ABSTRACT
The problem archaeologists face when interpreting the stone tools of modern humans is that tools are made under the joint influences of tradition and current needs. As these are not easily separated, the interpretation of stone tools requires extensive reference to both cultural tradition and patterns of economic, social and symbolic behaviour-a daunting task for the archaeologist. My argument in this chapter is that for the Early Palaeolithic the task is perhaps less complex, for tradition heavily outweighed a consideration of current needs in the minds of early tool-makers. This derives, I will argue, from the domain-specific mentality of early humans which prevented the complex integration of thought about technology, social interaction and environmental adaptation that is pervasive among modern humans (Mithen 1994a). In this regard, to further our understanding of early technology, archaeologists need to develop their understanding of ‘tradition’—how it arises, how it is transmitted and how it is transformed. Key foci must be the processes of social learning, how these vary between individuals and groups and how this variability influences Early Palaeolithic technology. As a contribution to this task, I will suggest a model for the relationship between social learning, group size and hominid technology and attempt to evaluate it by two case studies from the Early Palaeolithic. Prior to this, I must briefly consider the interaction between tradition and the process of adaptation in modern humans and why this appears to have been absent among early humans.
