Response to Bataille et al.'s 'Technological differences between Kostenki 17/II (Spitsynskaya industry, Central Russia) and the Protoaurignacian: Reply to Dinnis et al. (2019)' [J. Hum. Evol. (2019), 102685]
J Hum Evol
.
2020 Sep:146:102792.
doi: 10.1016/j.jhevol.2020.102792.
Epub 2020 Apr 28.
Authors
Rob Dinnis
1
,
Alexander Bessudnov
2
,
Natasha Reynolds
3
,
Abi Pate
4
,
Mikhail Sablin
5
,
Andrei Sinitsyn
2
Affiliations
1
The British Museum, Franks House, 56 Orsman Road, London, N1 5QL, UK. Electronic address: rdinnis@britishmuseum.org.
2
Institute for the History of Material Culture, Russian Academy of Sciences, Dvortsovaia Naberezhnaia 18, Saint Petersburg, 191186, Russia.
3
UMR 5199 PACEA, Université de Bordeaux, Bâtiment B8, Allée Geoffroy Saint Hilaire, CS 50023, Pessac Cedex, 33615, France.
4
Edinburgh, UK.
5
Zoological Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, Universitetskaya Nab. 1, Saint Petersburg, 199034, Russia.
PMID:
32359721
DOI:
10.1016/j.jhevol.2020.102792
No abstract available
Keywords:
Aquitaine model; Arbreda; Aurignacian; Fumane; Labeko Koba; Lithic technology.
Publication types
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Comment
MeSH terms
Archaeology*
Industry
Russia
Technology*