Response to “Comment on Late Mousterian Persistence near the Arctic Circle”
International audience Contrary to what Zwyns et al. claim on a bibliographical basis, the lithic industry of Byzovaya cannot belong to the Streletskayan complex or be considered as Upper Palaeolithic (UP). Direct analysis of northern assemblages and of Streletskayan technologies reveals incompatibl...
Published in: | Science |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
Other Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
Language: | English |
Published: |
HAL CCSD
2012
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://hal.science/hal-01842825 https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1210211 |
Summary: | International audience Contrary to what Zwyns et al. claim on a bibliographical basis, the lithic industry of Byzovaya cannot belong to the Streletskayan complex or be considered as Upper Palaeolithic (UP). Direct analysis of northern assemblages and of Streletskayan technologies reveals incompatible features between these industries. Byzovaya is structured on specific Mousterian technologies and does not show any unique features of the UP. |
---|