Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T17:07:50.932Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Interpreting the Function of Primitive Implements

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

J. Sonnenfeld
J. Sonnenfeld*
Affiliation:
University of Delaware, Newark, Del.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Reconstruction of the subsistence relationship existing between prehistoric man and his environment has been handicapped by the difficulty of ascribing reasonably precise function to many of his tools. This study began as an attempt to interpret the function of the enigmatic celt; it developed into a field experiment which included the testing of a series of stone hoes in an effort to prove or disprove the existence of prehistoric implements with the hoe function. Inherent difficulties and limitations in the functional approach to implement testing and interpretation are indicated.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Antiquity , Volume 28 , Issue 1 , July 1962 , pp. 56 - 65
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for American Archaeology 1962

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adam, L. 1953 The Discovery of the Vierkantbeil or Quadrangular Adze Head in the Eastern Central Highlands of New Guinea. Mankind, Vol. 4, No. 10, pp. 411–23. Sydney.Google Scholar
Ascher, Robert 1961 Experimental Archaeology. American Anthropologist, Vol. 63, No. 4, pp. 793–816. Menasha.Google Scholar
Becker, C. J. 1945 New Finds of Hafted Neolithic Celts. Acta Archaeologica, Vol. 16, pp. 156–75. Copenhagen.Google Scholar
Bryan, Kirk 1950 Flint Quarries — the Sources of Tools and, at the Same Time, the Factories of the American Indian. Papers of the Peabody Museum, Harvard University, Vol. 17, No. 3. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Clark, J. D. 1958 Certain Industries of Notched and Strangulated Scrapers in Rhodesia, Their Time Range and Possible Use. South African Archaeological Bulletin, Vol. 13, No. 50, pp. 56–66. Capetown.Google Scholar
Evans, J. 1872 Ancient Stone Implements, Weapons and Ornaments of Great Britain. D. Appleton, New York.Google Scholar
Hoeltker, G. 1947 Steinerne Ackerbaugeräte: Ein Problem der Vor und Frühgeschichte in Völkerkundlicher Beleuchtung. Internationales Archiv für Ethnographic, Vol. 45, Nos. 4–6, pp. 77–156. Leyden.Google Scholar
Iverson, J. 1956 Forest Clearance in the Stone Age. Scientific American, Vol. 194, No. 3, pp. 36–41. New York.Google Scholar
Jorgensen, S. 1953 Skovrydning Med Flintokse [Forest Clearance with Flint Axes]. Fra Nationalmuseets Arbejdsmark 1953, pp. 36–43 [English summary pp. 109–10]. Copenhagen.Google Scholar
Judd, N. M. 1954 The Material Culture of Pueblo Bonito. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, Vol. 124. Washington.Google Scholar
Kramer, F. L. 1957 Distributions of Primitive Tillage. MS, doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Leakey, L. S. B. 1953 Adam's Ancestors, fourth edition, revised. Methuen, London.Google Scholar
McCarthy, F. D. 1946 The Stone Implements of Australia. The Australian Museum, Memoir 9. Sydney.Google Scholar
Mason, R. J. 1957 The Transvaal Middle Stone Age and Statistical Analysis. South African Archaeological Bulletin, Vol. 12, pp. 119–43. Capetown.Google Scholar
Mitchell, S. R. 1949 Stone Age Craftsmen: Stone Tools and Camping Places of the Australian Aboriginees. Tait Book Company, Melbourne.Google Scholar
Morris, E. H. 1939 Archaeological Studies in the La Plata District, Southwestern Colorado and Northwestern New Mexico. Carnegie Institution of Washington, Publication 519. Washington.Google Scholar
Neustupny, E. 1961 Review of Semenov's “Pervobytnaya Tekhnika.” Antiquity Vol. 35, No. 138, pp. 161–3. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Pond, A. W. 1930 Primitive Methods of Working Stone: Based on Experiments of Halvor L. Skavlen. Logan Museum, Beloit College, Beloit.Google Scholar
Purse-Stanek, E. 1953 Stone Implements and Their Use in the Agriculture of Taiwan. Wiener Völkerkundliche Mitteilungen, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 22–31. Vienna.Google Scholar
Quente, P. 1914 Steinzeitliche, Ackerbaugeräte, aus der Ostprignitz Erdhacken und Pfluge, und Ihre Schaftungsmöglichkeit. Praehistorische Zeitschrift, Vol. 6, No. 3, pp. 180–87. Berlin.Google Scholar
Rau, C. 1864 Agricultural Implements of the North American Stone Period. Smithsonian Institution, Annual Report for 1863, pp. 379–80. Washington.Google Scholar
Semenov, S. A. 1957 Pervobytnaya Tekhnika: Opytizucheniya drevneyshikh orudiy i izdeliy po sledam raboty [Primitive Technology: Outline of the Study of Ancient Tools and Artifacts]. Materialy i Issledovaniya po Arfcheologii, No. 54. Moscow.Google Scholar
Smith, R. A. 1917 Origin of the Neolithic Celt. Archaeologia, Vol. 67 (2nd series Vol. 17), No. 2, pp. 27–48. Oxford.Google Scholar
Spitzley, J. H. 1890 Notes on Three Stone Adzes from Surinam … and on Eight Stone Implements from the Islands of St. Vincent and St. Lucia. Internationales Archiv för Ethnographie, Vol. 3, pp. 231–33. Leyden.Google Scholar
Steensberg, A. 1943 Ancient Harvesting Implements. Nationalmuseets Skrifter, Arkoeologisk-Historisk Roekke, I. Copenhagen.Google Scholar
Valentini, P. J. J. 1885 Semi-lunar and Crescent-shaped Tools. Proceedings of the American Antiquarian Society, n.s. Vol. 3, pp. 449–74. Worchester.Google Scholar
Wilde, W. R. 1863 A Descriptive Catalogue of the Antiquities in the Museum of the Royal Irish Academy, Vol. 1. Dublin.Google Scholar
Witthoft, John 1955 Worn Stone Tools from Southeastern Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Archaeologist, Vol. 25, No. 1, pp. 16–31. Gettysburg.Google Scholar