Yeah, those arrowheads look unusual and nice, very nice. It may be just that, a lot of people prefer form rather than function, there is no reason to believe our past ancestors had precisely 0 aesthetics. Or something else, who knows.
Arrow/spear points are different than watches. You dont throw your watch at squirrles when you are hungry. You dont risk your watch smashing into bits when you miss the squirrel and hit a rock. The fact these points were dimensionally similar to other materials means they were less objects of reverance and more likely actual weapon points and thus somewhat disposable.
You're being sarcastic, but aren't you accidentally right? Swiss watchmaking started because local bible-thumpers banned jewelry but made an exception for watches, thus creating demand for watches that fill the role of jewelry. Once established, the industry maintains itself.
Perhaps "symbolic significance" could simply by about signifying "I'm good at knapping cool looking material" or "I had enough resources to trade for this hard to knap tool". The symbol of status/skill, essentially. People like to show off.
Neither the article nor the backing paper discussed made any such definite claim.
Many casual readers confuse statements such as
"which *may* have had symbolic or ritual significance."
with meaning "this absolutely had to do with (a) religion" when no such thing is intended.
Attribution of potential cause of inferred behaviour to "ritual" is a long standing practice in archaeology; it's code for "we don't know" and covers all manner of things that may simply have developed as habit over years, may have unknown and non supernatural causes / motivations, etc.
Ritual may also have practical/non-supernatural motivations that were simply incorrect. We do lots of things that we think are good practical things that, years later, we learn were mistakes. Uranium and radiation as a cure-all was a mistake. Dig up a 1950s house and one might think the uranium devices were kept for "ritual" when in fact they were kept for thier mistaken health benefits.
It is like the go to explanation for things they don't have an answer to. What if the quartz arrow head was just a status symbol or was traded as a luxury item?
Could it be that relatively few quartz arrowheads were made, but that disproportionately many of them survived to have been subsequently discovered? Survivorship bias.
This is what I would bet on. If you spent decades of your life knapping various "easy" and ideal stones for tools and getting quite skilled at it, it doesn't seem like much of a stretch for them to try knapping a "difficult" stone just because it looks cooler and you can show it off.
Given I've spent the last few weeks teaching myself CAD and completely designing a custom 3d printed racking system for my consumer networking gear from scratch, I would like to think that "I decided to do this ostensibly stupid and pointlessly difficult thing for a minor aesthetic improvement even when a blatantly easier (and possibly better) option is available" is a valid reason for humans to do things.
Besides, that green quartz crystal is beautiful. If you can only afford to carry a limited number of objects then I personally would try to find a way to turn it into an object I can hold, use, and admire every day.
Why do the Swiss people continue to make timepieces in the difficult mechanical form, when making quartz movements would be easier and cheaper?
Must be religious reasons. Maybe they serve a purpose in rituals by Swiss shaman.
Anthropologists have no creativity.
> may have had symbolic or ritual significance.
I think is a fair description of Swiss mechanical watches.
They are certainly not of practical significance.
Yeah, those arrowheads look unusual and nice, very nice. It may be just that, a lot of people prefer form rather than function, there is no reason to believe our past ancestors had precisely 0 aesthetics. Or something else, who knows.
Arrow/spear points are different than watches. You dont throw your watch at squirrles when you are hungry. You dont risk your watch smashing into bits when you miss the squirrel and hit a rock. The fact these points were dimensionally similar to other materials means they were less objects of reverance and more likely actual weapon points and thus somewhat disposable.
You're being sarcastic, but aren't you accidentally right? Swiss watchmaking started because local bible-thumpers banned jewelry but made an exception for watches, thus creating demand for watches that fill the role of jewelry. Once established, the industry maintains itself.
I'm always suspicious of "it was religious" claims in archeology.
Perhaps "symbolic significance" could simply by about signifying "I'm good at knapping cool looking material" or "I had enough resources to trade for this hard to knap tool". The symbol of status/skill, essentially. People like to show off.
Neither the article nor the backing paper discussed made any such definite claim.
Many casual readers confuse statements such as
with meaning "this absolutely had to do with (a) religion" when no such thing is intended.Attribution of potential cause of inferred behaviour to "ritual" is a long standing practice in archaeology; it's code for "we don't know" and covers all manner of things that may simply have developed as habit over years, may have unknown and non supernatural causes / motivations, etc.
Ritual may also have practical/non-supernatural motivations that were simply incorrect. We do lots of things that we think are good practical things that, years later, we learn were mistakes. Uranium and radiation as a cure-all was a mistake. Dig up a 1950s house and one might think the uranium devices were kept for "ritual" when in fact they were kept for thier mistaken health benefits.
It is like the go to explanation for things they don't have an answer to. What if the quartz arrow head was just a status symbol or was traded as a luxury item?
Could it be that relatively few quartz arrowheads were made, but that disproportionately many of them survived to have been subsequently discovered? Survivorship bias.
Because it looks cool!
This is what I would bet on. If you spent decades of your life knapping various "easy" and ideal stones for tools and getting quite skilled at it, it doesn't seem like much of a stretch for them to try knapping a "difficult" stone just because it looks cooler and you can show it off.
Exactly. Same reason kids and people today are drawn to it and gems in general. Even today, people imbue crystals with mystical properties.
Given I've spent the last few weeks teaching myself CAD and completely designing a custom 3d printed racking system for my consumer networking gear from scratch, I would like to think that "I decided to do this ostensibly stupid and pointlessly difficult thing for a minor aesthetic improvement even when a blatantly easier (and possibly better) option is available" is a valid reason for humans to do things.
Besides, that green quartz crystal is beautiful. If you can only afford to carry a limited number of objects then I personally would try to find a way to turn it into an object I can hold, use, and admire every day.
When future humans find your cad files they are going to wonder why you would do it like this, and then probably settle on religious reasons
There goes Peter with his fancy quartz points does he think he is better than us?