No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Not just symbolism: Technologies may also have a less than direct connection with cognition
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 14 January 2025
Abstract
I expand Stibbard-Hawkes' exploration of symbolism and cognition to suggest that we also ought to reconsider the strength of connections between cognition and technological complexity. Using early weaponry as a case study I suggest that complexity may be “hidden” in early tools, and further highlight that assessments of technologies as linear and progressive have roots in Western colonial thought.
- Type
- Open Peer Commentary
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © University of Reading, 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press
References
Haidle, M. N. (2009). How to think a simple spear. In De Beaune, S., Coolidge, F. & Wynn, T. (Eds.), Cognitive archaeology and human evolution (pp. 57–174). Cambridge University Press. http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=yBnCOc8Tr_wC&oi=fnd&pg=PA57&dq=How+to+think+a+simple+spear&ots=n1pNXdAAPX&sig=Iw61sV-Dh4M2J9HlPEmm0JMmpUMGoogle Scholar
Haidle, M. N., Bolus, M., Collard, M., Conard, N. J., Garofoli, D., Lombard, M., … Whiten, A. (2015). The nature of culture: An eight-grade model for the evolution of cultural capacities in hominins and other animals. Journal of Anthropological Sciences, 93, 43–70. https://doi.org/10.4436/jass.93011Google ScholarPubMed
Hoffecker, J. F. (2018). The complexity of Neanderthal technology. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(13), E3066. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1803330115CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jones, R. (1977). The Tasmanian Paradox. In Wright, R. (Ed.), Stone tools as cultural markers: Change, evolution, and complexity (pp. 189–204). Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.Google Scholar
Leder, D., Lehmann, J., Milks, A., Koddenberg, T., Sietz, M., Vogel, M., … Terberger, T. (2024). The wooden artifacts from Schöningen's Spear Horizon and their place in human evolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 121(15), e2320484121. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2320484121CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lew-Levy, S., Bombjaková, D., Milks, A., Kiabiya Ntamboudila, F., Kline, M. A., & Broesch, T. (2022). Costly teaching contributes to the acquisition of spear hunting skill among BaYaka forager adolescents. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 289(1974), 20220164. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2022.0164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lew-Levy, S., Ringen, E. J., Crittenden, A. N., Mabulla, I. A., Broesch, T., & Kline, M. A. (2021). The life history of learning subsistence skills among Hadza and BaYaka Foragers from Tanzania and the Republic of Congo. Human Nature, 32(1), 16–47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-021-09386-9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lombard, M., & Haidle, M. N. (2012). Thinking a bow-and-arrow set: Cognitive implications of Middle Stone Age bow and stone-tipped arrow technology. Cambridge Archaeological Journal, 22(02), 237–264. https://doi.org/10.1017/S095977431200025XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milks, A., Lehmann, J., Leder, D., Sietz, M., Koddenberg, T., Böhner, U., … Terberger, T. (2023). A double-pointed wooden throwing stick from Schöningen, Germany: Results and new insights from a multianalytical study. PLoS ONE, 18(7), e0287719. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0287719CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Noetling, F. (1911). Notes on the hunting sticks (lughrana), spears (perenna), and baskets (tughbrana) of the Tasmanian Aborigines. Papers and Proceedings of the Royal Society of Tasmania, 64–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shea, J., & Sisk, M. (2010). Complex projectile technology and Homo sapiens dispersal into western Eurasia. PaleoAnthropology, 2010, 100–122.Google Scholar
Wadley, L., Hodgskiss, T., & Grant, M. (2009). Implications for complex cognition from the hafting of tools with compound adhesives in the Middle Stone Age, South Africa. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(24), 9590–9594. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0900957106CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Target article
Reconsidering the link between past material culture and cognition in light of contemporary hunter–gatherer material use
Related commentaries (21)
Advancing paleoanthropology beyond default nulls
All that glitters is not gold: The false-symbol problem in archaeology
Animal artefacts challenge archaeological standards for tracing human symbolic cognition
Archaeology retains a central role for studying the behavioral and cognitive evolution of our species and genus
Are we jingling modern hunter-gatherers and early Homo sapiens?
Behavioural modernity is dead: Long live behavioural modernity
Beyond the binary: Inferential challenges and solutions in cognitive archaeology
Cultural innovation is not only a product of cognition but also of cultural context
Don't ignore cognitive evolution during the three million years that preceded the archaeological record of material culture!
Inferences from absences
Material culture both reflects and causes human cognitive evolution
Negative priors and inferences from absence of evidence in cognitive and linguistic archaeology: Epistemically sound and scientifically strategic
Not just symbolism: Technologies may also have a less than direct connection with cognition
Perishable material choice indicates symbolic and representational capacities
Proposing the DN(C)-model of material evidence for well-calibrated claims about past cultures
Revising the null model in language evolution research
Shared intentionality may have been favored by persistence hunting in Homo erectus
Sports, team games, and physical skill competitions as an important source of symbolic material culture with low preservation probability
The cognitive and evolutionary science of behavioural modernity goes beyond material chronology
The Mbuti people still reproduce a 75,000 years old recursive pattern
What would be pre-modern human cognition?
Author response
Hominin cognition: The null hypothesis