Technology Studies and Material Culture Studies: Possibilities of Cooperation in the Case of Bone Artefacts

Authors

  • Selena Vitezović Institute of Archaeology, Belgrade, Serbia
  • Ivan Vranić Institute of Archaeology, Belgrade, Serbia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21301/EAP.V12I3.2

Keywords:

bone industry, technology studies, material culture studies

Abstract

Bone artefacts are among the less thoroughly studied classes of archaeological material, especially in the case of particular periods and regions. The reasons behind this are not uniform. The most obvious and general are linked to the research practices of culture-historical archaeology, often neglecting bone artefacts, considering them not sufficiently attractive or informative. The most significant shift towards recognition of a set of potential information gained from bone objects was achieved in the framework of studies of prehistoric technology during the second half of 20th century, especially in the French archaeological school.  This research strategy raised a number of questions concerning the acquisition of raw material, modes of production and usage of objects, whose interpretative potential gained in power, leading to the increased attention paid to faunal remains in archaeological investigations. Yet this source of information on the actual details of relations between people and material culture, opened by technology studies, has not been sufficiently explored.  It may be suggested that the reasons are the narrow specialization of researchers and insufficient inclusion of the gathered information into the wider interpretive framework, various traditions and lack of cooperation among the national archaeological “schools”, language barriers etc. However, the main reason behind this state of affairs may be sought for in non-integrated theoretical perspectives and the lack of clearly articulated interpretive position of researchers seeking to apply the knowledge gained from technology studies, considering this strategy as an “objective, scientific method”, providing concrete answers clearly complying to the expectations of the dominant archaeological paradigm.

The paper offers a critical review of a number of examples of application of technology studies in archaeology and possible directions of a more integrated and theoretically informed approach. One of the obvious solutions may be sought in the direction of another research strategy – material culture studies. The aim of the paper is thus to link these two approaches, whose theoretical foundations are not uniform today, but the history of the ideas and the mode of articulation of the basic theoretical assumptions indicate similar theoretical roots.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Appadurai, Arjun. 1986. “Introduction: commodities and the politics of value“. In The social life of things: Commodities in cultural perspective, (ed.) Arjun Appadurai, 3–63. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Averbouh, Aline. 2000. Technologie de la matière osseuse travaillée et implications palethnologiques. Thèse de doctorat, Université de Paris I.

Bar-Yosef, Ofer and Van Peer, Philip 2009. The Chaîne Opératoire Approach in Middle Paleolithic archaeology. Current Anthropology 50/1: 103–131.

Binford, Lewis. 1981. Bones: Ancient men and modern myths. San Diego: Academic Press.

Binford, Lewis. 1983. In pursuit of the past. New York: Thames and Hudson.

Buchli, Victor. 2002 (ed.) The Material Culture Reader. Oxford: Berg.

Caple, Chris. 2006: Objects. Reluctant witnesses to the past. London and New York: Routledge.

Cattelain, Pierre. 1994. La chasse au Paléolithique supérieur. Arc ou propulseur, ou les deux ? Archéo-Situla 21-24: 5-26.

Choyke, Alice. 2010. Not the Plastic of the Past: The significance of worked osseous materials in archaeology. In: Csont és bőr. Az állati eredetű nyersanyagok feldolgozásának története, régészete és néprajza. Bone and Leather. History, archaeology and ethnography of crafts utilizing raw materials from animals, (eds.) J. Gömöri and A. Kőrösi, 19-30. Budapest.

Clarke, David. 1968. Analytical archaeology. London: Methuen & Co.

De La Fuente, Guillermo Adrian. 2011. Chaîne opératoire, technical gestures and pottery production at southern Andes during the Late period (c. AD 900 – AD 1450) (Catamarca, Northwestern Argentina, Argentina). In: Archaeological Ceramics: A Review of Current Research, ed. S. Scarcella, 89–102. Oxford: Archaeopress

Dobres, Marcia-Anne and Hoffman, Christopher R. (eds.) 1999. The Social dynamics of Technology: practice, politics and world views. Washington and London: Smithsonian Institution Press.

Dobres, Marcia-Anne and Hoffman, Christopher R. 1999. Introduction: a context for the present and future of technology studies. In: The Social dynamics of Technology: practice, politics and world views, eds. Marcia-Anne Dobres and Christopher R. Hoffman, 1–19.Washington and London: Smithsonian Institution Press.

Dobres, Marcia-Anne. 1999. Technology’s link and Chaînes: The processual unfolding of technique and technician In The Social dynamics of Technology: practice, politics and world views, eds. Marcia-Anne Dobres and Christopher R. Hoffman, 124–146.Washington and London: Smithsonian Institution Press.

Đorđević-Bogdanović, Biljana. 1999. “Some features of pottery production of the sixth to fourth centuries BC in the central Balkans”. In Le Djerdap/ Les Portes de Fer à la deuxième moitié du premier millenaire av. J. Ch. jusqu'aux guerres daciques, ed. Miloje Vasić, 24–27. Beograd: Arheološki institut.

Džonson, Metju. 2008. Arheološka teorija: uvod. Clio: Beograd.

Editorial 1996. Journal of Material Culture 1 (5): 5–14.

Edwards, Elizabeth, Gosden, Chris and Ruth B. Phillips (eds). 2006. Sensible Objects: Colonialism, Museums and Material Culture. Oxford: Berg.

Farbstein, Rebecca. 2013. "The Materiality of production: exploring variability and choice in the production of Palaeolithic portable art made in antler and bone“. In From these bare bones : raw materials and the study of worked osseous objects, (eds.) Sonia O’Connor and Alice Choke, 98-108. Oxford and Oakville: Oxbow Books.

Garašanin, Milutin. ur. 1979. Praistorija jugoslavenskih zemalja II: Neolitsko doba. Sarajevo: Akademija nauka i umjetnosti Bosne i Hercegovine, Centar za balkanološka ispitivanja.

Gosden, Chris and Yvonne Marshall. 1999. The cultural biography of objects. World Archaeology 31 (2): 169–178.

Gosden, Chris. 2004. Archaeology of Colonialism: Cultural Contacts from 5000BC to the Present. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Gosden, Chris. 2005. What Do Objects Want? Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 12 (3): 193–211.

Gosden, Chris. 2012. “Magic, materials and matter: understanding different ontologies”. In Materiality and Social Practice: Transformative Capacities of Intercultural encounters, (eds.) Joseph Maran and Philipp W. Stockhammer, 13–19. Oxford and Oakville: Oxbow Books.

Greene, Kevin. 2006: Archaeology and technology. In A Companion to archeology, (ed.) John Bintliff, 155–173. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing

Hayden, Brian. 1998. Practical and prestige technologies: The evolution of material systems. Journal of archaeological method and theory, 5/1: 1–55.

Hicks, Dan and Mary C. Beaudry (eds.) 2010. The Oxford Handbook of Material Culture Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hicks, Dan. 2010. “The Material-Culture Turn: event and effect“. In The Oxford Handbook of Mterial Culture Studies, (eds.) Dan Hicks and Mary C. Beaudry, 25–98. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hodder, Ian (ed.). 1982. Symbolic and Structural Archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (New Directions in Archaeology).

Hodder, Ian. 2003: Archaeological reflexivity and the "local"voice. Anthropological Quarterly 76/1: 55–69.

Hodder, Ian. 2012. Entangled: An Archaeology of the Relationship between Humans and Things. Chichester: Wiley Blackwell.

Hodder, Ian. 2016. Studies in Human-Thing Entanglement. Open access book distributed in accordance with the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license.

Hosler, Dorothy. 1995: Sound, color and meaning in the metallurgy of the Ancient West Mexico. World archaeology 27, 1: 100–115.

Inizan, Marie-Loiuse, Michèle Reduron-Ballinger, Hélène Roche, Jacques Tixier. 1995. Technologie de la pierre taillée. Paris: CNRS et Université de Paris.

Jones, Andrew. 2004. Archaeological Theory and Scientific Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Killick, David. 2004. Social Constructionist Approaches to the Study of Technology. World Archaeology. 36/ 4: 571–578.

Knappet, Carl and Lambros Malafouris (eds). 2008. Material Agency:Towards a Non-Anthropocentric Approach. New York: Springer.

Knappet, Carl. 2011. An Archaeology of Interaction: Network perspectives on Material Culture and Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kopytoff, Igor. 1986. “The cultural biography of things: commoditization as process. In The social life of things: Commodities in cultural perspective, (ed.) Arjun Appadurai, 64–94. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Korobkova, Galina. 2008: S. A. Semenov and new perspectives on the experimental-traceological method. In ‘Prehistoric technology’ 40 years later: Functional studies and the Russian legacy, ed. Laura Longo and Natalia Skakun, 3–8. Oxford: Archaeopress

Kuhn, Steven L. 2004. Evolutionary Perspectives on Technology and Technological Change. World Archaeology 36/ 4: 561– 570.

Kuzmanović, Zorica. 2009. Upotreba etnografskih analogija u arheološkom zaključivanju. Etnoantropološki problemi n.s. 4(1): 133–148.

Kuzmanović, Zorica. 2010. Refleksivno mišljenje–zamena za analogiju: primer debate o antičkoj ekonomiji. Etnoantropološki problemi n.s. 4(1): 133–148.

Lechtman, Heather and Merill, Robert. 1977. Material culture: styles, organization and the dynamics of technology. St. Paul: West Publishing.

Lechtman, Heather. 1984: Andean value systems and the development of prehistoric metallurgy. Technology and Culture 25: 1–36.

Lemonier, Pierre (ed.). 1993. Technological choices: transformation in material cultures since the Neolithic. London: Routledge.

Lemonnier, Pierre 1993. Introduction. In Technological choices: transformation in material cultures since the Neolithic, (ed.) Pierre Lemonnier, 1–35. London: Routledge.

Lemonnier, Pierre. 1986. The study of material culture today: toward an anthropology of technical systems. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 5: 147–186.

Lemonnier, Pierre. 1992a. Elements for and anthropology of technology. Michigan: Ann Arbor.

Lemonnier, Pierre. 1992b. Leroi-Gourhan, ethnologue des techniques. Les Nouvelles d’Archéologie 48/49: 13–17.

Leroi-Gourhan, André. 1964. Le geste et la parole. Paris: Éditions Albin Michel.

Leroi-Gourhan, André. 1965. Évolution et techniques 1: L’homme et la matière. Paris: Éditions Albin Michel.

Leroi-Gourhan, André. 1971. Évolution et techniques 2: Milieu et techniques. Paris: Éditions Albin Michel.

Levi Stros, Klod. 1982. Uvod u delo Marsela Mosa. U: Marsel Mos, Sociologija i antropologija I, 9 –58. Beograd: Prosveta.

Livington Smith A. 2007. Chaîne opératoire de la poterie: Références Ethnographiques, Analyses et Reconstitution. Tervuren: Musée royal de l’Afrique centrale.

Longo, Laura and Skakun, Natalia (Eds.). 2008. ‘Prehistoric technology’ 40 years later: Functional studies and the Russian legacy, Oxford: Archaeopress.

Longo, Laura and Skakun, Natalia. 2008. Introduction. In ‘Prehistoric technology’ 40 years later: Functional studies and the Russian legacy, (ed.) Laura Longo and Natalia Skakun, 1-2. Oxford: Archaeopress.

Maigrot, Yolaine. 2003. Etude technologique et fonctionnelle de l’outillage en matières dures animales dans La station 4 de Chalain (Néolithique final, Jura, France). Thèse de Doctorat. Université de Paris I, Paris.

Martin, Henri. 1906. Maillets ou enclumes en os provenant de la couche moustérienne de la Quina (Charente). Bulletin de la Société préhistorique française 3 (4): 155‐162.

Martin, Henri. 1910. La Percussion osseuse et les esquilles qui en dérivent. Expérimentation. Bulletin de la Société préhistorique française 7 (5): 299–304

McGhee, Robert. 1977. Ivory for the Sea Women: the symbolic attributes of a prehistoric technology. Canadian Journal of Archaeology 1: 141 –149.

Méndez Melgar, C. A., 2008: Cadenas operativas en la manufactura de arte rupestre: un estudio de caso en El Mauro, valle cordillerano del Norte Semiárido de Chile. Intersecciones en Antropología 9: 145–155.

Merill, Robert. S. 1977. Preface. In: Material culture: styles, organization and dynamics of technology, (eds.) Heather Lechtman and Robert S. Merrill, v–vii. Proceedings of the American Ethnological Society, West Publishing Co., St. Paul.

Miller, Daniel. 1987. Material Culture and Mass Consumption. Oxford: Blackwell.

Miller, Heather Margaret-Louise. Archaeological approaches to technology. Oxford: Academic Press, Elsevier, 2007.

Mos, Marsel. Sociologija i antropologija I. Beograd, Prosveta, 1982.

Olsen, Bjørnar. 2003. Material Culture after Text: Re-Membering Things. Norwegian Archaeological Review 36 (2): 87–104.

Olsen, Bjørnar. 2010. In Defense of Things: Archaeology and the Ontology of Objects. Lahman: Alta Mira Press.

Palavestra, Aleksandar 2011. Kulturni konteksti arheologije. Beograd: Filozofski fakultet, Univerzitet u Beogradu.

Pasual Benito, Josep Lluis. 1998. Utillaje óseo, adornos e ídolos neolíticos valencianos. Valencia: Museu de Prehistòria de València.

Patou, Marylène ed. 1989. Outillage peu elabore en os et en bois de cervides III. Treignes: Éditions CEDARC.

Patou-Mathis, Marylène ed. 1994. Outillage peu élaboré en os et bois de cervidés IV: taphonomie/ bone modification (artefacts 9). Treignes: Éditions CEDARC.

Pétillon, Jean-Marc. 2006. Des Magdaléniens en armes. Technologie des armatures de projectiles en bois de cérvide en Magdalénien supérieur de la grotte d’Isturitz (Pyrénées Atlantiques). Éditions CEDARC, Treignes.

Popović, Petar i Aleksandar Kapuran. 2007. Milstones from Krševica (Southeastern Serbia). Godišnjak – Jahrbuch, Vol. XXXVI (34): 83–95.

Rowlands, Michael. 2004. “Relating anthropology and archaeology”. In A Companion to Archaeology, (ed.) John Bintliff, 473–489. Oxford: Blackwell.

Scheinsohn, Vivian. 2010. Hearts and bones. Bone raw material exploitation in Tierra del Fuego. Oxford: Archaeopress, BAR International Series 2094.

Schibler, Jörg. 1981. Typologische Untersuchungen der cortaillodzeitlichen Knochenartefakte. Die neolithischen Ufersiedlungen von Twann. Bd.17. Bern.

Schibler, Jörg. 2013. Bone and antler artefacts in wetland sites. In:F. Menotti & A. O’Sullivan (eds.), The Oxford handbook of Wetland archaeology, 339-355. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press.

Schiffer, Michael Brian. ed. 2001. Anthropological perspectives on technology. American foundation New World studies series, Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.

Schiffer, Michael Brian, Skibo, James M., Griffiths, Janet L., Hollenback, Kacy L. & Longacre, William A. 2001. Behavioral archaeology and the study of technology. American Antiquity. 66: 729–737.

Schiffer, Michael Brian. 2004. Studying technological change: A behavioral perspective, World Archaeology 36 (4) 579–585.

Schlanger, Nathan. The chaîne opératoire. In: Archaeology. The Key Concepts , (eds.) Colin Renfrew and Paul Bahn, 18–23. London and New York: Routledge.

Sellet Frederic. 1993: Chaîne opératoire: the concept and its applications. Lithic technology 18, 1–2: 106–112.

Semenov, Sergei. A. 1976. Prehistoric technology. An experimental study of the oldest tools and artefacts from traces of manufacture and wear. Barnes and Noble, Wiltshire.

Sinclair, Anthony. The Technique as a Symbol in Late Glacial Europe. World Archaeology 27 (1): 50–62.

Sinclair, Anthony. The value of tasks in the late Upper Palaeolithic, In: Archaeology of value, Douglas Bailey (ed.), 10 –16, Oxford: Bar International series 730.

Skibo, James & Schiffer, Michael Brian. People and things. A behavioral approach to material culture. New York: Springer, 2008.

Spataro, Michela 2016. Playing with colours: understanding the chaîne opératoire of the earliest red monochrome and white-on-red painted ware of the central Balkans. In Southeast Europe and Anatolia in prehistory. Essays in honor of Vassil Nikolov on his 65th anniversary. Universitätsforschungen zur prähistorischen Archäologie Band 293 Aus der Abteilung für Ur- und Frühgeschichtliche Archäologie der Universität Münster, (eds.) Krum Bacvarov and Ralf Gleser, 167-174.Verlag Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn

Sternke, Farina. All are not hunters that knap the stone – a search for a woman's touch in Mesolithic stone tool production. In: Mesolithic Studies at the beginning of the 21st century, (eds.) Nicky Milner & Peter Woodman, 144 –163. Oxford: Oxbow Books.

Tasić, Nikola. ur. 1979. Praistorija jugoslovenskih zemalja III: Eneolit. Sarajevo: Akademija nauka i umjetnosti Bosne i Hercegovine, Centar za balkanološka ispitivanja.

Tilley, Christopher. 1994. A Phenomenology of Landscape: places, paths and monuments. Oxford: Berg.

Torrence, Robin, ed. 1989. Time, energy and stone tools. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Vitelli, Karen. 1989. 1989: Were pots first made for foods? Doubts from Franchthi. World archaeology 21/1: 17–29.

Vitezović, Selena. 2016. Metodologija proučavanja praistorijskih koštanih industrija. Beograd: Srpsko arheološko društvo.

Voruz 1984 Outillages osseux et dynamisme industriel dans le néolithique jurassien. Lausanne: Cahiers d'archéologie romande 29, Bibliothèque Historique Vaudoise.

Vranić, Ivan. 2009. Teorijsko-metodološki problem tumačenja keramičkog materijala sa lokaliteta „Kale” u Krševici. Zbornik Narodnog muzeja u Beogradu XIX (1): 163–204.

Wаke, Thomas. 1999. Exploitation of tradition: bone tool production and use at Colony Ross, California. In: The social dynamics of technology: practice, politics and world views, eds. Marcia-Anne Dobres, Christopher R. Hoffman, 186–208. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington and London.

Zhilin, Mihail. 2014. Preemstvennost' i transformacii v razvitii kostjanoj industrii butovskoj kul'tury. Institut arheologii RAN, Moskva.

Downloads

Published

2017-09-19

How to Cite

Vitezović, Selena, and Ivan Vranić. 2017. “Technology Studies and Material Culture Studies: Possibilities of Cooperation in the Case of Bone Artefacts”. Etnoantropološki Problemi Issues in Ethnology and Anthropology 12 (3):703-24. https://doi.org/10.21301/EAP.V12I3.2.

Most read articles by the same author(s)