Adaptation in Archaeology

  • Luis Alberto Borrero
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51726-1_251-2

Introduction

The theory of evolution is inherently attractive for archaeologists, who are concerned with the long-term history of humankind (Dunnell 1980). Changes through time during the long process of hominization are, by definition, adaptive. Adaptation is clearly one basic constituent of evolution. For that reason, the concept of adaptation – including the capacity for a cultural system to adjust to changes – is important in many approaches, particularly in ecologically oriented archaeology and, more recently, in evolutionary archaeology.

Definition

This variety of approaches using the concept of adaptation naturally leads to the existence of slightly different definitions (O’Brien and Holland 1992; Van Pool 2002).

Basically, adaptation refers to “the idea that organisms are fitted for the particular environments in which they live” (Alexander 1962: 826) or more directly to the “conformity between the organism and its environment” (Pianka 1983: 85).

It is accepted that an...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Alexander, G. 1962. General biology. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell.Google Scholar
  2. Bird, D.W., and J.F. O’Connell. 2006. Behavioral ecology and archaeology. Journal of Archaeological Research 14: 143–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boone, J., and E.A. Smith. 1998. Is it evolution yet? A critique of evolutionary archaeology. Current Anthropology 39: 141–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dunnell, R.C. 1980. Evolutionary theory and archaeology. In Advances in archaeological method and theory, ed. M. Schiffer, vol. 3, 35–99. New York: Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Gould, S.J. 2002. The structure of evolutionary theory. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Kelly, R.L. 1995. The foraging spectrum. Diversity in hunter-gatherer lifeways. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press.Google Scholar
  7. Kirch, P.V. 1980. The archaeological study of adaptation: Theoretical and methodological issues. In Advances in archaeological method and theory, ed. M. Schiffer, vol. 3, 101–156. New York: Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kirch, P.V. 2010. Peopling of the Pacific: A holistic anthropological perspective. Annual Review of Anthropology 39: 131–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Leonard, R.D., and G.T. Jones. 1987. Elements of an inclusive evolutionary model for archaeology. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 6: 199–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Neff, H. 1992. Ceramics and evolution. In Archaeological method and theory, ed. M. Schiffer, vol. 4, 141–193. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.Google Scholar
  11. O’Brien, M.J. 1987. Sedentism, population growth, and resource selection in the Woodland midwest: A review of coevolutionary developments. Current Anthropology 28: 177–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. O’Brien, M.J., and T.D. Holland. 1992. The role of adaptation in archaeological explanation. American Antiquity 57: 36–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. O’Brien, M.J., R.L. Lyman, and R.D. Leonard. 1998. Basic incompatibilities between evolutionary and behavioral archaeology. American Antiquity 63: 485–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Pianka, E.R. 1983. Evolutionary ecology. 3rd ed. New York: Harper & Row Publishers.Google Scholar
  15. Prentiss, A.M., J.C. Chatters, and I. Kuijt. 2009. Macroevolution in human prehistory. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Scheinsohn, V. 2011. Adeptos a la adaptación: tres propuestas clásicas para la arqueología y una evaluación. Antipoda. Revista de Antropología Arqueológica 13: 55–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Schiffer, M.B. 1996. Some relationships between behavioral and evolutionary archaeologies. American Antiquity 61: 643–662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Steward, J. 1955. Theory of culture change. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  19. Van Pool, T.L. 2002. Adaptation. In Darwin and archaeology, ed. J.P. Hart and J.E. Terrell, 15–28. Westport: Bergin & Garvey.Google Scholar
  20. Vrba, E., and N. Eldredge. 1984. Individuals, hierarchies, and processes: Towards a more complete evolutionary theory. Paleobiology 10: 146–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. White, L. 1949. The science of culture: A study of man and civilization. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CONICET-IMHICIHUBuenos AiresArgentina

Section editors and affiliations

  • Jordan Ralph
    • 1
  • Troy Lovata
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of ArchaeologyFlinders UniversityAdelaideAustralia
  2. 2.Honors CollegeThe University of New MexicoAlbuquerqueUSA