Searching for the emergence of stone tool making in eastern Africa

Torre, Ignacio de la

doi:10.1073/pnas.1906926116

Cited by 17 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 20 publications

(17 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Reinnovation by a single naïve subject, of any species, would logically suffice to show that any affected technique does not require cultural transmission. Therefore, with our many independent cases (i.e., in-study replications) of reinnovation (here, in humans), we provide ample empirical evidence that it is possible, in principle, that all four of the main proposed early knapping techniques ( 16 , 26 , 42 – 45 ) can be individually reinnovated.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

“…The vast majority of our (mostly technique-naive) participants reinnovated early knapping techniques, and this included the totally naïve participants we tested, who had not only no previous cultural access to knapping techniques but also no previous knowledge of stone tools and stone tool types. Overall, we detected reinnovation of all four of the discussed early knapping techniques by technique-naïve participants (passive hammer, bipolar, freehand, and projectile) ( 16 , 26 , 42 – 45 ). Even the two technique-naïve participants who were also naïve to stone tool concepts innovated three of the four knapping techniques (only projectile technique failed to appear in these two participants; Fig.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

“…In previous knapping studies, there was a restricted expression of techniques, as participants’ behaviors were often socially guided (and thus, limited), especially by prescribing them, via demonstrations or restrictions in the experimental setup (e.g., lack of potential anvils), specific toolmaking techniques that the participants were expected to express. Unless otherwise required by the testing procedure (i.e., for the study of passive hammer or bipolar techniques) ( 26 , 48 ), freehand technique was often the default, expected means of knapping in earlier experimental studies despite existing evidence of other techniques throughout the record ( 26 , 42 , 43 , 45 ). Note that even where demonstrations exclusively used freehand technique, there are still documented cases of apparent reinnovation of bipolar technique ( 24 , 49 , 50 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This account therefore stands alone in not requiring the assumption of the presence of know-how copying skills during the Oldowan. To underline this point further, the minimal culture model, a cultural model, after all, still accounts for general processes of cultural transmission that generate population-level patterns (which did exist during the Oldowan) ( 11 , 45 ), while it parsimoniously does not require the specific assumption that cultural transmission of know-how was present, a skill often considered key for the cumulative cultural evolution of know-how seen in modern humans ( 1 – 4 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this way, we were able to determine whether naïve humans could reinnovate early knapping technique(s) in the absence of cultural transmission of their know-how. If naïve modern humans in our test can individually arrive upon any early knapping techniques, ideally, by inducing conchoidal fracture, and especially if they would develop all discussed techniques (passive hammer, bipolar, freehand, and projectile techniques) ( 16 , 26 , 42 – 45 ), then the hypothesis that early knapping techniques do not necessitate know-how copying would be supported. Simultaneously, the hypotheses that posit a necessity for cultural transmission of the know-how of early knapping techniques would become less parsimonious.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Early knapping techniques do not necessitate cultural transmission

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Early stone tool production, or knapping, techniques are claimed to be the earliest evidence for cultural transmission in the human lineage. Previous experimental studies have trained human participants to knap in conditions involving opportunities for cultural transmission. Subsequent knapping was then interpreted as evidence for a necessity of the provided cultural transmission opportunities for these techniques. However, a valid necessity claim requires showing that individual learning alone cannot lead to early knapping techniques. Here, we tested human participants ( N = 28) in cultural isolation for the individual learning of early knapping techniques by providing them with relevant raw materials and a puzzle task as motivation. Twenty-five participants were technique naïve according to posttest questionnaires, yet they individually learned early knapping techniques, therewith producing and using core and flake tools. Early knapping techniques thus do not necessitate cultural transmission of know-how and could likewise have been individually derived among premodern hominins.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Early knapping techniques do not necessitate cultural transmission

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Captive bonobos (Pan paniscus) apply precision grips when using flaked stone tools

Cebeiro,

Key

2023

American Journal of Biological Anthropology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesCurrent evidence suggests that flaked stone tool technologies did not emerge until ~3.3–2.6 million‐years‐ago (Ma). It is often hypothesized that early hominin (principally Ardipithecus and early Australopithecus) manual anatomy may have prevented an earlier emergence, as the forceful precision grips essential to flake tool‐use may have been ineffectively performed by these species. Marzke, Marchant, McGrew, and Reece (2015) observed potentially forceful pad‐to‐side precision grips being recruited by wild chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) during feeding behaviors, indicating that Pan‐like manual anatomy, and therefore potentially early hominin anatomy, may be capable of effectively securing flake stone tools during their use.Materials and MethodsHere, we report on the grips recruited by four captive, human‐trained, bonobos (Pan paniscus) during the use of stone and organic tools, including flake stone tools during cutting behaviors.ResultsIt is revealed that pad‐to‐side precision grips are frequently recruited by these bonobos when securing stone flakes during cutting actions. In some instances, high forces could have been resisted and applied by the thumb and fingers.DiscussionWhile our analyzes are preliminary and limited to captive individuals, and Pan is not suggested to secure flakes with the same efficacy as Homo or Australopithecus, it points to early hominins potentially being able to perform the precision grips required to use flake stone tools. In turn, the ability to gain tangible benefits from the effective use of flake tools (i.e., gain energetic returns from processing food resources) may have been – at least anatomically – possible in early Australopithecus and other pre‐Early Stone Age hominin species. In turn, hominin manual anatomy may not be a leading restriction on the emergence of the earliest stone tool technologies.

show abstract

Intentionality, pointing, and early symbolic cognition

van Mazijk

2024

Hum Stud

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Concepts such as “symbolism” and “symbolic cognition” often remain unspecified in discussions the symbolic capacities of earlier hominins. In this paper, I use conceptual tools from phenomenology to reflect on the origins of early symbolic cognition. In particular, I discuss the possible early use of pointing gestures around the time of the earliest known stone tool industries. I argue that unlike more basic social acts such as expression, gaze following, and attention-getters, which are used by extant non-human great apes, communicative pointing involves key elements that are characteristic of symbolic cognition. In particular, it involves “third order intentionality” as well as “shared practice horizons”: shared frameworks of understanding which are required for the interpretation of communicative acts whose meaning is not codified indexically or iconically in the signaling behavior. In the final part, I briefly review some indications for the use of pointing gestures around the time of the Lomekwian and Oldowan industries, as a way to sustain cooperation and possibly learning by instruction. It is suggested that pointing is more complex than is standardly acknowledged, and that it may have been an important communicative act for Early Stone Age hominins in transitioning to more fully symbolic speech capacities.

show abstract

Searching for the emergence of stone tool making in eastern Africa

Cited by 17 publications

References 20 publications

Early knapping techniques do not necessitate cultural transmission

Early knapping techniques do not necessitate cultural transmission

Captive bonobos (Pan paniscus) apply precision grips when using flaked stone tools

Intentionality, pointing, and early symbolic cognition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About