From Lithics to Spatial and Social Organization: Interpreting the Lithic Distribution and Raw Material Composition at the Final Palaeolithic Site of Kettig (Central Rhineland, Germany)

Baales, Michael

doi:10.1006/jasc.1999.0545

Cited by 21 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The results seem to support our theory that Oberkassel belongs to the Azilian period (Federmessergruppen). Confirmation of this comes in the form of the fragment of the arrowhead, which is similar to some finds from Kettig with a radiocarbon age of 11 314 ± 50 bp (Baales ).…”

Section: Old World Palaeolithic and Mesolithicsupporting

confidence: 84%

Radiocarbon Dates from the O xford AMS S ystem: A rchaeometry Datelist 35

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is the 35th list of AMS radiocarbon determinations measured at the Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit (ORAU). Amongst some of the sites included here are the latest series of determinations from the key sites of Abydos, El Mirón, Ban Chiang, Grotte de Pigeons (Taforalt), Alepotrypa and Oberkassel, as well as others dating to the Palaeolithic, Mesolithic and later periods. Comments on the significance of the results are provided by the submitters of the material.

show abstract

Section: Old World Palaeolithic and Mesolithicsupporting

confidence: 84%

Radiocarbon Dates from the O xford AMS S ystem: A rchaeometry Datelist 35

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite the potential that raw material procurement may have no or very little influence on hunter-gatherer technological organization, which I doubt is the case, recent research indicates that lithic raw materials are important for determining tool and core technological strategies (Ashton and White 2003; Brantingham and Kuhn 2001;Roth and Dibble 1998;Wenzel and Shelley 2001), artifact functional effectiveness (Bamforth 2003;Brantingham et al 2000;Hofman 2003;Sievert and Wise 2001;Terry et al 2008), retouch intensity on tools (Andrefsky 2008c; Bradbury et al 2008;Kuhn 1992;MacDonald 2008;Milliken and Peresani 1998), and aspects of risk management (Baales 2001;Beck et al 2002;Braun 2005;Lee and Lee 2006;Soressi and Hays 2003). If anything, the information gained from lithic raw materials regarding source location, shape, size, durability, and abundance has increased our understanding of stone tool technological organization in the past decade.…”

Section: Raw Materials and Organizational Choicesmentioning

confidence: 97%

The Analysis of Stone Tool Procurement, Production, and Maintenance

Andrefsky

2008

J Archaeol Res

250

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Researchers who analyze stone tools and their production debris have made significant progress in understanding the relationship between stone tools and human organizational strategies. Stone tools are understood to be morphologically dynamic throughout their use-lives; the ever-changing morphology of stone tools is intimately associated with the needs of tool users. It also has become apparent to researchers that interpretations of lithic analysis are more productive when the unique contexts and situations for which lithic artifacts were made, used, modified, and ultimately discarded are considered. This article reviews the recent literature on stone tool production with an emphasis on raw material procurement, manufacturing techniques, and tool maintenance processes as they relate to adaptive strategies of toolmakers and users.

show abstract

“…In the Central Rhineland Allerød assemblages are made mostly of local (regionally available) raw materials, such as Tertiary quartzite 3 and siliceous slate (Kieselschifer or lydite 4 ). It is worth mentioning that Late Glacial communities used also chalcedony 5 and several types of Cretaceous flints, located 40-100 km far from this area (Baales 2001).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

New evidences for core processing of non-flint, lithic materials in the Late Palaeolithic and Mesolithic of Poland

Osipowicz

Sobkowiak‐Tabaka

2014

JLS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:In the Late Palaeolithic and Mesolithic core processing in Poland was dominated by flint raw materials. The present paper considers the occurrence of non-flint assemblages at the sites Lubrza and Ludowice (Polish Lowland). The focus is on recognition of petrographic studies, technology, typology and use-wear of inventories from both sites. The collections contain debitage, cores and different kinds of tools. As a result the identification of granite, sandstone, quartzite, gneisses, mudstones, slates and single minerals of quartzes and feldspars was established. The use-wear analysis brought good results only in case in porphyry artefacts. The described analyses are accompanied by a review of European non-flint assemblages from Late Palaeolithic and Mesolithic sites and discussion of the role of this type of raw material in core processing.

show abstract

From Lithics to Spatial and Social Organization: Interpreting the Lithic Distribution and Raw Material Composition at the Final Palaeolithic Site of Kettig (Central Rhineland, Germany)

Cited by 21 publications

References 7 publications

Radiocarbon Dates from the O xford AMS S ystem: A rchaeometry Datelist 35

Radiocarbon Dates from the O xford AMS S ystem: A rchaeometry Datelist 35

The Analysis of Stone Tool Procurement, Production, and Maintenance

New evidences for core processing of non-flint, lithic materials in the Late Palaeolithic and Mesolithic of Poland

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About