Fat Residue and Use-Wear Found on Acheulian Biface and Scraper Associated with Butchered Elephant Remains at the Site of Revadim, Israel

Abstract

The archaeological record indicates that elephants must have played a significant role in early human diet and culture during Palaeolithic times in the Old World. However, the nature of interactions between early humans and elephants is still under discussion. Elephant remains are found in Palaeolithic sites, both open-air and cave sites, in Europe, Asia, the Levant, and Africa. In some cases elephant and mammoth remains indicate evidence for butchering and marrow extraction performed by humans. Revadim Quarry (Israel) is a Late Acheulian site where elephant remains were found in association with characteristic Lower Palaeolithic flint tools. In this paper we present results regarding the use of Palaeolithic tools in processing animal carcasses and rare identification of fat residue preserved on Lower Palaeolithic tools. Our results shed new light on the use of Palaeolithic stone tools and provide, for the first time, direct evidence (residue) of animal exploitation through the use of an Acheulian biface and a scraper. The association of an elephant rib bearing cut marks with these tools may reinforce the view suggesting the use of Palaeolithic stone tools in the consumption of large game.

Investigating interrelationships between Lower Palaeolithic stone tool effectiveness and tool user biometric variation: implications for technological and evolutionary changes

“…Notably, Lower Palaeolithic cutting tasks are likely to have been variable, with a range of plant and animal materials potentially being required to be cut and deformed through stone tool use (e.g., Keeley and Toth, 1981;Domínguez-Rodrigo et al, 2001;Braun et al, 2010;Ferraro et al, 2013;Solodenko et al, 2015;Plummer and Bishop, 2016). Presented here is evidence to suggest that across such variation, task efficiency would have been significantly affected by individual biometric variability.…”

Influence of Handaxe Size and Shape on Cutting Efficiency: A Large-Scale Experiment and Morphometric Analysis

“…They may essentially be defined by the imposition of a long-axis on artifact form by means of invasive bifacial knapping around the edge of a core, nodule or large flake blank, which results in a tool that has a sharp edge extending around at least the tip (and sometimes the entire outline) of its bilaterally organized form (Roe 1976;Isaac 1977;Gowlett 2006). The archaeological contexts of handaxes along with studies of cut-marks, residue analyses, and design theory indicate these items were used first and foremost (unsurprisingly) as cutting tools in a variety of situations (Roberts and Partfitt 1999;Domínguez-Rodrigo et al 2001;Simão 2002;Gowlett 2006;Bello et al 2009;Yravedra et al 2010;Solodenko et al 2015).…”

A complex adaptive system may be essential for cumulative modifications in tool design

“…Little is known about perishable tools in the Acheulean, except that woodworking traces occur on some African bifaces dating between 1.7 and 1.4 Mya (Dominguez-Rodrigo et al, 2001). However, H. erectus used stone tools extensively for butchering carcasses such as elephant with Acheulean bifaces (Solodenko et al, 2015). The high concentrations of tools and tool-associated bone damage after 1.9 Mya suggest that the species depended on technology for processing animal food (Ungar et al, 2006), as well as for extracting and/or processing plant food.…”