5 Comparisons, Contrasts, and Conclusions
Before noting traits shared by the Arnipik and Tyara assemblages, a few words of caution and explanation may prove useful. I hope they will remain alive in the reader's mind as he examines the three closely related conclusions presented in this chapter. The three conclusions are, in order, a pr...
| Published in: | Memoirs of the Society for American Archaeology |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
1968
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0081130000003269 https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S0081130000003269 |
| Summary: | Before noting traits shared by the Arnipik and Tyara assemblages, a few words of caution and explanation may prove useful. I hope they will remain alive in the reader's mind as he examines the three closely related conclusions presented in this chapter. The three conclusions are, in order, a preliminary conclusion of restricted application, an intermediate conclusion of wider import, and a final conclusion of general consequence to this study. These conclusions' ranges of consequence increase as the discussion expands to encompass broader reaches of evidence and thinking pertinent to the question of Dorset culture origins. First, I have assumed, for previously presented or self-evident reasons, that the Tyara and Arnapik assemblages are pure assemblages, that is, that neither contains artifacts made by peoples of other cultures. Second, since the Arnapik material comprises only stone artifacts, comparison between that site and the bone, antler, and ivory artifacts from Tyara is precluded. |
|---|