No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Backed lithic artifacts are an important part of the Upper Paleolithic tool kit, and are often among the most abundant categories of lithic tools found at Magdalenian and Gravettian sites. Often these tools are exclusively referred to as projectiles, and indeed many – if not most – backed pieces may have been parts of composite projectile heads, mounted laterally onto organic points (e.g., Allain and Descouts 1957; Allain 1979; Abramova 1982; Bergman and Newcomer 1983; Leroi­ Gourhan 1983; Plisson 1985; Nuzhnyi 1993; Christensen and Valentin 2004; Sano 2009; Langlais 2010; Araujo­Igreja 2011; Tomasso et al. 2018). Experiments of varying comprehensiveness concerned with the use of (Magdalenian) backed pieces as projectile inserts have confirmed the effectivity of this setup (e.g., Moss and Newcomer 1982; Pétillon et al. 2011; Gauvrit Roux et al. 2020). However, backed pieces sometimes also served other purposes like cutting, sawing, shaving, scraping or perforating (Moss and Newcomer 1982; Moss 1983; Owen 1988; Piel­Desruisseaux 1998; Christensen and Valentin 2004; Taller et al. 2012). The modular technological system involving these lithic artifacts is highly versatile, mobile and dynamic as there are numerous possibilities of use and as the small lithic inserts are easy to transport and the composite tools themselves are easy to maintain and repair. Here, we present the results of an experiment where different tasks were carried out using backed pieces hafted in a wooden handle or operated handheld. The design of the handles loosely follows examples found at Canadian Dorset sites where bladelets comparable in size to Magdalenian backed pieces were hafted and used as knives (Owen 1988, 88ff.). We tried out the tools in various activities (cutting, perforating and carving/whittling) on a set of worked materials (wood, antler, marine shell, smoked meat, dried, semi­tanned hide, and tanned leather). After the completion of these tasks, the applicability, durability and usefulness of the setup were evaluated and the lithic inserts were checked microscopically for use­wear traces.

No abstract

No abstract

Projectile technology is commonly viewed as a significant contributor to past human subsistence and, consequently, to our evolution. Due to the allegedly central role of projectile weapons in the food-getting strategies of Upper Palaeolithic people, typo-technological changes in the European lithic record have often been linked to supposed developments in hunting weaponry. Yet, relatively little reliable functional data is currently available that would aid the detailed reconstruction of past weapon designs. In this paper, we take a use-wear approach to the backed tool assemblages from the Recent and Final Gravettian layers (Levels 3 and 2) of Abri Pataud (Dordogne, France). Our use of strict projectile identification criteria relying on combinations of low and high magnification features and our critical view of the overlap between production and use-related fractures permitted us to confidently identify a large number of used armatures in both collections. By isolating lithic projectiles with the strongest evidence of impact and by recording wear attributes on them in detail, we could establish that the hunting equipment used during the Level 3 occupations involved both lithic weapon tips and composite points armed with lithic inserts. By contrast, the Level 2 assemblage reflects a heavy reliance on composite points in hunting reindeer and other game. Instead of an entirely new weapon design, the Level 2 collection therefore marks a shift in weapon preferences. Using recent faunal data, we discuss the significance of the observed diachronic change from the point of view of prey choice, seasonality, and social organisation of hunting activities. Our analysis shows that to understand their behavioural significance, typo-technological changes in the lithic record must be viewed in the light of functional data and detailed contextual information.