Ethnoarchaeology appears nowadays as a poorly formulated field. However, it could become a real science of reference for interpreting the past if it was focused upon well-founded cross-cultural correlates, linking material culture with static and dynamic phenomena. For this purpose, such correlates have to be studied in terms of explanatory mechanisms. Cross-cultural correlates correspond to those regularities where explanatory mechanisms invoke universals. These universals can be studied by reference to the theories found in the different disciplines they relate to and which are situated outside of the domain of archaeology. In the domain of technology, cross-cultural correlates cover a wide range of static and dynamic phenomena. They allow the archaeologist to interpret archaeological facts—for which there is not necessarily analogue—in terms of local historical scenario as well as cultural evolution. In this respect, it is shown that ethnoarchaeology, when following appropriate methodologies and focussing on the universals that underlie the diversity of archaeological facts, does provide the reference data needed to climb up in the pyramid of inferences that make up our interpretative constructs.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Arnold, D. E. (1985). Ceramic Theory and Cultural Process, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Arnold, D. E. (2000). Does the standardization of ceramic pastes really mean specialization? Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 7: 333–376.
Arnold III, P. J. (2000). Working without a net: recent trends in ceramic ethnoarchaeology. Journal of Archaeological Research 8: 105–134.
Binford, L. R. (1978). Nunamiut Ethnoarchaeology, Academic Press, New York.
Binford, L. R. (1981). Bones: Ancient Men and Modern Myths, Academic Press, New York.
Binford, L. R. (1983). In Pursuit of the Past- Decoding the Archaeological Record, Thames and Hudson, London.
Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a Theory of Practice, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Bowser, B. J. (2000). From pottery to politics: An ethnoarchaeological study of political factionalism, ethnicity, and domestic pottery style in the Ecuadorian Amazon. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 7: 219–248.
Bowser, B. J. (2005). Transactional politics and the local and regional exchange of pottery resources in the Ecuadorian Amazon. In Livingstone Smith, A., Bosquet, D., and Martineau, R. (eds.), Pottery Manufacturing Processes - Reconstruction and Interpretation, BAR International Series, Oxford, pp. 23–32.
Braudel, F. (1980). Civilisation Matérielle et Capitalisme, Armand Colin, Paris.
Bril, B. (2002). L’apprentissage de gestes techniques: Ordre de contraintes et variations culturelles. In Bril, B., and Roux, V. (eds.), Le Geste Technique. Réflexions Méthodologiques et Anthropologiques, Editions érès, Ramonville Saint-Agne, pp. 113–150.
Bril, B., and Lehalle, H. (1988). Le développement Psychologique est-il Universel? Approches Interculturelles, PUF, Paris.
Bril, B., and Roux, V. (eds) (2002). Le Geste Technique. Réflexions Méthodologiques et Anthropologiques, Editions érès, Ramonville Saint-Agne.
Bril, B., Roux, V., and Dietrich, G. (2000). Habiletés impliquées dans la taille des perles en calcédoine: Caractéristiques motrices et cognitives d’une action située complexe. In Roux, V. (ed.), Cornaline de l’Inde - Des Pratiques Techniques de Cambay aux Techno-systèmes de l’Indus, Editions de la MSH, Paris, pp. 207–332.
Brumfiel, E., and Earle, T. K. (1987). Specialization, Exchange and Complex Societies, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Crabtree, D. (1972). An introduction to flint working. Occasional Papers of the Idaho State University Museum 28: 1–98.
Dantzig, G. B. (1963). Linear Programming and Extensions, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
David, N. (1992). Integrating ethnoarchaeology: A subtle realist perspective. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 11: 330–359.
David, N., and Kramer, C. (2001) Ethnoarchaeology in Action, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
David, N., Sterner, J., and Gavua K. (1988). Why pots are decorated. Current Anthropology 29: 365–389.
Degoy, L. (2005). La variabilité céramique en Andhra Pradesh: Regard sur des productions céramiques indiennes entre histoire, sociologie et transformations économiques, PhD thesis, University of Paris X, Nanterre, France.
d’Errico, F., Roux, V., and Dumond, Y. (2000). Identification des techniques de finition des perles en calcédoine par l’analyse microscopique et rugosimétrique. In Roux, V. (ed.), Cornaline de l’Inde - Des Pratiques Techniques de Cambay aux Techno-systèmes de l’Indus, Editions de la MSH, Paris, pp. 95–170.
Dietler, M., and Herbich, I. (1998). Habitus, techniques, style: An integrated approach to the social understanding of material culture and boundaries. In Stark M. T. (ed.), The Archaeology of Social Boundaries, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC and London, pp. 232–269.
Dobres, M.-A. (2000). Technology and Social Agency, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford.
Eerkens, J. W., and Bettinger, R. L. (2001). Techniques for assessing standardization in artifact assemblages: Can we scale material variability? American Antiquity 66: 493–504.
Ericson, K. A., and Lehman A. C. (1996). Expert and exceptional performance: Evidence from maximal adaptation to task constraints. Annual Review of Psychology 47: 273–305.
Gallay, A. (1986). L’archéologie Demain, Belfond, Paris.
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 1(1) (www. thearkeotekjournal.org).
Gardin, J. C. (1979). Une Archéologie Théorique, Hachette, Paris.
Gardin, J. C. (1990). The structure of archaeological theories. In Voorips, A.. (ed.), Mathematics and Information Science in Archaeology, “Studies in Modern Archaeology” vol.3, Holos, Bonn, pp. 7–28.
Gelbert, A. (1997). De l’élaboration au tour au tournage sur motte: Difficultés motrices et conceptuelles. Techniques et cultures 30: 1–23.
Gelbert, A. (2003). Traditions Céramiques et Emprunts Techniques dans la Vallée du Fleuve Sénégal, Editions de la MSH, Editions Epistèmes, Paris. (English CD-ROM, demonstration chapter on www.arkeotek.org).
Gibson, J. J. (1979). The Ecological Approach to Perception, Lawrence Erlbaum, London (2nd edn, 1986).
Gosselain, O. P. (1992). Technology and style: Potters and pottery among Bafia of Cameroon. Man 27: 559–586.
Gosselain, O. P. (2000). Materializing identities: An African perspective. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 7: 187–218.
Gosselain, O., and Livingstone Smith, A. (2005). The source clay selection and processing practices in sub-Saharian Africa. In Livingstone Smith, A., Bosquet, D., and Martineau, R. (eds.), Pottery Manufacturing Processes - Reconstruction and Interpretation, BAR International Series, Oxford, pp. 33–48.
Gould, R. A. (ed.) (1978). Explorations in Ethnoarchaeology, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.
Hegmon, M. (1998). Technology, Style and Social Practices: Archaeological Approaches. In Stark, M. T. (ed.), The Archaeology of Social Boundaries, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC, pp. 264–280.
Hegmon, M. (2000). Advances in ceramic ethnoarchaeology. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 77: 129–138.
Hodder, I. (1982). Symbols in Action. Ethnoarchaeological Studies of Material Culture, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Hodder, I. (1985). Boundaries as strategies: An ethnoarchaeological study. In Green, S. W., and Perlman, S. M. (eds.), The Archaeology of Frontiers and Boundaries, Academic Press, New York.
Horne, L. (1994). Village Spaces: Settlement and Society in Northern Iran, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC.
Huysecom, E. (1994). Identification technique des céramiques africaines. In Binder, D., and Courtin, J. (eds.), Terre Cuite et Société. La Céramique, Document Technique, Economique, Culturel, Editions APDCA, Juan-les-Pins, pp. 31–44.
Ingold, T. (2001). Beyond art and technology: The anthropology of skill. In Schiffer, M. B. (ed.), Anthropological Perspective on Technology, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, pp. 17–32.
Inizan, M. L., Reduron-Ballinger, M., Roche, H., and Tixier, J. (1999). Technology and Terminology of Knapped Stone, CREP, Nanterre.
Jeannerod, M. (1997). The Cognitive Neuroscience of Action, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford.
Koopsman, T. C. (1951). Activity Analysis of Production and Allocation, Monograph no. 13 of the Cowles Foundation, John Wiley, New York.
Kramer, C. (ed.) (1979). Ethnoarchaeology - Implications of Ethnography for Archaeology, Columbia University, New York.
Kramer, C. (1997). Pottery in Rajasthan - Ethnoarchaeology of two Indian Cities, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington and London.
Lemonnier, P. (ed.) (1993). Technological Choices - Transformation in Material Cultures since the Neolithic, Routledge, London and New York.
Livingstone Smith, A. (2000). Processing clay for pottery in northern Cameroon: Social and technical requirements. Archaeometry 42: 21–42.
Longacre, W. A. (1978). Ethnoarchaeology. Reviews in Anthropology 5: 357–363.
Longacre, W. (ed.) (1991a). Ceramic Ethnoarchaeology, The University of Arizona Press, Tucson.
Longacre, W. A. (1991b). Sources of ceramic variability among the Kalinga of Northern Luzon. In Longacre, W. A. (ed.), Ceramic Ethnoarchaeology, The University of Arizona Press, Tucson, pp. 95–110.
Longacre, W. A. (1992). The perfect marriage: The essential joining of ethnoarcheology and experimental archaeology. In Gallay, A., Audouze, F., and Roux, V. (eds.), Ethnoarchéologie : Justification, Problèmes, Limites, Editions APDCA, Juan-les-Pins, pp. 15–24.
Lyman, R. L., and O’Brien, M. J. (1998). The goals of evolutionary archaeology. Current Anthropology 39: 615–652.
MacEachern, A. S. (1996). Foreign countries: The development of ethnoarchaeology in sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of World Prehistory 10: 243–304.
Matarasso, P., and Roux, V. (2000). Le système techno-économique des perles de cornaline. Modélisation des systèmes complexes de production par l’analyse d’activités. In Roux, V.. (ed.), Cornaline de l’Inde - Des Pratiques Techniques de Cambay aux Techno-systèmes de l’Indus, Editions de la MSH, Paris, pp. 333–412. (English CD-ROM).
Meijer, O. G., and Roth, K. (eds.) (1988). Complex Movement Behaviour: The Motor Action Controversy, Elsevier Science Publisher, Amsterdam.
Miller, D. (1985). Artefacts as Categories. A Study of Ceramic Variability in Central India, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Newell, K. (1996). Changes in movement and skills: Learning retention and transfer. In Latash, M. L., and Turvey, M. T. (eds), Dexterity and its Development, L.E.A., Mahwah, pp. 393–429.
Pelegrin, J. (1991). Aspects de démarche expérimentale en technologie lithique. In 25 ans d’Etudes Technologiques en Préhistoire, Editions APDCA, Juan-les-Pins, pp. 57–63.
Pelegrin, J. (1994). Lithic technology in Harappan times. In Parpola, A., and Koskikallio, P. (eds.), South Asian Archaeology (1993), Suuomalainen Tiedeakatemia, Helsinki, pp. 587–598.
Pétrequin, P., and Pétrequin, A.-M. (1993). Ecologie d’un Outil: La Hache de Pierre en Irian Jaya (Indonésie), Editions du CNRS, Paris.
Pfaffenberg, B. (1992). Social anthropology of technology. Annual Review of Anthropology 21: 491–516.
Reed, E. S. (1988). Applying the theory of action systems to research to the study of motor skills. In Meijer, O. G., and Roth, K. (eds.), Complex Movement Behavior: The Motor-Action Controversy, Elsevier Publishers, Amsterdam, pp. 45–86.
Reed, E. S., and Bril, B (1996). The primacy of action in development. A commentary of N. Bernstein. In Latash, M.. (ed.), Dexterity and its Development, Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale NJ, pp. 431–451.
Rice, P. (1996). Recent ceramic analysis: I. Function, style and origins. Journal of Archaeological Research 4: 133–163.
Roux, V. (1990). The psychological analysis of technical activities: A contribution to the study of craft specialization. Archaeological Review from Cambridge 9: 142–153.
Roux, V. (ed.) (2000), Cornaline de l’Inde - Des Pratique Techniques de Cambay aux Techno-systèmes de l’Indus, Editions de la MSH, Paris. (English CD-ROM, demonstration chapters on www.arkeotek.org).
Roux, V. (2003a). 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.
Roux, V. (2003b). Ceramic standardization and intensity of production: Quantifying degrees of specialization. American Antiquity 68: 768–782.
Roux, V., and Bril, B. (eds.) (2005). Stone Knapping: The Necessary Conditions for a Uniquely Hominin Behaviour, The MacDonald Institute for Archaeological research, Cambridge.
Roux, V., Bril, B., and Dietrich, G. (1995). Skills and learning difficulties involved in stone-knapping : The case of stone-bead knapping in Khambhat, India. World Archaeology 27: 63–87.
Roux, V., Corbetta D. (1989). The Potter's Wheel. Craft Specialization and Technical Competence, Oxford and IBH Publishing, New Delhi. (1990). Le Tour du Potier: Spécialisation Artisanale et Compétence Technique, Editions du CNRS, Paris. (Monographies du CRA, no. 4)
Roux, V., and P. Matarasso (1999). Crafts and the evolution of complex societies : New methodologies for modeling the organization of production, a Harappan example. In Dobres, M.-A., and Hoffman, C. R. (eds.), The Social Dynamics of Technology, Practice, Politics and World Views, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington and London, pp. 46–70.
Schiffer, M. B. (1978). Methodological issues in ethnoarchaeology. In Gould, R. A. (ed.), Explorations in Ethnoarchaeology, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, pp. 229–247.
Schiffer, M. B. (1988). The structure of archaeological theory. American Antiquity 53: 461–485.
Schiffer, M. B., and Skibo, J. M. (1987). Theory and experiment in the study of technological change. Current Anthropology 28: 595–622.
Schiffer, M. B., and Skibo, J. M. (1997). The explanation of artifact variability. American Antiquity 62: 27–50.
Semenov, S. (1964). Prehistoric Technology, Cory and Mc Key, London.
Shennan, S. J. (2002). Genes, Memes and Human History: Darwinian Archaeology and Cultural Evolution, Thames & Hudson, London.
Shennan, and Wilkinson, J. R. (2001). Ceramic style change and neutral evolution: A case study from Neolithic Europe. American Antiquity 66: 577–593.
Sillar, B., and Tite, M. S. (2000). The challenge of “technological choices” for materials science approaches in archaeology. Archaeometry 42: 2–16.
Simpson, G. G. (1963). Historical science. In Albritton, C. C. (ed.), The Fabric of Geology, Freeman, Cooper, Stanford, pp. 24–48.
Skibo, J. M. (1992). Pottery Function - a Use-Alteration Perspective, Plenum, New York.
Skibo, J. M., and Schiffer, M. B. (2001). Understanding variability and change: A behavioral framework. In Schiffer, M. B. (ed), Anthropological Perspectives on Technology, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, pp. 139–149.
Smith, L. B., and Thelen, E. (eds.) (1993). A Dynamic Systems Approach to Development, MIT Press/Bradford Book, Cambridge, Massachusetts, London, England.
Spencer, C. S. (1997). Evolutionary approaches in archaeology. Journal of Archaeological Research 5: 209–264.
Stahl, A. B. (1993). Concepts of time and approaches to analogical reasoning in historical perspective. American Antiquity 58: 235–260.
Stark, M. T. (1994). Pottery exchange and the regional system: A Dalupa case study. In Longacre, W. A., and Skibo, J. M. (eds.), Kalinga Ethnoarchaeology: Expanding Archaeological Method and Theory, Smithsonian Institution press, Washington, DC, pp.169–197.
Stark, M. T. (ed.) (1998). The Archaeology of Social Boundaries, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC.
Stark, M. T. (2003). Current issues in ceramic ethnoarchaeology. Journal of Archaeological Research 11: 193–241.
Stark, M. T., Bishop, R. L., and 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.
Stout, D. (2002). Skill and cognition in stone tool production: An ethnographic case study from Irian Jaya. Current Anthropology 45: 693–722.
Thelen, E., and Smith, L. (1994). A Dynamic System Approach in the Development of Cognition and Action, M.I.T. Press, Cambridge MA.
Tixier, J. (1967). Procédés d’analyse et questions de terminologie dans l’étude des ensembles industriels du Paléolithique recent et de l’Epipaléolithique en Afrique du Nord-Ouest. In Bishop, W. W., and Clark, J. D. (eds), Background to Evolution in Africa, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London.
Tixier, J. (1980). La taille expérimentale des roches dures. Encyclopedia Universalis, France, pp. 1199–1201.
Trigger, B. (1989). A History of Archaeological Thought, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Tschauner, H. (1996). Middle-range theory, behavioral archaeology, and post-empiricist philosophy of science in archaeology. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 3: 3–30.
Vitelli, K. (1993). Franchti Neolithic Pottery, vol. 1., Indian University Press, Bloomington/Indianapolis.
von Neumann, J. (1945). A model of general economic equilibrium. Review of Economic Studies 13.
Watson, P. J. (1986). Archaeological interpretation, 1985. In Meltzer, D. J., Fowler, D. D., and Sabloff, J. A. (eds.), American Archaeology Past and Future, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC, pp. 439–457.
Wobst, H. M. (1978). The archaeo-ethnography of hunter-gatherers or the tyranny of the ethnographic record in archaeology. American Antiquity 43: 303–309.
Wylie, A. (1985). The reaction against analogy. Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory 8: 63–111.
Yellen, J. E. (1977). Archaeological Approaches to the Past, Academic Press, New York.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This paper has been initially presented at the SAA symposium on Ethnoarchaeology held in Montreal in April 2004. I would like to thank Scott MacEachern and Jay Cunningham for inviting me to join this symposium. It has been a great opportunity to confront the American and European approaches. Fruitful comments are especially acknowledged. I would like also to thank them for their editing work which contributed greatly to improve the English. I am grateful to Mark Neupert, James Skibo and anonymous rewiever for their relevant comments and for improving an earlier version of the paper.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Roux, V. Ethnoarchaeology: A Non Historical Science of Reference Necessary for Interpreting the Past. J Archaeol Method Theory 14, 153–178 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-007-9030-8
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-007-9030-8