|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
INTRODUCTION The Eastern Sequence Project (ESP) was formally initiated in 1996 with the intention that over an extended period the project could re-assess Australian archaeological assemblages from sites in several sub-regions in southeastern New South Wales, e.g. Upper Mangrove Creek catchment, Sydney sub-region, the Hunter Valley, the Blue Mountains, and the NSW south coast. This project concentrates on studies of technological structure and change during the Holocene, and the landscape context of those technologies.
PROJECT GOALS Our long-term aim is to identify the nature and directionality of technological changes in the sequence of stone artefact assemblages in Aboriginal sites in the Sydney Basin, and to compare the temporal trends between and within this region. The Sydney Basin is a geological region (a structural entity) that extends from the Hunter River in the north to Batemans Bay in the south, and as far west as Lithgow and Ulan (on the upper reaches of the Goulburn River). Fred McCarthy proposed a regional sequence for this area in the 1940s which he called the Eastern Regional Sequence (ERS). Since that time the notion of the ERS has been widely used by archaeologists working in southeastern Australia. However, over time variations in the terminology used to identify the particular phases have been proposed, the nature of the assemblages in each of the phases has been re-described, and the dates assigned to the transition from one phase to another have not been consistent across the Sydney Basin. It is not clear whether such variation represents a reasonable image of the archaeological record or whether it is a product of inter-observer difference. In this project we will develop a framework for describing and explaining the temporal trends between sites within the Basin as a whole. One goal is therefore to review and systematically evaluate the artefact assemblages from the Sydney Basin with a view to determining: (a) whether the sequences from the now many excavated sites are actually the same; and (b) what level of uniformity or variability exists in the assemblages of each phase at individual sites across the Sydney Basin, and in the dates at which the transition from one phase to another occurs. Another goal of the project is to systematise current explanatory models for the nature and rate and direction of technological change in southeastern New South Wales. It is anticipated that this will enable the connection between technological strategies and their landscape setting to be examined. This means it will be possible to develop more sophisticated cultural selectionist models of prehistoric change, of the type that have already been proposed for the area (see Hiscock 2002a). The significance of the overall project is that this will be a major Australian project in which stone artefacts from a coherent sample of sites have been studied in detail with a view to examining, describing and explaining assemblage variability through a detailed technological/materialist approach, and determining whether there is a uniform trajectory of archaeological change in a single broad region.
Excavation at Mussel Shelter (photo by V.Attenbrow)
METHODS
One characteristic of the Project is the emphasis on recording and analysing artefact attributes digitally with the aid of SigmaScan Pro image-analysis software as well as standard metrical equipment. This approach facilitates complex measurement of artefact shape and retouch extent.
Screen capture of image analysis in progress.
RESULTS TO DATE Hiscock, P. and V. Attenbrow 1996 Backed into a corner. Australian Archaeology 42:64-65. Hiscock, P. and V.Attenbrow 1998 Early Holocene Backed Artefacts from Australia. Archaeology in Oceania 33: 49-63. Abstract: Many archaeologists have argued that backed artefacts, or backed ‘blades’, were used in Australia only during the last 4500 years. We show that those arguments are theoretically flawed and present case studies which demonstrate the manufacture of backed artefacts in the early Holocene. Implications of early Holocene backed artefacts are explored. Hiscock, P. and V.Attenbrow 2003 Early Australian implement variation: a reduction model. Journal of Archaeological Science 30(2): 239-249. Abstract: The composition of lithic assemblages is typically depicted in terms the relative abundance of different implement types. In this paper we hypothesize that the characteristics of early Australian assemblages said to distinguish those types are part of a morphological continuum, and that this continuum is largely explained as a reflection of different levels of reduction. We demonstrate the viability of this perspective at one of the classic sites at which early industries were defined, Capertee 3. The existence of an Australian technology structured around continuous reduction without evidence of "imposed form" reveals that this pattern is widespread and should not be taken to represent an "archaic" approach to stone working. Implications for conventional interpretations of Palaeolithic stone implements are briefly examined. Hiscock, P. and V.Attenbrow 2002 Reduction continuums in Eastern Australia: measurement and implications at Capertee 3. In Sean Ulm (ed.) Barriers, Borders, Boundaries. Tempus volume 7. Pp.167-174. University of Queensland. Abstract: At one of the classic Australian sites we document how retouched flakes (often called 'scrapers') display a morphological continuum, and that this continuum is largely explained as a reflection of different levels of reduction. The measurement and interpretation of retouching patterns, and their explanation in terms of the extent of reduction, is discussed. We argue that the demonstration of continuous variation at Capertee 3 has implications for artefact analysis elsewhere in Australia. Researchers should no longer assume that a segmented model appropriately describes the fundamental pattern of morphological variation in Australian assemblages. Consequently, Australian archaeologists aiming to identify and explain the nature of artefact variation should not continue to use conventional typological classification as though this was necessarily the appropriate, or even the only, analytical practice. Instead they should be aware that a fundamental question about assemblage composition and artefact variation is whether in any particular region or assemblage morphological variation takes the form of a segmented or continuous pattern. Hiscock, P. and V.Attenbrow 2004 A revised sequence of backed artefact production at Capertee 3. Archaeology in Oceania 39:94-99. Abstract: Re-analysis of the artefact assemblage from Capertee 3, an Australian rockshelter excavated by F.D. McCarthy in the 1950s and 1960s, yields a revised image of chronological changes in backed artefact production. A technologically-defined sample of backed retouched flakes gives a new depiction of the vertical distribution of backed artefacts in this site. Analysis of artefact weathering indicates most specimens were probably altered in situ, with minimal large-scale vertical displacement. Calibration of radiocarbon dates provides refined age-depth estimates for the site. The result is identification of backed artefacts up to 6000 to 7000 years old, documentation of many backed specimens prior to 3500 cal b.p., and observation of only a relatively brief period, between 1500 and 3500 cal BP, in which backed artefact production rates were extremely high. Changes in production rates are similar to those previously reported from Upper Mangrove Creek.
RESEARCHERS Peter Hiscock is a Reader in the School of Archaeology and Anthropology at the Australian National University. He obtained a PhD from the University of Queensland, and is currently a Research Associate of the Australian Museum, and an Honorary Research Fellow of the Northern Territory University. His specialities include lithic technology and assemblage variation in Australia and island Southeast Asia. Mailing address: Dr Peter Hiscock, School of Archaeology and Anthropology, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia, 0200 Email address: peter.hiscock@anu.edu.au Val Attenbrow is a Senior Research Scientist in the Division of Anthropology at the Australian Museum in Sydney. She obtained a PhD from the University of Sydney for her detailed quantitative study of the Upper Mangrove Creek Catchment (Attenbrow 1987). Her research interests include land and resource use patterns, particularly in coastal south-eastern Australia. Mailing address: Dr Val Attenbrow, Division of Anthropology, Australian Museum, 6 College Street, Sydney, NSW Australia, 2010. Email address: vala@austmus.gov.au
REFERENCES Attenbrow, V. J. 1987. The Upper Mangrove Creek Catchment: a study of quantitative changes in the archaeological record. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Sydney. Clarkson, Chris. 2002. An Index of Invasiveness for the Measurement of Unifacial and Bifacial Retouch: A Theoretical, Experimental and Archaeological Verification. Journal of Archaeological Science 29, 65–75. Hiscock, P. in press. Looking the other way. A materialist/technological approach to classifying tools and implements, cores and retouched flakes. In S. McPherron and J. Lindley (Eds) Tools or Cores? The Identification and Study of Alternative Core Technology in Lithic Assemblages. University of Pennsylvania Museum. Hiscock, P. 2002a Pattern and context in the Holocene proliferation of backed artefacts in Australia. Pp. 163-177 in Robert G. Elston and Steven L. Kuhn (eds) Thinking Small: Global Perspectives on Microlithization. Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association (AP3A) number 12. Hiscock, P. 2002b Quantifying the size of artefact assemblages. Journal of Archaeological Science 29, 251-258. Hiscock, P. and V. Attenbrow 1996 Backed into a corner. Australian Archaeology 42, 64-65. Hiscock, P. and V. Attenbrow 1998 Early Holocene Backed Artefacts from Australia. Archaeology in Oceania 33, 49-63. Hiscock, P. and V. Attenbrow 2003 Early Australian implement variation: a reduction model. Journal of Archaeological Science 30(2), 239-249 Kuhn, S. 1990. A geometric index of reduction for unifacial stone tools. Journal of Archaeological Science 17, 585-593. McCarthy, F. D. 1948. The Lapstone Creek excavation: two culture periods revealed in eastern New South Wales, Records of the Australian Museum 22, 1-34.
IMAGES  This diagram illustrates the pattern of continuous reduction that is evident in the 'scrapers' that were recovered from Capertee 3. This pattern suggests that prehistoric knappers sought to extend the use-life of these items but were not working the specimen into an 'ideal specimen'. Consequently the archaeological practice of arbitrarily dividing assemblage variation into 'types' is probably misleading. The ESP analyses seek to establish the structure of technology in terms of its processes.
LINKS Description of ESP on the Australian Museum web
site: Photographs to accompany the paper: Hiscock, P. and V.Attenbrow 1998 Early Holocene backed artefacts from Australia. Archaeology in Oceania. Hiscock, P. and V.Attenbrow 1998 Early Holocene Backed Artefacts from Australia. Archaeology in Oceania 33:49-63. (View a copy in .pdf format) Val Attenbrow's web page: Peter Hiscock's web page:
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We acknowledge the Australian Museum for permission to reproduce the photograph of excavations at Capertee3, and for funding that allowed us to purchase the SigmaScan Pro software.
|
Artefact analysis in the ESP concentrates on descriptions of prehistoric stoneworking technology within the materialist framework provided by Hiscock (in press). Quantitative methods used to describe these technologies include Kuhn’s (1990) reduction index, Clarkson’s (2002) invasiveness index, and Hiscock’s (2002b) method for estimating abundance. The productivity of these approaches has been demonstrated by the initial analysis of the Capertian assemblage from Capertee 3 (see Hiscock and Attenbrow 2003).