Old stones' song: Use-wear experiments and analysis of the Oldowan quartz and quartzite assemblage from Kanjera South (Kenya)

Abstract

Old stones' song: Use-wear experiments and analysis of the Oldowan quartz and quartzite assemblage from Kanjera South (Kenya) http://ljmu-new.eprints-hosting.org/313/ Article LJMU has developed LJMU Research Online for users to access the research output of the University more effectively. Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. Users may download and/or print one copy of any article (s) AbstractEvidence of Oldowan tools by ~2.6 million years ago (Ma) may signal a major adaptive shift in hominin evolution. While tool-dependent butchery of large mammals was important by at least 2.0 Ma, the use of artifacts for tasks other than faunal processing has been difficult to diagnose.Here we report on use-wear analysis of ~2.0 Ma quartz and quartzite artifacts from Kanjera South, Kenya. A use-wear framework that links processing of specific organic materials and tool motions to their resultant use-wear patterns was developed in a suite of experiments. A blind test was then carried out to assess and improve the efficacy of this experimental use-wear framework, which was then applied to the analysis of 62 Oldowan artifacts from Kanjera South.Use-wear on a total of 23 artifact edges was attributed to the processing of specific materials.Use-wear on seven edges (30%) was attributed to animal tissue processing, corroborating zooarchaeological evidence for butchery at the site. Use-wear on sixteen edges (70%) was attributed to the processing of plant tissues, including wood, grit-covered plant tissues that we interpret as underground storage organs (USOs), and stems of grass or sedges. These results expand our knowledge of the suite of behaviors carried out in the vicinity of Kanjera South to include the processing of materials that would be "invisible" using standard archaeological methods. Wood cutting and scraping may represent the production and/or maintenance of wooden tools. Use-wear related to USO processing extends the archaeological evidence for hominin acquisition and consumption of this resource by over 1.5 Ma. Cutting of grasses, sedges or reeds may be related to a subsistence task (e.g., grass seed harvesting, cutting out papyrus culm for consumption) and/or a non-subsistence related task (e.g., production of "twine," simple carrying devices, or bedding). These results highlight the adaptive significance of lithic technology for hominins at Kanjera.

The Archaeology of Teaching and the Evolution ofHomo docens

“…Oldowan technology is based on flake production from simple cores. Flakes and, more contingent, cores were used as tools for butchery and possibly plant processing (Lemorini et al 2014;Torre 2011;Wynn et al 2011) as well as for nonsubsistence tasks such as woodworking (Lemorini et al 2014). Oldowan has previously been re-garded as the earliest evidence of flaked-stone technology.…”

Use wear analysis of quartzite lithic implements from the Middle Palaeolithic site of Lagoa do Bando (Central Portugal)

“…For this study, we used a metallographic microscope to carry out the analysis of the lithic artifacts (archaeological and experimental) Gibaja et al 2002;Gibaja & Carvalho 2005;Gibaja et al 2009). With this kind of microscopy two techniques of visualisation are available to reduce the glare of highly reflective raw materials (such as the quartz-rich raw materials) (Igreja 2009;Lemorini et al 2014): equip the microscope with a Differential Interference Contrast Capability (also known as Nomarski contrast) or use high-resolution epoxy casts of the edges of the artifacts (Banks & Kay 2003;Plisson 1983). We used also the second methodology with a little modification since the observations were made only on the moulds (negative replicas) rather than making casts (positive replicas) of each mould surface.…”

“…We used also the second methodology with a little modification since the observations were made only on the moulds (negative replicas) rather than making casts (positive replicas) of each mould surface. This protocol, already used by C. Lemorini (Lemorini et al 2014) has as advantages the lowering of the laboratory expenses by eliminating the need for casting material, the reduction of the loss of fine detail that can occur when using casts and a better placement of the edges under the microscope. The use of moulds, in addition to being cheap also allows the easy transport of the samples to be analysed (Plisson 1983), without move the archaeological artifacts (eliminating conservation, legal and insurance problems).…”

Test, Model, and Method Validation: The Role of Experimental Stone Artifact Replication in Hypothesis-driven Archaeology

“…The investigation of natural versus functional lithic fracture patterns, taphonomy, and use-wear studies has traditionally made use of "crash dummies"-replicates that are subjected to various processes such as butchering, projectile-shooting, and trampling and then compared to archaeological specimens (Andrefsky 2013;Bello, Parfitt, and Stringer 2009;Claud et al 2015;Driscoll et al 2015;Eren et al 2010aEren et al , 2011aIovita et al 2014;Jennings 2011;de Juana, Galán, and Domínguez-Rodrigo 2010;Key 2013;Lemorini et al 2014;Lombard and Pargeter 2008;MacDonald 2014;Miller 2015;Pargeter and Bradfield 2012;Pevny 2012;Price 2012;Smallwood 2013;Tallavaara et al 2010;Temple and Lee Sappington 2013;Weitzel et al 2014aWeitzel et al , 2014b. Heat treatment or damage has also been examined through stone-tool replication as model (Brown et al 2009;Schmidt et al 2013), although there are also examples of heat-treatment studies conducted through replication as test, in which researchers were more concerned with understanding the general process and parameters of the effect of heat on stone (Mercieca and Hiscock 2008;Schmidt et al 2012Schmidt et al , 2013.…”