207 research outputs found
Book review: Lithic technological analysis: theory and practice
Lithic Technological Analysis: Theory and Practice
by Yinghua Li
Social Sciences Academic Press (China), 2017, pp. 459. ISBN 978-7-5201-0787-7
https://www.ssap.com.cn/c/2017-07-12/1057538.shtm
Nouvelles données sur le peuplement ancien de la Nouvelle-Calédonie : la vallée de la Koumac (Grande-Terre)
Les premiÚres fouilles préhistoriques et datations réalisées dans la vallée de la Koumac montrent que l'occupation des vallées de Nouvelle-Calédonie est aussi ancienne que les premiers sites "Lapita" de la cÎte (ca. 3000 BP). Les vallées permettent également une étude interdisciplinaire de l'ensemble des activités humaines, y compris la production d'industrie lithique, peu étudiée jusqu'alors. (Résumé d'auteur
Time, memory and alterity in prehistoric lithic technology: Synthesis and perspectives of the French technogenetic approach
The technogenetic approach in the field of prehistoric lithic technology studies originated in the late 1980s. Traditional approaches, such as typology and production technology, have tended to approach prehistoric lithic objects through their socio-cultural and economic dimensions, without really considering the existence of a technogenesis prior to these contingencies. The apprehension of this technogenetic dimension in prehistory will call upon both the philosophy and the anthropology of techniques to lead to a double approach of the artefacts: a technogenetic approach of the lithic object according to the technical criteria of its genesis; and a psychosocial approach of the object according to the criteria proper to its artisanal production within a major technical system. The objective of this article is to identify two fundamental existences constituting the technical object, one internal (technogenetic) with technical lineages and the other external (psychosocial) with technical trajectories. The spatio-temporal distribution of prehistoric technical otherness on different continents has logically led to new questions, findings and new criteria of analysis. On this basis, our approach will aim to revisit the main conceptual axes of the foundations of the technological approach, to clarify old questions while developing new expertise. Through the application of key concepts such as time, memory and otherness, an overall methodology will also be discussed and will help proposing its epistemological line
Le techno-complexe hoabinhien en Asie du Sud-est continentale : Lâhistoire dâun galet qui cache la forĂȘt
The prehistory of Southeast Asia is characterized by some chaĂźnes opĂ©ratoires which are still not very well known or poorly described. This lack of knowledge comes on the geographical remoteness of these tropical regions with respect to Western prehistoric problems developed during the past two centuries. The prehistory of the Far East is complex, original, surprising because on the sidelines of major technical lineages elsewhere known to the relevant period, the one of anatomically modern human advent. This regional prehistory of about 2 million km2, which is called Peninsular or Continental Southeast Asia, refers to the development of a science in motion whose construction is still relevant. In colliding with the classic thesis of evolution and technical progress, the Hoabinhian shakes the rules and landmarks in prehistory. It is located at the antipodes of the classical model (Eurasian, African) of development of the stone tools according to the improvement and gradual lightening of the tool-kit, from the pebble culture until the Neolithic. Our reflection is precisely on this singularity, about a unique technical phenomenon that remains difficult to place on the evolutionary axis of industries as it exists elsewhere in the world or in East Asia (China, Korea, Japan). The regularity and homogeneity of cobble-based tool shapes in a vast area and for a record length of nearly 30,000 years are the main features of this unorthodox technocomplex that questions the cognitive capacity of Homo sapiens in a wet tropical ecosystem. But we also question the nature of the existing links between prehistoric men and their lithic productions, and the role played by knapped stone techniques during the human development in this region away from Europe. To this monotonous longevity of pebble-based tools is added the absence of pointed lithic tools (tips, apical ends, tool with converging salient edges, etc.) as they are found everywhere else in hunter-gatherer groups, whether from the Upper Palaeolithic or historical times.This is why the stability of these pebble-based tools would hide a whole range of complexity unknown to the technical field such as the elusive activities relating to the transformation of hard animal materials but also of vegetable materials not preserved in archaeological context. The thought process from the mineral towards the question of the vegetal sends back the need to complete the "toolbox" of Hoabinhian prehistoric artisans with sharp objects. Known to date only through the ethnographic data, the "vegetal civilization" leads naturally to reflect on the importance of this perishable material in the tool-kit of the last hunter-gatherers from the Upper Pleistocene rain forest in continental Southeast Asia. In other words, the possibility of another technical existence in equilibrium with the external environment.After having highlighted the originality of Hoabinhian cultural phenomenon compared with impact of research in paleoanthropology and prehistory in the Southeast Asia regions, this paper will present from a strictly qualitative point of view the main chaĂźnes opĂ©ratoires that are present within the Hoabinhian techno-complex, a regional variant that characterizes the main culture of Southeast Asia Final Paleolithic hunters-gatherers between about 30 000 and 5 000 years BP. More generally, details will be provided on the informative incompleteness of the lithic phenomenon as archaeological data and, also, on its overcoming as a phenomenon. It will therefore be a question of rethinking the reverse of the lithic-lignic dialectic, that is to say the vegetable objects forever extinguished, in the light of stone tools, the only preserved markers of time, technique, space and absence.La prĂ©histoire du Sud-est asiatique se caractĂ©rise par un matĂ©riel lithique dont les chaĂźnes opĂ©ratoires restent encore peu connues ou mal dĂ©crites. Cette mĂ©connaissance sâexplique par lâĂ©loignement gĂ©ographique de ces rĂ©gions tropicales vis Ă vis des problĂ©matiques prĂ©historiques occidentales dĂ©veloppĂ©es depuis maintenant deux siĂšcles. La prĂ©histoire de lâExtrĂȘme-Orient est complexe, originale, surprenante parfois paradoxale car en marge des grandes lignĂ©es techniques connues ailleurs pour la pĂ©riode concernĂ©e, celle qui a vu lâavĂšnement de lâHomme anatomiquement moderne. Cette prĂ©histoire rĂ©gionale dâenviron 2 millions de km2 que lâon nomme lâAsie du Sud-est pĂ©ninsulaire ou continentale renvoie Ă lâĂ©laboration dâune science en mouvement dont la construction est toujours dâactualitĂ©. En se heurtant Ă la thĂšse classique de lâĂ©volution comme Ă celle du progrĂšs technique, le Hoabinhien bouscule les rĂšgles et les repĂšres en prĂ©histoire. Il se situe aux antipodes du modĂšle classique (Eurasiatique, Africain) de dĂ©veloppement des outils de pierre selon lâenrichissement et lâallĂšgement progressif de lâoutillage depuis la pebble culture jusquâau NĂ©olithique. Câest prĂ©cisĂ©ment sur cette singularitĂ© que porte notre rĂ©flexion Ă propos dâun phĂ©nomĂšne technique unique qui reste difficile Ă positionner sur lâaxe Ă©volutif des industries tel quâil existe ailleurs dans le monde ou en Asie de lâEst (Chine, CorĂ©e, Japon). La rĂ©gularitĂ© et lâhomogĂ©nĂ©itĂ© des formes dâoutils façonnĂ©es sur galet dans un vaste espace et sur une durĂ©e record de prĂšs de 30 000 ans sont les caractĂ©ristiques principales de ce technocomplexe peu orthodoxe qui interroge la capacitĂ© cognitive dâHomo sapiens en Ă©cosystĂšme tropical humide. Mais aussi, la question de la nature des liens existants entre lâhomme et ses productions lithiques ou la place occupĂ©e par la technique de la pierre taillĂ©e lors du dĂ©veloppement humain dans cette rĂ©gion hors dâEurope.A cette monotone pĂ©rennitĂ© dâoutils sur galet se greffe lâabsence dâoutils lithiques pointus (pointe, extrĂ©mitĂ© apicale, outil Ă bords saillants convergents, etc.) tels quâils se rencontrent partout ailleurs chez les groupes de chasseurs-cueilleurs quâils soient du PalĂ©olithique supĂ©rieur ou (sub-)actuels.Câest pourquoi la stabilitĂ© de ces outillages sur galet cacherait tout un pan de complexitĂ© inconnu du domaine technique comme lâinsaisissable travail des matiĂšres dures dâorigine animale mais surtout vĂ©gĂ©tale non conservĂ©es Ă ce jour dans les niveaux archĂ©ologiques. Le cheminement du minĂ©ral vers la question du vĂ©gĂ©tal renvoie Ă la nĂ©cessitĂ© de complĂ©ter la « boĂźte Ă outils » des artisans prĂ©historiques hoabinhiens par des objets pointus. Connue Ă ce jour quâĂ travers les donnĂ©es de lâethnographie, la « civilisation du vĂ©gĂ©tal » conduit tout naturellement Ă rĂ©flĂ©chir sur lâimportance de ce matĂ©riau pĂ©rissable dans le bagage outillĂ© des derniers chasseurs-cueilleurs de la forĂȘt tropicale dâAsie du Sud-est continentale. Autrement dit, la possibilitĂ© dâune autre existence technique en Ă©quilibre avec le milieu extĂ©rieur.AprĂšs avoir mis en avant lâoriginalitĂ© du phĂ©nomĂšne culturel hoabinhien au regard de lâimpact de la recherche en prĂ©histoire et en palĂ©oanthropologie dans les rĂ©gions du Sud-est asiatique, cet article prĂ©sentera dâun point de vue strictement qualitatif, les chaĂźnes opĂ©ratoires du techno-complexe hoabinhien. FaciĂšs industriel sur galet qui caractĂ©rise la principale culture technique des chasseurs-cueilleurs du PalĂ©olithique final dâAsie du Sud-est entre environ 30 000 et 5 000 ans BP. Plus largement des prĂ©cisions seront apportĂ©es dâune part sur lâinachĂšvement informatif du phĂ©nomĂšne lithique en tant que donnĂ©e archĂ©ologique et dâautre part, sur son dĂ©passement en tant que phĂ©nomĂšne. Il sâagira donc de repenser lâenvers de la dialectique lithique-lignic câest-Ă -dire les objets du vĂ©gĂ©tal Ă jamais disparus, Ă la lumiĂšre des objets de pierre taillĂ©e seuls conservĂ©s comme marqueurs de temps, de technique, d'espace et dâabsence
Temps, mĂ©moire et altĂ©ritĂ© en technologie lithique: synthĂšse et perspectives de lâapproche technogĂ©nĂ©tique française
L'approche technogĂ©nĂ©tique dans le domaine des Ă©tudes en technologie lithique prĂ©historique trouve son origine Ă la fin des annĂ©es 1980. Les approches traditionnelles comme de la typologie Ă la technologie productionnelle ont eu tendance Ă aborder les objets de la prĂ©histoire Ă travers leurs dimensions socioculturelle et Ă©conomique, sans vraiment considĂ©rer lâexistence dâune technogenĂšse antĂ©rieure Ă ces contingences. LâapprĂ©hension de cette dimension technogĂ©nĂ©tique en prĂ©histoire convoquera Ă la fois la philosophie et lâanthropologie des techniques pour amener Ă une double approche des artefacts: une approche technogĂ©nĂ©tique de lâobjet lithique selon les critĂšres techniques de sa genĂšse; et une approche psychosociale de lâobjet selon les critĂšres propres Ă sa production artisanale au sein dâun systĂšme technique majeur. Lâobjectif de cet article est dâidentifier deux existences fondamentales constituantes de lâobjet technique, lâune interne (technogĂ©nĂ©tique) avec des lignĂ©es techniques et lâautre externe (psychosociale) avec des trajectoires techniques. La distribution spatio-temporelle de lâaltĂ©ritĂ© technique prĂ©historique sur diffĂ©rents continents a logiquement amenĂ© Ă de nouvelles questions, constats et de nouveaux critĂšres dâanalyse. Sur cette base, notre dĂ©marche visera Ă revisiter les principaux axes conceptuels des fondements de lâapproche technologique, Ă prĂ©ciser les anciennes questions tout en dĂ©veloppant de nouvelles expertises. Ă travers lâapplication de concepts clĂ©s comme celui de temps, de mĂ©moire et dâaltĂ©ritĂ©, une mĂ©thodologie dâensemble sera Ă©galement rediscutĂ©e et proposera une ligne de fuite Ă©pistĂ©mologique
Tiempo, memoria y alteridad en tecnologĂa lĂtica: sĂntesis y perspectivas del enfoque tecnogenĂ©tico francĂ©s
En el campo de los estudios en tecnologĂa lĂtica prehistĂłrica, el enfoque tecnogenĂ©tico tiene su origen a fines de los años 1980. Los enfoques tradicionales, de la tipologĂa a la tecnologĂa de producciĂłn, tienden a abordar los objetos lĂticos de la prehistoria a travĂ©s de sus dimensiones sociocultural y econĂłmica, sin realmente considerar la existencia de una tecnogĂ©nesis anterior a estas contingencias. La aprehensiĂłn de esta dimensiĂłn tecnogenĂ©tica en prehistoria requerirĂĄ tanto de la filosofĂa como de la antropologĂa de las tĂ©cnicas para conducir a un enfoque dual de los artefactos: un enfoque tecnogenĂ©tico del objeto lĂtico segĂșn los criterios tĂ©cnicos relativos a su gĂ©nesis; y un enfoque psicosocial del objeto segĂșn los criterios propios de su producciĂłn artesanal, en el seno de un sistema tĂ©cnico mayor. El objetivo de este artĂculo es identificar dos existencias fundamentales constituyentes del objeto tĂ©cnico, una interna (tecnogenĂ©tica) con linajes tĂ©cnicos y otra externa (psicosocial) con trayectorias tĂ©cnicas. La distribuciĂłn espacio-temporal de la alteridad tĂ©cnica prehistĂłrica en diferentes continentes ha conducido lĂłgicamente a nuevas preguntas, constataciones y nuevos criterios de anĂĄlisis. Sobre esta base, nuestro trabajo tendrĂĄ como objetivo revisar los principales ejes conceptuales de los fundamentos del enfoque tecnolĂłgico, asĂ como aclarar viejas preguntas y desarrollar nuevos criterios de estudio. Mediante la aplicaciĂłn de conceptos clave como tiempo, memoria y alteridad, se volverĂĄ tambiĂ©n a discutir una metodologĂa global que propondrĂĄ una lĂnea de fuga epistemolĂłgica
Plant processing experiments and use-wear analysis of Tabon Cave artefacts question the intentional character of denticulated stone tools in prehistoric Southeast Asia
The presence of notches on European Palaeolithic flaked stone tools termed âdenticulatesâ has been variously ascribed to cultural, functional and taphonomic factors. In Southeast Asia prehistoric stone tool assemblages are dominated by unretouched flakes, so the rare retouched lithics, including denticulates, can be considered unique testimonies of the intention of the tool makers to control the shape and properties of tool edges. Here we report the results of plant processing experiments with modern unretouched flakes made of red jasper. Splitting plants with the help of a specific hand and arm movement (âtwist-of-the-wristâ) resulted in a series of use-wear traces that included large crescent-break micro-scars. These are very similar in shape and appearance to the notches of prehistoric denticulated tools. These results suggest that some denticulated pieces in prehistoric Southeast Asia could be less intentional than previously thought, being instead the result of plant processing activities. We also report here the analysis of 41 denticulates from Tabon Cave, Philippines. While some are clearly intentionally retouch, others exhibit use-wear and nocth micro-morphology characteristic of plant splitting. The notches of others result from utilisation and taphonomy or trampling. Altogether, our observations raise the following question: should the term denticulates be restricted to the tools intentionally retouched or encompass all the tools with adjacent notches whatever the origin of the latter is
- âŠ