Technological organization and settlement mobility: An ethnographic examination

Citation: M. J. Shott (1986) Technological organization and settlement mobility: An ethnographic examination. Journal of Anthropological Research (RSS)
Internet Archive Scholar (search for fulltext): Technological organization and settlement mobility: An ethnographic examination
Download: http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/3630378?uid=3739960&uid=2&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=21104742793821
Tagged: Anthropology (RSS)

Summary

Stone tools are the most common archaeological remains of forager societies. The analysis of these lithics, however, is very broad. Traditional analyses group tools based on functionality and frequency. A large range of tools, however do not commonly fall under one function. As a result, a simple equation of function and gross morphology is not universally valid. An expanded view of tool assemblages within cultural systems is needed in order to get a more accurate representation.

In this study, Shott looks at three major attributes: Technological Organization, Mobility and Technology, and Ethnographic Analysis. The main concern of Technological Organization is that a tool is built in order to perform certain tasks. As a result significant constraints are placed on the tool’s design in order to be functional. Though functionality is the most commonly looked application of the tool, the tool can also be analyzed based on their efficiency of use, minimization of risk, portability, but most importantly mapping relations and discard rates. Forager technologies could also be broken up into three categories: Diversity, Versatility, and Flexibility. Mobility and Technology is important because people need to keep in mind the gross number of artifacts a group of people can carry when taking into consideration how mobile they are. If a group is highly mobile then less specialized and more multifunctional the tool is. Mobility also puts a constraint on the tools when it comes to its design and size. Concerning Ethnographic Analysis, Oswalt points out two major components: the amount of tool types in the inventory and the complexity of the tool.

When looking at the mobility and diversity of the tools, it seems that mobility sets the maximum limit on the tools that can be carried. The diversity of the tools, however, do not necessarily decrease. There would be a decrease in tools but an increase in flexible tool classes that can do a wide range of tasks. As a result, any forager can survive with less than three tool classes. Mobility and Versatility, completely agrees that the fewer the tools, the larger the range of use. However, the complexity of the tool varies with the number of tasks a tool can be used for. Logistic Mobility focuses on residential mobility where the mobility is very specialized and is commonly used in search of a new food resource or when men pursue game or women gather food. Different moves, however, have different purposes. As a result, more specialized tool may be produced.

Theoretical and Practical Relevance

In this article, though Shott names a variety of different attributes that could allow researchers to better understand the different artifacts and the relationships they have with other part of their life like mobility (but mostly hunting and food processing), I like how in Torrence’s 1989 article entitled "Retooling: Towards a behavioral theory of stone tools" talks about the relationship some artifacts have with others. For example, In Shott’s article it talks about how a more mobile group of people are more likely to carry a smaller tool kit. Something Torrence talks about, however, is how each tool is rather unique and complex because of the tools used to maintain their tools vary which makes them different from other tools.

This article can be broken up into three separate sections. The problem with this is that the first and second "section" seem rather repetitive where the second section seems to deliver a summary of the first. Otherwise, the article was rather well written and brought ups some interesting points and ideas.