The archaeology of mind: Standardization and symmetry in lithics and their implications for the study of the evolution of the human mind

Abstract

This dissertation studies whether stone tools can be used to study the origin and evolution of human cognition, symboling and language. Although archaeological investigation has historically been more concerned with the reconstruction of human behavior through the study of subsistence patterns, migration routes and techniques of artifact manufacture there is a long tradition of archaeologists studying the human mind and a great history of debate concerning the best methods for doing so. Since the 1980's there has been a more overt and focused movement toward looking at questions of the evolving human mind culminating in the definition of a new area of research within traditional archaeology inquiry known as cognitive archaeology. Within this intellectual framework the potential of and problems with using stone tools to study the mind is explored. With the exception of those researchers for whom the mere presence of stone tools is taken as sufficient proof of language and symboling, all the studies and debates presented focused on the presence, absence or degree of symmetry and standardization in lithic assemblages. A new method, drawn from robotics, is employed to study these variables and is applied through a number of studies to the lithic industries at Tabun. These studies suggest that symmetry and standardization are not always the product of symbol-based mental templates but rather may be the result of what are termed coincidental factors such as raw material, technology of blank manufacture, retouch and the imposition of typology. It is argued that coincidental factors do not require symboling abilities. It is further argued that while there is a great deal of potential for studying the evolving mind through lithics in conjunction with other archaeological and non-archaeological data, the effects of these coincidental factors must first be isolated. If archaeologists treat coincidental levels of standardization and symmetry as if they are symbolic then they run the risk of reconstructing hominid capabilities in ways that are not meaningful behaviorally.