Deborah I. Olszewski

New excavations at the site of Contrebandiers Cave, Morocco

PaleoAnthropology 2012: 145−201.

Nubian Complex strategies in the Egyptian high desert.

Systematic survey by the Abydos Survey for Paleolithic Sites project has recorded Nubian Complex artifact density, distribution, typology, and technology across the high desert landscape west of the Nile Valley in Middle Egypt. Our work contrasts with previous investigations of Nubian Complex settlement systems in Egypt, which focused on a small number of sites in the terraces of the Nile Valley, the desert oases, and the Red Sea Mountains. Earlier research interpreted the Nubian Complex, in particular, as a radiating settlement system that incorporated a specialized point production. Our high desert data, however, indicate that the Nubian Complex associated with early modern humans in this region of the high desert reflects a circulating, rather than a radiating, settlement system, and that point production has been over-emphasized. Data available from our work, as well as sites investigated by others, do not conclusively identify Nubian Complex behavioral strategies as modern. These data, however, do contribute to the understanding of landscape use by early modern human populations living along the Nile Valley Corridor route out of Africa.

High Desert Paleolithic Survey at Abydos, Egypt

Abstract In the winters of 2000 and 2002–2003 we surveyed a portion of the high desert immediately adjacent to the Nile Valley at Abydos, Egypt. The initial field season assessed the areas potential to contribute to the existing database of Paleolithic landscapes. Limited work done prior to our initial survey indicated that such Paleolithic sites in this region, while present, were relatively infrequent. Contrary to this expectation, we found the desert landscape densely littered with Paleolithic artifacts. Our subsequent work documented the extent of the distribution and the nature of Paleolithic artifacts. The goal of this work is to develop models of desert landscape use, particularly during the Middle Paleolithic, which can be integrated into those existing for the Nile Valley. In doing this, we provide a more complete picture of hominid adaptations in a place and time period critical to our understanding of the origins of modern human behaviors.

Comparing Middle to Upper Paleolithic Transitions in the Middle East and Egypt

Transitions in the lithic archaeological record are subject to diverse questions. These include whether this record is characterized by gradualism or by punctuated changes; how different terminologies (for example, the Middle Stone Age and the Middle Paleolithic) affect interpretations; at what point a lithic assemblage is classified as Upper rather than Middle Paleolithic; and if the lithic transitions from the Middle to Upper Paleolithic for both modern humans and Neandertals are similar or different.

Archaeological Variability and Interpretation in Global Perspective

Earth, and its archaeological record, is diverse. Archaeologists continually work to characterize how the archaeological record formed and in what ways it can be interpreted to learn about past human lifeways. Researchers continue to revise their ideas and approaches as new evidence is unearthed, the puzzle pieces shift, and images of the past are reconstructed. Sullivan and Olszewski acknowledge that archaeological variability influences researchers’ processes, and they have created a volume that provides disciplinary self-reflection. The book’s contributors use global case studies that incorporate diverse theoretical and methodological perspectives—conceptual, crosscultural, experimental, scalar, etc.—to provide insights that illuminate the myriad ways in which archaeologists can approach human prehistory. The book’s first section, “Advances in Interpreting Regional Archaeological Records,” explores spatiality: how sites, assemblages, and artifacts are distributed within landscapes and how these data can be used to investigate prehistoric technological organization, human interactions, mobility, and what factors contribute to humans’ sense of place. Two articles in this section stand out. First, Holdoway et al. investigate how the terminal Holocene arid environment in western New South Wales, Australia, influenced raw material access, technology, artifact reuse, and occupational durations at a landscape level. They conclude that Aboriginal mobile lifestyles in this arid zone focused on provisioning people rather than provisioning places. This article demonstrates that studies of raw material procurement and mobility should consider a humanfocused approach in addition to the more typical place-focused one. In the second standout, Roth writes about how “persistent places” emerged in the Mimbres Valley in southwestern New Mexico and what socioeconomic consequences resulted as these occupations continued. Roth notes that how people reacted to environmental change in these landscapes influenced regional culture change. Among the articles in this collection, Roth’s continues to linger in my mind and make me (re-) consider how I learn about and understand both the archaeological record and how prehistoric groups related to the spaces they occupied. The book’s second section, “Venerable Sites Revisited,” reinterprets important archaeological sites via studies that use new methods and theoretical frameworks. Here, Rollefson’s contribution is notable for integrating experimental research into a new model of biface production focused on technological features (i.e., chaînes opératoires) that he uses to reclassify the lithic assemblage from Tabun Cave, Israel. Rollefson finds that when the assemblage is classified following the typical morphological protocols, researchers over-characterize biface quantities in the assemblage. His technoBOOK REVIEWS | 539