Editing Three-age system (section)

=== The Epipaleolithic and Protoneolithic of Stjerna and Obermaier ===
[[File:Caballo de Mas d'Azil.gif|thumb|upright=1.15|right|Small Magdalenian carving representing a horse]]
Sir John Evans never changed his mind, giving rise to a dichotomous view of the Mesolithic and a multiplication of confusing terms. On the continent, all seemed settled: there was a distinct Mesolithic with its own tools and both tools and customs were transitional to the Neolithic. Then in 1910, the Swedish archaeologist, [[Knut Stjerna]], addressed another problem of the Three-Age System: although a culture was predominantly classified as one period, it might contain material that was the same as or like that of another. His example was the [[Gallery grave]] Period of Scandinavia. It was not uniformly Neolithic, but contained some objects of bronze and more importantly to him three different subcultures.<ref>{{harvnb|Stjerna|1910|p=2}}</ref>

One of these "civilisations" (sub-cultures) located in the north and east of Scandinavia<ref>{{harvnb|Stjerna|1910|p=10}}</ref> was rather different, featuring but few gallery graves, using instead stone-lined pit graves containing implements of bone, such as harpoon and javelin heads. He observed that they "persisted during the recent Paleolithic period and also during the Protoneolithic." Here he had used a new term, "Protoneolithic", which was according to him to be applied to the Danish [[Ertebølle culture|kitchen-middens]].<ref>{{harvnb|Stjerna|1910|p=12}}: "... a persisté pendant la période paléolithique récente et même pendant la période protonéolithique."</ref>

Stjerna also said that the eastern culture "is attached to the Paleolithic civilization (''{{lang|fr|se trouve rattachée à la civilisation paléolithique}}'')." However, it was not intermediary and of its intermediates he said "we cannot discuss them here (''{{lang|fr|nous ne pouvons pas examiner ici}}'')." This "attached" and non-transitional culture he chose to call the [[Epipaleolithic]], defining it as follows:<ref>{{harvnb|Stjerna|1910|p=12}}</ref>
<blockquote>With Epipaleolithic I mean the period during the early days that followed the age of the reindeer, the one that retained Paleolithic customs. This period has two stages in Scandinavia, that of Maglemose and that of Kunda. (''{{lang|fr|Par époque épipaléolithique j'entends la période qui, pendant les premiers temps qui ont suivi l'âge du Renne, conserve les coutumes paléolithiques. Cette période présente deux étapes en Scandinavie, celle de Maglemose et de Kunda.}}'')</blockquote>

[[File:Pointe de Tardenois.png|thumb|left|Tardenoisian Mode 5-point – Mesolithic or Epipaleolithic?]]
There is no mention of any Mesolithic, but the material he described had been previously connected with the Mesolithic. Whether or not Stjerna intended his Protoneolithic and Epipaleolithic as a replacement for the Mesolithic is not clear, but [[Hugo Obermaier]], a German archaeologist who taught and worked for many years in Spain, to whom the concepts are often erroneously attributed, used them to mount an attack on the entire concept of Mesolithic. He presented his views in {{lang|es|El Hombre fósil}}, 1916, which was translated into English in 1924. Viewing the Epipaleolithic and the Protoneolithic as a "transition" and an "interim" he affirmed that they were not any sort of "transformation:"<ref>{{Cite book |last=Obermaier |first=Hugo |url=https://archive.org/details/fossilmaninspain00ober |title=Fossil man in Spain |publisher=Yale University Press |year=1924 |location=New Haven |page=[https://archive.org/details/fossilmaninspain00ober/page/322 322] |url-access=registration}}</ref>
<blockquote>But in my opinion this term is not justified, as it would be if these phases presented a natural evolutionary development – a progressive transformation from Paleolithic to Neolithic. In reality, the final phase of the [[Capsian]], the [[Tardenoisian]], the [[Azilian]] and the northern [[Maglemosian|Maglemose]] industries are the posthumous descendants of the Palaeolithic ...</blockquote>

The ideas of Stjerna and Obermaier introduced a certain ambiguity into the terminology, which subsequent archaeologists found and find confusing. Epipaleolithic and [[Protoneolithic]] cover the same cultures, more or less, as does the Mesolithic. Publications on the Stone Age after 1916 include some sort of explanation of this ambiguity, leaving room for different views. Strictly speaking the Epipaleolithic is the earlier part of the Mesolithic. Some identify it with the Mesolithic. To others it is an Upper Paleolithic transition to the Mesolithic. The exact use in any context depends on the archaeological tradition or the judgement of individual archaeologists. The issue continues.