The fate of evolutionary archaeology: survival or extinction?

Abstract

It is important to be clear as to whether a theory such as evolutionary archaeology pertains to biological evolution, in which acquired change is obliterated at the end of each generation, or cultural change, in which acquired change is retained. In evolutionary archaeology, (1) the population is said to consist of artifacts, yet (2) artifacts are said to be phenotypic. Neither (1) nor (2) is necessarily problematic in and of itself, but the two are inconsistent, as the first pertains to cultural change whereas the second to the biological evolution of humans. A first step to avoiding this problem is to recognize that there is a need for a theory of change specific to human culture. Referring to ongoing work using a related approach to cultural change, it is suggested that the inconsistencies in evolutionary archaeology, though problematic, are not insurmountable.

Keywords:

• Acquired characteristics
• evolutionary archaeology
• inheritance
• lineage
• natural selection
• phenotypic trait
• unit of replication

Notes

1 This was initiated by the pioneering efforts of Fisher (1930), Haldane (1932) and Wright (1931), and has since been extensively developed by other population geneticists.