Thinking a Bow-and-arrow Set: Cognitive Implications of Middle Stone Age Bow and Stone-tipped Arrow Technology
For various reasons increased effort has recently been made to detect the early use of mechanically-projected weaponry in the archaeological record, but little effort has yet been made to investigate explicitly what these tool sets could indicate about human cognitive evolution. Based on recent evid...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Cambridge archaeological journal 2012-06, Vol.22 (2), p.237-264 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 264 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 237 |
container_title | Cambridge archaeological journal |
container_volume | 22 |
creator | Lombard, Marlize Haidle, Miriam Noël |
description | For various reasons increased effort has recently been made to detect the early use of mechanically-projected weaponry in the archaeological record, but little effort has yet been made to investigate explicitly what these tool sets could indicate about human cognitive evolution. Based on recent evidence for the use of bow-and-arrow technology during the Middle Stone Age in southern Africa by 64 kya, we use the method of generating and analysing cognigrams and effective chains to explore thought-and-action sequences associated with this technology. We show that, when isolated, neither the production of a simple bow, nor that of a stone-tipped arrow, can be reasonably interpreted to indicate tool behaviour that is cognitively more complex than the composite artefacts produced by Neanderthals or archaic modern Homo. On the other hand, as soon as a bow-and-arrow set is used as an effective group of tools, a novel cognitive development is expressed in technological symbiosis, i.e. the ability to conceptualize a set of separate, yet inter-dependent tools. Such complementary tool sets are able to unleash new properties of a tool, inconceivable without the active, simultaneous manipulation of another tool. Consequently, flexibility regarding decision-making and taking action is amplified. The archaeological evidence for such amplified conceptual and technological modularization implies a range of cognitive and behavioural complexity and flexibility that is basic to human behaviour today. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1017/S095977431200025X |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1112665544</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cupid>10_1017_S095977431200025X</cupid><sourcerecordid>2667853811</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c464t-76d9d39d14e14ec1d0266b2b6be3959dfa16b8cd34d3c6f4be945a32b004a25c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kU9LwzAYh4MoOKcfwFvAi5do0iTt6m0O_wwmHjbBW0mTtMvskpp0jn17U-dBFCEQyPs8P973DQDnBF8RTLLrOc55nmWMkgRjnPDXAzAgLGMIc4YPwaAvo75-DE5CWGFMKM7oANjF0tg3Y2so4K3bImEVEt67LZzr7gZOXG1NZz40nK7bxkjRGWcDdBV8Mko1Gs47ZzUc17q3YbT3L6gzbasVHH9FLbRcWte4encKjirRBH32fQ_By_3dYvKIZs8P08l4hiRLWYeyVOWK5oowHY8kCidpWiZlWmoaB1GVIGk5kooyRWVasVLnjAualBgzkXBJh-Byn9t6977RoSvWJkjdNMJqtwkFISQmcs5YRC9-oSu38TZ2V8TNcsoTNkojRfaU9C4Er6ui9WYt_C5CPZcVf34gOvTbEevSG1Xrn9H_WZ-qxIeH</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1015352486</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Thinking a Bow-and-arrow Set: Cognitive Implications of Middle Stone Age Bow and Stone-tipped Arrow Technology</title><source>Cambridge University Press Journals Complete</source><creator>Lombard, Marlize ; Haidle, Miriam Noël</creator><creatorcontrib>Lombard, Marlize ; Haidle, Miriam Noël</creatorcontrib><description>For various reasons increased effort has recently been made to detect the early use of mechanically-projected weaponry in the archaeological record, but little effort has yet been made to investigate explicitly what these tool sets could indicate about human cognitive evolution. Based on recent evidence for the use of bow-and-arrow technology during the Middle Stone Age in southern Africa by 64 kya, we use the method of generating and analysing cognigrams and effective chains to explore thought-and-action sequences associated with this technology. We show that, when isolated, neither the production of a simple bow, nor that of a stone-tipped arrow, can be reasonably interpreted to indicate tool behaviour that is cognitively more complex than the composite artefacts produced by Neanderthals or archaic modern Homo. On the other hand, as soon as a bow-and-arrow set is used as an effective group of tools, a novel cognitive development is expressed in technological symbiosis, i.e. the ability to conceptualize a set of separate, yet inter-dependent tools. Such complementary tool sets are able to unleash new properties of a tool, inconceivable without the active, simultaneous manipulation of another tool. Consequently, flexibility regarding decision-making and taking action is amplified. The archaeological evidence for such amplified conceptual and technological modularization implies a range of cognitive and behavioural complexity and flexibility that is basic to human behaviour today.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0959-7743</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1474-0540</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/S095977431200025X</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Anthropology ; Archaeology ; Bows & arrows ; Cognition & reasoning ; Stone Age ; Technology</subject><ispartof>Cambridge archaeological journal, 2012-06, Vol.22 (2), p.237-264</ispartof><rights>Copyright © The McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research 2012</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c464t-76d9d39d14e14ec1d0266b2b6be3959dfa16b8cd34d3c6f4be945a32b004a25c3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S095977431200025X/type/journal_article$$EHTML$$P50$$Gcambridge$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>164,314,780,784,27924,27925,55628</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lombard, Marlize</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Haidle, Miriam Noël</creatorcontrib><title>Thinking a Bow-and-arrow Set: Cognitive Implications of Middle Stone Age Bow and Stone-tipped Arrow Technology</title><title>Cambridge archaeological journal</title><addtitle>CAJ</addtitle><description>For various reasons increased effort has recently been made to detect the early use of mechanically-projected weaponry in the archaeological record, but little effort has yet been made to investigate explicitly what these tool sets could indicate about human cognitive evolution. Based on recent evidence for the use of bow-and-arrow technology during the Middle Stone Age in southern Africa by 64 kya, we use the method of generating and analysing cognigrams and effective chains to explore thought-and-action sequences associated with this technology. We show that, when isolated, neither the production of a simple bow, nor that of a stone-tipped arrow, can be reasonably interpreted to indicate tool behaviour that is cognitively more complex than the composite artefacts produced by Neanderthals or archaic modern Homo. On the other hand, as soon as a bow-and-arrow set is used as an effective group of tools, a novel cognitive development is expressed in technological symbiosis, i.e. the ability to conceptualize a set of separate, yet inter-dependent tools. Such complementary tool sets are able to unleash new properties of a tool, inconceivable without the active, simultaneous manipulation of another tool. Consequently, flexibility regarding decision-making and taking action is amplified. The archaeological evidence for such amplified conceptual and technological modularization implies a range of cognitive and behavioural complexity and flexibility that is basic to human behaviour today.</description><subject>Anthropology</subject><subject>Archaeology</subject><subject>Bows & arrows</subject><subject>Cognition & reasoning</subject><subject>Stone Age</subject><subject>Technology</subject><issn>0959-7743</issn><issn>1474-0540</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AVQMV</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>K50</sourceid><sourceid>M1D</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kU9LwzAYh4MoOKcfwFvAi5do0iTt6m0O_wwmHjbBW0mTtMvskpp0jn17U-dBFCEQyPs8P973DQDnBF8RTLLrOc55nmWMkgRjnPDXAzAgLGMIc4YPwaAvo75-DE5CWGFMKM7oANjF0tg3Y2so4K3bImEVEt67LZzr7gZOXG1NZz40nK7bxkjRGWcDdBV8Mko1Gs47ZzUc17q3YbT3L6gzbasVHH9FLbRcWte4encKjirRBH32fQ_By_3dYvKIZs8P08l4hiRLWYeyVOWK5oowHY8kCidpWiZlWmoaB1GVIGk5kooyRWVasVLnjAualBgzkXBJh-Byn9t6977RoSvWJkjdNMJqtwkFISQmcs5YRC9-oSu38TZ2V8TNcsoTNkojRfaU9C4Er6ui9WYt_C5CPZcVf34gOvTbEevSG1Xrn9H_WZ-qxIeH</recordid><startdate>20120601</startdate><enddate>20120601</enddate><creator>Lombard, Marlize</creator><creator>Haidle, Miriam Noël</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AVQMV</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>C18</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K50</scope><scope>M1D</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20120601</creationdate><title>Thinking a Bow-and-arrow Set: Cognitive Implications of Middle Stone Age Bow and Stone-tipped Arrow Technology</title><author>Lombard, Marlize ; Haidle, Miriam Noël</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c464t-76d9d39d14e14ec1d0266b2b6be3959dfa16b8cd34d3c6f4be945a32b004a25c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Anthropology</topic><topic>Archaeology</topic><topic>Bows & arrows</topic><topic>Cognition & reasoning</topic><topic>Stone Age</topic><topic>Technology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lombard, Marlize</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Haidle, Miriam Noël</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Arts Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Humanities Index</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>Access via Art, Design & Architecture Collection (ProQuest)</collection><collection>Arts & Humanities Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Cambridge archaeological journal</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lombard, Marlize</au><au>Haidle, Miriam Noël</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Thinking a Bow-and-arrow Set: Cognitive Implications of Middle Stone Age Bow and Stone-tipped Arrow Technology</atitle><jtitle>Cambridge archaeological journal</jtitle><addtitle>CAJ</addtitle><date>2012-06-01</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>22</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>237</spage><epage>264</epage><pages>237-264</pages><issn>0959-7743</issn><eissn>1474-0540</eissn><abstract>For various reasons increased effort has recently been made to detect the early use of mechanically-projected weaponry in the archaeological record, but little effort has yet been made to investigate explicitly what these tool sets could indicate about human cognitive evolution. Based on recent evidence for the use of bow-and-arrow technology during the Middle Stone Age in southern Africa by 64 kya, we use the method of generating and analysing cognigrams and effective chains to explore thought-and-action sequences associated with this technology. We show that, when isolated, neither the production of a simple bow, nor that of a stone-tipped arrow, can be reasonably interpreted to indicate tool behaviour that is cognitively more complex than the composite artefacts produced by Neanderthals or archaic modern Homo. On the other hand, as soon as a bow-and-arrow set is used as an effective group of tools, a novel cognitive development is expressed in technological symbiosis, i.e. the ability to conceptualize a set of separate, yet inter-dependent tools. Such complementary tool sets are able to unleash new properties of a tool, inconceivable without the active, simultaneous manipulation of another tool. Consequently, flexibility regarding decision-making and taking action is amplified. The archaeological evidence for such amplified conceptual and technological modularization implies a range of cognitive and behavioural complexity and flexibility that is basic to human behaviour today.</abstract><cop>Cambridge, UK</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><doi>10.1017/S095977431200025X</doi><tpages>28</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0959-7743 |
ispartof | Cambridge archaeological journal, 2012-06, Vol.22 (2), p.237-264 |
issn | 0959-7743 1474-0540 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1112665544 |
source | Cambridge University Press Journals Complete |
subjects | Anthropology Archaeology Bows & arrows Cognition & reasoning Stone Age Technology |
title | Thinking a Bow-and-arrow Set: Cognitive Implications of Middle Stone Age Bow and Stone-tipped Arrow Technology |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-30T06%3A43%3A06IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Thinking%20a%20Bow-and-arrow%20Set:%20Cognitive%20Implications%20of%20Middle%20Stone%20Age%20Bow%20and%20Stone-tipped%20Arrow%20Technology&rft.jtitle=Cambridge%20archaeological%20journal&rft.au=Lombard,%20Marlize&rft.date=2012-06-01&rft.volume=22&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=237&rft.epage=264&rft.pages=237-264&rft.issn=0959-7743&rft.eissn=1474-0540&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/S095977431200025X&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2667853811%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1015352486&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_cupid=10_1017_S095977431200025X&rfr_iscdi=true |