Archaeology and cognitive evolution

Abstract

Archaeology can provide two bodies of information relevant to the understanding of the evolution of human cognition -the timing of developments, and the evolutionary context of these developments. The challenge is methodological. Archaeology must document attributes that have direct implications for underlying cognitive mechanisms. One example of such a cognitive archaeology is found in spatial cognition. The archaeological record documents an evolutionary sequence that begins with ape-equivalent spatial abilities 2.5 million years ago and ends with the appearance of modern abilities in the still remote past of 400,000 years ago. The timing of these developments reveals two major episodes in the evolution in spatial ability, one, 1.5 million years ago and the other, one million years later. The two episodes of development in spatial cognition had very different evolutionary contexts. The first was associated with the shift to an open country adaptive niche that occurred early in the time range of Homo erectus. The second was associated with no clear adaptive shift, though it does appear to have coincided with the invasion of more hostile environments and the appearance of systematic hunting of large mammals. Neither, however, occurred in a context of modern hunting and gathering.thomas wynn is Professor of Anthropology at the University of Colorado, Colorado Springs. He was one of the first archaeologists to make explicit use of psychological concepts in the interpretation of the archaeological record, and has published extensively on the cognitive abilities of early hominids. Cognitive implications.In most respects the cognitive requirements of these early bifaces were the same as Wynn: Archaeology and cognitive evolution 394 BEHAVIORAL AND BRAIN SCIENCES (2002) 25:3Figure 4. 1.4 million year-old handaxe from West Natron, Tanzania. The artifact has a "global" bilateral symmetry. The lateral edges mirror one another in quality of shape, but are not congruent.Abstract: Lack of symmetry of stone tools does not require that hominids making asymmetric tools are incapable of doing better. By analogy, differences between stone tools of early humans and modern technology arose without genetic change. A conservative assumption is that symmetry of stone artifacts may have arisen simply because symmetrical tools work better when used for striking and chopping rather than scraping.Abstract: Long before signs of staged toolmaking appeared, Homo erectus made symmetrical tools. The handaxe is a flattened tear-drop shape, but often with edges sharpened all around. Before we assign their obsession with symmetry to an aesthetic judgment, we must consider whether it is possible that the symmetry is simply very pragmatic for one particular use in the many suggested.Abstract: Handaxe morphology is thought to be the first example of the imposition of arbitrary form. Handaxes may thus inform researchers about shared mental templates and evolving cognitive abilities. However, many factors, not related to changes in cognition (e.g., mat...

Flake morphology as a record of manual pressure during stone tool production

“…Given the high cognitive demands associated with stone tool production techniques, a great deal of this attention has been focused on how the lithic archaeological record may inform our understanding of the evolution of human cognitive capabilities (Beaune et al, 2009;Gamble et al, 2014). These capabilities include the evolution of language, imitation, complex technological capabilities, increased brain size, complex social systems, cognitive and manual lateralisation, spatial cognition and shape recognition (Ambrose, 2010;de Beaune, 2004;Gowlett et al, 2012;Morgan et al, 2015;Schillinger et al, 2015;Stout, 2011;Stout et al, 2008;Uomini and Meyer, 2013;Wynn, 2002). Comparatively little work has investigated how lithic artefacts may be used to further our understanding of the evolution of human musculoskeletal anatomy and biomechanical capabilities.…”

Factors affecting Acheulean handaxe variation: Experimental insights, microevolutionary processes, and macroevolutionary outcomes

“…"Variability" at the level of the Pleistocene, however, extends beyond merely variation within and between assemblages of handaxes to a phenomenon that even demands the explanation of the "absence" of handaxes, as is the case with the Clactonian of Britain or the "patchiness" of handaxe production east of the so-called "Movius Line." Indeed, concepts of "variability" over the course of the Pleistocene might also need to take into consideration long-term trends that take place, such as changes in the form and symmetry that some argue to occur during the "Late Acheulean" (e.g., Clark, 1994;Wynn, 2002;Beyenne et al, 2013;Stout et al, 2014). Hence, "the Acheulean" is comprised of an amalgam of long-term, short-term, local, and continental trends, all of which need to be recognized and accounted for.…”

“…The target "model" handaxe ( Figure 1) was manufactured on flint from a different source from that used in the experimental data, and exhibited an overall roughly symmetrical profile in three dimensions with low width/thickness ratio (3.33:1), so resembling handaxes of the "Late Acheulean" (Edwards, 2001;Wynn, 2002). This form of handaxe was deliberately chosen for the experiment so as to challenge the knapper within the context of Acheulean handaxe variation as a whole.…”

The evolution of endurance running and the tyranny of ethnography: A reply to Pickering and Bunn (2007)

“…It is difficult to imagine that a H. erectus hunter with significantly more encephalization than any carnivore could not also have performed rudimentary tracking. Moreover, these hominids could make sophisticated tools involving as many as 30 flake removals from one core, and by 1.7 Ma, they were also capable of making stereotypically symmetrical handaxes that required some mental template (Roche et al, 1999;Wynn, 2002). In addition, however hominids hunted, either by walking or running, they would have needed to track wounded prey in the absence of any sophisticated projectile technology to dispatch their prey instantly (see below).…”