A faltering origin for the Acheulean? Technological and cognitive implications from FLK West (Olduvai Gorge, Tanzania)

Semiotics and the Origin of Language in the Lower Palaeolithic

“…The archaeological record suggests an early awareness of icons based on intentional use of resemblance, and by two million years ago, hominins had developed a reliance on technology and a range of cooperative behaviours that exceeded those seen in other primates today (Plummer and Bishop 2016). With the emergence of the Acheulean tradition 1.7 million years ago, the first evidence exists of attention given to the visual form of artefacts, in this case a large symmetrical hand-axe from Olduvai Gorge that prefigures the standardisation of the hand-axe form later in the Acheulean after 1.2 million years ago (Diez-Martína et al 2019). The establishment of conventions of hand-axe and cleaver forms, and multiple ways of making these tools (Sharon 2009), marks the development of symbols and language.…”

“…The hand-axe and cleaver are distinguished from Oldowan tools by their large size (> 10 cm), but particularly by their bilateral and plan form symmetry (Roe 1968;Crompton and Gowlett 1993;. Symmetrical hand-axes occur early in the Acheulean 1.7 Ma marking an elaborated attention to form over function which distinguishes these tools from Oldowan retouched tools (Diez-Martína et al 2019). This focus on form becomes more widespread from~1.2 Ma with some regional trends towards greater refinement , but not in all parts of the Acheulean range (e.g.…”

Ergonomic clusters and displaced affordances in early lithic technology

“…Archeologists Diez-Martin and colleagues excavated this handaxe in situ in well-dated deposits in Bed II at Olduvai Gorge (Diez-Martin et al, 2015, 2019). Its 1.69 Ma date places it only slightly more recent than the earliest known handaxes, from Kokiselei (Lepre et al, 2011), yet it is strikingly different (compare to Figure 3).…”

“…Indeed, its size arguably places it outside the range of effective single-handed manipulation, and it is thus ergonomically different from smaller bifaces. Examination of the tip for damage revealed no evidence that the artifact had ever been used (Diez-Martin et al, 2019, p. 55). However, what is most telling is its overdetermined form; simply put, the artifact is more aesthetically pleasing than it needed to be to perform its ergonomic role (Berlant & Wynn, 2018; Wynn & Berlant, 2019).…”

El estudio funcional lítico en la Early Stone Age (ESA) africana. Aplicación analítica, metodológica y experimental en los yacimientos arqueológicos del Lecho II de la Garganta de Olduvai, Tanzania

“…ANDERSON, P.C., KOROBKOVA, G.F., LONGO, L.,PLISSON, H. y SKAKUN, N. (2005): Various viewpoints on the work of S.A. Semenov. The roots of use-wear analysis: selected papers of S.A.Semenov,[2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19].ARAMBOURG, C. (1970): Les Vertébrés du Pleistocène d'Afrique du Nord. Arch.…”