The earliest evidence for mechanically delivered projectile weapons in Europe

Sano, Katsuhiro; Arrighi, Simona; Stani, Chiaramaria; Aureli, Daniele; Boschin, Francesco; Fiore, Ivana; Spagnolo, Vincenzo; Ricci, Stefano; Crezzini, Jacopo; Boscato, Paolo; Gala, Monica; Tagliacozzo, Antonio; Birarda, Giovanni; Vaccari, Lisa; Ronchitelli, Annamaria; Moroni, Adriana; Benazzi, Stefano

doi:10.1038/s41559-019-0990-3

Cited by 65 publications

(57 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The shapes and the locations of the breakage surfaces on the lithic tools resemble impact fractures of throwing lithic tipped composite weapons (Fischer et al, 1984;Yaroshevich, 2010;Yaroshevich et al, 2010;Rots and Plisson, 2014;Rots, 2016;Sano et al, 2019). The most obvious impact damages are the burination on the tip of the first tool ( Fig.…”

Section: Lithic Toolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Zöld Cave and the Late Epigravettian in Eastern Central Europe

Béres¹,

Cserpák²,

Hoyo

et al. 2021

Quaternary International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Zöld Cave is a recently discovered Late Epigravettian site in Hungary. It yielded a small archaeological collection dated to 17.0-14.9 ka cal BP. The findings consists of faunal remains of horse and reindeer bearing extensive marks of human activity, and lithic artifacts of hunting Manuscript File Click here to view linked References armature types, including curved backed points, backed truncated bladelets, and backed bladelet, typical for a Late Epigravettian tool inventory. The archeozoological results indicate the cave was used as a hunting-butchering site. The Late Epigravettian archaeological record of eastern Central Europe suggests that this human population of hunter-gatherers practiced a residentially mobile subsistence strategy. Our results indicate that the Late Epigravettian population of eastern Central Europe did not disappear without descendants but likely contributed to the formation of the Federmesser culture.

show abstract

Section: Lithic Toolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Zöld Cave and the Late Epigravettian in Eastern Central Europe

Béres¹,

Cserpák²,

Hoyo

et al. 2021

Quaternary International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Gum exuding trees are widespread, with acacia alone being present throughout Africa, Arabia, portions of Iran, India, Australia, southern United States, and Central America (Mantell 1954). Possible evidence of gum adhesives on Uluzzian backed segments has recently been identified at Grotta del Cavallo, Italy (Sano et al 2019). The absence of any identified gum adhesives from the Pleistocene is then unlikely to be due to economic, technological, performance, or environmental factors.…”

Section: Gummentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Beeswax is used as a component in compound adhesives containing resins and possibly gums (Sano et al 2019). At low temperatures beeswax is brittle, but at room temperature it becomes relatively soft and so it is frequently mixed with resin to act as a plasticizer and soften the otherwise brittle material (Gaillard et al 2015;Kozowyk et al 2016).…”

Section: Beeswaxmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The oldest identified beeswax use comes from Border Cave, South Africa, and dates to approximately 44 ka (Wadley et al 2015). Beeswax may also have been used at Fossellone Cave (Degano et al 2019) and Grotta del Cavallo, Italy (Sano et al 2019). More modern beeswax was found on a Final Palaeolithic barbed point from Bergkamen, Germany (Baales et al 2017), and it is likely that by the Neolithic, the honeybee was being widely exploited (Roffet-Salque et al 2015;Van Gijn and Boon 2006).…”

Section: Beeswaxmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, it is also possible that other clay-like sediment without the iron oxide component of ochre may serve a similar function (Zipkin et al 2014). Ochre has been identified in many instances with a direct correlation to hafting, dating back to the Middle Stone Age, so its use is unambiguous, regardless of its purpose (Allain and Rigaurd 1989;Bradtmöller et al 2016;Dickson 1981;Helwig et al 2014;Lombard 2006;Sano et al 2019;Shaham et al 2010;Villa et al 2015).…”

Section: Ochrementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Understanding preservation and identification biases of ancient adhesives through experimentation

Kozowyk

Gijn

Langejans

2020

Archaeol Anthropol Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Adhesive production is one of the earliest forms of transformative technology, predating ceramics and metallurgy by over 150,000 years. The study of the adhesives used by Neandertals and early modern humans currently plays a significant role in debates about human technological and cognitive evolution. Depending on the type of adhesive used, different production sequences were required. These can vary in complexity and would have needed different knowledge, expertise, and resources to manufacture. However, our knowledge of this important technological development is severely hampered by poorly understood taphonomic processes, which affects the preservation and identification of adhesive materials and leads to a research bias. Here we present the results from a 3-year field preservation experiment. Flint flakes hafted and non-hafted with replica adhesives were left to weather naturally on and below the surface at two locations with different soils and climatic conditions. Differential preservation was recorded on a variety of natural adhesives by digitally measuring the surface area of each residue before and after the elapsed time. Residues were further assessed and photographed using metallographic optical microscopy. Results show that certain adhesives preserve to a significantly higher degree than others, while some materials may be more easily overlooked or visually misdiagnosed. We must therefore be aware of both taphonomic and identification biases when discussing ancient adhesive technology. This research provides a first look that will help us understand the disparities between which adhesives were used in the past and what we find in the archaeological record today.

show abstract

Did Pleistocene Africans use the spearthrower‐and‐dart?

Lombard

Shea

2021

Evolutionary Anthropology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Archeologists commonly suppose that among complex projectile weapons humans use as subsistence aids, the spearthrower‐and‐dart preceded bow‐and‐arrow use. And yet, neither ethnographic nor archeological records furnish any robust evidence for spearthrower‐and‐dart use in Africa. Instead, evidence grows apace for ever‐more ancient bow‐and‐arrow use. Here we explore these findings and their implications for models of early Homo sapiens behavior.

show abstract

The earliest evidence for mechanically delivered projectile weapons in Europe

Cited by 65 publications

References 39 publications

Zöld Cave and the Late Epigravettian in Eastern Central Europe

Zöld Cave and the Late Epigravettian in Eastern Central Europe

Understanding preservation and identification biases of ancient adhesives through experimentation

Did Pleistocene Africans use the spearthrower‐and‐dart?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About