wheeler and Platnick). In Wheeler, Q. D. and Meier, R. (eds.) Species Concepts and Phylogenetic Theory. A Debate. Columbia University Press, New York, pp. 55–69.Google Scholar
  199. Whewell, W. (1847). The philosophy of the inductive sciences: founded upon their history. John W. Parker, London.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Archaeology, Institute of Anthropology, Archaeology and LinguisticsAarhus UniversityMoesgårdDenmark

Personalised recommendations