An extended and simplified model of RfP in the lithic assemblage

possible to simply list a set of conditions that have to be fulfilled for it to be likely. I think however, that it is possible to make a hierarchy of the concepts and ideas explored thus far, and subsequently, relate them to the associated data. I will attempt to explain what segments of the hierarchy account for what kind of hypotheses. A further restriction will be that I only focus on three phenomena per category to reduce further complications. The three categories are representations of the locale, region and rhythm; respectively the place, the social landscape and ‘enhanced rhythms’. Each of these categories carries three associated phenomena as spokes around a hub (see fig. 3.1, p.40). The used colours on the spokes are indicative of the likelihood by which they express the associated hub: orange represents a concept that can be easily accounted for by data, but is in itself not sufficient to represent the hub-concept. Purple represents a concept that is harder accounted for by data, for example, because it is unclear what exactly would constitute an activity, or ambiguity in the data is more likely to occur, but is in itself sufficiently indicative of the hub-concept. Green represents a concept that has associated easily identifiable data and is very likely indicative of the hub- concept. Hubs are either blue or red. A blue hub indicates that there is a reasonable likelihood that if data underpinning the node-concepts is sufficient, the hub-concept can be assessed for its (non-)existence within a particular assemblage. Red, on the other hand, means that the hub-concept is unlikely to be accounted for by the archaeological data. Every hub has three nodes connected by spokes, making one system. The nodes represent conditions for activation of the hub. Only data underpinning a node-concept ‘activates’ it. It cannot be readily assumed as an existent condition on its own. Some data can account (partly) for multiple node-concepts across systems and are therefore rather understood dynamically than secluded. All nodes with a different colour than green are sufficiently indicative of the hub if they are ‘activated’ in conjunction with a different node. However, purple nodes can be sufficient nodes on their own if sufficient data is provided, as explained below.

First, let’s focus on locales. A strong indication of the locale being part of a social landscape is if it is a social occasion or a place, a location that carries

memories and associations beyond its immediate presence for individuals. In this regard, establishing whether one is dealing with a social occasion rather than a place, which is a social occasion ‘festered with meanings’, is not important for further interpretation. Both are established through subconcepts that are indicative of RfP. More or less obviously, if a locale holds full-blown symbolic artefacts (regardless whether they are lithic-made or of exotic material), or dwelling structures, it is very likely to be a place. Since it has been established that symbolic communication was the modus operandi in a global network, regardless of which specific segment of the network it was associated with in everyday life it is an evident marker of RfP. Provisioning is another, although less obvious characteristic of a place. Storing items is a social practice associated with the extension of information beyond the direct environment; the knowledge of stored items must be carried with an individual or group of individuals when traveling. Showing provision as an activity in the archaeological record in itself might be somewhat unclear, but a simple accumulation of concentrated material at one place on a locale will generally not represent such activity. Ideally, clear structuring of item-placement in or along the setting of a locale should be sought after. Lastly, refitting and research on sources of chaîne opératoires present in locales might reveal that raw material transfer did not hold a fall-off curve for distant travelling, if complete or partially parts of the production sequence can be found far from the source. To make more quantifiable, what far means, I have set a distance for more than 100 km, as a distance between source and locale. As indicated earlier, increased distance of raw material transfer is not necessarily indicative of the extension of social engagement. I would argue however, that a consistent patterning of widely distributed chaîne opératoires crossing the threshold distance between locales dated at around the same period ultimately does show that distance matters, because it would show agreement in shared information (that material can be carried further) among groups vastly disconnected.

Second, we turn to the social landscape. The social landscape is the regionalized landscape of interaction for individuals building extensive and global networks, thus for individuals who display the release from proximity. The social landscape ought to display two or more landscapes of habit. Intra-regional studies studying the variety of such landscapes should look for those shared elements that

highlight human creativity in their intersection. In a conceptual setting, it would mean that some shared type of object X is represented in both assemblages A and B within a shared region. Whether it is indicative of trade or shared culture is not important in this regard. As far as the lithic assemblages are concerned, it would most ideally include finding key artefacts X of assemblage A mixed with other key artefacts Y in assemblage B in a clearly defined, unambiguous layer, or sequence of layers. What is hard, however, is showing that this practice of sharing items occurred regularly enough to indicate that landscapes of habit did, in fact, socially interact. Reconstructing material transfer networks, as far as data is concerned, is somewhat akin to the point raised with regard to the further movement of (partially) complete chaîne opératoires from their sources. However, this involves analyzing on a semi-regional or regional scale the intensities with which certain locales were used. Consistent preference for locales and sources further located from each other with the former being reused multiplying in the region, gives rise to structuring the movement of material transfer networks. However, these are not in themselves sufficiently indicative of a social landscape if it turns out they are characterized as low-density networks. Regional high density all-channel networks form the ideal for indicating the social landscape, but this would either require proving that trade occurred, or alternatively that many landscapes of habits shared a culture. The latter approach would in that regard be an extension of studying two or more landscapes of habit as describe above. Lastly, rapid cultural spread in a large region is characterized mainly by what we are interested in here, involving large scale, great lengths of distance over little time. Ideally, comparative analyses should be made of changes in movement between the arrival of new assemblages and the ‘natural’ spread of older assemblages.

Third, ‘enhanced rhythms’ as I have called them, are those rhythms that structure non-bodily gestures such that a routinization of life can arise in which symbolic communication is at least partly integrated in social interaction. Admittedly, this is the hardest category for which lithic data can be neutrally assessed without having a tendency to ‘project’ symbolic implications into raw data. Nonetheless, I want to briefly address the associated concepts here in order to elucidate them. A diversification of socially learned gestures means that some skills are no longer habituated through the practical consciousness, that is by

learning it by gestures, but involves using the discursive consciousness. Reflection and metareflection upon actions become a mode of thought and consequently influence the way gestures associated with for example dancing, learning, rituals are structured more or less consciously, diversifying and categorizing different modes of gestures. The routinization of future action means that anticipation can be negotiated beyond the bodily co-presence of others. A red encirclement of your sister’s birthday on a calendar would be an example of a complicated, semiotically induced anticipation without someone else negotiating this anticipation in bodily co-presence. Lastly, a symbolically charged taskscape is a more accentuated form of the diversification of social gestures. In the ‘normal’ taskscape specific skills are socially transferred. A symbolically charged taskscape structures these specific skills along symbolic understanding such that the skills themselves become categories and therefore objects of social negotiation. To put it bluntly, in a symbolically charged landscape, taste for skills and behaviour itself becomes an object of negotiation. Thus, preference as a clear (i.e. no longer unconsciously expressed) category of desire enters the social epistemology, and thus social discourse. Admittedly the account of enhanced rhythms as set out here is highly speculative and I see little to no use for the lithic record to be bothered attempting to prove any of the elements set out here. Why bother with it in the first place then? I would argue that it is here where the cognitivist framework could prove itself more than useful. I will not attempt here to integrate the cognitivist approach exhaustively, and I want to keep it purely speculative, but it could complement any research done on the ‘rhythmic’ aspect of Gamble’s framework extensively. Although in chapter 2.5 I focused mostly on the differences between the ‘phenomenological’ approach employed by Gamble in studying the Release from proximity as contrasted to the cognitivist approach, I also suggested that both approaches could be mutually beneficial for the same cause. Here, I think, such an opportunity puts itself to the fore.

Finally, a simplified model for studying the release from proximity is illustrated in figure 3.2 (p.41). Importantly is that not all elements have to be accounted for qua data in order to establish the existence of the release from proximity. If a place is properly shown to have existed, then RfP is verified, but for that place only. However, places bear relationships to other locales through paths and tracks. Here, zooming out, the social landscape enlarges the picture

drastically. I would argue that verifying its existence is harder data-wise than in comparison to the place, but it is much more efficient in showing the scope of the release from proximity as a social disposition in a region. The ‘enhanced’ rhythms lastly, although hard to account for by mere lithic data, might be applied to a greater scale than the social landscape if successfully verified, if what is addressed is not lithic distribution, but cognitive capacity.

4. Conclusion