A Comment on Curren's “Potential Interpretations of ‘Stone Gorget’ Function”

Abstract

Curren (1977) presents an interesting and provocative hypothesis regarding the “potential” function of “stone gorgets.” Nevertheless, there are some serious problems with his thesis that require comment.Initially, there is a danger in the rather simplistic association drawn between form and function. To claim a functional similarity because there is a morphological similarity between stone gorgets and contemporary ceramic tools called “ribs” is a risky procedure. One does not need to go very far to demonstrate analogous examples. For instance, if I were to show a surveyor a stone “plummet,” I would most likely elicit the response, “ a surveyor’s plummet in stone?” If I were to present an unsuspecting archaeologist with a surveyor’s plummet, I might hear, “plummets (net sinkers or bolas] in brass?” In contrast to the paper under disucssion, Ahler’s (1971) important study is a sophisticated treatment of the problems involved in equating form with function.