Quakers and Shakers

me and my obsidian handaxe in Rosengarten

Any flintknapper will tell you that transforming a hunk of stone into something that looks like one of the bifaces, blades or points found in the archaeological record is a time consuming and challenging process. Why is it then that the hominins of the Acheulian and Mousterian industries were interested in devoting so much time and energy to crafting highly-symmetrical, homogeneous handaxes when it was much easier to produce flakes or notches/denticulates, which were often acceptable substitutes for handaxes?

Archaeologists Kohn and Mithen (1999) propose that handaxes were so common at Middle Paleolithic sites because they “were products of sexual selection: they were used as reliable indicators of a potential mate’s quality by those of the opposite sex” (Kohn and Mithen 1999: 524).

Though this paper is a prime example of post-processualism gone terribly, gut-wrenchingly wrong, Kohn and Mithen have hit on percussed a rather important point about human sexual selection: we are totally into people who make cool shit. It may seem fairly obvious, but I suspect that explicitly identifying and harnessing the power of craftiness may be a real boon for those attempting to attract mates. Read more…

Relationships flintknapping, handaxes, Mousterian Industry, sexual selection