A technological crossroads: Exploring diversity in the pressure blade technology of Mesolithic Latvia

Abstract

Summary A long‐standing debate in archaeology concerns the sources of technological diversification among prehistoric hunter‐gatherers. This includes the study of the emergence and spread of pressure blade technology in Northern Europe during the Early Holocene. Until now, there has been little technological study of lithic collections from the East Baltic region, and our knowledge of the development and spread of this technology in the area is inadequate. This article presents for the first time a technological analysis of lithic assemblages from seven Early and Middle Mesolithic sites in the territory of present‐day Latvia, offering new possibilities for discussing pressure blade technology and research objectives connected with it. Furthermore, variation in elements of this technology is explored in relation to raw‐material characteristics through experimental flint knapping. Finally, the factors influencing diversity in craft traditions, as well as large‐scale communication and shifting spheres of interaction within Northern Europe during the Mesolithic, are discussed.

All these Fantastic Cultures? Research History and Regionalization in the Late Palaeolithic Tanged Point Cultures of Eastern Europe

“…In particular, lithic reduction techniques, as analysed through operational chains, have been proposed as a key method (e.g. Damlien et al, 2018). Problematically, however, such time-consuming analyses usually begin by selecting assemblages that are pre-classified by traditional typological means (mostly through projectile points) and hence tend to replicate traditional taxonomies.…”

A tanged point and two blade technologies from Rubha Port an t-Seilich, Isle of Islay, western Scotland

“…Further, the assemblage seems to show some similarities with the Star Carr assemblage as described by Conneller et al (2018;see also Pitts & Jacobi 1979;Reyner 2005;Saville 2004). The blade production in RPAS Concept 2 technology differs in its basic strategies from those of RPAS Concept 1, as well as those used within the Final Palaeolithic and Early Mesolithic of northwest Europe, and the Middle and Late Mesolithic of northwest continental Europe (Berg-Hansen 2017; 2018; Damlien 2016; Damlien et al 2018;David & Sørensen 2016;Sørensen 2006b;Sørensen et al 2013). However, the technology of RPAS Concept 2 is consistent with the narrow blade industry from Scottish and the English Late Mesolithic (Conneller et al 2016;Mithen 2000;Mithen et al 2015).…”

First encounters in the north: cultural diversity and gene flow in Early Mesolithic Scandinavia

“…8100–7600 BC; D) sites with pressure-blade production from plain-platform cores ( c . 8000 BC onwards) (C after Schulz (1996) and Risla (1999); D after Guinard (2018) and Damlien et al (2018a & b); data in Tables S1–2 are used for A–B) (maps by M.A. Manninen; drawings by H. Damlien & M.A.…”