| Summary: | The sorting of artefacts into categories for study represents simultaneously one of the most important – and yet one of the most problematic – tasks in archaeology. In an ideal world, the archaeological record would comprise clearly-defined and easily-separable groups of material for consistent identification and interpretation; the reality, though, is somewhat different. Here, in a systematic review of associated classification systems, the long-standing dart-arrow dichotomy in North American archaeology provides valuable insight into the relationship between classificatory idealism and practical reality, and, in-so-doing, lends itself to a much-needed reassessment of technological change. As the results derived from different study areas using different classification analyses make clear, traditional assumptions of a consistent large dart, small arrow point divide are far too simplistic, overlook the importance of individual context, and obscure the deeper complexities of human technological adaptation. Although a necessary and inevitable part of the interpretive process, thus, artefact classification must be approached in a more reflexive manner if the results derived are to provide meaningful insight into past systems and behaviour; something that can only be achieved via regular systems of review.
|
|---|
