Technology and tradition in the eastern Arctic, 2500 BC–AD 1200: A dynamic technological investigation of lithic assemblages from the Palaeo-Eskimo traditions of Greenland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main objective in this study is to bring the acts and thoughts of prehistoric people into focus. This is attempted by introducing the dynamic technological methodology, in a case study, to Arctic archaeology. The case study consists of an investigation of the lithic chaînes opératoires and lithic concepts of production for the five accepted Palaeo-Eskimo cultures in the easternmost Arctic (primarily Greenland). As a precondition for the lithic chaînes opératoires analyses, a study of outcrops of lithic materials suited for knapping (microcrystalline quartzes (mcq), metamorphosed slates (killiaq), fine-grained basalts, quartz and quartzite, etc.), that are found in Greenland, was conducted. The study was primarily completed on the basis of information from earlier surveys by geologists and archaeologists, but was complemented by a survey of northern Nuussuaq in 2004. The lithic chaînes opératoires studied is documented and explained by a comprehensive number of drawings, ordered according to the steps in the process, from the procurement of the raw materials, the shaping of preforms, to the discard of the rejuvenated tool. Thus an important result of the investigation is a well-documented analysis of the dynamic change of the lithic artefact types and a definition of the range of the formal tool types in the Palaeo-Eskimo groups of Greenland. Because of the detailed knowledge of the different concepts of lithic productions achieved through the investigation, and the affinity between social traditions and technological knowledge, the results of the investigation is employed to discuss the cultural history of the eastern Arctic. The conclusions from this discussion is that Saqqaq and Independence I must remain identified as two regional traditions, while Dorset I and Independence II should be understood as the same regional tradition, named Greenlandic Dorset in this study. The change in lithic technology from Saqqaq to Dorset I is abrupt, and there can therefore be no technological continuity between these two groups in Greenland, although they might have been present at the same time. During the chaînes opératoires analysis of lithic inventories from the Thule regions, two so far unknown Palaeo-Eskimo groups in Greenland have been identified from distinct lithic technologies: the Pre-Dorset and the Early Canadian Dorset. The appearance of these groups, in the most western Thule region, suggests that the Palaeo-Eskimo cultural sequence of Ellesmere Island has to be mirrored in Northwest Greenland. The final Palaeo-Eskimo group in Greenland, the Late Dorset in the High Arctic, has a lithic technology in line with that of Middle Dorset. However, changes and lithic technological devolutions, among other reasons due to the first use of metal do appear in this period. Because of careful selection, high standardisation, high precision and a long curation of the tools in the Palaeo-Eskimo lithic process, the stepwise intentions in the lithic production concepts are comparatively easily described. It is therefore finally concluded that the dynamic technological methodology is very well suited for the study of lithic technology in the Palaeo-Eskimo tradition, and that this methodology, e.g. in combination with spatial analysis, in the future can be an important method in the investigation of Palaeo-Eskimo cultural history, and for the understanding of behaviour and social aspects in the Palaeo-Eskimo traditions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".