New advances in French prehistory.

New advances in French prehistory. Introduction The study of technology is long-standing in France, with its rootsin the Enlightenment. Since then, French technological studies haveexhibited divergent characteristics: a search for universal principlesand a deep interest in the material and physical details of technology,the role of the craftsman and his skill. Technology is considered amediator between Nature and Culture, material and social. The 1950s weremarked by a renewal of this debate mainly through the work of two socialanthopologists (Leroi-Gourhan and Haudricourt), a historian (Gilles) anda philosopher of technology (Simondon). All looked for generalprinciples in order to explain the evolution of technology and its placein society. Apart from Haudricourt, who emphasized social relations, allstressed the autonomy of the technical realm and its quasi-biologicaldevelopment. It took decades to implement these innovative approaches.The researches of Boris Valentin and Eric Boeda represent the mostrecent outcome of these technological trends. In the last five years the expression 'chaine operatoire'has become more familiar to the English-speaking reader through thetranslation of Leroi-Gourhan's Le geste geste?n.Variant of gest. et la parole and the papersof Schlanger (1990), Lemonnier (1992) and others. But why does thisconcept take up so much space in the French prehistoric literature andwhy are state-of-the-art Palaeolithic studies in France still based onit? The answer lies in two factors which deeply influenced the evolutionof research. One is the efficiency of the chaine operatoire as ananalytical tool, which makes it as basic in prehistoric technology aselementary analysis is in chemistry. The other is related to the systemof values prevailing in prehistoric research where positive results aremore valued than negative, and opposition to previous works is notrequired. Because of this, French prehistorians have been more inclinedto deepen the technology field and 'identify the virtually includedtendencies' (Martinelli 1988) in Leroi-Gourhan's texts ratherthan developing other directions. Building: the proper use of tradition Boeda's and Valentin's approaches are built upon twobodies of concepts developed over the last 40 years in socialanthropology, philosophy of science and prehistory prehistory,period of human evolution before writing was invented and records kept. The term was coined by Daniel Wilson in 1851. It is followed by protohistory, the period for which we have some records but must still rely largely on archaeological evidence to , but only in the1980s and 1990s has co-operation between different schools of thoughtpermitted their integration into coherent systems. The chaine operatoireconcept holds a central position, its development strongly affected bythe way it was created by Leroi-Gourhan. His major works - L'Hommeet la matiere (1943 & 1944), still unpublished in English, and Legeste et la parole (1964 & 1965) published in English in 1993 -opened so many new paths, sometimes in a few sentences and withoutfurther development, that even analysis of technical acts as socialproducts can justifiably be considered to derive from his thinking.Probably because of this profusion of new concepts and theories, hisstudents were left with a large choice of (sometimes contradictory)approaches and there was no need to oppose previous theories in order tobe innovative, nor to adopt all of the master's theories. Most ofLeroi-Gourhan's students have thus chosen to develop one path oranother and to enrich with new concepts the body of theories derivingfrom Leroi-Gourhan's work without claiming to be building theory. An implicit ban on epistemology epistemology(ĭpĭs'təmŏl`əjē)[Gr.,=knowledge or science], the branch of philosophy that is directed toward theories of the sources, nature, and limits of knowledge. Since the 17th cent. Leroi-Gourhan was very mistrustful of epistemology and wasreluctant, if not opposed, to explaining his concepts and their origin.He preferred to describe how they functioned. The only sentence in whichhe describes the chaine operatoire is quite typical in this respect (Leroi-Gourhan1993:114, with developments 130-34): Techniques are at the same time gestures and tools, organized insequences by a true syntax which gives the operational series both theirstability and their flexibility. The operational syntax is generated bymemory and is born from the dialogue between the brain and the materialrealm. He was more interested in demonstrations than their scientificbasis and praised 'scientific imagination which... [looks for] . .. ways of evidencing and controlling facts' (Leroi-Gourhan 1964:4). Epistemological analysis of Leroi-Gourhan's work only startedafter his death, as if his disappearance had freed his circle from animplicit ban. How otherwise can we explain that it took 47 years toorganize a symposium on 'la tendance technique' where theparticipants, mostly first- and second-generation former students,debated the different meanings that 'tendance' had acquiredfor them (Colloquium col��lo��qui��um?n. pl. col��lo��qui��ums or col��lo��qui��a1. An informal meeting for the exchange of views.2. An academic seminar on a broad field of study, usually led by a different lecturer at each meeting. 'Sens et ten dance en technologiecomparee', 1992); that the first seminar and publicationspecifically dedicated to the chaine operatoire (Balfet 1991) onlyoccurred 35 years after its first enunciation enunciation(inun´sēā´shn),n an auxiliary function of teeth, particularly those in the anterior sector of the dental arch; the formation of sounds ? It is also striking thatthe first explicit epistemological publications on Leroi-Gourhan camefrom researchers alien to Leroi-Gourhan's circle: a youngarchaeologist trained in Cambridge (Nathan Schlanger) and a philosopherof technology (Bernard Stiegler Bernard Stiegler (born April 1, 1952) is a French philosopher and Director of the Department of Cultural Development at the Centre Georges-Pompidou. Influences and themes ) whose doctoral dissertation onLeroi-Gourhan - among others - is very illuminating (Stiegler 1994). Aniconoclastic i��con��o��clast?n.1. One who attacks and seeks to overthrow traditional or popular ideas or institutions.2. One who destroys sacred religious images. social anthropologist Noun 1. social anthropologist - an anthropologist who studies such cultural phenomena as kinship systemscultural anthropologistanthropologist - a social scientist who specializes in anthropology whose book was not well receivedeverywhere also wrote interestingly on Leroi-Gourhan (Guille-Escuret1994). Earlier, several philosophers had been interested inLeroi-Gourhan's ideas on technology, but the fact that they drewtheir inspiration from his work was not always explicit and did notinspire French prehistorians (for example Derrida 1967). On the otherhand, the sociologist of technology Bruno Latour has acknowledgedLeroi-Gourhan's contribution to the anthropology of technology(Latour & Lemonnier 1994a). Technological analyses and the concepts necessary to make themoperational were first developed by social anthropologists. RobertCresswell and Helene Balfet were among the first to choose to specializein the ethnology ethnology(ĕthnŏl`əjē), scientific study of the origin and functioning of human cultures. It is usually considered one of the major branches of cultural anthropology, the other two being anthropological archaeology and of technology. Cresswell acknowledged his debts toLevi-Strauss, Leroi-Gourhan and Marx, and was mostly interested in thephysical implications of technical changes and the socialimplications/components of techniques (Cresswell 1972). Balfetspecialized in ceramic technology and female crafts (Balfet 1973).Others preferred to embed technology in regional monographs (Pelras1966; Bernot 1967). In the 1970s, the emergence of a second generationof social anthropologists strongly influenced by Marxism or trained ineconomics gave new impetus to technological research (Digard 1979). Twogroups formed, one around Robert Cresswell in the CNRS CNRS Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (National Center for Scientific Research, France)CNRS Centro Nacional de Referencia Para El Sida (Argentinean National Reference Center for Aids)'Techniqueset Culture' laboratory; the other, the 'groupe de technologiecomparee' developed around Helene Balfet in the Department ofTechnology in the Musee de l'Homme and at the Department ofEthnology in the University of Aix-en-Provence. At the same time, thecreation of a journal dedicated to research in cultural technology,Techniques et Culture, by Robert Cresswell and his group added impetus.The first issue (1975) contained the first papers first paperspl.n.The documents first filed by one applying for U.S. citizenship. to try to elucidatethe nature of the chaine operatoire in all its dimensions, enriching itwith new concepts (Cresswell 1976; Lemonnier 1976). Very soonprehistorians from Leroi-Gourhan's and Tixier's laboratoriesand research groups came to consider this journal, along withLemonnier's research on salt marshes in Brittany (1980), one of thetheoretical bases of their work. The chaine operatoire: a fuzzy but very flexible concept Since Mauss (1947: 34) and Leroi-Gourhan (and also Maget 1962:17-49), all social anthropologists have agreed on the interest ofdeconstructing production sequences in stages. Many differentdefinitions exist, however, expressing the diversity of the concept.Leroi-Gourhan insisted on sequence and relations between the stages(syntax). Cresswell chose to stress the project: 'the chaineoperatoire aims to transform raw material to achieve a project'(1976). Lemonnier (1980) added a cognitive dimension: 'technicalactivities (are) organized in a series of technical operations(themselves organized in chaines operatoires) which require theexistence of a body of knowledge'. Applications soon showed the need to deconstruct de��con��struct?tr.v. de��con��struct��ed, de��con��struct��ing, de��con��structs1. To break down into components; dismantle.2. chainesoperatoires in significant steps: operations conceived as elementaryactions, grouped in sequences, themselves subdivisions of phases. Butthey also required that the starting and finishing points be defined.This revealed the arbitrary nature of such divisions and the necessityto adjust them in relation to problem orientation in every case. Itbecame obvious that, provided definitions and limits were indicated, theconcept could be used in quite a flexible way, whether to analyse theefficiency of craft production (Cresswell 1965), to express thecomplexity of a collective expedition or metallurgical production(Martinelli 1991), or to identify significant similarities and variantsbetween different productions (Lemonnier 1980). Leroi-Gourhan haddeveloped the chaine operatoire to evaluate cognitive evolutiondiachronically, but his followers used it synchronically. Only when prehistorians and social anthropologists gatheredtogether did it become clear that their respective use of the termchaine operatoire was dissimilar. For prehistorians, it referred toindividual core reduction sequences (as reconstructed through refitting)while for social anthropologists, it referred to the scheme common tothe different observed production sequences. Concepts borrowed fromsocial anthropologists turned out, however, to be extremely useful,instrumental in the most recent developments of French studies ofprehistoric technology. Developments in social anthropology and prehistory Concepts borrowed from social anthropology There was a need to organize conceptually relations betweendifferent chaines operatoires and between these and other operations.There was also a need to develop a hierarchical terminology from thesimplest technical gesture/action to the largest significant body oftechniques. Rather than using Leroi-Gourhan's concepts of milieutechnique and milieu interieur (Leroi-Gourhan 1945: 334, 340-45), socialanthropologists chose to borrow from a historian of science andtechnology, B. Gilles, the concept of technical system (1978) as the setof techniques employed by a human group (ethnic group, nation . . .) ata given time. They also borrowed from him the concept of necessarycompatibility among techniques within a technical system. In the late 1970s, Lemonnier made a breakthrough by demonstratingthe existence of variant and invariant (programming) invariant - A rule, such as the ordering of an ordered list or heap, that applies throughout the life of a data structure or procedure. Each change to the data structure must maintain the correctness of the invariant. stages in operational sequencesand of strategic stages 'the execution of which is necessary forthe accomplishment of the technical process, which means that it cannotbe delayed, suppressed or replaced without deeply upsetting it'(Lemonnier 1980: 9). These strategic stages introduced a bridge betweentechnical and social systems since they are always socially controlled.But variants also lead to the social realm since they are either due toadaptation to local ecology or related to the social system (Lemonnier1980: 9). The necessity to define entities intermediate between the technicalsystem and the chaine operatoire was perceived by several socialanthropologists and prehistorians but no agreement was ever found on theterminology and, as a result, several terms coexist: technical process(Lemonnier), technical structure (Gilles), technical path'filiere' (Sigaut) or 'cheminement' (Martinelli).This diversity never prevented mutual understanding. But it clearlyshowed that both the limits and the hierarchical constructs establishedby technologists were relative and had to be selected according to according toprep.1. As stated or indicated by; on the authority of: according to historians.2. In keeping with: according to instructions.3. thenature of the problem. Prehistorians : refitters and experimenters Two groups worked in parallel in the 1970s before joining forces inthe mid 1980s. On the one hand, the refitters from the Leroi-Gourhanschool obtained a very complete image of the Late Magdalenian knappingtechnique at Paris Basin As a modern administrative r��gion of France, it is known as the ?le de France As the territory at the political centre of the Kingdom of France, it is known as the ?le de France. As a hydrological basin, it is largely the basin of the River Seine. sites, with characteristic variants for everysite. On the other hand, experimenters of Tixier's schoolestablished principles for scientific knapping experiments (Inizan etal. 1992) and started to develop criteria for technical diagnostics. Inthe 1970s, Tixier's school developed the concepts of 'econemiede la matiere premiere' (raw material management which includedprocurement strategy and use) and 'economie du debitage'(production and use management) (Inizan 1980; Perles 1992). They joinedforces for the first time at a symposium held in 1984 where they studiedthe intersite variability of lithic lith��ic?1?adj.Consisting of or relating to stone or rock.Adj. 1. lithic - of or containing lithium2. lithic - relating to or composed of stone; "lithic sandstone" production in the Magdalenian of theParis Basin (Audouze et al. 1988). The identification of norms common tothe different chaines operatoires led the task group to create theconcept of conceptual scheme. Later, this term was replaced by technicalscheme, a term still in use and preferred because it avoids the risk ofconfusion.TABLE 1. Means for achieving a chaine operatoire.KNOWLEDGE composed of:mental representations of ideal forms of raw materialsconcepts of ideal formsof raw materialsa catalogue of actions with their practicaland gestures consequencesKNOW-HOW existing as:a conceptual know-how which organizes actions which evaluates actions and results at every stepa psychemotor know-how for programming gestures and actions Nicole Pigeot's research on Etiolles, one of the Magdaleniansites of the Paris Basin, opened a new field with her analyses ofefficiency and productivity. She showed that the level of competence ofknappers varied, that flint knapping obeyed very strict norms atEtiolles and that stereotyped errors could be shown on several refittedblocks of low productivity, corresponding to different levels oftechnical difficulty, both conceptual and psychomotor psychomotor/psy��cho��mo��tor/ (si?ko-mo��ter) pertaining to motor effects of cerebral or psychic activity. psy��cho��mo��toradj.1. (1990). Shedemonstrated the degree to which Magdalenian blade production waspredetermined by the preparation of the core. At the same time, prodetermination was also a key concept ofBoeda's work on the Levallois technique The Levallois technique is a name given by archaeologists to a distinctive type of flint knapping developed by humans during the Palaeolithic period.It is named after nineteenth century finds of flint tools in the Levallois-Perret . He showed that it wasorganized according to a Levallois concept (1994: 12-13). In thistechnical process, flakes are predetermining, or predetermined, or areboth at the same time.(2) Cognitive research by Pelegrin led to the identification ofdifferent conceptual and material levels in a technical process in whicha conceptual scheme was the intellectual counterpart of the corereduction sequence (Pelegrin 1993; Pelegrin et al. 1988).Pelegrin's work on knapping knowledge and know-how was instrumentalboth in the development of cognitive archaeology Cognitive archaeology is a sub-discipline of archaeology which focuses on the ways that ancient societies thought and the symbolic structures that can be perceived in past material culture. and the refinement ofcriteria for a general technological characterization of lithicproduction (1993). At the same time he developed fine diagnosticcriteria to identify knapping techniques and a cognitive analysis of thedifferent intellectual and physical components implied in knappingactivities. He was the first to propose a coherent scheme of thecognitive means needed for knapping activities (TABLE 1). Pelegrin completed this cognitive approach by adding concepts ofintermediate and final intentions, of suivi critique (criticalfollow-through), of mental representations. All these concepts, if notnew in cognitive science cognitive scienceInterdisciplinary study that attempts to explain the cognitive processes of humans and some higher animals in terms of the manipulation of symbols using computational rules. , were new to prehistory. Adding culturalconcepts of 'maniere de faire' (ways of doing) and'maniere de voir' (ways of seeing) resulted in an originalbody of concepts on which Valentin could build his comparative method. Boris Valentin's comparative method for analysingintercultural variability in Upper Palaeolithic lithic industries Though an original enterprise, Boris Valentin's comparativemethod (Valentin 1995) integrates in a unified approach many previousconcepts (Tixier, Balfet, Lemonnier, Perles, Pigeot, Pelegrin). He setsit within a palaeohistorical framework and wishes 'to reconstructindividual's "movement", their creations and ideas andtheir changing relations with the environment'. His goal is'to understand the mechanisms behind the geographic expansion ofLate Glacial societies during a phase of improving climate whichtransformed their environment; . . . to understand the azilianisationprocess, its genesis and its mechanisms' (1995). Changingperspective from previous works, he uses lithic technology In archeology, Lithic Technology refers to a broad array of techniques and styles to produce usable tools from various types of stone. The earliest stone tools were recovered from modern Ethiopia and were dated to between two-million and three-million years old. in adiachronic di��a��chron��icadj.Of or concerned with phenomena as they change through time. approach, the study of lithics ensuring the permanence oftestimony through time. This method represents one more step intoabstraction and data inference. It is based upon the chaine operatoireas an analytical tool used to measure the intra- and interculturalvariability of lithic industries. It unifies typology typology/ty��pol��o��gy/ (ti-pol��ah-je) the study of types; the science of classifying, as bacteria according to type. typologythe study of types; the science of classifying, as bacteria according to type. and technology ina unique approach in which tool types are the end-product for thetechniques selected to produce them. It uses all the concepts previouslycreated to clarify the choices and the constraints, to identify thevariants and the correlated options. It proceeds on four successivelevels of analysis (Valentin 1995: 22-46). These four levels allow a fine and precise characterization oflithic productions. Comparisons then are no longer made on objects noron given reduction sequences but on elements of the conceptual schemesof the chaines operatoires as well as on a higher level of abstraction The level of complexity by which a system is viewed. The higher the level, the less detail. The lower the level, the more detail. The highest level of abstraction is the single system itself. :on final and intermediate goals, on priorities. Valentin offers a hierarchical analytical process which allows himto identify technical and cultural characteristics. Applying thisapproach to Late Glacial cultures from central France, he was able todistinguish two stages within the Federmesser techno-complex and proposea coherent scheme of evolution from Magdalenian to early Federmesser andthen to late Federmesser and Belloisian. The transformation ofprojectile projectilesomething thrown forward.projectile syringesee blow dart.projectile vomitingforceful vomiting, usually without preceding retching, in which the vomitus is thrown well forward. points from lateral (backed bladelets) to distal points(backed points) led to deep changes in their manufacturing technology,including reversal from soft hammer to soft stone hammer a hammer formed with a face at one end, and a thick, blunt edge, parallel with the handle, at the other, - used for breaking stone.See also: Stone , shorter stagesof preparation balanced by more intense final retouching of tools, and,generally speaking, a shift from strategic behaviour towards tacticalbehaviour. He cautiously relates this trend to the changes in huntingtechniques induced by environmental and ecological shifts. Boeda's analytical method A reaction to the Leroi-Gourhan tradition The second theoretical innovation proceeds from a very differentpoint of view. Specialists of the Middle Palaeolithic, while using thechaine operatoire to analyse lithics from their period, becamedissatisfied because it led to an almost infinite number infinite numbera number so large as to be uncountable. Represented by 8, frequently obtained by 'dividing' by zero. of solutionsand did not assist in understanding the rationale behind MiddlePalaeolithic technology? Moreover, no available method satisfactorilyexplained the technological variability and correctly identifiedspecific Early and Middle Palaeolithic techniques. Given the fact that agiven object could be obtained by different technical processes andcould perform different functions, they concluded that an object cannotbe satisfactorily described and its function deduced from its typology.It can only be defined by its position in a succession of technicalstages and by the purposes for which it was created (Boeda 1997: 16). Itwas thus necessary to use concepts permitting the analysis of allcomponents of lithic production and the identification of regularities.In the late 1980s, a research group was created which gatheredPalaeolithic specialists from Tixier's and from Bordes' schoolaround Jean-Michel Geneste and Eric Boeda. Though not abandoning theadvantages of the chaine operatoire for reconstructing core reductionsequences, they chose to tackle technological problems in lithics from acompletely different viewpoint. They were more interested in thetechnical logic and principles which governed lithic production. Theirresearch was first published in a special issue of Techniques et Culture(Geneste 1991; Boeda 1991) and resulted in a new comparative approachpresented by Boeda (1997). Simondon's basic concepts This group chose to apply Simondon's concepts on the genesisof technical objects, even though these concepts constitute a'mechanology' more suited for analysis of modern technologythan of 'actes traditionnels efficaces'. In the 1950s, GilbertSimondon Gilbert Simondon (October 2 1924 – February 7 1989) was a French philosopher best known for his theory of individuation and his interest in technology. Career , a psychologist and philosopher of technology, built a theoryof technology or mechanology aimed at understanding the nature andevolution of technical systems and (contemporary) technical objects. Hewas interested in the principles of function which define and determinelines of evolution for technical objects. In his major work Du moded'existence des objets techniques (1958), he focused on theautonomous part of the evolution of technical objects determined bytheir technical properties: 'the dynamic of organized inorganicmatter' (Stiegler 1994: 84). Central to Simondon's theory arethe following concepts: * Technical objects (whether processes or machines) retain in theirconstituent parts the memory of their predecessors; this property is'technicity'. * The evolution of a technical object proceeds by integration andincreasing synergy of the different parts and functions. Attracted by the way this theory operated at a more abstract andgeneric level than Leroi-Gourhan's, Boeda retained and adapted fromSimondon a few crucial concepts: * Technical structures are sets of principles which control thefunction of technical objects and are present throughout the whole lineof evolution of these objects. * A tool is made of many functionally different zones attached toone another, conceived on the basis of a functioning scheme andassembled in a stable structure by the manufacturing process. These are'techno-functional units'. * The general principle of evolution for technical objects is toevolve from an 'abstract state' of juxtaposed elements to a'concrete state' of integration of functions in a synergic synergic/syn��er��gic/ (sin-er��jik) acting together or in harmony. syn��er��gicadj.Synergistic. way. In its concrete form, the technical object may become sospecialized than it cannot be modified to answer even minormodifications of function or environment. This phenomenon is called'hypertelie'. As he stresses (Boeda 1997: preamble/H): Using such an approach has the advantage of documenting differencesof structure only through technical criteria which are always identicaland very simple, such as convexity ConvexityA measure of the curvature in the relationship between bond prices and bond yields.Notes:Positive convexity corresponds to curvature that opens upward. Negative convexity corresponds to curvature that opens downward. , operational surfaces, hierarchy ofsurfaces, percussion technique . . . The differences will be based onthe number of implied technical criteria and on their interaction. He also applies concepts created by Tixier's group such asrecurrent series of flakes, predetermining and predetermined flakes(Inizan et al. 1992; Boeda 1994). He introduces a distinction betweentwo types of retouch: 'confection' and 'affutage',best translated as retouch of the edges in order to shape them, andresharpening (1997: 35). Like Valentin, Boeda wants to build a comparative system, 'anew method for "reading" objects' (1997: preamble/G) andto organize it in several 'levels of reality'. This involves: * core refitting, * the 'technological reading' of scars on cores andflakes, * experimental checking through experimental knapping in order toidentify technical rules (correlations between technical acts and scarson cores and flakes). Boeda organizes lithic production in different levels ofvariability: * families of structures ('structures de debitage' and'structures de faconnage')(4) * structures (for the moment he identifies seven 'structuresde debitage': Clactonian, Levallois, Discoid, Quina, Trifacial,Hummal and Rocourt; and one 'structure de faconnage': bifacesand bifacial pieces) * methods (conceived as the knowledge and the know-how of a givengroup at a given time and place for production and considered as theonly means to obtain it; in other words Adv. 1. in other words - otherwise stated; "in other words, we are broke"put differently , the relation between anabstract representation of the goals (the structure) and itsconcretization (Boeda 1997: 31). He divides them into a stage ofinitialization in��i��tial��ize?tr.v. in��i��tial��ized, in��i��tial��iz��ing, in��i��tial��iz��es Computer Science1. To set (a starting value of a variable).2. To prepare (a computer or a printer) for use; boot.3. (which can vary according to the shapes of the rawmaterial); and a stage of exploitation. * chaines operatoires which express the lowest degree ofvariability (including, among others, adaptation to raw material andlevel of competence). Boeda analyses structures according to several types ofclassification which shed light on different properties associated withdifferent methods and reduce the variability to identifiable elements.Number of operational surfaces contrasts Levallois, Clactonian andDiscoid structures, which include two surfaces, to the triface structurewhich includes three. Mode of exploitation contrasts the Levalloisstructure, on a surface, with the Discoid, Clactonian and Trifacestructures on a volume, on the one hand, and on the other with theHummal and Rocourt structures on an oblong volume for the extraction ofblades (Boeda 1997: 44). A key concern is the evolution of the core during the knappingprocess, and here a distinction may be drawn between homothetic andnon-homothetic volumes. In homothetic knapping the core retains aconstant morphology, whether there is re-initialization of the corebetween recurrent series (for example in Levallois) or not (UpperPalaeolithic laminar laminar/lam��i��nar/ (lam��i-nar)1. pertaining to a lamina or laminae.2. laminated.3. of, pertaining to, or being a streamlined, smooth fluid flow. structure). In non-homothetic volumes, themorphology of the core is altered at different stages of exploitation,through changes in striking platform, flaked surface or both. Boedainsists on the need to reconstruct different stages through which thecore has evolved. This is to avoid confusion arising from similaritiesbetween cores belonging to different structures but at different stagesof exploitation (e.g. a discoid core may in its first stage look like aClactonian core); and to avoid missing the changes of structure duringthe exploitation of a core (Boeda 1997: 46-54). Boeda's analytical method is particularly efficient in hisapproach to bifaces and tools: their division into differenttechno-functional units leads to identification and understanding ofelements of variability which have not previously been perceived orunderstood. Thus the 'plan de coupe' (created by theintersection of the two surfaces of a bifacially worked piece) isdistinguished from effects created by the intersection of locallymodified surfaces created by resharpening and called 'plans debec' (Boeda 1997: 67). Boeda renews our conception of bifaces inmany ways: he considers the biface to be simultaneously: * a structured matrix equivalent to a core, * a blank with morphotechnical characteristics corresponding to thewhole artefact See artifact. or to a part of it and * one or several tools created on this blank. He demonstrates the importance of the asymmetry in biface profiles(complete or reduced to a part of the volume and much more frequent thantruly biconvex biconvex/bi��con��vex/ (-kon-veks��) having two convex surfaces. bi��con��vexadj.Convex on both sides or surfaces.biconvexhaving two convex surfaces. symmetrical profiles). This allows a homotheticresharpening, the planar surface always being used as the strikingplatform (Boeda 1997: 63-74). The division into primary elements permitsus to reduce the seemingly random variability of bifaces and flakes usedas tools to significant synergic relations: edge/point, edge/edge,edge/'angle de coupe' or even, for predetermined flakes, toone significant element: angle, delineation, back (1997: 94-103). Using the concepts of 'abstract' and 'concrete'structures, of 'hypertelie', and of genesis and lines ofdescent of technical products, Boeda rejects the hypothesis oftechnophyletic gradualism grad��u��al��ism?n.1. The belief in or the policy of advancing toward a goal by gradual, often slow stages.2. Biology and of a unique line of descent Noun 1. line of descent - the kinship relation between an individual and the individual's progenitorsfiliation, lineage, descentfamily relationship, kinship, relationship - (anthropology) relatedness or connection by blood or marriage or adoption from pebblesto blades. He argues that the Clactonian volume is an abstract,non-saturated structure made of juxtaposed elements, since only part ofit is functional. The Levallois is a saturated structure in which theelements interact in order to create a functional synergy and is thus a'concrete' structure which cannot experience furtherstructural modification. The extremely lengthy duration and stability ofthis structure is for Boeda proof of its 'concrete' nature. Itpossesses a few properties in common with the Clactonian structure:predetermination predetermination,n an administrative procedure whereby a dental professional submits a treatment plan to the carrier before treatment is initi-ated. of the striking platform and of the flaked surfaces,selection of the longest surface of the block as flaked surface. Thisleads Boeda to believe that the Clactonian is situated earlier than theLevallois in the same line of descent. Chronological evidence confirmsit to be earlier (Boeda 1997: 115-27). Similarly, he sees the discoidvolume as another possible and much earlier independent evolution of theClactonian volume in which the 'charnitres' - angles ofintersection between the successive knapping surfaces and the surfacesfor striking platforms - remain recurrent and in which the core isprogressively shaped during the knapping process. In this hypothesis,the triface structure would belong to another independent line (1997:128-34). Among the bifaces, Boeda distinguishes earlier bifaces composedof juxtaposed parts created by different algorithms and later ones whichare concrete structures in which the different parts merge in a synergicway. Some of the more regular and smaller bifaces have a'volumetric structure conceived in such a way that it isself-maintained and that its functionality is inscribed in the wholevolume and not only in its periphery' (1997: 141). Some of thembecome overspecialized: they exhibit characteristics of'hypertelie' and cannot adapt to the slightest change inconditions of use or manufacture. This can be detected in the fact thatthey are neither resharpened nor rejuvenated. The existence of abstractand concrete bifaces in both early African and European industries,separated by a large time-span, leads him to propose reinvention of thebifacial structure in Europe around 550,000 BP (1997: 146-9). Boeda's hypothesis of technogenesis is not as solidly arguedas his analytical approach, largely because it is too early to drawconclusions until this type of analysis has been performed on manydifferent industries from all over the world - particularly from Africa.This comparative approach, Boeda's search for the internalevolutionary dynamics of technical systems, runs completely counter tothe post-processualist trend. This does not mean, however, that herejects the social dimension of technological change. It is rather that,following Simondon, he focuses on the technological logic and theembedded potential for evolution. His attempt to build a new theory of technology for Early andMiddle Palaeolithic stone industries is more innovative and provocativethan Valentin's approach, as the latter is built on a longertradition and enriched by insights from many earlier researchers. Whilehis reading of cores and bifacial pieces as volumetric volumetric/vol��u��met��ric/ (vol?u-met��rik) pertaining to or accompanied by measurement in volumes. vol��u��met��ricadj.Of or relating to measurement by volume. constructsresponding to algorithms transforms our perception of lithicvariability, his hypotheses of technogenesis and lines of evolution havestill to be properly demonstrated. Nevertheless, he challengestraditional interpretations of lithic products and the meaning of theirvariability, and offers a global theoretical framework of interpretationwhich can accommodate technical structures and methods of exploitationyet to be identified. While some of his results are confirmed byprevious work (among others Ashton et al. 1992; Amiot 1993) he reallyopens a new field of investigation. Boeda's approach represents asignificant step forward from the theories of Bordes, Binford and theirfollowers (Binford 1973; Dibble & Rolland 1992). Conclusion The two comparative approaches described here rest on solid theory,anchored in the French technological tradition. It is essential,however, to realize that their application requires prehistorians tomaster a vast and rigorous empirical knowledge, whether using refitting,experimental knapping or a 'technical reading' of cores andflake scars. Both open new possibilities to the understanding ofinter-assemblage variability and allow us to evaluate technicaldifferences between synchronic syn��chron��ic?adj.1. Synchronous.2. Of or relating to the study of phenomena, such as linguistic features, or of events of a particular time, without reference to their historical context. or diachronic cultures. Both retain some neo-positivism which is still strong in Frenchresearch. Though the social implications and the role of environment inthe production that they study is not ignored or underestimated, bothfirst reduce the social system to its 'elementary' componentsand focus on only one sub-system of Palaeolithic societies: technicalsystem analysed for its internal content. Both are quite representative of the French scholarly tradition inbuilding new concepts on selected earlier ones rather than insystematically rejecting previous work. One must realize that, far fromkeeping French prehistorians in a closed system, this standpoint permitsthem to include in their approaches all the concepts that seemappropriate for their research, whatever their origin. Acknowledgements. I express my warmest thanks to Boris Valentin andEric Boeda for allowing me to give an account of their recent partiallyunpublished researches. The innovative ideas are theirs, the clumsinessof rendition is mine. I also thank Anick Coudart for her critique andsuggested improvements, and Chris Scarre Chris Scarre is a leading writer in the fields of archeology and ancient history. He took his MA and PhD degrees at Cambridge University. From 1984 to 1988 he was editor of the acclaimed Past Worlds: The Times Atlas and Archeology for the hard task to correct mylame English. 1 As Anick Coudart rightly points out (see this issue), the Frenchtend to employ 'concepts' for what the British call'theories'. Moreover, since a new theory or a new concept doesnot receive its full appreciation in France as long as it is notsupported by a corresponding analytical method and a successfulapplication, the result is that in many cases concepts are embedded in afirst methodology chapter where they are not illustrated particularlywell. Boris Valentin's doctorate dissertation is a good example ofthis tradition. 2 The Levallois concept is composed with the volumetric conceptionof the core and technical criteria such as the lateral and distalconvexities and the preferential striking platform. 3 The unsatisfactory explanations proposed by Bordes and laterBinford about the Middle Palaeolithic variability of lithic industriesdemonstrated how this question of variability was difficult. 4 Structures de faconnage i.e. manufactured structures are bifacesand bifacial pieces as opposed to structures de debitage The term debitage refers to the totality of waste material produced during lithic reduction and the production of chipped stone tools. This assemblage includes, but is not limited to, different kinds of lithic flakes, shatter, and production errors and rejects. i.e. structuresgoal of which are producing flakes. References ASHTON, N.-M., J. COOK, S.G. LEWIS & J. ROSE. 1992. High Lodge:Excavations by G. de G. Sieveking 1962-68 and J. Cook 1988. London:British Museum British Museum,the national repository in London for treasures in science and art. Located in the Bloomsbury section of the city, it has departments of antiquities, prints and drawings, coins and medals, and ethnography. Press. 1993. Atouts et outils de l'ethnologie des techniques: Sens ettendance en technologie comparee, Actes du colloque, Paris, 16-17novembre 1992, Techniques et Culture 21. AUDOUZE, F., C. KARLIN et al. 1988. Taille taille:see tallage. du silex silex (sī´leks) (silicon dioxide),n a substance used in dental surface polishing due to its abrasive characteristics. et finalite dudebitage dans le Magdalenien du Bassin Parisien, in M. Otte (ed.), De laLoire a l'Oder, Les civilisations du Paleolithique final dans lenord-ouest europeen: 55-83. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports.International series S444. BALFET, H. 1973. A propos du tour de potier, l'outil et legeste technique, in L'Homme hier et aujourd'hui, recueild'etudes en hommage a Andre Leroi-Gourhan: 109-22. Paris: EditionsCujas. (Ed.) 1991. Observer l'action technique des chainesoperatoires, pour quoi faire? Paris: Editions du CNRS. BERNOT, L. 1967. Les Cak: contribution a l'etudeethnographique d'une population de langue langue?n.Language viewed as a system including vocabulary, grammar, and pronunciation of a particular community.[French, from Old French; see language.] loi. Paris: EditionsC.N.R.S. Centre de documentation sur l'Asie du Sud-Est, Atlasethno-linguistique 2eme serie. BINFORD, L.R. 1973. Inter-assemblage variability - the Mousterianand the 'functional argument', in C. Renfrew (ed.), Theexplanation of culture change: 227-54. London: Duckworth. BOEDA, E. 1991. Approche de la variabilite des sytemes deproduction lithique des industries du Paleolithique inferieur et moyen:chronique d'une vatiabilite attendue, Techniques et Culture 199117-18: 37-79. 1994. Le concept Levallois: variabilite des methodes. Paris:Editions du CNRS. Monographies du CRA See Community Reinvestment Act. 19. 1997. Technogenese des systemes de production lithique auPaleolithique inferieur et moyen en Europe occidentale et auProche-Orient. Unpublished dissertation, Universite de Paris X-Nanterre. CRESSWELL, R. 1965. Un pressair a olives au Liban, L'Homme5(1): 33-63. 1972. Les trois sources d'une technologie nouvelle, in J.M.C.Thomas & L.L. Bernat (ed.), Langues et techniques, nature etsociete, approche ethnologique, approche naturaliste 2: 21-7. Paris:Klincksiek. 1976. Avant-propos. Techniques et Culture 1: 5-6. DERRIDA, J. 1967. De la Grammatologie. Paris: Minuit. DIBBLE, H.L. & N. ROLLAND. 1992. On assemblage variability inthe Middle Palaeolithic of Western Europe Western EuropeThe countries of western Europe, especially those that are allied with the United States and Canada in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (established 1949 and usually known as NATO). : history, perspectives and anew synthesis, in H.L. Dibble & P.A. Mellars (ed.): The MiddlePalaeolithic: adaptation, behavior and variability: 1-28. Philadelphia(PA): University of Pennsylvania (body, education) University of Pennsylvania - The home of ENIAC and Machiavelli.http://upenn.edu/.Address: Philadelphia, PA, USA. , University Museum. Monograph 72. DIGARD, J.-P. 1979. La technologie en anthropologie: fin deparcours ou nouveau souffle souffle/souf��fle/ (soo��f'l) a soft, blowing auscultatory sound.cardiac souffle? any cardiac or vascular murmur of a blowing quality. ? L'Homme 19(1): 73-104. GENESTE, J.-M. 1991. Systemes techniques de production lithique:variations techno-economiques dans les processus de realisation desoutillages paleolithiques, Techniques et Culture 17-18: 1-35. GILLES, B. 1978. Histoire des techniques. Paris: Gallimard. GUILLE-ESCURET, G. 1994. Le decalage humain - le fait social dansl'evolution. Paris: Kime. INIZAN, M.-L. 1980. Series anciennes et economie du debitage, in J.Tixier (ed.), Prehistoire et technologie lithique: 28-30. Paris: CNRS.Journees du 11 au 13 juin 1979, cahier ca��hier?n.A report, especially one concerning the policy or proceedings of a parliamentary group.[French, notebook, from Old French quaier, from Vulgar Latin *quaternum no.1. INIZAN, M.-L., H. ROCHE & J. TIXIER. 1992. Technology ofKnapped Stone (followed by a multilingual vocabulary in Arabic, English,French, German, Greek, Italian, Russian and Spanish): Prehistoire de lapierre taillee 3. Meudon: CREP CREP Conservation Reserve Enhancement ProgramCREP Contract Repair Enhancement ProgramCREP Court Referral Education Programs . LATOUR, B. & P. LEMONNIER. 1994a. Introduction, Genese socialedes techniques, genese technique des humains, in Latour & Lemonnier(ed.): 9-24. (Ed.). 1994b. De la prehistoire aux missiles balistiques. Paris: LaDecouverte. LEMONNIER, P. 1976. La description des chaines operatoires:contribution a l'analyse des systemes techniques, Techniques etCulture 1: 100-151. 1980. Les Salines de l'Ouest, logique technique, logiquesociale. Paris: Editions de la Maison des Sciences de l'Homme. 1983. L'Etude des systemes techniques, une urgence entechnologie culturelle, Techniques et Culture 'nouvelle serie'1: 11-34. (Ed.) 1992. Elements for an anthropology of technology. Ann Arbor Ann Arbor,city (1990 pop. 109,592), seat of Washtenaw co., S Mich., on the Huron River; inc. 1851. It is a research and educational center, with a large number of government and industrial research and development firms, many in high-technology fields such as (MI): Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan (body, education) University of Michigan - A large cosmopolitan university in the Midwest USA. Over 50000 students are enrolled at the University of Michigan's three campuses. The students come from 50 states and over 100 foreign countries. . AnthropologicalPapers 88. LEROI-GOURHAN, A. 1943 & 1971. Evolution et techniques 1:L'Homme et la Matiere. Paris: Albin Michel. 1945 & 1973. Evolution et technique 2: Milieu et Technique.Paris: Albin Michel. 1964. Les Religions de la Prehistoire. Paris: PUF PUF Public Use FilePUF Parallel URL fetcher (*nix download tool)PUF Physically Unclonable FunctionPUF Northern PufferPUF Paid-Up-FrontPUF Preguntas de Uso Frequente (Spanish: Frequently Asked Questions). 1964. Le Geste et la Parole 1: Technique et langage. Paris: AlbinMichel. 1965. Le Geste et la Parole 2: la Memoire et les Rythmes. Paris:Albin Michel. 1993. (Trans. Anna Rostock Berger.) Gesture and Speech. Cambridge(MA): MIT MIT - Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press. MAGET, M. 1962. Guide d'etude directe des comportementsculturels. Paris: CNRS. MARTINELLI, B. 1988. Apres Leroi-Gourhan: les chemins de latechnologie, in Andre Leroi-Gourhan ou les voles de l'homme: 61-89.Paris: Albin Michel. 1991. Une chaine operatoire halieutique au Toga, reflexions sur lamethode, in Balfet (1991): 65-86. MAUSS, M. 1947 & 1971. Manuel d'Ethnographie. Paris:Payot. PELEGRIN, J. 1993. A framework for analysing prehistoric stonetools manufacture and a tentative application to some early stoneindustries, in A. Berthelet & J. Chavaillon (ed.), The Use of Toolsby Human and Non-human Primates: 302-14. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Symposia sym��po��si��a?n.A plural of symposium. of the Fyssen Foundation 3. PELEGRIN, J., C. KARLIN & P. BODU. 1988. Chaines operatoires:un outil pour le prehistorien, in J. Tixier (ed.), Technologieprehistorique: 55-62. Paris: Editions du CNRS. PELRAS, C. 1973. Technologie, ethnographie, ethnologie, inL'Homme, bier et aujourd'hui: 715-30. Paris: Editions Cujas. PERLES, C. 1992. In search of lithic strategies: a cognitiveapproach to prehistoric chipped assemblages, in J.-C. Gardin & C.Peebles (ed.), Representations in archaeology: 223-47. Bloomington (IN):Indiana University Press Indiana University Press, also known as IU Press, is a publishing house at Indiana University that engages in academic publishing, specializing in the humanities and social sciences. It was founded in 1950. Its headquarters are located in Bloomington, Indiana. . PIGEOT, N. 1990. Technical and social actors, Archaeological Reviewfrom Cambridge 9(1): 126-141. SCHLANGER, N. 1990. Technique as human action, Archaeological Revuefrom Cambridge 9(1): 18-26. 1994. Piaget et Leroi-Gourhan, deux conceptions biologiques desconnaissances, in Latour & Lemonnier (ed.): 165-83. SIMONDON, G. 1958. Du mode d'existence des objets techniques.Paris: Aubier. STIEGLER, B. 1994. La faute d'Epimethee. Paris: Cite desSciences. VALENTIN, B. 1995. Les Groupes humains et leurs traditions auTardiglaciaire dans le Bassin Parisien - apport An apport is the transference of an article from an unknown source, to you, or another place by unknown means.[1] The item can be anything, from coins and jewellery from ancient times, to modern objects such as watches and keys. de la technologielithique comparee. These de doctorat de l'Universite de Paris I.