Known and Unknown Stone: Papuan Petrology and Reciprocity-Reference-Cited by-同舟云学术

Known and Unknown Stone: Papuan Petrology and Reciprocity

Published:2024-03-07 Issue:1 Volume:20 Page:214-238
ISSN:1555-8622
Container-title:Archaeologies
language:en
Short-container-title:Arch

Author:

Sillitoe Paul

Abstract

AbstractWhat is knowable about stone tool users’ knowledge? The people of the New Guinea Highlands were among the last to use stone implements routinely in their daily lives. These comprised both lithic flake tools and polished stone axes. Their classification of these objects challenges our notion of taxonomic knowledge, which involves agreement over defined classes, whereas they evidence considerable disagreement with unclear categories. It is necessary to situate stone within the egalitarian acephalous cultures where reciprocity features centrally to appreciate the ontological status of stone.

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Link

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11759-024-09496-7.pdf

Reference59 articles.

1. Arthur, K. W. (2018). The lives of stone tools: Crafting the status, skill, and identity of flintknappers. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.

2. Bartlett, H. K. (1964). Note on flint implements near Nipa, central Papuan Highlands. With Comments by N. Tindale. Records of the South Australian Museum, 14(4), 669–673.

3. Binford, L. (1977). Forty-seven trips: A case study in the character of archaeological formation processes. In R. V. S. Wright (Ed.), Stone tools as cultural markers: Change, evolution and complexity. Prehistory and material culture series No. 12 (pp. 24–36). Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.

4. Binford, L. (1989). Debating archaeology. New York: Academic Press.

5. Blackwood, B. (1950). The technology of a modern stone age people in New Guinea. Occasional papers on technology (Vol. 3). Oxford: Pitt Rivers Museum.