Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-dfsvx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T16:13:32.843Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Living Lithics: ethnoarchaeology in Highland Papua New Guinea

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Paul Sillitoe  and
Karen Hardy
Paul Sillitoe
Affiliation:
Department. of Anthropology, University of Durham, Durham, UK. (Email: paul.sillitoe@durham.ac.uk)
Karen Hardy
Affiliation:
School of Historical Studies, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Newcastle, UK. (Email: mikar@clara.net)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper represents the joint work of two very different specialists. The fieldwork was undertaken by Sillitoe as part of his ethnographic research in Papua New Guinea (PNG) and the interpretative work was done by an archaeologist, Hardy. The work described here represents some of the last direct evidence from users of stone tools. It shows how procurement, manufacture, use, storage and the relative roles of men and women in the process was dependant on what other materials were available – material often sadly elusive in the archaeological record. Discard did not reflect use, but was often guided by the thoughtful wish to avoid cut feet.

Keywords

Papua New Guineamaterial culturelithicsdiscardgender
Type
Method
Information
Antiquity , Volume 77 , Issue 297 , September 2003 , pp. 555 - 566
Copyright
Copyright © Antiquity Publications Ltd. 2003

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

Allen, J., Golson, J. & Jones, R. (eds.) 1977. Sunda and Sahul, Prehistoric studies in Island Southeast Asia, Melanesia and Australia. New York/London. Academic Press.Google Scholar
Llchin, B. 1957. Australian Stone Industries, past and present. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 87:115–36.Google Scholar
Binford, L. 1977. Forty-seven trips: A case study in the character of archaeological formation processes, in Wright, R.V.S., 24–36.Google Scholar
Binford, L. 1989. Debating Archaeology. New York, Academic Press.Google Scholar
Blackwood, B. 1950. The Technology of a Modern Stone Age People in New Guinea. Occasional Papers on Technology 3. Oxford, Pitt Rivers Museum.Google Scholar
Blaffer Hrdy, S. 2000. Mother Nature: Maternal Instincts and the Shaping of the Species. London, Vintage.Google Scholar
Brass, L. 1998. Modern stone tool use as a guide to prehistory in the New Guinea Highlands, in Fullagar, R. (ed.) A Closer Look: Recent Australian Studies of Stone Tools. Sydney University Archaeological Methods Series 6.Google Scholar
Brody, H. 1981. Maps and Dreams. London, Faber and Faber.Google Scholar
Brody, H. 2000. The Other Side of Eden. London, Faber and Faber.Google Scholar
Bulmer, S. 1977. Waisted blades and axes: A functional interpretation of some early stone tools from Papua New Guinea, in Wright, R.V.S., 40–59.Google Scholar
Bulmer, R. & Bulmer, S. 1964. The Prehistory of the Australian New Guinea Highlands. American Anthropologist 66(4): 39–76.Google Scholar
Burton, J. 1984. Quarrying in a Tribal Society. World Archaeology 16(2):234–247.Google Scholar
Clark, J.E. 1991. Flintknapping and Debitage Disposal among the Lacondon Maya of Chiapas.Google Scholar
Staski, E. & Sutro, L. (eds.) The Ethnoarchaeology of Refuse Disposal. Arizona State University, Anthropological Research Papers No. 42.Google Scholar
Cranstone, B.A.L. 1971. The Tifalmin: a ‘Neolithic’ people in New Guinea. World Archaeology 3(2):132–142.Google Scholar
Dahlberg, F. (ed.) 1981. Woman the Gatherer. New Haven & London. Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Deal, M. & Hayden, B. 1989. The Persistence of Pre- Columbian Lithic Technology, in Hayden, B. 1989, 235–331.Google Scholar
Dobres, M.A. 2000. Technology and Social Agency. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Elkin, A.P. 1964. The Australian Aborigines: How to understand them. Sydney, Angus and Robertson.Google Scholar
Flannery, K.V. 1986. Guila· Naquitz. Archaic foraging and Early Agriculture in Oaxaca, Mexico. London, Academic Press.Google Scholar
Flenniken, J.J. & Wilke, P.J. 1989. Typology, Technology and Chronology of Great Basin Dart Points. American Anthropologist 91(1): 149–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallager, J. 1977. Contemporary Stone tools in Ethiopia. Journal of Field Archaeology 4:407–414.Google Scholar
Gaxiola, M. & Clark, J.E. (eds.). 1989. La obsidiana en Mesoamerica. Colección Científica. Mexico, INAH.Google Scholar
Gero, J.M. 1991. Genderlithics: Women&s role in Stone Tool Production, in Gero, J.M. & Conkey, M.W., 163–193.Google Scholar
Gero, –J.M. & Conkey, M.W. (eds.). 1991 Engendering Archaeology: Women and Prehistory. Oxford, Blackwell.Google Scholar
Godelier, M. & Garanger, J. 1973. Outils de pierre, outils d’acier chez les Baruya de Nouvelle-Guinee. L’Homme 13:187–220.Google Scholar
Golson, J. 1977. Simple tools and complex technology, in Wright, R.V.S.,154–161. Google Scholar
Gould, R.A. 1980. Living Archaeology. New Studies in Archaeology. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gould, R.A., Koster, D.A. & Sontz, H.L. 1971. The Lithic Assemblage of the Western Desert Aborigines of Australia. American Antiquity 36 (2): 149–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grace, R. 1992. Use Wear Analysis, in Healey, F. A Mesolithic Site at Thatcham, Berkshire. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 58: 41–76.Google Scholar
Groube, L., Chappell, J., Muke, J. & Price, D. 1986. A 40,000 year old human occupation site at Huon Peninsula, Papua New Guinea. Nature 324:453–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hampton, O.W. 1999. Culture of Stone: Sacred and Profane Uses of Stone among the Dani. Texas A & M University Press. Google Scholar
Hardy, K. In press. Microwear Analysis of a Sample of Flaked Stone Tools from Camas Daraich In Wickham-Jones, C.R & Hardy, K. Camas Daraich: a Mesolithic site at the Point of Sleat, Skye. SAIR. Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Hardy, K & Sillitoe, P. 2003. Material Perspectives: Stone Tool Use and Material Culture in Papua New Guinea. Internet Archaeology 14. http://intarch.ac.uk/journal/issue14/hardy_index.html Google Scholar
Hardy, K. & Wickham-Jones, C.R. 2002. Scotland’s First Settlers: the Mesolithic seascape of the Inner Sound, Skye and its contribution to the early prehistory of Scotland. Antiquity 76:825–833.Google Scholar
Hayden, B. 1977. Stone tool functions in the Western Desert. In Wright, R.V.S.,178–188.Google Scholar
Hayden, B. 1979. Palaeolithic Reflections: Lithic technology of the Western Desert Aborigines. Canberra, Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies, New Jersey, Humanities Press Inc.Google Scholar
Hayden, B. 1987. Lithic Studies among the Contemporary Maya. Tucson, University of Arizona Press.Google Scholar
Holdaway, S. 1995. Stone artefacts and the Transition. Antiquity 69, Special Number 265:784–797.Google Scholar
Hutterer, K.L. 1977. Reinterpreting the Southeast Asian Palaeolithic. In Allen, et al. 31–71.Google Scholar
Lee, R.B. 1979. The !Kung San: Men, Women and Work in a Foraging Society. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lôffler, E. 1977 Geomorphology of Papua New Guinea. Canberra: CSIRO & Australian National University Press.Google Scholar
Miller, T.O. Jr. 1979. Stonework of the Xít Indians of Brazil, in Hayden, B. (ed.). Lithic Use-Wear Analysis. New York, Academic Press.Google Scholar
Mountain, M.J. 1993. Bones, hunting and predation in the Pleistocene of Northern Sahul. In Smith, et al. 123–130.Google Scholar
Owen, L.R. 2000. Lithic Functional Analysis as a means of Studying Gender and Material Culture in Prehistory, in Donald, M. & Hurcombe, L. (eds.) Gender and Material Culture in Archaeological Perspective. Studies in Gender and Material Culture. London, Macmillan Press Inc.Google Scholar
Parry, W.J. & Kelly, R.R.L. 1987. Expedient Core Technology and Sedentism. Johnson, J.K. & Morrow, C.A. (eds.) The Organisation of Core Technology. Boulder and London. Westview Press.Google Scholar
Pétrequin, A.M. & Pétrequin, P. 1998. Les Néolithiques des Lacs. Paris. Editions Errance. Google Scholar
Pospisil, L. 1963. Kapauko Papuan Economy. New Haven, Yale University Dept. of Anthropology. Yale University Publications in Anthropology no.67.Google Scholar
Runnels, C. 1975. A note on glass implements from Greece. Newsletter of Lithic Technology 4:30–31.Google Scholar
Runnels, C. 1976. More on glass implements from Greece. Newsletter of Lithic Technology 5:27–31.Google Scholar
Salisbury, R.F. 1962. From Stone to Steel. Melbourne. Melbourne University Press.Google Scholar
Sillitoe, P. 1979. Stone versus steel. Mankind 12:151–161.Google Scholar
Sillitoe, P. 1982. The Lithic technology of a Papua New Guinea Highland People, The Artefact, 7:19–38.Google Scholar
Sillitoe, P. 1983. Roots of the earth: the cultivation and classification of crops in the Papua New Guinea highlands. Manchester University Press, and the University of New South Wales Press.Google Scholar
Sillitoe, P. 1988. Made in Niugini. Technology in the Highlands of Papua New Guinea. London, British Museum Publications Ltd.Google Scholar
Sillitoe, P. 2001. Hunting for Conservation in the Papua New Guinea Highlands. Ethnos 66(3):365–393.Google Scholar
Sillitoe, P. 2002. ‘Maggots in their Ears’: Hunting Incantations and Indigenous Knowledge in Development. Journal of Ritual Studies 16 (1): 64–77.Google Scholar
Smith, M.A. & Sharp, N.D. 1993 Pleistocene sites in Australia, New Guinea and Island Melanesia: Geographic and temporal structure of the archaeological record. In Smith, et al. 37–59.Google Scholar
Smith, M.A., Spriggs, M. & Faukhauser, B. (eds.). 1993. Sahul in Review: Pleistocene Archaeology in Australia, New Guinea and Island Melanesia. Occasional Papers in Prehistory, No. 24. Canberra: Department of Prehistory, The Australian National University.Google Scholar
Strathern, M. 1969. Stone axes and flake tools: evaluations from two New Guinea Highland societies, Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 35:311–29.Google Scholar
Taçon, P 1991. The power of stone: symbolic aspects of stone use and tool development in western Arnhem Land, Australia. Antiquity 65: 192–207.Google Scholar
Thomson, D.F. 1964. Some wood and stone implements of the Bindibu tribe of Central Western Australia. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 30:400–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torrence, R. 1986. Production and exchange of stone tools. Studies in Archaeology. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Torrence, R. 1989. Time, energy and stone tools. New Directions in Archaeology. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Watson, V.D. 1995. Simple and significant: Stone tool production in Highland New Guinea. Lithic Technology 20, 2:89–99.Google Scholar
Wayland Barber, E. 1994. Women’s Work: The first 20,000 years. Women, Cloth and Society in Early Times. New York, W.W. Norton & Co. Google Scholar
White, J.P. 1967. Ethno-archaeology in New Guinea: Two Examples. Mankind. 6: 409–14.Google Scholar
White, J.P. 1968. Ston naip bilong tumbuna: the living stone age in New Guinea, in Bordes, F. & De Sonneville Bordes, D. (eds.). La Préhistoire: problemes et tendances, 511–16. Paris. Editions du CNRS.Google Scholar
White, J.P. 1977. Crude, colourless and unenterprising? Prehistorians and their views on the Stone Age of Sunda and Sahul. In Allen, et al. 13–30.Google Scholar
White, J.P. 1979. Recreating the Stone Age. Popular Archaeology. Nov 1979:19–21.Google Scholar
White, J.P & Modjeska, N. 1978. Where do all the stone tools go? Some examples and problems in their social and spatial distribution in the Papua New Guinea Highlands, in Hodder, I. (ed.). The Spatial Organisation of Culture. London, Duckworth Press.Google Scholar
White, J.P., Modjeska, N. & Hipuya, I. 1977. Group definitions and mental templates. An ethnographic experiment, in Wright, R.V.S. (ed.). 380–390.Google Scholar
White, J.P. & Thomas, D.H. 1972. What mean these stones? in Clarke, G. Models in Archaeology 275–308.Google Scholar
Wright, R.V.S. (ed.). 1977. Stone tools as cultural markers: change, evolution and complexity. Prehistory and Material Culture Series No. 12. Canberra. Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.Google Scholar