Steak tournedos or beef Wellington: an attempt to understand the meaning of Stone Age transformative techniques

Abstract Research into human uniqueness is gaining increasing importance in prehistoric archaeology. The most striking behaviour unique to early and modern humans among other primates is perhaps that they used fire to transform the properties of materials. In Archaeology, these processes are sometim...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Patrick Schmidt
Formato: article
Lenguaje:EN
Publicado: Springer Nature 2021
Materias:
H
Acceso en línea:https://doaj.org/article/a7c08bed2cc0405eab473fb10b36b768
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
id oai:doaj.org-article:a7c08bed2cc0405eab473fb10b36b768
record_format dspace
spelling oai:doaj.org-article:a7c08bed2cc0405eab473fb10b36b7682021-11-21T12:28:21ZSteak tournedos or beef Wellington: an attempt to understand the meaning of Stone Age transformative techniques10.1057/s41599-021-00971-y2662-9992https://doaj.org/article/a7c08bed2cc0405eab473fb10b36b7682021-11-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-00971-yhttps://doaj.org/toc/2662-9992Abstract Research into human uniqueness is gaining increasing importance in prehistoric archaeology. The most striking behaviour unique to early and modern humans among other primates is perhaps that they used fire to transform the properties of materials. In Archaeology, these processes are sometimes termed “engineering” or “transformative techniques” because they aim at producing materials with altered properties. Were such transformative techniques cognitively more demanding than other tool making processes? Were they the key factors that separated early humans, such as Neanderthals and early Homo sapiens, from other hominins? Many approaches to investigating these techniques rely on their complexity. The rationale behind this is that some techniques required more steps than others, thus revealing the underlying mechanisms of human uniqueness (e.g., unique human culture). However, it has been argued that the interpretation of process complexity may be prone to arbitrariness (i.e., different researchers have different notions of what is complex). Here I propose an alternative framework for interpreting transformative techniques. Three hypotheses are derived from an analogy with well-understood processes in modern-day cuisine. The hypotheses are about i) the requirement in time and/or raw materials of transformative techniques, ii) the difficulty to succeed in conducting transformative techniques and iii) the necessity to purposefully invent transformative techniques, as opposed to discovering them randomly. All three hypotheses make testable predictions.Patrick SchmidtSpringer NaturearticleHistory of scholarship and learning. The humanitiesAZ20-999Social SciencesHENHumanities & Social Sciences Communications, Vol 8, Iss 1, Pp 1-9 (2021)
institution DOAJ
collection DOAJ
language EN
topic History of scholarship and learning. The humanities
AZ20-999
Social Sciences
H
spellingShingle History of scholarship and learning. The humanities
AZ20-999
Social Sciences
H
Patrick Schmidt
Steak tournedos or beef Wellington: an attempt to understand the meaning of Stone Age transformative techniques
description Abstract Research into human uniqueness is gaining increasing importance in prehistoric archaeology. The most striking behaviour unique to early and modern humans among other primates is perhaps that they used fire to transform the properties of materials. In Archaeology, these processes are sometimes termed “engineering” or “transformative techniques” because they aim at producing materials with altered properties. Were such transformative techniques cognitively more demanding than other tool making processes? Were they the key factors that separated early humans, such as Neanderthals and early Homo sapiens, from other hominins? Many approaches to investigating these techniques rely on their complexity. The rationale behind this is that some techniques required more steps than others, thus revealing the underlying mechanisms of human uniqueness (e.g., unique human culture). However, it has been argued that the interpretation of process complexity may be prone to arbitrariness (i.e., different researchers have different notions of what is complex). Here I propose an alternative framework for interpreting transformative techniques. Three hypotheses are derived from an analogy with well-understood processes in modern-day cuisine. The hypotheses are about i) the requirement in time and/or raw materials of transformative techniques, ii) the difficulty to succeed in conducting transformative techniques and iii) the necessity to purposefully invent transformative techniques, as opposed to discovering them randomly. All three hypotheses make testable predictions.
format article
author Patrick Schmidt
author_facet Patrick Schmidt
author_sort Patrick Schmidt
title Steak tournedos or beef Wellington: an attempt to understand the meaning of Stone Age transformative techniques
title_short Steak tournedos or beef Wellington: an attempt to understand the meaning of Stone Age transformative techniques
title_full Steak tournedos or beef Wellington: an attempt to understand the meaning of Stone Age transformative techniques
title_fullStr Steak tournedos or beef Wellington: an attempt to understand the meaning of Stone Age transformative techniques
title_full_unstemmed Steak tournedos or beef Wellington: an attempt to understand the meaning of Stone Age transformative techniques
title_sort steak tournedos or beef wellington: an attempt to understand the meaning of stone age transformative techniques
publisher Springer Nature
publishDate 2021
url https://doaj.org/article/a7c08bed2cc0405eab473fb10b36b768
work_keys_str_mv AT patrickschmidt steaktournedosorbeefwellingtonanattempttounderstandthemeaningofstoneagetransformativetechniques
_version_ 1718419023254781952