In the eye of the beholder: contextual issues for Bayesian modelling at the Middle-to-Upper Palaeolithic transition

Abstract

Refining and interpreting the chronology of the so-called Middle-to-Upper Palaeolithic transition continues to be a contentious issue, polarizing the opinion of archaeologists, anthropologists and dating experts alike. Bayesian modelling has become an important means for organizing and interpreting an increasing number of available radiocarbon dates. Here we address what we consider important oversights in recent models purportedly demonstrating a chronological overlap between the Mousterian and Châtelperronian and a very early appearance of the Aurignacian in Western Europe. When faced with closer scrutiny, the integrity of several dated contexts appears less than ideal, questioning either the reliability of the ages obtained and/or their use in such models. Bayesian modelling can in some instances present an illusion of higher resolution and reliability; however, our comprehension of the chronology of the Middle-to-Upper Palaeolithic transition may be in more need of taphonomic revisions of archaeological contexts than it is of new statistical models.