In Techno-logic & technology, Éric Boëda argues for a shift in our approach to stone tool analysis. Highlighting the failure of current methodologies to reach the human element at the heart of every tool’s production and use, he laments how stone tool analysts continue to be reduced to pigeonholing artefacts rather than understanding them as part of the trajectories of ongoing technological lineages. Though we have seen an evolution from typological methodologies to our current technological approaches grounded in the chaîne opératoire, Boëda argues that we continue to fall into the trap of naturalising the objects we recover—attempting to understand them as instruments in service of a goal. Instead, we must view them as structured objects that incorporate a multiplicity of uses, not only in terms of functionality but also, at times, symbology. By studying and understanding the structure of these objects, we can begin to understand how they are related via lineages; through these lineages we can begin to identify and understand evolution in structure that links tools together through time.

Boëda’s thesis comprises three sections. The introduction and epistemological approach lay the groundwork of his argument. The second section—‘The techno-logic of evolution’—describes how such an approach can be operationalised. It draws on both functional analyses and an understanding of production processes, integrating these with a philosophy of technology that aims to understand tools holistically, considering ergonomic considerations, context and chronology, and situating these in terms of the totality of an assemblage, for “an object only exists and can only be defined within the technical assemblage to which it belongs” (p.127). Approaches to the study/analysis of flake products, retouched tools and cores are explored in detail, with six classificatory types (A–F, plus sub-types) proposed for core working strategies—Boëda acknowledges that he creates types akin to the methodologies he criticises, but argues that these go beyond mere comparison, striving to “come as close as possible to the structural characteristics of each object” (p.150). The third section provides an example of his approach in action, exploring the techno-functional context and evolution of blade industries within the Near East. In doing so, he develops a ‘paleo-history’ of the manufacturing processes, describing how regional technological variability can be analysed to understand how the technological potential of the blade emerges gradually, and describes a lineage in methods of production that can be the “only response to the evolutionary potential of blades as a support for tools” (p.155).

Boëda summarises the theories that underpin his approach in his conclusion, drawing on Henri Bergson’s philosophy of the relationship between body and mind to describe how objects are “the interface between the subject and the environment” (p.198) and repositories of epiphylogenetic memory. This memory may exist in living memory, or may be fragmented or lost entirely; it is the latter case for many of the objects produced in the Pleistocene. This section presents the best account of Boëda’s thought processes; it would perhaps have been better to see some of this woven into the opening sections to better ground the reader in advance of the book’s core arguments. It is also this part of the book that may have broader appeal to those studying material culture in its wider forms.

Though it must be praised for providing an approach that strives to recentre the human element within tool production and use, the text does suffer, as many philosophically orientated approaches can, in being semantically complex. It pays to read the text extremely closely to fully comprehend it. At the same time, it forces the reader to reflect on the semantics of their own studies, demonstrating how attributions and descriptions of artefacts can introduce flawed understanding—perhaps a defined lexicon for referring to techno-functional attributes is required. Boëda, however, does not go so far to define this explicitly.

Originally published in 2013, this edition marks its translation into English for the first time, masterfully undertaken by Michael Chazan. It opens with a brief but insightful interview between the author and translator, revealing how Boëda’s career in medicine prior to archaeology has in part directed his philosophy of technology. The volume’s publication in English, however, does brings with it several failings in comparison with the original French edition. It is assumed that many of these must be placed at the feet of the publisher. The decision to move all the footnotes to endnotes is the most egregious; much of the information contained within these underpins or further explains the theoretical arguments within the main text, forcing the reader to constantly flick back and forth between the two. Meanwhile, the table of contents has been reformatted to the point of being practically unusable, compared to the clearly defined subheadings of the original. The figures have, thankfully, transitioned mostly unscathed, though the use of greyscale throughout removes the colour imagery of the previous edition that provided additional interpretive value to the diacritical illustrations and some of the more abstracted explanatory diagrams.

Despite these issues, this volume has much to be lauded. It brings Boëda’s 20-plus years of research and experience in studying stone tools to a wider audience, and formulates an approach that seeks to reintegrate the human into our study of objects. His analytical methodology allows us to better understand the tools we recover from the archaeological record as dynamic and complex structured systems that are constructed out of myriad factors. The book builds upon previous philosophical approaches to the evolution of technology, such as those of André Leroi-Gourhan and Gilbert Simendon, to provide an original heuristic methodology through which objects that fall outside of our lived and historical memories can be interpreted more fully. While explicitly focused on stone tool technologies, the theoretical underpinnings of Boëda’s approach will be of interest to those studying all forms of technology for which there are limited to no modern analogues.