Minimal Tools, Maximum Meat: A Pilot Experiment to Butcher an Elephant Foot and Make Elephant Bone Tools Using Lower Paleolithic Stone Tool Technology

Starkovich, Britt M.; Cuthbertson, Patrick; Kitagawa, Keiko; Thompson, Nicholas; Rots, Veerle; Münzel, Susanne C.; Giusti, Domenico; Schmid, Viola; Blanco-Lapaz, Ángel; Lepers, Christian; Tourloukis, Vangelis

doi:10.1080/19442890.2020.1864877

Cited by 16 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 69 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, use-wear analyses of FN3 flakes conducted by Toro-Moyano et al (2003) documented their use in butchery activities. Recent experimental studies have shown that small flakes are suitable for defleshing activities, even on very large carcasses, such as proboscideans (Starkovich et al, 2021;Marinellu et al, 2021). Lower Palaeolithic sites with small, simple flake lithic assemblages associated with cut-marked remains are indeed very common (see Marinellu et al, 2021 for a more in-depth discussion).…”

Section: Carnivores Have Also Left Feeding Traces On a Wide Range Ofmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of meat resources in the Early Pleistocene assemblages from Fuente Nueva 3 (Orce, Granada, Spain)

Yravedra

Solano

Courtenay

et al. 2021

Archaeol Anthropol Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the last few decades, several types of evidence such as presence of hominin remains, lithic assemblages, and bones with anthropogenic surface modifications have demonstrated that early human communities inhabited the European subcontinent prior to the Jaramillo Subchron (1.07–0.98 Ma). While most studies have focused primarily on early European lithic technologies and raw material management, relatively little is known about food procurement strategies. While there is some evidence showing access to meat and other animal-based food resources, their mode of acquisition and associated butchery processes are still poorly understood. This paper presents a taphonomic and zooarchaeological analysis of the Fuente Nueva-3 (FN3) (Guadix-Baza, Spain) faunal assemblage, providing a more in-depth understanding of early hominin subsistence strategies in Europe. The present results show that hominins had access to the meat and marrow of a wide range of animal taxa, including elephants, hippopotami, and small- and medium-sized animals. At the same time, evidence of carnivore activity at the site suggests that these communities likely faced some degree of competition from large predators when acquiring and processing carcasses.

show abstract

Section: Carnivores Have Also Left Feeding Traces On a Wide Range Ofmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of meat resources in the Early Pleistocene assemblages from Fuente Nueva 3 (Orce, Granada, Spain)

Yravedra

Solano

Courtenay

et al. 2021

Archaeol Anthropol Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…84 ] used to remove blanks (flakes or blades) from a core or to shape and re-sharpen stone tools (active retouching, sensu Starkovitch et al . [ 85 ]). Hard and soft hammers are also used to abrade platforms; this is done to facilitate accurate flake-removal.…”

Section: Interpretation and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Pressure-flakers: Antler tines, pointed bones or teeth used to trim the edge of a stone tool by forcing-off small flakes, by mean of passive or active pressure flaking [ 75 , 78 , 85 ].…”

Section: Interpretation and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Starkovitch et al . [ 85 ] define two modes for tools used in retouching, namely ‘active’ in which the knapping tool is forced against the edge of a stone, and ‘passive’ in which the retoucher is stationary and the edge of the stone tool is pressure-flaked against it. Retouching can be accomplished with a variety of tools, including hard hammerstones, soft hammers (stone or organic), punches and anvils as well as pressure-flakers.…”

Section: Interpretation and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Horse metapodial (e.g. M50025) used as a hammer to detach blades/bladelets from a core; B. horse phalanx (UNREG 3482) used as a hammer to remove small blades or flakes, or for retouching an edge; C. horse incisor (M49811) used as an active retoucher ( sensu [ 85 ]) in pressure-flaking; D. horse molar (M50064) used as a passive retoucher ( sensu [ 85 ]) in pressure-flaking.…”

Section: Interpretation and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Knapping tools in Magdalenian contexts: New evidence from Gough’s Cave (Somerset, UK)

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our knowledge of the recolonization of north-west Europe at the end of the Last Glacial Maximum depends to a large extent on finds from Gough’s Cave (Somerset, UK). Ultra-high resolution radiocarbon determinations suggest that the cave was occupied seasonally by Magdalenian hunters for perhaps no more than two or three human generations, centred on 12,600 BP (~14,950–14,750 cal BP). They left behind a rich and diverse assemblage of Magdalenian lithic and osseous artefacts, butchered animal bones, and cannibalised human remains. The faunal assemblage from Gough’s Cave is one of the most comprehensively studied from any Magdalenian site, yet new and unexpected discoveries continue to be made. Here, we record previously unrecognized flint-knapping tools that were identified during a survey of the Gough’s Cave faunal collection at the Natural History Museum (London). We identified bones used as hammers and teeth manipulated as pressure-flakers to manufacture flint tools. Most of the pieces appear to be ad hoc (single-use?) tools, but a horse molar was almost certainly a curated object that was used over an extended period to work many stone tools. This paper explores how these knapping tools were used to support a more nuanced understanding of Magdalenian stone-tool manufacturing processes. Moreover, we provide a standard for identifying minimally-used knapping tools that will help to establish whether retouchers and other organic stone-working tools are as rare in the Magdalenian archaeological record as current studies suggest.

show abstract

Back(s) to basics: The concept of backing in stone tool technologies for tracing hominins' technical innovations

Delpiano,

Gravina,

Peresani

2024

Evolutionary Anthropology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The evolution of Paleolithic stone tool technologies is characterized by gradual increase in technical complexity along with changes in the composition of assemblages. In this respect, the emergence of retouched‐backed tools is an important step and, for some, a proxy for “modern” behavior. However, backed tools emerge relatively early and develop together with major changes in Middle‐Upper Pleistocene stone tool technologies. We provide an updated review of the emergence and development of the “backing” concept across multiple chrono‐cultural contexts and discuss its relationship to both the emergence of hafting and major evolutionary steps in the ergonomics of stone tool use. Finally, we address potential mechanisms of context‐specific re‐invention of backing based primarily on data from the late Middle Paleolithic of Western Europe.

show abstract

Minimal Tools, Maximum Meat: A Pilot Experiment to Butcher an Elephant Foot and Make Elephant Bone Tools Using Lower Paleolithic Stone Tool Technology

Cited by 16 publications

References 69 publications

Use of meat resources in the Early Pleistocene assemblages from Fuente Nueva 3 (Orce, Granada, Spain)

Use of meat resources in the Early Pleistocene assemblages from Fuente Nueva 3 (Orce, Granada, Spain)

Knapping tools in Magdalenian contexts: New evidence from Gough’s Cave (Somerset, UK)

Back(s) to basics: The concept of backing in stone tool technologies for tracing hominins' technical innovations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About