Insights into early lithic technologies from ethnography

Abstract

Oldowan lithic assemblages are often portrayed as a product of the need to obtain sharp flakes for cutting into animal carcases. However, ethnographic and experimental research indicates that the optimal way to produce flakes for such butchering purposes is via bipolar reduction of small cryptocrystalline pebbles rather than from larger crystalline cores resembling choppers. Ethnographic observations of stone tool-using hunter-gatherers in environments comparable with early hominins indicate that most stone tools (particularly chopper forms and flake tools) were used for making simple shaft tools including spears, digging sticks and throwing sticks. These tools bear strong resemblances to Oldowan stone tools. Bipolar reduction for butchering probably preceded chopper-like core reduction and provides a key link between primate nut-cracking technologies and the emergence of more sophisticated lithic technologies leading to the Oldowan.

Variability in an early hominin percussive tradition: the Acheulean versus cultural variation in modern chimpanzee artefacts

“…It was not possible to approach these systematically from the sources of this dataset. Hence the great value of current studies that concentrate on the documentation of individual cases of use of these categories [62,100,101]. Without doubt, different biases operate when we look at chimpanzee and early hominin artefact sets.…”

How similar are nut-cracking and stone-flaking? A functional approach to percussive technology

“…This perspective reflects the argument presented by Hayden [72] based upon ethnographic observations of contemporary hunter-gatherer populations. Prior studies confronting bipolar reduction methods have described the technique as 'requiring little to no skill' [65, p. 241] and easily learned [71].…”

Identifying bipolar knapping in the Mesolithic site of Font del Ros (northeast Iberia)

“…At present, there is much literature on the recognition of bipolar percussion, with experimental studies and macroscopic analyses forming the basis for its identification [5,[9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18]29]. Previously, we have emphasized the temporal and spatial ubiquity of the method, present from the earliest evidence of stone tools [98] and lasting until late prehistory [8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18].…”

“…However, bipolar artefacts and the functional contexts in which they are used are not well known. In recent years, there has been increased interest in investigating the technological, cognitive and evolutionary implications of a technique closely linked with the origin of percussive technology [2][3][4], and which is ubiquitous in its far-reaching geographical and chronological dispersion [5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18].…”