Technology and Terminology of Knapped Stone - IRIT

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Fig. 36 — Refitting. Centripetal Levallois debitage : at least five Levallois flakes were produced, one of which was retouched into a scraper. Mousterian, flint, Berigoule, Vaucluse (Brugal et a/., 1994). 95
techniques and methods, which can be inferred from knapping products 85 8 6 . At Meer II , in the absence of preserved living floors, it is owing to the numerous refits that the spatial organization of the campsite was finally understood. Refitting, now almost systematically practised, is essential to the deciphering of surface sites in particular 87 . Thanks to this method, J. Tixier was able to demonstrate the unity of a large Neolithic surface settlement in a desert setting, at Bordj Mellala (Algeria), which at first sight could have been considered as a juxtaposition of distinct sites. By plotting objects on a plan, carrying out refits of ostrich eggs and lithics, and subsequently analysing the spatial patterning of the refits, he showed that the "sites" actually represented different activity areas within a single occupation 88 . Recently, this method allowed socio-economic inferences to be made concerning two Magdalenian occupation units at Etiolles in the Paris Basin 89 , after confirmation that they were indeed contemporary. A step was thus taken, which makes it possible, through the unravelling of intentions, to propose a type of social organization in an Upper Palaeolithic culture. Refits are also necessary to answer such questions as : - is there a relationship between particular cores and particular types of tools ? - were tools (or tool blanks) knapped in advance, or as needed ? The other contributions of this method are mainly verifications : - what debitage or retouching operations were carried out on the actual site ? - what is the relationship between the categories of debitage products associated with the different stages of the knapping process (roughing out, shaping out, initial / optimal / final phase of debitage), and the types of tools? In other words, what - in terms of the differential management of debitage products - is the aim of each operation? Because the morphology of the blanks has often been severely modified by retouch, it is not easy to answer the question without resorting to conjoining and refitting; - was the transformation, resharpening and re-use of broken pieces a common phenomenon? Was this done randomly or systematically? Depending on the amount of raw material available, was it used sparingly or not? Such riddles can be solved by conjoining several tools, or tools and their characteristic waste products, by matching fragments of a single blank, by fitting a blank on another blank or on a core; - how many blocks were needed to produce the tools, and which items were brought to the campsite as finished end-products? It can turn out (and this is only discovered through refitting) that two types of rocks, which appear to differ in colour, grain or patina, actually come from the same block. Conjoining and refitting are time-consuming procedures, which require an in-depth knowledge of knapping techniques; the meticulous observation involved also guarantees a more accurate reading of lithics. The many results acheived through systematic refitting over the last few years have highlighted the relevance and potential of the method, which must be applied within the context of well defined research strategies and to appropriate archaeological sites. 2. Knapping experiment s The experimental knapping of hard rocks should not be undertaken for the purpose of "reproducing" aesthetically pleasing prehistoric objects for exhibition or sale. We are not dealing here with "replication" but with a scientific approach, and our concern is not copying but understanding. Experimental knapping is an analogic process, which has the advantage of showing an affinity with test experiments. Indeed, it seemed possible a few years ago to repeat an experiment as often as necessary 90 , while changing a single parameter, such as the position, the motion, the 85 Cahen et aU 1980. 86 Van Noten et al, 1978. 87 Audouze, Cahen, 1982. 88 Tixier et aU 1976b. 89 Pigeot, 1987; Olive, 1988. 90 Tixier, Inizan, Roche, 1980. 96
Page 1 and 2:
Technology and Terminology of Knapp
Page 3 and 4:
In the same collection Préhistoire
Page 5 and 6:
Authors Marie-Louise Inizan*, Mich
Page 7 and 8:
Chapter 4 : Debitage 59 The core De
Page 9 and 10:
List o f illustration s Fig. 1 Raw
Page 12:
Foreword Many students and research
Page 15 and 16:
Why? Technology has its place withi
Page 17 and 18:
In blade debitage 17 , for instance
Page 20 and 21:
Chapter 1 Raw material s Knapped ha
Page 22 and 23:
2. Knappin g suitability o f hard r
Page 24 and 25:
• A single block of raw material
Page 26 and 27:
Raw material procuremen t strategie
Page 28:
unmodified block roughed ou t or pr
Page 31 and 32:
Knapping, shaping, flaking, retouch
Page 33 and 34:
could not be reached with such othe
Page 35 and 36:
ipples, hackles (see p. 142). Parad
Page 37 and 38:
• Languette 31 breaks occurring o
Page 39 and 40:
- distinguish intentional from unin
Page 41 and 42:
Fig. 9 — Blade debitage carried o
Page 44 and 45:
Chapter 3 Shaping We use the term s
Page 46 and 47: to another in the course of roughin
Page 48 and 49: Fig. 13 — Example of bifacial sha
Page 50 and 51: aspects be from now on taken into c
Page 52 and 53: Polyhedral and spheroidal shaping a
Page 54 and 55: Fig. 18 — Preforms. 1 : experimen
Page 56 and 57: (fig. 18 : 3), using indirect percu
Page 58: As a rule, the part played by shapi
Page 61 and 62: study should not be dissociated fro
Page 63 and 64: Fig. 21 62 1 — Relatively simple
Page 65 and 66: Fig. 22 — Volumetric representati
Page 67 and 68: 66 Fig. 23 — Levallois debitage o
Page 69 and 70: 1. Recurrent unipolar Levallois met
Page 71 and 72: 0 1 2 3 9 Fig. 26 — Various examp
Page 73 and 74: 72 Fig. 28 — Phonolite cleaver on
Page 75 and 76: In the repeated production of blade
Page 77 and 78: Indirect percussion Strangely enoug
Page 79 and 80: Fig. 31 — Pressure debitage of bl
Page 81 and 82: method was invented in a Sibero-Mon
Page 83 and 84: These seven characteristics, as wel
Page 85 and 86: If the microburin blow has removed
Page 87 and 88: Fig. 34 — Various examples of spe
Page 90 and 91: Chapter 6 Technology a s a means to
Page 92 and 93: 1. Observation o f surface conditio
Page 94 and 95: 3. Framework fo r th e readin g o f
Page 98 and 99: hammer, the stability of the core o
Page 100 and 101: Only the major milestones in the co
Page 102 and 103: Chapter 7 0 I ~"~2 3 4 o Graphic re
Page 104 and 105: 103 Fig. 37 — Acheulean handaxe,
Page 106 and 107: Fig. 39 — Pressure-flaked bladele
Page 108 and 109: Fig. 41 — Examples of orientation
Page 110 and 111: 1 I Fig. 43 — Two layouts of view
Page 112 and 113: 4. Graphi c desig n an d techniqu e
Page 114 and 115: Fig. 46 — Tracing the outline and
Page 116 and 117: Fig. 47 — Uncompleted laurel leaf
Page 118 and 119: Fig. 48 — Graphical treatment of
Page 120 and 121: Fig. 50 — Large convex Mousterian
Page 122 and 123: 6. Symbol s Although multiple views
Page 124 and 125: Clean breaks are indicated by two s
Page 126 and 127: Fig. 54 — Schematic representatio
Page 128: indicated by numbered arrows. The p
Page 131 and 132: ANVIL. A block of relatively hard s
Page 133 and 134: produced at the very moment the fla
Page 135 and 136: Fig. 60 — Inclination of a burin
Page 137 and 138: Fig. 62 — Various types of butts.
Page 139 and 140: If the morphology of the raw materi
Page 141 and 142: 7 8 9 11 1 2 13 1 4 1 5 Fig. 65 —
Page 143 and 144: - or from a cobble, a slab, a core,
Page 145 and 146: INVERSE. A term defining a position
Page 147 and 148:
distinguish the types of certain to
Page 149 and 150:
Fig. 72 — The stone-knapper's set
Page 151 and 152:
5 Fig. 74 — Various examples of p
Page 153 and 154:
1 2 3 Fig. 75 — Position of remov
Page 155 and 156:
0 1 cm Fig. 78 — Proximal fragmen
Page 157 and 158:
conventionally applied to "the fash
Page 160 and 161:
AKAZAWA T., ODA S., YAMANAKA I. 198
Page 162 and 163:
CRABTREE D.E. 1966 A stone worker's
Page 164 and 165:
LAPLACE G. 1964 Essai de typologie
Page 166 and 167:
SEMENOV S. A. 1964 Prehistoric tech
Page 168:
Multilingual vocabulary
Page 171 and 172:
pressure platfor m : proximal: f i
Page 173 and 174:
ENGLISH : FRENCH abrasion : abrasio
Page 175 and 176:
Levallois (méthode, éclat, etc.)
Page 177 and 178:
punctiform : punktförmi g refittin
Page 179 and 180:
ENGLISH : GREEK translated by A. Mo
Page 181 and 182:
epiklinήV (epexergasίa) : low ang
Page 183 and 184:
punch : punzone punctiform : puntif
Page 185 and 186:
ENGLISH : PORTUGUESE translated by
Page 187 and 188:
face : fac e faceta: buri n face t
Page 189 and 190:
pressure platform : plano de presi
Page 192:
LOUIS-JEAN avenue d'Embrun, 05003 G
show all

Technology and Terminology of Knapped Stone - IRIT

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?