Reader’s Report
Review of Bachelor’s Diploma thesis Title of Thesis
Field of Study: Centre of Prehistoric Archaeology of the Near East Name of Author: Denis Štefanisko
Supervisor: Mgr. Inna Mateiciucová, Ph.D.
Reader: Ferran Borrell Tena, Ph.D.
The presented work is evaluated by these criteria:
1. Treatment of the subject, content intention and purpose, fulfillment of assignment, processing of literature
The first thing I have to say is that it has been a great pleasure to read Mr. Štefanisko's BA thesis. He is dealing with a major topic within Near Eastern archaeology, and Neolithic in particular. Projectiles (Byblos, Amuq and other types) together with bi-directional technology are considered for many researchers the chief unifying feature of PPNB interaction sphere throughout the Levant. During this long period of time (10 to 8th millennia cal. BC), right when agriculture and animal herding are being consolidated, hunting is still an important source of meat. Projectiles are abundant and large in size, becoming a unique source of information for archaeologists. Many technological and typological studies have been undertaken and published but, strangely nobody has in the Levant, like in other regions dealing with similar problemathics (e.g. North America and dart-throwers), attempted a detailed and scientific approach to determining the delivery systems used.
The morphometric analyses performed by the candidate represent a brilliant approach to scientifically identify which weapons (bow, spears or spear-throwers) were used, which is key to not only understand hunting activities but also social organization of the Neolithic communities. In future his results will be complemented by use-wear analyses, impact fracture analyses and data from wild fauna assemblages from the same site, but this first and solid step was necessary.
The candidate shows familiarity with both the chronology and the historical and regional background. From the very first moment he understands what he is doing and shows the reader where he wants to go, whether if the road will be full of obstacles. By reading the candidate's work it is clear that he thinks, which is not that common nowadays, and shows a well structured mind to face scientific problems. He is open to use new methodologies, cautious with his interpretations and accepts the limits of his work.
The results of his research are clear, solid and good so the aims of the BA thesis are largely accomplished.
(Mark A)
2. Language, requirements concerning linguistic accuracy (orthographic mistakes and other lingual mistakes)
Concerning the language, the thesis is good and easy to understand. The candidate is familiar with the technical terminology and the writing is quite fluid. His English is not perfect but this is something we, non-native English speakers, have to deal with during all our career
(Mark A)
3. Formal requirements, formal design, required layout and content, following citation norms, references, bibliography
The bibliography used is correct. Almost all relevant publications are there. I only miss one:
Abbès, F., 2003. Les outillages néolithiques en Syrie du Nord. Méthode de débitage et gestion laminaire durant le PPNB. (British Archaeological Reports International Series
1150.) Oxford: Archaeopress In page 154 he proposes the use of bow (large or small reinforced) during the PPNB although he also accepts that the larger projectiles, as proposed before by Cauvin (1968: 66-69) and Roodenberg (1986, 44), could be javelins or knives.
It will be good to have a look to it, even though it is mere speculation because none of the authors mentioned undertook any study on projectiles.
If we go into details, I have found that Rollefson (1998) in The Prehistory of Jordan (Edited by D.O.
Henry, BAR 705: 102-126) mentions that atl-atl would be used during the Middle PPNB at Ain Ghazal, while during PPNC bow and arrow would virtually exclusive. This statement is not proved in the publication even though he cites a MA thesis, which could be difficult to find, made by J.
Eighmey: A functional Analysis of Projectile Points from the Neolithic Site of 'Ain Ghazal. San Diego University.
The rest of the formal aspects (citation norm, references, etc) are ok (Mark A)
4. Overall impression, comments, topics, questions for discussion
In conclusion, a good research BA thesis, which clearly shows that the candidate has successfully accomplished what a BA thesis is for. With time he will be better, of course, but now he has done and excellent work, and this is how I suggest that his work should be marked: vyberte hodnocení
Proposed overall assessment: A
In Brno Ferran Borrell Tena Centre de Recherche Français à Jérusalem (CRFJ_CNRS)
Signature
