Abstract
Technology is not only the material means of making artifacts, but a dynamic cultural phenomenon embedded in social action, worldviews, and social reproduction. This paper explores the theoretical foundations for an anthropology of technology that is compatible with this definition. Because of its focus on social agency, practice theory provides an appropriate starting point for a social theory of technology. In addition, three other themes require explicit attention: scale, context, and the materiality of technology. Four case studies demonstrate how archaeologists are beginning to take technology beyond its material dimensions, and additional questions are proposed stemming from the theoretical issues raised in the paper. The purpose of this essay is to synthesize a diverse set of emerging ideas and approaches to understand better dynamic community-level social processes of prehistoric material culture production.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References cited
Adams, M. (1977). Style in southeast Asian materials processing: Some implications for ritual and art. In Lechtman, H., and Merrill, R. (eds.), Material Culture: Styles, Organization, and Dynamics of Technology, West, St. Paul, MN, pp. 21–52.
Appadurai, A. (ed.) (1986).The Social Life of Things, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Audouze, F. (1987). The Paris Basin in Magdalenian times. In Soffer, O. (ed.),The Pleistocene Old World: Regional Perspectives, Plenum Press, New York, pp. 183–200.
Audouze, F., David, F., and Enloe, J. (1989). Les apports des modèles ethno-archéologiques.Le Courrier du CNRS 73: 12–14.
Barnett, H. G. (1953).Innovation: The Basis of Culture Change, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Basalla, G. (1988).The Evolution of Technology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Barcet, A., Le Bas, C., and Mercier, C. (1985).Savoir-Faire et Changements Techniques, Presses Universitaires de Lyon, Lyon.
Bell, C. (1992).Ritual Theory, Ritual Practice, Oxford University Press, New York.
Bell, J. (1992). On capturing agency in theories about prehistory. In Gardin, J.-C., and Peebles, C. (eds.),Representations in Archaeology, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, pp. 30–55.
Bender, B. (1985). Prehistoric developments in the American mid-continent and in Brittany northwest France. In Price, T. D., and Brown, J. (eds.),Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherers: The Emergence of Cultural Complexity, Academic Press, Orlando, FL, pp. 21–58.
Bettinger, R. (1980). Explanatory/predictive models of hunter-gatherer adaptation.Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory 3: 189–255.
Bettinger, R. (1987). Archaeological approaches to hunter-gatherers.Annual Review of Anthropology 16: 121–142.
Bijker, W., Hughes, T., and Pinch, T. (eds.) (1987).The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Binford, L. (1962). Archaeology as anthropology.American Antiquity 28: 217–225.
Binford, L. (1965). Archaeological systematics and the study of cultural process.American Antiquity 31(2): 203–210.
Bourdieu, P. (1977).Outline of a Theory of Practice (Nice, R., trans.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Bourdieu, P. (1984).Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste (Nice, R., trans.), Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Boyd, R., and Richerson, P. (1985).Culture and the Evolutionary Processes, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Brumfiel, L. (1992). Distinguished lecture in archaeology: Breaking and entering the ecosystem: Gender, class, and faction steal the show.American Anthropologist 94(3): 551–567.
Bunge, M. (1979). Philosophical inputs and outputs of technology. In Bugliarello, G., and Doner, D. (eds.),History and Philosophy of Technology, University of Illinois Press, Urbana, pp. 262–281.
Buisson, D., Menu, M., Pinçon, G., and Walter, P. (1989). Les objects colorés du paléolithique supérieur: Cas de la grotte de la Vache (Ariège).Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Française 86(3): 183–191.
Chapman, R. (1984). Early metallurgy in Iberia and the western Mediterranean: Innovation, adoption and production. In Waldren, W., Chapman, R., Lewthwaite, J., and Kennard, R. (eds.),The Deyá Conference of Prehistory: Early Settlement in the Western Mediterranean Islands and their Peripheral Areas, British Archaeological Reports International Series 229, Oxford, pp. 1139–1165.
Chase, A. K. (1989). Domestication and domiculture in northern Australia: A social perspective. In Harris, D., and Hillman, G. (eds.),Foraging and Farming: The Evolution of Plant Domestication, Unwin Hyman, London, pp. 42–54.
Childe, V. G. (1925).The Dawn of European Civilization, Kegan Paul, London.
Childe, V. G. (1934).New Light on the Most Ancient Near East: The Oriental Prelude to European Prehistory, Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co., London.
Childe, V. G. (1956).Society and Knowledge, Harper and Brothers, New York.
Childs, S. T. (1991a). Style, technology and iron smelting furnaces in Bantu-speaking Africa.Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 10(4): 332–359.
Childs, S. T. (1991b). Transformations: Iron and copper production in central Africa. In Glumac, P. (ed.),Recent Trends in Archaeometallurgical Research, MASCA Research Papers in Science and Archaeology 8(1), MASCA Press, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, pp. 33–46.
Christian, J., and Gardner, P. (1977). The individual in northern Dene thought and communication: A study in sharing and diversity.National Museum of Man Mercury Series, No. 35, National Museum of Canada, Ottawa.
Clark, G. (1991). A paradigm is like an onion: Reflections on my biases. In Clark, G. (ed.),Perspectives on the Past: Theoretical Biases in Mediterranean Hunter-Gatherer Research, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, p. 79–108.
Cleuziou, S., Coudart, A. Demoule, J.-P., and Schnapp, A. (1991). The use of theory in French archaeology. In Hodder, I. (ed.),Archaeological Theory in Europe: The Last Three Decades, Routledge, London, pp. 91–128.
Clottes, J., Menu, M., and Walter, P. (1990). New light on the Niaux paintings.Rock Art Research 7(1): 21–26.
Conkey, M. (1989). The place of material culture studies in contemporary anthropology. In Hedlund, A. (ed.),Perspectives on Anthropological Collections from the American Southwest, Arizona State University Anthropological Research Papers No. 40, Tempe, pp. 13–31.
Conkey, M. (1991). Contexts of action, contexts for power: Material culture and gender in the Magdalenian. In Gero, J., and Conkey, M. (eds.),Engendering Archaeology: Women and Prehistory, Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 57–92.
Conkey, M. (1993). Humans as materialists and symbolists: Image-making in the upper paleolithic. In Rasmussen, T. (ed.),The Origin and Evolution of Humans and Humanness, Jones and Bartlett, Boston, pp. 95–118.
Conkey, M., and Spector, J. (1984). Archaeology and the study of gender.Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory 7: 1–38.
Costin, C. (1991). Craft specialization: Issues in defining, documenting and explaining the organization of production.Archaeological Method and Theory 3: 1–56.
Costin, C., Earle, T., Owen, B., and Russell, G. (1989). The impact of Inca conquest on local technology in the upper Mantaro Valley, Peru. In van der Leeuw, S. E., and Torrence, R. (eds.),What's New: A Closer Look at the Process of Innovation, One World Archaeology No. 14, Unwin Hyman, London, pp. 107–39.
Cowgill, G. (1975). On causes and consequences of ancient and modern population changes.American Anthropologist 77(3): 505–525.
Cowgill, G. (1993). Distinguished lecture in archaeology: Beyond criticizing new archaeology.American Anthropologist 95(3): 551–573.
Cresswell, R. (1972). Les trois sources d'une technologie nouvelle. In Thomas, J., and Bernot, L. (eds.),Langues et Techniques, Nature et Société, Tome II: Approche Ethnolie, Approche Naturaliste, Klincksieck, Paris, pp. 21–27.
Cresswell, R. (1990). “A new technology” revisited.Archaeological Review from Cambridge 9(1): 39–54.
Cross, J. (1990).Specialized Production in Non-stratified Society: An Example from the Late Archaic in the Northeast, Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
Cross, J. (1993). Craft specialization in nonstratified societies.Research in Economic Anthropology 14: 61–84.
Cutcliffe, S., and Post, R. (eds.) (1989).In Context, Research in Technology Studies, Vol. 1, Lehigh University Press, Bethlehem, PA.
Deetz, J. (1977).In Small Things Forgotten: The Archaeology of Early American Life, Anchor Books, Garden City, NY.
Dobres, M.-A. (1988).The Underground World of the Upper Paleolithic on the Central Russian Plain: Social Organization, Ideology, and Style, Unpublished M.A. thesis, State University of New York, Binghamton.
Dobres, M.-A. (1991a). Production as process, artifacts as artifice. Papers presented at the 56th Meetings of the Society for American Archaeology, New Orleans.
Dobres, M.-A. (1991b). Re-presentations of paleolithic visual imagery: Simulacra and their alternatives.Kroeber Anthropological Society Papers 73–74: 1–26.
Dobres, M.-A. (1993). Social agency and the dynamics of Magdalenian bone and antler technology. Paper presented at the 58th Meetings of the Society for American Archaeology, St. Louis.
Dobres, M.-A. (1994a). Technology and “Complexity”: Peopling the Relationship. InDebating Complexity, Proceedings of the 1993 International Chacmool Conference, University Calgary, Calgary, Canada (in press).
Dobres, M.-A. (1994b). Beyond gender attribution: Some methodological issues for engendering the past. In Balme, J., and Beck, W. (eds.),Proceedings of the Women in Archaeology Conference, Department of Prehistory, Research School of Pacific Studies, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia (in press).
Durbin, P. T. (1983). Introduction: Some questions for philosophy of technology. In Durbin, P., and Rapp, F. (eds.),Philosophy and Technology, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. 80, D. Reidel, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp. 1–14.
Edmonds, M. (1990). Description, understanding, and the chaîne opératoire.Archaeological Review from Cambridge 9(1): 55–70.
Enloe, J. (1992). Le partage de la nourriture à partir des témoins archéologiques: Une application ethnoarchéologique. In Gallay, A., Audouze, F., and Roux, V. (eds.),Ethnoarchéologie: Justification, Problèmes, Limites, Editions APDCA, Juan-les-Pins, pp. 307–323.
Enloe, J. (1993). Did palaeolithic hunters at Vérberie share their prey? Clues from site structure and ethnoarchaeology. Paper presented at the 58th Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, St. Louis.
Enloe, J., and David, F. (1989). Le remontage des os par individus: Le partage du renne chez les Magdaléniens de Pincevent (La Grande Paroisse, Sienne-et-Marne).Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Française 86: 275–281.
Ferré, F. (1988).Philosophy of Technology, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Foucault, M. (1977).Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, Pantheon, New York.
Gallay, A. (1992). On the study of habitat structures: Reflections concerning the archaeology-anthropology-science transition. In Gardin, J.-C., and Peebles, C. (eds.),Representations in Archaeology, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, pp. 107–121.
Geertz, C. (1973). Thick description: Toward an interpretative theory of culture. InThe Interpretation of Culture, Basic Books, New York, pp. 3–30.
Gero, J. (1983). Gender bias in archaeology: A cross-cultural perspective. In Gero, J., Lacey, D., and Blakey, M. (eds.).The Socio-Politics of Archaeology, Research Report No. 23, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, pp. 51–57.
Gero, J. (1991a). Gerderlithics: Women's roles in stone tool production. In Gero, J., and Conkey, M. (eds.),Engendering Archaeology: Women and Prehistory, Basil Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 163–193.
Gero, J. (1991b). Gender divisions of labor in the construction of archaeological knowledge. In Walde, E., and Willows, N. (eds.),The Archaeology of Gender, Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Chacmool Conference, University of Calgary, Calgary, p. 96–102.
Gero, J., and Conkey, M. (eds.) (1991).Engendering Archaeology: Women and Prehistory, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.
Giddens, A. (1979).Central Problems in Social Theory: Action, Structure, and Contradiction in Social Analysis, University of California Press, Berkeley.
Giddens, A. (1984).The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration, University of California Press, Berkeley.
Gifford-Gonzalez, D. (1993a). Gaps in ethnoarchaeological analyses of butchery. Is gender an issue? In Hudson, J. (ed.),Bones to Behavior: Ethnoarchaeological and Experimental Contributions to the Interpretation of Faunal Remains, Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale, pp. 181–199.
Gifford-Gonzalez, D. (1993b). You can hide but you can't run: Representations of women's work in illustrations of palaeolithic life.Visual Anthropology Review 9(1): 23–41.
Glassie, H. (1975).Folk Housing in Middle Virginia, University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville.
Goodway, M. (1991). Archaeometallurgy: Evidence of a paradigm shift? In Vandiver, P., Druzik, J., and Wheeler, G. (eds.),Materials Issues in Art and Archaeology II, MRS Symposium Proceedings 185, Materials Research Society, Pittsburgh, pp. 705–712.
Hagestrand, T. (1952). The propagation of innovation waves.Lund Studies in Geography (B: Hukan Geography) 4: 3–19.
Hall, R. (1977). An anthropocentric perspective for eastern United States prehistory.American Antiquity 42(4): 499–518.
Hanen, M., and Kelley, J. (1992). Gender and archaeological knowledge. In Embree, L. (ed.),Metaarchaeology, Kluwer Academic, Amsterdam, pp. 195–225.
Harris, M. (1968).The Rise of Anthropological Theory, T. Y. Crowell, New York.
Harris, M. (1979).Cultural Materials: The Struggle for a Science of Culture, Random House, New York.
Hastorf, C. (1991). Gender, space, and food in prehistory. In Gero, J., and Conkey, M. (eds.),Engendering Prehistory: Women and Production, Basil Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 132–159.
Haudricourt, A.-G. (1968). Le technologie culturelle: Essai du méthodologie. In Poirier, J. (ed.),Ethnologie Générale, Gallimard, Paris, pp. 731–822.
Hawkes, C. (1954). Archaeological theory and method: Some suggestions from the old world.American Anthropologist 56: 155–168.
Heidegger, M. (1977).The Question Concerning Technology (Lovitt, W., trans.), Garland, New York.
Herskovits, M. (1960).Economic Anthropology, Alfred A. Knopf, New York.
Hodder, I. (1982). Theoretical archaeology: A reactionary view. In Hodder, I. (ed.),Symbolic and Structural Archaeology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 1–16.
Hodder, I. (1985). Postprocessual archaeology.Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory 8: 1–26.
Hodder, I. (1986).Reading the Past, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Hodder, I. (ed.), (1987).The Archaeology of Contextual Meanings, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Hodder, I. (1990). Commentary.Archaeological Review from Cambridge 9(1): 154–157.
Hoffman, C. (1991a). The metals of Son Matge, Mallorca: Technology as cultural activity and behavior. In Waldren, W., Ensenyat, J., and Kennard, R. C. (eds.),2nd Deyá Conference of Prehistory: Archaeological Techniques, Technology, and Theory, British Archaeological Reports International Series 574, Oxford, pp. 169–188.
Hoffman, C. (1991b). Bronze, iron and lead: Iron age metallurgy in Mallorca, Spain. In Glumac, P. (ed.),Recent Trends in Archaeometallurgical Research, MASCA Research Papers in Science and Archaeology 8(1), MASCA Press, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, pp. 21–32.
Hoffman, C. (1994). The making of material culture: The roles of technology in Late Prehistoric Iberia. In Lillios, K. (ed.),Social Complexity in Late Prehistoric Iberia, International Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor, MI (in press).
Hosler, D. (1986).The Origins, Technology and Social Construction of Ancient West Mexican Metallurgy, Ph.D. dissertation, University of California at Santa Barbara. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, MI.
Hosler, D. (1988). Ancient west Mexican metallurgy: South and Central American origins and west Mexican transformations.American Anthropologist 90: 832–855.
Hughes, T. (1979). The electrification of America: The system builders.Technology and Culture 20(1): 124–162.
Ingersoll, D., Jr. and Bronitsky, G. (eds.) (1988).Mirror and Metaphor: Material and Social Constructions of Reality, University Press of America, Lanham, MD.
Ingold, T. (1988). Comment to Testart.Current Anthropology 29(1): 14–15.
Ingold, T. (1990). Society, nature, and the concept of technology.Archaeological Review from Cambridge 9(1): 5–17.
Ingold, T. (1991). Anthropological studies of technology: Paper presented at the Institute for Advanced Studies in the Humanities Conference “Cultures and Technologies,” University Edinburgh, July.
Ingold, T. (1993). Technology, language, and intelligence: A reconsideration of basic concepts. In Gibson, K., and Ingold, T. (eds.),Tools, Language and Cognition in Human Evolution, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 449–472.
Johnson, M. (1989). Conceptions of agency in archaeological interpretation.Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 8(2): 189–211.
Johnson, M. (1990). Technical and social systems in England, AD 1400–1700. Paper presented at the 55th Meetings of the Society for American Archaeology, Las Vegas.
Johnson, M. (1993).Housing Culture: Traditional Architecture in an English Landscape, Smithsonian, Washington, DC.
Karlin, C., and Pigeot, N. (1989). L'apprentissage de la taille du silex.Le Courrier du CNRS 73: 10–12.
Karlin, C., Pigeot, N., and Ploux, S. (1992). L'ethnologie préhistorique.La Recherche 247: 1106–1116.
Keller, E. F. (1985).Reflections on Gender and Science, Yale University Press, New Haven, CT.
Keller, E. F. (1992).Secrets of Life, Secrets of Death: Essays on Language, Gender, and Science, Routledge, New York.
Kenoyer, J. (1989). Harappan craft specialization and the question of urban segregation and stratification. Paper presented at the 54th Meetings of the Society for American Archaeology, Atlanta.
Kirk, T. (1991). Structure, agency, and power relations “chez les dermiers chasseurs-cueilleurs” of northwestern France. In Preucel, R. (ed.),Processual and Post-Processual Archaeologies: Multiple Ways of Knowing the Past, Center for Archaeological Investigation, Occasional Paper No. 10, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, pp. 108–125.
Kitching, G. (1988).Karl Marx and the Philosophy of Praxis, Routledge, London.
Knecht, H. (1991a). Early Upper Palaeolithic approaches to bone and antler projectile technology. Paper presented at the 56th Meetings of the Society for American Archeology, New Orleans.
Knecht, H. (1991b). The role of innovation in changing early upper paleolithic organic projectile technologies.Techniques et Culture 17–18: 115–144.
Knecht, H., and White, R. (1992). Operational sequences and prehistoric technology. Symposium organized for the 57th Meetings of the Society for American Archaeology, Pittsburgh.
Kohl, P. (1993). Limits to a post-processual archaeology (Or, the dangers of a new scholasticism). In Yoffee, N., and Sherratt, A. (eds.),Archaeological Theory: Who Sets the Agenda? Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 13–19.
Kopytoff, I. (1986). The cultural biography of things: Commodization as a process. In Appadurai, A. (ed.),The Social Life of Things, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 64–91.
Larick, R. (1991). Warriors and blacksmiths: Mediating ethnicity in east African spears.Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 10(4): 299–331.
Latour, B. (1986).The Prince for machines as well as for machinations. In Elliott, B. (ed.),Technology and Social Process, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, pp. 20–43.
Layton, R. (1973). Social systems theory and a village community in France. In Renfrew, C. (ed.),The Explanation of Culture Change: Models in Prehistory, Duckworth, London, pp. 499–516.
Layton, R. (1989). Pellaport. In van der Leeuw, S. E., and Torrence, R. (eds.),What's New? A Closer Look at the Process of Innovation, One World Archaeology No. 14, Unwin Hyman, London, pp. 33–53.
Lechtman, H. (1977). Style in technology: Some early thoughts. In Lechtman, H., and Merrill, R. (eds.),Material Culture: Styles, Organization, and Dynamics of Technology, 1975 Proceedings of the American Ethnological Society, West Publishers, St. Paul, MN, pp. 3–20.
Lechtman, H. (1984). Andean value systems and the development of prehistoric metallurgy.Technology and Culture 25(1): 1–36.
Lechtman, H. (1993). Technologies of power: The Andean case. In Henderson, J., and Netherly, P. (eds.),Configurations of Power in Complex Societies, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY, pp. 244–280.
Lechtman, H., and Steinberg, A. (1979). The history of technology: An anthropological perspective. In Bugliarello, G., and Doner, D. B. (eds.),History and Philosophy of Technology, University of Illinois Press, Urbana, pp. 135–160.
Lee, R. (1979).The !Kung San: Men, Women, and Work in a Foraging Society, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
LeGros, D. (1988). Comment to Testart.Current Anthropology 29(1): 15–17.
Lemonnier, P. (1986). The study of material culture today: Towards an anthropology of technical systems.Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 5: 147–186.
Lemonnier, P. (1989a). Bark capes, arrowheads, and concorde: On social representations of technology. In Hodder, I. (ed.),The Meaning of Things: Material Culture and Symbolic Expressions, Unwin Hyman, London, pp. 156–171.
Lemonnier, P. (1989b). Towards an anthropology of technology.Man 24: 526–527.
Lemonnier, P. (1990). Topsy turvy techniques: Remarks on the social representation of techniques.Archaeological Review from Cambridge 9(1): 27–37.
Lemonnier, P. (1991). De la culture matérielle à la culture? Ethnologie des techniques et préhistoire. In25 Ans d'Etudes Technologiques en Préhistoire, XI Rencontres Internationales d'Archéologie et d'Histoire d'Antibes, Editions APDCA, Juan-les-Pins, pp. 15–20.
Lemonnier, P. (1992a).Elements for an Anthropology of Technology, Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan Anthropological Papers No. 88, Ann Arbor.
Lemonnier, P. (1992b). Leroi-Gourhan: Ethnologue des techniques.Les Nouvelles de l'Archéologie 48–49: 13–17.
Lemonnier, P. (1993a). Introduction. In Lemonnier, P. (ed.),Technological Choices: Transformation in Material Cultures Since the Neolithic, Routledge, London, pp. 1–35.
Lemonnier, P. (1993b). Pigs as ordinary wealth: Technical logic, exchange and leadership in New Guinea. In Lemonnier, P. (ed.),Technological Choices: Transformation in Material Cultures Since the Neolithic, Routledge, London, pp. 126–156.
Lemonnier, P. (ed.) (1993c).Technological Choices: Transformation in Material Cultures Since the Neolithic, Routledge, London.
Leone, M. (1973). Archeology as the science of technology: Mormon town plans and fences. In Redman, C. (ed.),Research and Theory in Current Archeology, John Wiley & Sons, New York, pp. 125–150.
Leone, M. (1982). Some opinions about recovering mind.American Antiquity 49: 742–760.
Leroi-Gourhan, A. (1943).Evolution et Techniques: L'Homme et la Matière, A. Michel, Paris.
Leroi-Gourhan, A. (1945).Evolution et Techniques: Milieu et Techniques, A. Michel, Paris.
Leroi-Gourhan, A. (1964).Le Geste et la Parole I: Technique et Langage, A. Michel, Paris.
Leroi-Gourhan, A. (1965).Le Geste et la Parole II: La Mémoire et les Rythmes, A. Michel, Paris.
Leroi-Gourhan, A., and Allain, J. (1979).Lascaux Inconnu, XII Supplément àGallia Préhistoire, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris.
Lévi-Strauss, C. (1976).Structural Anthropology, Vol. III, Basic Books, New York.
Lewis-Williams, D. (1990). Documentation, analysis and interpretation: Dilemmas in rock art research.South African Archaeological Bulletin 45: 126–136.
Linton, R. (1936).The Study of Man, D. Appleton-Century, New York.
MacKenzie, D., and Wajcman, J. (eds.) (1985).The Social Shaping of Technology: How the Refrigerator Got Its Hum, Open University Press, Milton Keynes, England.
Malinowski, B. (1948). Magic, science and religion. In Redfield, R. (ed.),Magic, Science, and Religion and Other Essays, Beacon Press, Boston, pp. 17–36.
Marquardt, W. (1992). Dialectical archaeology.Archaeological Method and Theory 4: 101–140.
Marx, K., and Engels, F. (1970).The German Ideology, International, New York.
Mason, O. (1894).Women's Share in Primitive Culture, D. Appleton, New York.
Mauss, M. (1936). Les techniques du corps.Sociologie et Psychologie, Parts II–VI. [InSociology and Psychology: Essays of Marcel Mauss (Brewster, B., trans.), Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1979).]
Mazel, A. (1989). Changing social relations in the Thukela Basin, Natal (South Africa) 7000–2000 BP.South African Archaeological Society Goodwin Series 6: 33–41.
McGaw, J. (1989). No passive victims, no separate spheres: A feminist perspective on technology's history. In Cutcliffe, R., and Post, S. (eds.),Context, History, and History of Technology, Research in Technology Studies, Vol. 1, Lehigh University Press, Bethlehem, PA, pp. 172–191.
Merchant, C. (1989).The Death of Nature: Women, Ecology, and the Scientific Revolution, Harper and Row, San Francisco.
Michea, J. (1968) La technologie culturelle: Essai de systématique. In Poirier, J. (ed.),Ethnologie Générale, Gallimard, Paris, pp. 823–877.
Mitcham, C. (1980). The philosophy of technology. In Durbin, P. (ed.),A Guide to the Culture of Science, Technology, and Medicine, Free Press, New York, pp. 282–363.
Moore, H. (1986).Space, Text, and Gender: An Anthropological Study of the Marakwet of Kenya, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Morton, J. (1988). Comment to Testart.Current Anthropology 29(1): 18–20.
Moser, S. (1994). Gender stereotyping in pictorial reconstructions of human origins. In du Cros, H., and Smith, L. (eds.),Women in Archaeology: A Feminist Critique, Department of Prehistory, Research School of Pacific Studies, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia (in press).
Nelson, M. (1991). The study of technological organization.Archaeological Method and Theory 3: 57–100.
Noël Hume, I. (1982).Martin's Hundred, University Press of Virginia, Charlottesville.
Olive, M., and Pigeot, N. (1992). Les tailleurs de silex Magdaléniens d'Etiolles: Vers l'identification d'une organization social complexe? in Menu, M., and Walter, P. (eds.),La Pierre Préhistorique, Actes du Séminaire, Décembre 1990, Laboratorie de Recherches des Musées de France, Paris, pp. 173–185.
Ormiston, G. (ed.) (1986).From Artifact to Habitat: Studies in the Critical Engagement of Technology, Research on Technology Series, Vol. 3, Lehigh University Press, Bethlehem, PA.
Ortner, S. (1984). Theory in anthropology since the sixties.Comparative Studies in Society and History 26(1): 126–166.
Oswalt, W. (1973).Habitat and Technology, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York.
Oswalt, W. (1976).An Anthropological Analysis of Food-Getting Technology (with the assistance of G. Mann and L. Satterthwait), John Wiley and Sons, New York.
Peebles, C. (1992). Rooting out latent behaviorism in prehistory. In Gardin, J.-C., and Peebles, C. (eds.),Representations in Archaeology, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, pp. 357–384.
Pelegrin, J. (1990). Prehistoric lithic technology: Some aspects of research:Archaeological Review from Cambridge 9(1): 116–125.
Pepe, C., Clottes, J., Menu, M., and Walter, P. (1991). Le liant des peintures paléolithiques Ariégeoises.Competes Rendues de l'Académie des Sciences, Paris 312 (Serie II): 929–934.
Perlès, C. (1992). In search of lithic strategies: A cognitive approach to prehistoric chipped stone assemblages. In Gardin, J.-C., and Peebles, C. (eds.),Representations in Archaeology, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, pp. 223–247.
Peterson, N. (1988). Comment to Testart.Current Anthropology 29(1): 20–21.
Petrovic, G. (1983). Praxis. In Bottomore, T. (ed.),Dictionary of Marxist Thought, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, pp. 384–389.
Pfaffenberger, B. (1988). Fetishized objects and humanized nature: Towards an anthropology of technology.Man (NS)23: 236–252.
Pfaffenberger, B. (1992). Social anthropology of technology.Annual Review of Anthropology 21: 491–516.
Pigeot, N. (1987). Magdaléniens d'Etiolles: Economie, de débitage et organisation sociale. XXV Supplément àGallia Préhistoire, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris.
Pigeot, N. (1990). Technical and social actors. Flintknapping specialists at Magdalenian Etiolles.Archaeological Review from Cambridge 9(1): 126–141.
Pigeot, N. (1991). Réflexions sur l'histoire technique de l'homme: De l'homme cognitive à l'evolution culturelle.Paleo: Revue d'Archéologie Préhistorique 3: 167–200.
Pigeot, N., Philippe, M., Le Licon, G., and Morgenstern, M. (1991). Systèmes techniques et essai de technologie culturelle à Etiolles: Nouvelles perspectives. In25 Ans d'Etudes Technologiques en Préhistoire, XI Actes des Rencontres Internationales d'Archéologie et d'Histoire d'Antibes, APDCA, Juan-les-Pins, pp. 169–185.
Ploux, S. (1991). Technologie, technicité, techniciens: Méthode de déterminations d'auteurs et comportements techniques individuels. In25 Ans d'Etudes Technologiques en Préhistoire: Actes des Rencontres d'Antibes, XI Actes des Rencontres Internationales d'Archéologie et d'Histoire d'Antibes, APDCA, Juan-les-Pins, pp. 206–214.
Renfrew, C. (1978). The anatomy of innovation. In Green, D., Haselgrove, C., and Spriggs, M. (eds.),Social Organization and Settlement, British Archaeological Reports International Series S47, Oxford, pp. 89–117.
Ridington, R. (1982). Technology, world view, and adaptive strategy in a northern hunting society.Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology 198(4): 469–481.
Ridington, R. (1983). From artifice to artifact: Stages in the industrialization of a northern hunting people.Journal of Canadian Studies 18(3): 55–66.
Ridington, R. (1988). Knowledge, power, and the individual in subarctic hunting societies.American Anthropologist 90: 98–110.
Rogers, E. (1963).Diffusion of Innovations, Macmillan, New York.
Roscoe, P. (1993). Practice and political centralization.Current Anthropology 34(2): 111–140.
Ross, D. (1991).The Origins of American Social Sciences, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Roux, V. (1990). The psychosocial analysis of technical activities: A contribution to the study of craft specialization.Archaeological Review from Cambridge 9(1): 142–153.
Roux, V. (1991). Peut-on interpréter les activités lithiques préhistoriques en termes de durée d'apprentissage? Apport de l'ethnologie et de la psychologie aux etudes technologiques. In25 Ans d'Etudes Technologiques en Préhistoire, XI Actes des Rencontres Internationales d'Archéologie et d'Histoire d'Antibes, APDCA, Juan-les-Pins, pp. 47–56.
Roux, V. (1992). Logicist analysis, exterior knowledge, and ethnoarchaeologial research. In Gardin, J.-C., and Peebles, C. (eds.),Representations in Archaeology, Indiana University Press, Bloomington, pp. 277–290.
Sackett, J. (1982). Approaches to style in lithic archaeology.Journal of Anthropological Archeology 1: 59–112.
Sackett, J. (1990). Style and ethnicity in archaeology: The case for isochrestism. In Conkey, M., and Hastorf, C. (eds.),The Uses of Style in Archaeology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 32–43.
Sahlins, M. (1976).Culture and Practical Reason, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Schiffer, M. (1976).Behavioral Archeology, Academic Press, New York.
Schiffer, M. (1991).The Portable Radio in American Life, University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
Schiffer, M. (1992).Technological Perspectives on Behavioral Change, University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
Schiffer, M., and Skibo, J. (1987). Theory and experiment in the study of technological change.Current Anthropology 28(5): 595–622.
Schlanger, N. (1990). Techniques as human action: Two perspectives.Archaeological Review from Cambridge 9(1): 18–26.
Schlanger, N., and Sinclair, A. (eds.) (1990). Technology in the humanities,Archaeological Review from Cambridge 9(1).
Shanks, M., and Tilley, C. (1987).Reconstructing Archaeology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Simondon, G. (1958).Du Mode d'Existence des Objects Techniques, Aubier, Paris.
Smith, C. S. (1986). On material structure and human history.Annual Review of Materials Science 16: 1–11.
Solomon, A. (1992). Gender, representation, and power in San ethnography and rock art.Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 11: 291–329.
Spector, J. (1993).What This Awl Means: Feminist Archaeology at a Dakota Village, Minnesota Historical Society Press, St. Paul.
Spender, D. (1980).Man-Made Language, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.
Spratt, D. (1982). The analysis of innovation processes.Journal of Archaeological Science 9: 79–94.
Spratt, D. (1989). Innovation theory made plain. In van der Leeuw, S. E., and Torrence, R. (eds.),What's New? A Closer Look at the Process of Innovation, One World Archaeology No. 14, Unwin Hyman, London, pp. 245–257.
Staudenmaier, J. M. (1985).Technology's Storytellers: Reweaving the Human Fabric, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Stig-Sørenson, M. (1989). Ignoring innovation — denying change: The role of iron and the impact of external influences on the transformation of Scandinavian societies 800–500 BC. In van der Leeuw, S. E., and Torrence, R. (eds.),What's New? A Closer Look at the Process of Innovation, One World Archaeology No. 14, Unwin Hyman, London, pp. 182–202.
Straus, L. (1991). Paradigm found? A research agenda for study of the upper and post-paleolithic in southwest Europe. In Clark, G. (ed.),Perspectives on the Past: Theoretical Biases in Mediterranean Hunter-Gatherer Research, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, pp. 56–78.
Testart, A. (1982).Les Chasseurs-Cueilleurs, ou L'Origine des Inégalités, Société d'Ethnographie, Université de Paris X-Nanterre, Paris.
Testart, A. (1986).Essai sur les Fondements de la Division Sexuelle du Travail Chez les Chasseurs-Cuellieurs, Editions de l'Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales, Paris.
Testart, A. (1988). Some major problems in the social anthropology of hunter-gatherers.Current Anthropology 29(1): 1–32.
Torrence, R. (1983). Time budgeting and hunter-gatherer technology. In Bailey, G. (ed.),Hunter-Gatherer Economy in Prehistory: A European Perspective, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 11–22.
Tringham, R. (1991). Households with faces: The challenge of gender in prehistoric architectural remains. In Gero, J., and Conkey, M. (eds.),Engendering Archaeology: Women and Prehistory, Basil Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 93–131.
Tringham, R. (1994). Engendered places in prehistory.Gender, Place, and Culture 1(2) (in press).
van der Leeuw, S. E., and Torrence, R. (1989a). Introduction: What's new about innovation? In van der Leeuw, S. E., and Torrence, R. (eds.),What's New? A Closer Look at the Process of Innovation, One World Archaeology No. 14, Unwin Hyman, London, pp. 1–15.
van der Leeuw, S. E., and Torrence, R. (eds.) (1989b).What's New? A Closer Look at the Process of Innovation (eds.), One World Archaeology No. 14, Unwin Hyman, London.
van der Leeuw, S., Papousek, D., and Coudart, A. (1991). Technical traditions and unquestioned assumptions: The case of pottery in Michoacan.Techniques et Culture 17–18: 145–173.
Walde, D., and Willows, N. (eds.) (1991).The Archaeology of Gender, Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Chacmool Conference, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.
Weber, M. (1946). Religious rejections of the world and their directions. In Gerth, H., and Mills, C. W. (eds.),From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology, Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 323–359 (originally published 1915).
Westkott, M. (1979). Feminist criticism of the social sciences.Harvard Educational Review 49: 422–430.
White, R. (1989a). Toward a contextual understanding of the earliest body ornaments. In Trinkaus, E. (ed.),The Emergence of Modern Humans: Biocultural Adaptations in the Later Pleistocene, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 211–231.
White, R. (1989b). Production complexity and standardization in early Aurignacian bead and pendant manufacture: Evolutionary implications. In Mellars, P., and Stringer, C. (eds.),The Human Revolution: Behavior and Biological Perspectives on the Origins of Modern Humans, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, pp. 366–390.
White, R. (1992). Beyond art: Toward an understanding of the origins of material representation in Europe.Annual Review of Anthropology 21: 537–564.
White, R. (1993). Technological and social dimensions of “Aurignacian-age” body ornaments across Europe. In Knecht, H., White, R., and Pike-Tay, A. (eds.),Before Lascaux: The Complex Record of the Early Upper Paleolithic, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp. 277–299.
Wiessner, P. (1984). Reconsidering the behavioral basis of style: A case study among the Kalahari San.Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 3: 190–234.
Winner, L. (1986).The Whale and the Reactor: A Search for the Limits in an Age of High Technology, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Winterhalder, B., and Smith, E. A. (eds.) (1981).Hunter-Gatherer Foraging Strategies, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Wobst, M. (1977). Stylistic behavior and information exchange. In Cleland, C. E. (ed.),Papers for the Director: Research Essays in Honor of James B. Griffin, Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, pp. 317–342.
Wright, R. (1984).Technology, Style, and Craft Specialization: Spheres of Interaction and Exchange in the Indo-Iranian Borderlands, Third Millennium B.C., Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University, University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, MI.
Wright, R. (1986). The boundaries of technology and stylistic change. In Kingery, W. D. (ed.),Ceramics and Civilization Vol. II, American Ceramic Society, Columbus, OH, p. 1–20.
Wright, R. (1989). New tracks on ancient frontiers: Ceramic technology on the Indo-Iranian borderlands. In Lamberg-Karlovsky, C. C. (ed.),Archaeological Thought in America, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 268–279.
Wright, R. (1991). Women's labor and pottery production in prehistory. In Gero, J., and Conkey, M. (eds.),Engendering Prehistory: Women and Production, Basil Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 194–223.
Wright, R. (1993). Technological styles: Transforming a natural material into a cultural object. In Kingery, W. D., and Luber, S. (eds.),History from Things: Essays on Material Culture, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC.
Wylie, A. (1991a). Gender theory and the archaeological record: Why is there no archaeology of gender? In Gero, J., and Conkey, M. (eds.),Engendering Prehistory: Women and Production, Basil Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 31–54.
Wylie, A. (1991b). Evidential constraints in feminist research: The new research on gender in archaeology. Paper presented at the Conference “Interdisciplinary Approaches to Knowledge and Gender,” University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.
Wylie, A. (1994). Why is there no archaeology of gender? Sexism, androcentrism, and theory change. In Galison, P., and Stump, D. (eds.),The Constitution of Archaeological Evidence: Boundaries, Contexts, and Power, Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA (in press).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dobres, MA., Hoffman, C.R. Social agency and the dynamics of prehistoric technology. J Archaeol Method Theory 1, 211–258 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02231876
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02231876