Technical Skills

  • Valentine Roux


Chapter 5 complements the analysis of technical traditions by dealing with skills involved in forming techniques and degrees of expertise. Skills are remarkable markers of learning niches and networks for characterizing social groups as well as technical changes. Research on the expertise theme addresses the question of skill variability through markers significant of manufacturing difficulties, execution awkwardness, or motor habits. These markers aim to assess indirectly the skill investment, the rate of ceramic production, or the organization of craft production (learners versus experts, domestic versus specialized, size of workshops). The necessary interdisciplinary dimension of skill-related studies is emphasized, and the methodology is exposed, with a view to validating hypotheses.


Technical skills Learning Apprenticeship Expertise Forming difficulties Skill variability Standardization Individual style Field experiments 


  1. Arcellin-Pradelle, C., & Laubenheimer, F. (1982). Une mission d’archéo-ethnologie: les ateliers de potiers traditionnels dans les provinces de Valencia et de Castellon (Espagne). Techniques et Technologie. Sources Documentaires 5. Institut de Recherches Méditerranéennes, Université de Provence, 27–56.Google Scholar
  2. Arcellin-Pradelle, C., & Laubenheimer, F. (1985). La notion de série de production en céramique tournée. Techniques et Technologie. Sources Documentaires. Institut de Recherches Méditerranéennes, Université de Provence, 129–139.Google Scholar
  3. Arnold, D., & Nieves, A. L. (1992). Factors affecting ceramic standardization. In G. J. Bey III & C. A. Pool (Eds.), Ceramic production and distribution: An integrated approach (pp. 113–214). Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  4. Benco, N. L. (1988). Morphological standardization: An approach to the study of craft specialization. In C. Kolb & L. Lackey (Eds.), A pot for all reasons: Ceramic ecology revisited (pp. 57–72). Philadelphia: Temple University.Google Scholar
  5. Blackman, M. J., Stein, G. J., & Vandiver, P. B. (1993). The standardization hypothesis and ceramic mass production: Technological, compositional and metrix indexes of craft specialization at Tell Leilan, Syria. American Antiquity, 58, 60–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bril, B. (1984). Description du geste technique: quelles méthodes? Techniques & Culture, 3, 81–96.Google Scholar
  7. Bril, B. (1991). Les gestes de percussion: analyse d’un mouvement technique. In D. Chevallier (Ed.), Savoir-faire et Pouvoir transmettre. Transmission et apprentissage des savoir-faire et des techniques (pp. 61–80). Paris: Editions de la Maisons des Sciences de l’Homme.Google Scholar
  8. Bril, B. (2002). L’apprentissage de gestes techniques: ordre de contraintes et variations culturelles. In B. Bril & V. Roux (Eds.), Le geste technique. Réflexions méthodologiques et anthropologiques (pp. 113–150. Technologies/ Idéologies/ Pratiques). Ramonville Saint-Agne: Editions érès.Google Scholar
  9. Bril, B. (2011). Retour sur «Description du geste technique». Techniques & Culture, 54–55, 242–244.Google Scholar
  10. Bril, B. (2015). Learning to use tools: A functional approach to action. In L. Filletaz & S. Billet (Eds.), Learning through and for practice: Contributions from francophone perspectives (pp. 95–118). Cham: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bril, B., & Goasdoué, R. (2009). Du mouvement sans sens ou du sens sans mouvement: rôle des finalités et des contextes dans l’étude des comportements moteurs. Intellectica, 51, 27–23.Google Scholar
  12. Bril, B., Roux, V., & Dietrich, G. (2005). Stone knapping: Khambhat (India), a unique opportunity? In V. Roux & B. Bril (Eds.), Stone knapping: The necessary conditions for a uniquely hominin behaviour (pp. 53–72). Cambridge: Mc Donald Institute for Archaeological Research.Google Scholar
  13. Bril, B., Smaers, J., Steele, J., Rein, R., Nonaka, T., Dietrich, G., Biryukova, E., Hirata, S., & Roux, V. (2012). Functional mastery of percussive technology in nut-cracking and stone-flaking actions: Experimental comparison and implications for the evolution of the human brain. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 367, 59–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Budden, S. (2008). Skill amongst the sherds: Understanding the role of skill in the early to late middle bronze age in Hungary. In I. Berg (Ed.), Breaking the Mould (pp. 1–17). Oxford: Archaeopress.Google Scholar
  15. Caiger-Smith, A. (1995). Pottery, people and time. Somerset: Richard Dennis.Google Scholar
  16. Colomer, E. (1995). Pràctiques socials de manufactura ceràmica: anàlisis morfomètriques i tecnològiques al sud-est de la Península Ibérica, 2200–1500 cal ane. Barcelona: Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.Google Scholar
  17. Costin, C. L. (1991). Craft specialization: Issues in defining, documenting and explaining the organization of production. In M. B. Schiffer (Ed.), Archaeological method and theory (Vol. 3, pp. 1–56). Tucson: The University of Arizona Press.Google Scholar
  18. Costin, C. L. (2000). The use of ethnoarchaeology for the archaeological study of ceramic production. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 7(4), 377–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Costin, C. L., & Hagstrum, M. B. (1995). Standardization, labor investment, skill, and the organization of ceramic production in late prehispanic highland Peru. American Antiquity, 60(4), 619–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Crown, P. L. (2001). Learning to make pottery in the Prehispanic American Southwest. Journal of Anthropological Research, 57, 451–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Crown, P. L. (2007). Life histories of pots and potters: Situating the individual in archaeology. American Antiquity, 72, 677–690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Crown, P. L. (2014). The archaeology of crafts learning: Becoming a Potter in the Puebloan Southwest. Annual Review of Anthropology, 43, 71–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Eerkens, J. W., & Bettinger, R. L. (2001). Techniques for assessing standardization in artifact assemblages: Can we scale material variability? American Antiquity, 66, 493–504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ericson, K. A., & Lehman, A. C. (1996). Expert and exceptional performance: Evidence from maximal adaptation to task constraints. Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 273–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gandon, E. (2014). To what extent do traditional motor skills reveal a cultural model? Field experiments with expert French and Indian potters. Annales de la Fondation Fyssen, 29, 47–68.Google Scholar
  26. Gandon, E., Casanova, R., Sainton, P., Coyle, T., Roux, V., Bril, B., & Bootsma, R. J. (2011). A proxy of potters’ throwing skill: Ceramic vessels considered in terms of mechanical stress. Journal of Archaeological Science, 38, 1080–1089.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gandon, E., Coyle, T., Bootsma, R. J., Roux, V., & Endler, J. A. (2018). Individuals amongst the pots: How do traditional ceramic shapes vary between potters? Ecological Psychology, 31, 1–15. Scholar
  28. Gelbert, A. (1997). De l’élaboration au tour au tournage sur motte: difficultés motrices et conceptuelles. Techniques et cultures, 30, 1–23.Google Scholar
  29. Gelbert, A. (2003). Traditions céramiques et emprunts techniques dans la vallée du fleuve Sénégal. Ceramic traditions and technical borrowings in the Senegal River Valley. Paris: Editions de la Maison des sciences de l’homme, Editions Epistèmes.Google Scholar
  30. Grenier, J. Y., Grignon, C., & Menger, P. M. (2001). Le Modèle et le Récit. Paris: Editions de la MSH.Google Scholar
  31. Kamp, K. A. (2001). Prehistoric children working and playing: A southwestern case study in learning ceramics. Journal of Anthropological Research, 57, 427–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kvamme, K. L., Stark, M. T., & Longacre, W. A. (1996). Alternative procedures for assessing standardization in ceramic assemblages. American Antiquity, 61(1), 116–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. London, G. A. (1991). Standardization and variation in the work of craft specialists. In W. A. Longacre (Ed.), Ceramic Ethnoarchaeology (pp. 182–204). Tucson: The University of Arizona Press.Google Scholar
  34. Longacre, W. A. (1991). Sources of ceramic variability among the Kalinga of Northern Luzon. In W. A. Longacre (Ed.), Ceramic Ethnoarchaeology (pp. 95–110). Tucson: The University of Arizona press.Google Scholar
  35. Longacre, W. A. (1999). Standardization and specialization: What’s the link? In J. M. Skibo & G. M. Feinman (Eds.), Pottery and people: A dynamic interaction (pp. 44–58). Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.Google Scholar
  36. Longacre, W. A., Kvamme, K. L., & Kobayashi, M. (1988). Southwestern pottery standardization: An ethnoarchaeological view from the Philippines. Kiva, 53, 101–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mayor, A. (2010). Traditions céramiques dans la boucle du Niger. Ethnoarchéologie et histoire du peuplement au temps des empires précoloniaux (Journal of African Archaeology Monographs Series 7). Frankfurt am Main: Africa Magna Verlag.Google Scholar
  38. Minar, C. J., & Crown, P. L. (2001). Learning and craft production: An introduction. Journal of Anthropological Research, 57, 369–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Newell, K. M. (1986). Constraints on the development of coordination. In M. G. Wade & H. T. A. Whiting (Eds.), Motor skill acquisition. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  40. Olivier de Sardan, J. P. (1988). Jeu de la croyance et “je” ethnologique: exotisme religieux et ethno-égo-centrisme. Cahiers d’Etudes Africaines, 28, 527–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Parry, R., Dietrich, G., & Bril, B. (2014). Tool use ability depends on understanding of functional dynamics and not specific joint contribution profiles. Frontiers in Psychology, 5(306), 1–15.Google Scholar
  42. Reed, E. S. (1988). Applying the theory of action systems to research to the study of motor skills. Advances in Psychology, 50, 45–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Reed, E. S., & Bril, B. (1996). The primacy of action in development. A commentary of N. Bernstein. In M. Latash (Ed.), Dexterity and its development (pp. 431–451). Hillsdale: Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  44. Rein, R., Nonaka, T., & Bril, B. (2014). Movement pattern variability in stone knapping: Implications for the development of percussive traditions. PLoS One, 9, e113567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Rice, P. (1991). Specialization, standardization and diversity: A retrospective. In R. L. Bishop & F. W. Lange (Eds.), The ceramic legacy of Anna O. Shepard (pp. 257–279). Boulder, Colorado: University Press of Colorado.Google Scholar
  46. Rice, P. M. (1984). Change and conservatism in pottery-producing systems. In The many dimensions of pottery. Ceramics in archaeology and anthropology (pp. 231–288). Amsterdam: Universiteit van Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  47. Roux, V. (1989). Development of a taxonomy to measure throwing difficulties of prehistorical and protohistorical ceramic vessels. In The Potter’s wheel. Craft specialization and technical competence (pp. 93–145). New Delhi: Oxford and IBH publishing.Google Scholar
  48. Roux, V. (1990). The psychological analysis of technical activities: A contribution to the study of craft specialization. Archaeological Review from Cambridge, 9, 142–153.Google Scholar
  49. Roux, V. (1997). Archéologie et cognition : habiletés impliquées dans les techniques du passé. Journal des Anthropologues, 70., Anthropologie et cognition, 51–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Roux, V. (2003a). A dynamic systems framework for studying technological change: Application to the emergence of the potter’s wheel in the southern Levant. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 10, 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Roux, V. (2003b). Ceramic standardization and intensity of production: Quantifying degrees of specialization. American Antiquity, 68, 768–782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Roux, V. (2009). The potter’s wheel in Middle Bronze II in the Southern Levant: Technological study of the Beth Shean ceramics. The Arkeotek Journal ( ), 3.
  53. Roux, V. (2012). Pour une étude des habiletés techniques selon une approche interdisciplinaire. In S. de Beaune & H. P. Francfort (Eds.), L’archéologie à découvert (pp. 99–104). Paris: CNRS Editions.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Roux, V. (2015). Cultural transmission, migration and plain wheel made pottery in the MB II Southern Levant. In C. Glatz (Ed.), Plain pottery traditions of the Eastern Mediterranean and near east. Production, use, and social significance (pp. 69–90). Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press.Google Scholar
  55. Roux, V., & Bril, B. (2002a). Observation et expérimentation de terrain: des collaborations fructueuses pour l’analyse de l’expertise technique. Le cas de la taille de pierre en Inde. In B. Bril & V. Roux (Eds.), Le geste technique. Réflexions méthodologiques et anthropologiques (pp. 29–48. Technologies/ Idéologies/ Pratiques). Ramonville Saint-Agne: Editions érès.Google Scholar
  56. Roux, V., & Bril, B. (2002b). Des “programmes” d’apprentissage comparables pour des actions techniques différentes. In B. Bril & V. Roux (Eds.), Le geste technique. Réflexions méthodologiques et anthropologiques (pp. 231–242. Technologies/ Idéologies/ Pratiques). Ramonville Saint-Agne: Editions érès.Google Scholar
  57. Roux, V., Bril, B., & Dietrich, G. (1995). Skills and learning difficulties involved in stone knapping: The case of stone-bead knapping in Khambhat, India. World Archaeology, 27, 63–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Roux, V., & Corbetta, D. (1989). Wheel-throwing technique and craft specialization. In The Potter’s wheel. Craft specialization and technical competence (pp. 1–91). New Delhi: Oxford and IBH Publishing.Google Scholar
  59. Roux, V., & Karasik, A. (2018). Standardized vessels and number of potters: Looking for individual production. In J. Vukovic & I. Miloglav (Eds.), Artisans rule: Product standardization and craft specialization in prehistoric society (pp. 20–39). Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
  60. Stark, B. L. (1995a). Problems in analysis of standardization and specialization in pottery. In B. Mills & P. L. Crown (Eds.), Ceramic production in the American Southwest (pp. 231–267). Tucson: University of Arizona Press.Google Scholar
  61. Stark, M. T. (1995b). Economic intensification and ceramic specialization in the Philippines: A view from Kalinga. Research in Economic Anthropology, 16, 179–226.Google Scholar
  62. Vitelli, K. D. (1989). Were pots first made for foods ? Doubts from Franchti. World Archaeology, 21, 17–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Vitelli, K. D. (1993). Franchti Neolithic pottery. Vol. 1. Bloomington/Indianapolis: Indian University Press.Google Scholar
  64. Warnier, J. P. (2001). A praxeological approach to subjectivation in a material world. Journal of Material Culture, 6(1), 5–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Valentine Roux
    • 1
  1. 1.Préhistoire & Technologie, UMR 7055French National Centre for Scientific ResearchNanterreFrance

Personalised recommendations