Dados Bibliográficos

AUTOR(ES) R.L. Lyman , M.J. O'Brien , Robert D. Leonard
ANO 2003
TIPO Artigo
PERIÓDICO American Antiquity
ISSN 0002-7316
E-ISSN 2325-5064
EDITORA Cambridge University Press
DOI 10.2307/3557109
CITAÇÕES 3
ADICIONADO EM 2025-08-18
MD5 38d2b114afb2ad76cb927258037e04a7

Resumo

Douglas Bamforth's recent paper in American Antiquity, 'Evidence and Metaphor in Evolutionary Archaeology,' charges that Darwinism has little to offer archaeology except in a metaphorical sense. Specifically, Bamforth claims that arguments that allegedly link evolutionary processes to the archaeological record are unsustainable. Given Bamforth's narrow view of evolution—that it must be defined strictly in terms of changes in gene frequency—he is correct. But no biologist or paleontologist would agree with Bamforth's claim that evolution is a process that must he viewed fundamentally at the microlevel. Evolutionary archaeology has argued that materials in the archaeological record are phenotypic in the same way that hard parts of organisms are. Thus changes in the frequencies of archaeological variants can be used to monitor the effects of selection and drift on the makers and users of those materials. Bamforth views this extension of the human phenotype as metaphorical because to him artifacts are not somatic features, meaning their production and use are not entirely controlled by genetic transmission. He misses the critical point that in terms of evolution, culture is as significant a transmission system as genes are. There is nothing metaphorical about viewing cultural transmission from a Darwinian point of view.

Ferramentas