Advertisement

Anthropological Interpretation of Chaînes Opératoires

  • Valentine Roux
Chapter

Abstract

Chapter 6 summarizes the scope of the technological approach for interpreting the synchronic and diachronic variability of technical traditions and is a culmination of the analyses presented in the previous chapters. It shows how the chaîne opératoire concept is powerful for modeling techno- and socioeconomic systems and for analyzing cultural lineages and their evolution through the elementary and universal mechanism of transmission. In the same way, it shows how this concept is essential for appraising the history of techniques and the underlying evolutionary forces using theoretical frameworks combining the singularity of historical scenarios and anthropological regularities, Francophone and Anglophone approaches.

Keywords

Ceramic production Ceramic distribution Ceramic circulation Ceramic filiation Ceramic diffusion Cultural lineages Phylogenetic approach Evolutionary trajectories Ceramic innovation 

References

  1. Alden, J. R., & Minc, L. (2016). Itinerant potters and the transmission of ceramic technologies and styles during the Proto-Elamite period in Iran. Journal of Archaeological Science, 7, 863–876.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Archie, J. W. (1989). A randomization test for phylogenetic information in systematic data. Systematic Biology, 38, 239–252.Google Scholar
  3. Axelrod, R. (1997). The dissemination of culture a model with local convergence and global polarization. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 41, 203–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bentley, R. A., & Shennan, S. J. (2003). Cultural transmission and stochastic network growth. American Antiquity, 68, 459–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bettinger, R. L., & Eerkens, J. (1999). Point typologies, cultural transmission, and the spread of Bow-and-arrow technology in the prehistoric Great Basin. American Antiquity, 64, 231–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blake, E. (2014). Dyads and triads in community detection: A view from the Italian bronze age. Les nouvelles de l’archéologie, 135, 28–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boëda, É. (2013). Techno-logique & technologie: une paléo-histoire des objets lithiques tranchants. Préhistoire au Présent. s.l.: Archéo-éditions.Google Scholar
  8. Boileau, M.-C. (2005). Production et distribution des céramiques au IIIème millénaire en Syrie du Nord-Est. Paris: Editions Epistèmes et Editions de la Maison des sciences de l’homme.Google Scholar
  9. Borck, L., Mills, B. J., Peeples, M. A., & Clark, J. J. (2015). Are social networks survival networks? An example from the late pre-Hispanic US southwest. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 22, 33–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Boyd, R., & Richerson, P. J. (1985). Culture and the evolutionary process. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  11. Bril, B. (2002). Apprentissage et contexte. Intellectica, 2, 251–268.Google Scholar
  12. Brughmans, T. (2010). Connecting the dots: Towards archaeological network analysis. Oxford Journal of Archaeology, 29, 277–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Brughmans, T. (2013). Thinking through networks: A review of formal network methods in archaeology. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 20, 623–662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cavalli-Sforza, L. L., & Feldman, M. W. (1981). Cultural transmission and evolution: a quantitative approach. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University.Google Scholar
  15. Centola, D. (2015). The social origins of networks and diffusion. American Journal of Sociology, 120, 1295–1338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Centola, D., & Baronchelli, A. (2015). The spontaneous emergence of conventions: An experimental study of cultural evolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112, 1989–1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Centola, D., & Macy, M. (2007). Complex contagions and the weakness of long ties1. American Journal of Sociology, 113, 702–734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Charbonneau, M. (2018). Technical constraints on technological evolution. In B. Buchanan, M. I. Eren, & M. J. O’Brien (Eds.)., in press. Convergent evolution and stone-tool technology. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  19. Chéneau Loquay, A., & Matarasso, P. (1991). Une représentation globale et systémique des zones rurales du Tiers Monde. Les Cahiers de la recherche-développement: 45–63.Google Scholar
  20. Chéneau-Loquay, A., & Matarasso, P. (1997). Approche du développement durable en milieu rural africain. Paris: Editions L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
  21. Collar, A., Coward, F., Brughmans, T., & Mills, B. J. (2015). Networks in archaeology: Phenomena, abstraction, representation. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 22, 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Collard, M., & Shennan, S. J. (2008). Patterns, processes, and parsimony: Studying cultural evolution with analytical techniques from evolutionary biology. In M. T. Stark, B. J. Bowser, & L. Horne (Eds.), Cultural transmission and material culture. Breaking down boundaries (pp. 17–33). Tucson: The University Press of Arizona.Google Scholar
  23. Collard, M., & Tehrani, J. (2005). Phylogenesis versus ethnogenesis in Turkmen cultural evolution. In R. Mace, C. J. Holden, & S. J. Shennan (Eds.), The evolution of cultural diversity: A phylogenetic approach (pp. 109–132). Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press.Google Scholar
  24. Collard, M., Shennan, S. J., & Tehrani, J. J. (2006). Branching, blending, and the evolution of cultural similarities and differences among human populations. Evolution and Human Behavior, 27, 169–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Costin, C. L. (1991). Craft specialization: Issues in defining, documenting and explaining the organization of production. In M. B. Schiffer (Ed.), Archaeological method and theory (Vol. 3, pp. 1–56). Tucson: The University of Arizona Press.Google Scholar
  26. Costin, C. L., & Hagstrum, M. B. (1995). Standardization, labor investment, skill, and the organization of ceramic production in late prehispanic highland Peru. American Antiquity, 60(4), 619–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Creswell, R. (1993). Of mills and waterwheels. In Technological choices: Transformation in material cultures since the Neolithic (pp. 181–213). London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  28. Creswell, R. (1994). La nature cyclique des relations entre le technique et le social. Approche technologique de la chaîne opératoire. In B. Latour & P. Lemonnier (Eds.), De la préhistoire aux missiles balistiques. L’intelligence sociale des techniques (pp. 275–289). Paris: Editions La découverte.Google Scholar
  29. Creswell, R. (1996). Prométhée ou Pandore? Propos de technologie culturelle. Paris: Editions Kimé.Google Scholar
  30. Darlu, P., & Tassy, P. (1993). La reconstruction phylogénétique. Concepts et méthodes. Paris: Masson.Google Scholar
  31. Deflandre, J., Jamet, M., Matarasso, P., & Valette, F. (1987). MEPP4.0. Logiciel de Mod‚lisation en Economie Physique et Prospective. CNRS Meudon-Montpellier: Laboratoire Modèles d’économie physique.Google Scholar
  32. Deforge, Y. (1989). Postface: Simondon et les questions vives de l’actualité. In G. Simondon (Ed.), Du mode d’existence des objets techniques (pp. 269–331). Paris: Aubier.Google Scholar
  33. Duistermaat, K. (2017). The Organization of Pottery Production: toward a Relational Approach. In A. M. W. Hunt (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of archaeological ceramic analysis (pp. 114-147). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Dupont-Delaleuf, A. (2011). Styles techniques des céramiques de la protohistoire en Asie Centrale: méthodologie et études de cas. Nanterre: Université de Paris Nanterre. PhD.Google Scholar
  35. Eerkens, J. W., & Lipo, C. P. (2005). Cultural transmission, copying errors, and the generation of variation in material culture and the archaeological record. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 24, 316–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ericson, K. A., & Lehman, A. C. (1996). Expert and exceptional performance: Evidence from maximal adaptation to task constraints. Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 273–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Flache, A. (2018). Between monoculture and cultural polarization. Agent-based models of the interplay of social influence and cultural diversity. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 25, 996-1023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Flache, A., & Macy, M. W. (2011). Small worlds and cultural polarization. The Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 35, 146–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Gallay, A. (1994). Sociétés englobées et traditions céramiques. Le cas du pays Dogon (Mali) depuis le XIIIe siècle. In D. Binder & J. Courtin (Eds.), Terre cuite et Société. La céramique, document technique, économique, culturel (pp. 435–458). Juan-les-Pins: Editions APDCA.Google Scholar
  40. Gallay, A. (2007). The decorated marriage jars of the inner delta of the Niger (Mali): Essay of archaeological demarcation of an ethnic territory. The Arkeotek Journal (www.thearkeotekjournal.org), 1, 1.Google Scholar
  41. Gallay, A. (2011). Pour une ethnoarchéologie théorique. Paris: Editions Errance.Google Scholar
  42. Gallay, A. (2013). Biens de prestige et richesse en Afrique de l’Ouest: un essai de définition. In C. Baroin & C. Michel( Eds.), Richesse et sociétés, (pp. 25–36). Colloques de La Maison de l’Archéologie et de l’ethnologie René Ginouvès 9. Paris: Editions de Boccard.Google Scholar
  43. Gallay, A. (forthcoming). Les traditions céramiques dogon (Mali) : une étude ethnoarchéologique.Google Scholar
  44. Gallay, A., & de Ceuninck, G. (1998). Les jarres de mariage décorées du Delta intérieur du Niger (Mali): approche ethnoarchéologique d’un “bien de prestige.” In B. Fritsch, M. Maute, J. Müller, & C. Wolf (Eds.), Tradition und Innovation: prëhistorische Archëologie als historische Wissenschaft : Festchrift fr Christian Strahm (pp. 13–30). Rahden: M. Leidorf.Google Scholar
  45. Gandon, E., Roux, V., & Coyle, T. (2014). Copying errors of potters from three cultures: Predictable directions for a so-called random phenomenon. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 33, 99–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Gardin, J.-C. (1980). Archaeological constructs: An aspect of theoretical archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Gauss, W., Klebinder-Gauss, G., & von Rüden, C. (2016). The Transmission of Technical Knowledge in the Production of Ancient Mediterranean Pottery. Vol. Sonderschriften Band 54. Wien: Österreichisches Archäologisches Institut.Google Scholar
  48. Gelbert, A. (2003). Traditions céramiques et emprunts techniques dans la vallée du fleuve Sénégal. Ceramic traditions and technical borrowings in the Senegal River Valley. English/French extracts at http://www.thearkeotekjournal.org/tdm/Arkeotek/en/articles_reedites/Traditions.xml. Paris: Editions de la Maison des sciences de l’homme, Editions Epistèmes.
  49. Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to perception. London: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  50. Gille, B. (1978). Histoire des Techniques. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
  51. Goloboff, P. A., Farris, J. S., & Nixon, K. C. (2008). TNT, a free program for phylogenetic analysis. Cladistics, 24, 774–786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Gomez de Soto, J. (1996). Grotte des Perrats à Agris (Charente). In Etude préliminaire (pp. 1981–1994). Chauvigny: Editions A.P.C.Google Scholar
  53. Gosselain, O. (2000). Materializing identities: An African perspective. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 7, 187–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Gosselain, O. (2008). Mother Bella was not a Bella. Inherited and transformed traditions in Southwestern Niger. In M. T. Stark, B. Bower, & L. Horne (Eds.), Cultural transmission and material culture. Breaking down boundaries (pp. 150–177). Tucson: Arizona University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Gosselain, O. (2011). Fine if I do, fine if I don’t. Dynamics of technical knowledge in Sub-Saharan Africa. In B. W. Roberts & M. Vander Linden (Eds.), Investigating archaeological cultures: Material culture, variability, and transmission (pp. 211–227). New York/London: Springer Science+Business Media.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Granovetter, M. S. (1983). The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited. Sociological Theory, 1, 201–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Hamilton, M. J., & Buchanan, B. (2009). The accumulation of stochastic copying errors causes drift in culturally transmitted technologies: Quantifying Clovis evolutionary dynamics. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 28, 55–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Harding, A. F. (2000). European societies in the bronze age. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Harding, A. F., & Fokkens, H. (2013). The Oxford handbook of the European bronze age. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  60. Haudricourt, A. G. (1987). La technologie science humaine. Recherches d’histoire et d’ethnologie des techniques. Paris: Editions de la Maison des Sciences de l’Homme.Google Scholar
  61. Hegmon, M. (1998). Technology, style, and social practice: Archaeological approaches. In M. T. Stark (Ed.), The Archaeology of social boundaries (pp. 264–279). Washington D.C: Smithsonian University Press..Google Scholar
  62. Hodder, I. (1985). Boundaries as strategies: An ethnoarchaeological study. In The archaeology of frontiers and boundaries. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  63. Iserlis, M. (2009). Khirbet Kerak ware at Bet Yerah: Segregation and integration through technology. Tel Aviv: Journal of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University, 2009, 181–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Jamet, M. (2001). Approche par la modélisation du complexe de potiers de Sallèles d’Aude. In Vingt ans de recherches à Sallèles d’Aude. Le monde des potiers gallo-romain, ed. F. Laubenheimer, 257–284. Institut Des Sciences et Techniques de l’Antiquité. Besançon: Presses Universitaires de Franche-Comté.Google Scholar
  65. Jordan, P., & Shennan, S. J. (2003). Cultural transmission, language, and basketry traditions amongst the California Indians. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 22, 42–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Knappett, C. (2011). An archaeology of interaction: Network perspectives on material culture and society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Knappett, C. (2018). From network connectivity to human mobility: Models for Minoanization. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 25, 974–995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Leroi-Gourhan, A. (1964). Le Geste et la Parole. Technique et Langage (Vol. 1). Paris: Albin Michel.Google Scholar
  70. Leroi-Gourhan, A. (1971). Evolution et techniques. L’Homme et la matière. 1ère édition 1943 (Vol. 1). Paris: Albin Michel.Google Scholar
  71. Lipo, C. P., O’Brien, M. J., Collard, M., & Shennan, S. J. (2006). Cultural phylogenies and explanation: Why historical methods matter. In C. P. Lipo, M. J. O’Brien, M. Collard, & S. J. Shennan (Eds.), Mapping our ancestors. Phylogenetic approaches in anthropology and prehistory (pp. 3–16). New Brunswick/London: Aldine Transaction.Google Scholar
  72. Lycett, S. J. (2015). Cultural evolutionary approaches to artifact variation over time and space: Basis, progress, and prospects. Journal of Archaeological Science, 56, 21–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Lyman, R. L., & O’Brien, M. J. (2006). Seriation and cladistics: The difference between anagenetic and cladogenetic evolution. In C. P. Lipo, J. M. O’Brien, M. Collard, & S. J. Shennan (Eds.), Mapping our ancestors: phylogenetic approaches in anthropology and prehistory, (pp. 65–88). New Brunswick/London: Aldine Transaction.Google Scholar
  74. Maddison, W. P., & Maddison, D. R. (2011). Mesquite: A modular system for evolutionary analysis (version 2.75). http://mesquiteproject.org.
  75. Manem, S. (2008). Etude des fondements technologiques de la culture des Duffaits (âge du Bronze moyen). Nanterre: Université de Paris Nanterre. PhD.Google Scholar
  76. Manzo, G. (2007). Variables, mechanisms, and simulations: Can the three methods be synthesized. Revue Française de Sociologie, 48, 35–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Manzo, G., Gabbriellini, S., Roux, V., & M’Mbogori, F. N. (2018). Complex contagions and the diffusion of innovations: Evidence from a small-N study. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 25, 1109-1154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Marro, C., Berthon, R., & Bakhshaliyev, V. (2014). On the genesis of the Kuro-Araxe phenomenon: New evidence from Nakhchivan (Azerbaijan). Paléorient, 40, 131–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Matarasso, P., & Roux, V. (2000). Le système techno-économique des perles de cornaline. Modélisation des systèmes complexes de production par l’analyse d’activités. In V. Roux (Ed.), Cornaline de l’Inde. Des pratiques techniques de Cambay aux techno-systèmes de l’Indus (pp. 333–412). Paris: Editions de la maison des sciences de l’homme.Google Scholar
  80. Mayor, A. (1994). Durées de vie des céramiques africaines : facteurs responsables et implications archéologiques. In Terre cuite et Société. La céramique, document technique, économique, culturel, ed. D. Binder and J. Courtin, (pp. 179–198). XIVe Rencontres Internationales d’Archéologie et d’Histoire d’Antibes. Juan-les-Pins: Editions APDCA.Google Scholar
  81. Mayor, A. (2010a). Traditions céramiques dans la boucle du Niger. Ethnoarchéologie et histoire du peuplement au temps des empires précoloniaux. Journal of African Archaeology Monographs Series 7. Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Africa Magna Verlag.Google Scholar
  82. Mayor, A. (2010b). Ceramic traditions and ethnicity in the Niger bend, West Africa. Ethnoarchaeology, 2, 5–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Mayor, A. (2011). Impressions de vanneries et technique du martelage sur forme concave: Anthropologie et histoire d’une technique dans la boucle du Niger. Azania: Archaeological Research in Africa, 46, 88–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Mesoudi, A. (2007). Using the methods of social psychology to study cultural evolution. Journal of Social Evolutionary and Cultural Psychology, 1, 35–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Mesoudi, A. (2009). How cultural evolutionary theory can inform social psychology and vice versa. Psychological Review, 116, 929.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Mesoudi, A., & O’Brien, M. J. (2009). Placing archaeology within a unified science of cultural evolution. In S. J. Shennan (Ed.), Pattern and process in cultural evolution (pp. 21–32). Berkeley/Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  87. Mills, B. J. (2018). Intermarriage, technological diffusion, and boundary objects in the U.S. Southwest. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 25, 1051-1086.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Miroschedji, P. (2000). La céramique de Khirbet Kerak en Syro-Palestine: état de la question. In C. Marro & H. Hauptmann (Eds.), Chronologies des pays du Caucase et de l’Euphrate aux IVe–IIIe millénaires(pp 255–278). Varia Anatolica 9. Paris: Institut d’Etudes Anatoliennes.Google Scholar
  89. Mordant, C. (1989). Préface. In C. Mordant (Ed.), Dynamique du Bronze moyen en Europe occidentale (Actes Des Congrès Nationaux Des Sociétés Savantes) (Vol. 9). Paris: Ed. du C.T.H.S.Google Scholar
  90. Mordant, C., Pernot, M., & Rychner, V. (1998). L’Atelier du bronzier en Europe du XXe au VIIIe siècle avant notre ère. Production, circulation et consommation du bronze (Vol. 3). Paris: Editions du CTHS.Google Scholar
  91. Nelson, B. A. (1991). Ceramic frequency and use-life: A highland Mayan case in cross-cultural perspective. In W.A. Longacre (Ed.), Ceramic ethnoarchaeology (pp. 162–181). Tucson: The University of Arizona Press.Google Scholar
  92. O’Brien, M. J., & Bentley, R. A. (2011). Stimulated variation and cascades: Two processes in the evolution of complex technological systems. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 18, 309–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. O’Brien, M. J., & Lyman, R. L. (2000). Applying evolutionary archaeology: A systematic approach. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.Google Scholar
  94. O’Brien, M. J., Darwent, J., & Lyman, R. L. (2001). Cladistics is useful for reconstructing archaeological phylogenies: Palaeoindian points from the southeastern United States. Journal of Archaeological Science, 28, 1115–1136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. O’Brien, M. J., Lyman, R. L., Glover, D. S., & Darwent, J. (2003). Cladistics and archaeology. Salt Lake City: Univ of Utah Press.Google Scholar
  96. Olesen, A. (1994). Afghan Craftsmen: The cultures of three itinerant communities. Copenhaguen: Thames and Hudson, New York, and Rhodos International Science and Art Publishers.Google Scholar
  97. Östborn, P., & Gerding, H. (2014). Network analysis of archaeological data: A systematic approach. Journal of Archaeological Science, 46, 75–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Perlès, C. (2013). Tempi of change: When soloists don’t play together. Arrhythmia in ‘continuous’ change. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 20, 281–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Pétrequin, A.-M., & Pétrequin, P. (1999). La poterie en Nouvelle-Guinée : savoir-faire et transmission des techniques. Journal de la Société des océanistes, 108, 71–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Philip, G. (1999). Complexity and diversity in the southern Levant during the Third Millenium BC: The evidence of Khirbet Kerak Ware. Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology, 12, 26–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Ramón, G. (2011). The swallow potters: seasonal migratory styles in the Andes. In S. Scarcella (Ed.), Archaeological Ceramics: A Review of Current Research (British Archaeological Reports) (pp. 160–175). Oxford: Archaeopress.Google Scholar
  102. Reed, E. S. (1988). Applying the theory of action systems to research to the study of motor skills. Advances in Psychology, 50, 45–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Renfrew, C. (1993). Trade beyond the material. In C. Scarre & F. Healy (Eds.), Trade and exchange in prehistoric Europe. Proceedings of a conference held at the University of Bristol, April 1992 (pp. 5–16). Oxford: Oxbow Books.Google Scholar
  104. Rogers, E. M. (1962). Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  105. Romainville, M. (2009). Les routes africaines de l’aluminium. Techniques & Culture, 51, 74–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Roux, V. (2003a). Ceramic standardization and intensity of production: Quantifying degrees of specialization. American Antiquity, 68, 768–782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Roux, V. (2003b). A dynamic systems framework for studying technological change: Application to the emergence of the potter’s wheel in the southern Levant. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 10, 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Roux, V. (2008). Evolutionary trajectories of technological traits and cultural transmission: A qualitative approach to the emergence and disappearance of the ceramic wheel-fashioning technique in the southern Levant during the fifth to the third millenia BC. In M. T. Stark, B. Bowser, & L. Horne (Eds.), Cultural transmission and material culture. Breaking down boundaries (pp. 82–104). Tucson: Arizona University press.Google Scholar
  109. Roux, V. (2009). Wheel fashioned ceramic production during the third millenium BCE in the southern Levant: A perspective from Tel Yarmuth. In S. A. Rosen & V. Roux (Eds.), Techniques and people: Anthropological perspectives on technology in the archaeology of the proto-historic and early historic periods in the Southern Levant (pp. 195–212). Paris: De Boccard.Google Scholar
  110. Roux, V. (2010). Technological innovations and developmental trajectories: Social factors as evolutionary forces. In M. J. O’Brien & S. J. Shennan (Eds.), Innovation in cultural systems. Contributions from evolutionary anthropology (pp. 217–234). Cambridge, MA/London: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  111. Roux, V. (2011). Habiletés et inventions: Le comportement “intelligent”, un facteur aléatoire dans l’évolution des techniques. In R. Treuil (Ed.), Archéologie cognitive : Techniques, modes de communication, mentalités (pp. 173–188). Paris: Maison des Sciences de l’Homme.Google Scholar
  112. Roux, V. (2013). Spreading of innovative technical traits and cumulative technical evolution: Continuity or discontinuity? Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 20, 312–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Roux, V. (2015a). Cultural transmission, migration and plain wheelmade pottery in the MB II Southern Levant. In C. Glatz (Ed.), Plain pottery traditions of the Eastern Mediterranean and Near East. Production, use, and social significance (pp. 69–90). Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press.Google Scholar
  114. Roux, V. (2015b). Standardization of ceramic assemblages: Transmission mechanisms and diffusion of morpho-functional traits across social boundaries. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 40, 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Roux, V. (2017). Not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. A response to Gosselain’s article. Archaeological Dialogues, 24, 225–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Roux, V. (2019). Technical traditions, relational structure of societies and evolution process. The Late Chalcolithic of southern Levant as a case study. In M. Saqalli & M. Vander (Eds.), Qualitative/quantitative distinctions in social modelling. Linden: Springer.Google Scholar
  117. Roux, V., & Courty, M.-A. (1997). Les bols élaborés au tour d’Abu Hamid: Rupture technique au 4e mill. avt J.-C. dans le Levant sud. Paléorient, 23/1, 25–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Roux, V., & Courty, M.-A. (1998). Identification of wheel-fashioning methods: Technological analysis of 4th-3rd millenium BC oriental ceramics. Journal of Archaeological Science, 25, 747–763.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Roux, V., & Courty, M.-A. (2013). Introduction to discontinuities and continuities: Theories, methods and proxies for a historical and sociological approach to evolution of past societies. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 20, 187–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. Roux, V., & Matarasso, P. (1999). Crafts and the evolution of complex societies : New methodological perspectives for modeling the organization of production. An Harappan example. In M. A. Dobres & C. R. Hoffman (Eds.), The social dynamics of technology: Practice, politics and worldviews (pp. 46–70). Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press.Google Scholar
  121. Roux, V., & Matarasso, P. (2000). Les perles en cornaline harappéennes. Pratiques techniques et techno-système. In Cornaline de l’Inde. Des pratiques techniques de Cambay aux techno-systèmes de l’Indus (pp. 413–438). Paris: Editions de la MSH.Google Scholar
  122. Roux, V., & Thalmann, J.-P. (2016). Évolution technologique et morpho-stylistique des assemblages céramiques de Tell Arqa (Liban, 3e millénaire av. J.-C.) : stabilité sociologique et changements culturels. Paléorient, 42, 95–121.Google Scholar
  123. Roux, V., van den Brink, E. C. M., & Shalev, S. (2013). Continuity and discontinuity in the Shephela (Israel) between the Late Chalcolithic and the Early Bronze I: The Modi’in “Deep Deposits” ceramic assemblages as a case study. Paléorient, 39, 63–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. Roux, V., Bril, B., Cauliez, J., Goujon, A.-L., Lara, C., de Saulieu, G., & Zangato, E. (2017). Persisting technological boundaries: Social interactions, cognitive correlations and polarization. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 48, 320–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. Roux, V., Bril, B., & Karasik, A. (2018). Weak ties and expertise: Crossing technological boundaries. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 25, 1024–1050.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Schillinger, K., Mesoudi, A., & Lycett, S. J. (2017). Differences in manufacturing traditions and assemblage-level patterns: The origins of cultural differences in archaeological data. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 24, 640–658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. Shennan, S. J. (2000). Population, culture history, and the dynamics of culture change. Current Anthropology, 4, 811–835.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. Shennan, S. J. (2002). Genes, memes and human history: Darwinian archaeology and cultural evolution. London: Thames & Hudson.Google Scholar
  129. Shennan, S. J. (2011). Descent with modification and the archaeological record. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 36, 1070–1079.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. Shennan, S. J. (2013). Lineages of cultural transmission. In E. Roy, S. J. Lycett, & S. E. Johns (Eds.), Understanding cultural transmission in anthropology: a critical synthesis (Methodology and history in anthropology) (Vol. 26, pp. 346–360). Oxford: Berghahn Books.Google Scholar
  131. Shennan, S. J., & Wilkinson, J. R. (2001). Ceramic style change and neutral evolution: A case study from Neolithic Europe. American Antiquity, 66, 577–593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. Shennan, S. J., Crema, E. R., & Kerig, T. (2015). Isolation-by-distance, homophily, and “core” vs. “package” cultural evolution models in Neolithic Europe. Evolution and Human Behavior, 36, 103–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. Shott, M. J. (1996). Mortal pots: On use life and vessel size in the formation of ceramic assemblages. American Antiquity, 61, 463–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. Simondon, G. (1958). Du mode d’existence des objets techniques. Paris: Aubier.Google Scholar
  135. Stark, B. L. (1995). Problems in analysis of standardization and specialization in pottery. In B. Mills & P. L. Crown (Eds.), Ceramic production in the American Southwest (pp. 231–267). Tucson: University of Arizona Press.Google Scholar
  136. Stark, M. T. (Ed.). (1998). The Archaeology of social boundaries (Smithsonian series in archaeological inquiry). Washington, WA/London: Smithsonian Institution Press.Google Scholar
  137. Stark, M. T., Bishop, R. L., & Miska, E. (2000). Ceramic technology and social boundaries: Cultural practices in Kalinga clay selection and use. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 7, 295–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. Stark, M. T., Bowser, B. J., & Horne, L. (Eds.). (2008). Cultural transmission and material culture. Breaking down boundaries. Tucson: The University Arizona Press.Google Scholar
  139. Tani, M., & Longacre, W. A. (1999). On methods of measuring ceramic uselife: A revision of the uselife estimates of cooking vessels among the Kalinga, Philippines. American Antiquity, 64, 299–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. Tehrani, J. J., & Collard, M. (2009). On the relationship between interindividual cultural transmission and population-level cultural diversity: A case study of weaving in Iranian tribal populations. Evolution and Human Behavior, 30, 286–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. Testart, A. (2001). Échange marchand, échange non marchand. Revue Française de Sociologie, 42, 719–748.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  142. Testart, A. (2007). Critique du don: Études sur la circulation non marchande. Paris: Syllepse.Google Scholar
  143. Thalmann, J.-P. (2006). Tell Arqa, 1. Les niveaux de l’âge du Bronze (Bibliothèque archéologique et historique 177). Beyrouth: Institut français du Proche-Orient.Google Scholar
  144. Thelen, E., & Smith, L. (1994). A dynamic system approach in the development of cognition and action. Cambridge MA: M.I.T. Press.Google Scholar
  145. Tite, M. S. (1999). Pottery production, distribution, and consumption—The contribution of the physical sciences. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 6, 181–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  146. Valente, T. W. (1996). Social network thresholds in the diffusion of innovations. Social Networks, 18, 69–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  147. Valente, T. W. (1999). Network models of the diffusion of innovations (2nd ed.). Cresskill: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
  148. van der Leeuw, S. E., & Torrence, R. (1989). What’s new ? A closer look at the process of innovation (Vol. 14). London: Unwin Hyman.Google Scholar
  149. von Neumann, J. (1945). A model of general economic equilibrium. Review of Economic Studies, 13, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  150. Voyatzoglou, M. (1973). The potters of Thrapsano. Ceramic Review (London), 24, 13–16.Google Scholar
  151. Wenger, E. (2000). Communities of practice and social learning systems. Organization, 7, 225–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  152. Wiley, E. O. (1976). The phylogeny and biogeography of fossil and recent gars (Actinopterygii: Lepisosteidae) (Miscellaneous Publication- University of Kansas, Museum of Natural History) (pp. 1–111). Lawrence: University of Kansas.Google Scholar
  153. Wiley, E. O., & Lieberman, B. S. (2011). Phylogenetics: Theory and practice of phylogenetic systematics. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  154. Zuckerman, S., Ziv-Esudri, A., & Cohen-Weinberger, A. (2009). Production centres and distribution patterns of Khirbet Kerak Ware in the Southern Levant: A typological and petrographic perspective. Tel Aviv: Journal of the Institute of Archaeology of Tel Aviv University, 36, 135–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Valentine Roux
    • 1
  1. 1.Préhistoire & Technologie, UMR 7055French National Centre for Scientific ResearchNanterreFrance

Personalised recommendations