Ethnoarchaeology in Siberia: an implication to late Palaeolithic settlements analysis

Ethnoarcheology has emerged out of processual archaeology that was a response to the intellectual critics of the 1960s. Adepts of processual or so called «Ne w» archaeology were dissatisfied with methodology of culture history’ s approach and argued that the P ast is knowable, that archaeology should adopt the scientific methods, using data to produce h ypotheses to be tested by additional data (Binford,1983 & 2000). Most of processualists embrace a system-ecological approach that deals with the ways in which cultural systems function, both internally and in relation to external factors, such as the environment, climate and landscape. Ironically, ethnoarchaeology born in the processual cradle play very important role in archaeo-logy even nowadays when processualism had to retreat under post-processual critics (Hodder, 1986). Today ethnoarchaeology seems to be one of the approaches in processual and post-processual archaeology that based on using of kno wledge on contemporary cultures of the peoples following traditional lifeways for explanation material remains (features and structures) of the P ast. The most general ground of ethnoarchaeological approach is relation between social culture and material culture expressed via behavioral patterns. From archaeological perspective such a ground allow us to develop hypothesis about behavior of prehistoric peoples at the base on ethnographic data and then to test it along an archaeological excavation (Kramer,1979).