A wet strawman: A response to Ward et al.

Jonathan Benjamin, Michael O'Leary, Jo McDonald, Sean Ulm, Peter Jeffries, Geoff Bailey

Research output: Contribution to journalLetterpeer-review

Abstract

Ward et al. (2022) assert in their desktop study that we are “mistaken” in our interpretation of the artifacts at the Cape Bruguières Channel (CBC), Flying Foam Passage (FF), and Dolphin Island (DI) sites as evidence of cultural activity on a pre-inundation land surface (Benjamin et al., 2020 [CBC and FF]; Dortch et al., 2019 [DI]) and that we have failed to take account of local hydrodynamic processes that could have displaced artifacts and moved them over much greater distances than we thought possible. They argue two key points in support: (1) that “these sites are in the intertidal zone” (p. 783) and (2) that “many or all artefacts are likely to have been reworked” (p. 783).
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)813-818
Number of pages6
JournalGeoarchaeology-An International Journal
Volume37
Issue number6
Early online date26 Sep 2022
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Nov 2022

Keywords

  • archaeology
  • Australia
  • bathymetry
  • underwater cultural heritage

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'A wet strawman: A response to Ward et al.'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this