Skill matters

Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory

Volumn 15, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 154-166

  Bleed, Peter ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN   (United States)

Author keywords

Blade production; Japan; Paleolithic; Skill

Indexed keywords

EID: 40249100124     PISSN: 10725369     EISSN: 15737764     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10816-007-9046-0     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Bamforth, D. (1986). Technological efficiency and tool curation. American Antiquity, 51, 38-50.
2. Bamforth, D. (1991). Flintknapping skill, communal hunting, and Paleoindian projectile point typology. Plains Anthropologist, 36, 309-322.
3. Bamforth, D., & Bleed, P. (1997). Technology, flaked stone technology and risk. In C. Barton & G. Clark (Eds.), Rediscovering Darwin: Evolutionary theory and archaeological explanation. (pp. 109-140). Washington: Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association No. 7, American Anthropological Association.
4. Bleed, P. (1986). The optimal design of hunting weapons: Maintainability or reliability. American Antiquity, 51(4), 737-747.
5. Bleed, P. (1991). Operations research and archaeology. American Antiquity, 56(1), 19-35.
6. Bleed, P. (1996). Risk and cost in Japanese microblade production. Lithic Technology, 21, 95-107.
7. Bleed, P. (1997). Content as variability, result as selection: A behavioral model for the study of technology. In C. Barton & G. Clark (Eds.), Rediscovering Darwin: Evolutionary theory and archaeological explanation, (pp. 95-106). Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association No. 7. Washington. American Anthropological Association.
8. Bleed, P. (2002). Cheap, regular and reliable: Implications of design variation in of late Pleistocene Japanese microblade technology. In R. Elston & S. Kuhn (Eds.), Thinking Small: Global Perspectives on Microlithization, (pp 95-102). Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association No. 12. American Anthropological Association, Washington D.C.
9. Bodu, P. (1996). Les chasseurs Magdaleniens de Pincevent: Quelques aspects de leurs comportements. Lithic Technology, 21, 48-70.
10. Costin, C. L. (1998). Craft and social identity. In: Craft and Social Identity Edited by C. L. Costin & R. P. Wright, (pp. 3-16). Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association no. 8. American Anthropological Association Washington, D.C.
11. Childs, S. T. (1998). Social identity and craft specialization among Toro iron workers in western Uganda. In C. Costin & R. Wright (Eds.), Craft and Social Identity. pp. 109-121. Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association no. 8. American Anthropological Association Washington, D.C.
12. Eerkens, J., & Bettinger, R. (2001). Techniques for assessing standardization in artifact assemblages: Can we scale material variability? American Antiquity, 66, 493-504.
13. Fischer, A. (1989). Late Paleolithic "school" of flintknapping at Trollesgave, Denmark: Results from refitting. Acta Archaeologica, 60, 33-49.
14. Fitzhugh, B. (2001). Risk and invention in human technological evolution. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 20, 125-167.
15. Goebel, T., Waters, M., & Dikova, M. (2003). The archaeology of Ushki Lake, Kamchatka, and the Pleistocene peopling of the Americas. Science, 301(5632), 501-505.
16. Harvey, P. (1997). Technology as skilled practice: approaches from anthropology, history and psychology. Social Analysis (Adelaide), 41, 3-14.
17. Hokkaido Maizo Bunkazai Sentaa (Hokkaido Buried Cultural Properties Center) (2007) Shirataki Iseki Gun VI. Sapporo.
18. Ingold, T. (2001). Beyond art and technology: the anthropology of skill. In M. Schiffer (Ed.), Anthropological Perspectives on Technology, (pp. 17-31). Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.
19. Kuhn, S., & Elston, R. (2002). Introduction: Thinking small globally. In R. Elston & S. Kuhn (Eds.), Thinking Small: Global Perspectives on Microlithization. pp 1-8. Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association No. 12 Washington. American Anthropological Association.
20. Maynard, A., Greenfield, P., & Childs, C. (1999). Culture, history, biology, and body: native and non-native acquisition of technological skill. Ethos, 27, 379-402.
21. Nakazawa, Y., Masami, I., Takakura, J., & Yamada, S. (2005). Toward an understanding of technological variability in microblade assemblages in Hokkaido, Japan. Asian Perspectives, 44(2), 277-292.
22. Schiffer, M. B. (ed.).(2001) Anthropological Perspectives onTechnology. Albuquerque, NM:University of New Mexico Press.
23. Schiffer, M. B., & Skibo, J. (1997). Explanation of artifact variability. American Antiquity, 62, 27-50.
24. Skibo, J. and Schiffer, M. (2001). Understanding artifact variability and change: a behavioral framework. In M. Schiffer (Ed.), Anthropological Perspectives on Technology. (pp. 139-150). Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.
25. Spier, R. (1975). Skill as a component of technological complexity. In: Annual Conference. Proceedings no. 7, (pp. 162-166). Calgary University Archaeological Association.
26. Sutoh, T. (1990). The Araya Site: Results of the Second and Third Term Excavations. Sendai: Department of Archaeology, Tohoku University.
27. Uno, S., & Ueno, S. (1983). Kakuniyama. In Aso, Y. S. Kato, & T. Fujimoto (Eds.) Nihon no Kyuseki Bunka 2. Iseki to Ibutsu. (pp. 96-112). Oyama, Tokyo.