Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T15:02:34.676Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Excavation of an Acheulian workshop at Isampur, Karnataka (India)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

K. Paddayya ,
Richa Jhaldiyal  and
M.D. Petraglia
K. Paddayya
Affiliation:
Department of Archaeology, Deccan College, Pune 411006, India
Richa Jhaldiyal
Affiliation:
Department of Archaeology, Deccan College, Pune 411006, India
M.D. Petraglia
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington DC 20560, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
News and notes
Information
Antiquity , Volume 74 , Issue 286 , December 2000 , pp. 751 - 752
Copyright
Copyright © Antiquity Publications Ltd. 2000

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Paddayya, K. 1982. The Acheulian culture of the Hunsgi valley, peninsular India: a settlement system perspective. Pune: Deccan College.Google Scholar
Paddayya, 1991, The Acheulian culture of the Hunsgi-Baichbal Valleys, Peninsular India: a processual study, Quartar 41/42:111–38.Google Scholar
Paddayya, K., Jhaldiyal, R. & Petraglia, M.D.. 1999. Geoarchaeology of the Acheulian workshop at Isampur, Hunsgi Valley, Karnataka, Man and Environment 24(1): 167–84.Google Scholar
Petraglia, M.D., Laporta, P. & Paddayya, K.. 1999. Isampur, the first Acheulian quarry in India : stone tool manufacture, biface morphology and behaviours, Journal of Anthropological Research 55: 39–70.Google Scholar