Sources of flint in Britain and Ireland: A quantitative assessment of geochemical characterisation using acid digestion inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry (ICP-MS)
“…Returning to a national scale, the results presented here corroborate with previous research that flint from different locations and geologies can be reliably differentiated 44 – 49 , 61 , 62 , albeit with issues remaining. The results of this paper however show significantly greater separation of geological samples of flint than previously achieved through the greater identification of specific locations This can be compared most recently with the recent work of Bradley et al 49 , 62 , who achieved broad, regional separation, as well as modest differentiation of sites, but whose work was hampered by more limited sampling and the use of a less powerful statistical technique. The increased spatial resolution gained through the greater number of sampling sites, and the greater differentiation between them seen in this project will be most impactful towards generating more specific and localised narratives of the prehistoric past 63 – 65 , and this is more apparent towards helping to evidence the procurement, movement and exchange of materials previously unknown.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 87%
“…These features were then used for the model evaluations below. These results compare favourably with existing research 20 , 44 – 49 , with some differences likely due to analytical methods and sample locations used. Figure 4 Feature importance results from RFECV.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 79%
“…The feature selection and importance ranking conducted in this paper have broader geographic implications, highlighting similarities in the most predictive elements with research on the continent 20 , 47 , 49 . This apparent correlation warrants further attention, with the potential to help establish continent-scale sourcing studies on flint if proven, in much the same way as has been done for other lithic materials previously 58 – 60 .…”
It is 50 years since Sieveking et al. published their pioneering research in Nature on the geochemical analysis of artefacts from Neolithic flint mines in southern Britain. In the decades since, geochemical techniques to source stone artefacts have flourished globally, with a renaissance in recent years from new instrumentation, data analysis, and machine learning techniques. Despite the interest over these latter approaches, there has been variation in the quality with which these methods have been applied. Using the case study of flint artefacts and geological samples from England, we present a robust and objective evaluation of three popular techniques, Random Forest, K-Nearest-Neighbour, and Support Vector Machines, and present a pipeline for their appropriate use. When evaluated correctly, the results establish high model classification performance, with Random Forest leading with an average accuracy of 85% (measured through F1 Scores), and with Support Vector Machines following closely. The methodology developed in this paper demonstrates the potential to significantly improve on previous approaches, particularly in removing bias, and providing greater means of evaluation than previously utilised.
“…Returning to a national scale, the results presented here corroborate with previous research that flint from different locations and geologies can be reliably differentiated 44 – 49 , 61 , 62 , albeit with issues remaining. The results of this paper however show significantly greater separation of geological samples of flint than previously achieved through the greater identification of specific locations This can be compared most recently with the recent work of Bradley et al 49 , 62 , who achieved broad, regional separation, as well as modest differentiation of sites, but whose work was hampered by more limited sampling and the use of a less powerful statistical technique. The increased spatial resolution gained through the greater number of sampling sites, and the greater differentiation between them seen in this project will be most impactful towards generating more specific and localised narratives of the prehistoric past 63 – 65 , and this is more apparent towards helping to evidence the procurement, movement and exchange of materials previously unknown.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 87%
“…These features were then used for the model evaluations below. These results compare favourably with existing research 20 , 44 – 49 , with some differences likely due to analytical methods and sample locations used. Figure 4 Feature importance results from RFECV.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 79%
“…The feature selection and importance ranking conducted in this paper have broader geographic implications, highlighting similarities in the most predictive elements with research on the continent 20 , 47 , 49 . This apparent correlation warrants further attention, with the potential to help establish continent-scale sourcing studies on flint if proven, in much the same way as has been done for other lithic materials previously 58 – 60 .…”
It is 50 years since Sieveking et al. published their pioneering research in Nature on the geochemical analysis of artefacts from Neolithic flint mines in southern Britain. In the decades since, geochemical techniques to source stone artefacts have flourished globally, with a renaissance in recent years from new instrumentation, data analysis, and machine learning techniques. Despite the interest over these latter approaches, there has been variation in the quality with which these methods have been applied. Using the case study of flint artefacts and geological samples from England, we present a robust and objective evaluation of three popular techniques, Random Forest, K-Nearest-Neighbour, and Support Vector Machines, and present a pipeline for their appropriate use. When evaluated correctly, the results establish high model classification performance, with Random Forest leading with an average accuracy of 85% (measured through F1 Scores), and with Support Vector Machines following closely. The methodology developed in this paper demonstrates the potential to significantly improve on previous approaches, particularly in removing bias, and providing greater means of evaluation than previously utilised.
“…Using flint as a baetylus of solar character. Prehistoric tools were made with basalt, diabase, andesite, quartzites, flint, quartz, obsidian and other stones [56]. These tools (Figure 2) were inseparable companions in the daily life of their manufacturers, even after death.…”
Section: Stones and Religionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Prehistoric "thunderstones" resembled the Norse god Thor's hammerhead (Mjöllnir) and they were purposely placed as good-luck talismans in tombs of Vikings. Additionally, a popular belief exists in some Prehistoric tools were made with basalt, diabase, andesite, quartzites, flint, quartz, obsidian and other stones [56]. These tools (Figure 2) were inseparable companions in the daily life of their manufacturers, even after death.…”
Human activity has required, since its origins, stones as raw material for carving, construction and rock art. The study, exploration, use and maintenance of building stones is a global phenomenon that has evolved from the first shelters, manufacture of lithic tools, to the construction of houses, infrastructures and monuments. Druids, philosophers, clergymen, quarrymen, master builders, naturalists, travelers, architects, archaeologists, physicists, chemists, curators, restorers, museologists, engineers and geologists, among other professionals, have worked with stones and they have produced the current knowledge in heritage stones. They are stones that have special significance in human culture. In this way, the connotation of heritage in stones has been acquired over the time. That is, the stones at the time of their historical use were simply stones used for a certain purpose. Therefore, the concept of heritage stone is broad, with cultural, historic, artistic, architectural, and scientific implications. A historical synthesis is presented of the main events that marked the use of stones from prehistory, through ancient history, medieval times, and to the modern period. In addition, the main authors who have written about stones are surveyed from Ancient Roman times to the middle of the twentieth century. Subtle properties of stones have been discovered and exploited by artists and artisans long before rigorous science took notice of them and explained them.
Tzw. „krzemień czekoladowy” jest jednym z najpopularniejszych i najwyższej jakości surowcem krzemiennym, używanym w czasach prehistorycznych w Europie Środkowej. Znany i użytkowany był od środkowego paleolitu aż do epoki żelaza. Jest przedmiotem badań od prawie 100 lat, ale pytania związane z wydobyciem, przetwarzaniem i dystrybucją krzemienia czekoladowego są wciąż aktualne i podejmowane przez wielu badaczy. W dużej mierze jest to efekt odkrycia złóż krzemienia czekoladowego i miejsc jego wydobycia na terenie Wyżyny Krakowsko-Częstochowskiej, co znacząco zmieniło obecny stan wiedzy. Niniejszy artykuł jest próbą uporządkowania wiedzy na temat tego surowca o niewątpliwie wyjątkowej jakości, szeroko wykorzystywanego przez społeczności prehistoryczne.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
