by Laure Metz, Jason E. Lewis, Ludovic Slimak
Science Advances, Vol 9, Issue 8
22.02.2023
Results
(excerpt)
A precise macroscopic and microscopic use-wear analysis (see Materials and Methods) was undertaken on 852 artifacts—highly controlled points and micro/nanopoints (n = 476), regular bladelets (n = 230), and blades and flakes (n = 146)—to find any wear or micropolish. We conducted an experimental program called Initiarc, based on Mandrin E point replicas, including both nonpercussion (pressure and taphonomic, n = 219) (8) and percussion (throwing/thrusting, n = 82) actions to evaluate the potentialities of these specific stone points and their impact damages when used as weapons (Fig. 3, fig. S3, and note S3). To detect whether a tool was used kinetically, we consider not only the presence, type, or patterns of diagnostic impact fractures (DIFs) but also the frequency, combination of diagnostic characters, and the location of these DIFs on the lithic piece (see Materials and Methods; Fig. 4, and note S3).
The first results of the use-wear analysis show that 10.4% of the archaeological elements, all technological categories included, are devoid of any macro- or microscopic trace of use (n = 89; within the Initiarc experimental program, 8.3% of the points show no trace; note S3). Macro- and/or microscopic traces that were clearly identifiable as resulting from taphonomic action were identified on 4.1% of the blanks (n = 35). Macro- and/or microscopic traces that were too ambiguous to deduce with certainty a function were observed on 15.4% of the pieces (n = 131). This gives a total of 255 pieces (29.9%) whose anthropic use is uncertain, if not absent, within the 852 pieces selected. The rest of the sample shows evidence of anthropic activity, representing 70.1% of the series studied (n = 597). Of the 597 pieces used, 82.4% were fractured (n = 492). For those for which the cause could be established (n = 269), fracturing occurred in both modes of operation, 20.5% in a nonpercussive manner and 34.1% in a percussive action. For the remaining 223 pieces, no interpretation could be stated. Physical traces of past use were observed on 383 elements: 172 pressure actions, 196 percussion actions, and 15 pieces presenting both. The proportions obtained within these different categories of objects clearly show an obvious distinction in the modes of action with a predominance of pressure gestures on blades and flakes and a preponderance of percussive actions on points (points, micropoints, and nanopoints; Fig. 3A). Each technological category bears evidence of having been used in different tasks; blades and flakes were almost exclusively used in domestic activities (meat cutting, tanning skins, etc.), and points and micro/nanopoints were almost exclusively used in percussive actions, such as a part of propelled or thrusted weapons. The bladelets occupy a clearly intermediate position where nonpercussive actions slightly dominate with 52.9% compared to 47.1% percussive actions.
In pressure motions, points and micro/nanopoints were purposely grouped together within the same category. In isolation, the number of microlithic supports engaged in pressure activities was too small (micropoint, n = 9; nanopoint, n = 1) to be compared to the rest of the sample. Cutting actions amply predominate over the rest of the observed movements (n = 128; Fig. 3B). This type of movement is mainly representative of butchery activities, which include cutting meat, removing tendons, skinning, eviscerating, and disarticulating limbs. All technological categories bear stigmata specific to this type of movement, with a slight overrepresentation among the points (82.5%). Traces left during scraping actions are observed on less than 10 pieces (eight flakes and one blade) and are totally absent within the bladelets and micro/nanopoints (Fig. 3C). Rotary movements occupy an anecdotal place with only four objects having been used to drill, all having a pointed end (two points, one micropoint, and one bladelet). In 17.7% of cases, the movement could not be clearly identified, and although all the pieces show a purely nonpercussive action, their exact function remains undetermined.
Percussive actions concern 83.2% of the points but only, anecdotally, the flakes or blades (4.6%; Fig. 3A). Last, no flakes or blades show any characteristic traces that would allow us to consider their use as weapons. This means that in Layer E of Mandrin, the technical categories of blades and flakes, retouched or not, are mostly not directly related to hunting activities. The macrofracture study shows that the points (points, micropoints, and nanopoints) primarily had this function. The functional analysis also shows that not all the points were systematically destined to become armatures for weapons: 21.3% of large points were used in domestic activities, mainly in butchery work (skinning, evisceration, disarticulation, meat cutting, etc.; Fig. 3C).
A total of 131 DIFs were attested on 71 pieces (35 points, 25 micropoints, and 11 nanopoints); just over a third (33.8%) of points record between two and four DIFs per piece, with 12.7% having a minimum of three DIFs per piece [Figs. 5 to 7 and note S3 (“DIFs” in the “Archaeological results” section)]. These DIFs show strong similarities with those obtained during our experimental use of such points as projectiles and those reported from more than four decades of similar experimental work [Fig. 8 and note S3 (Projectile experimental results)] (9–22). When considered by the minimum number of individual, as many as 15.5% of all points present DIFs from violent axial impact on their distal end that are strictly diagnostic of their use as weapons [9.7% of the points, 30.2% of the micropoints, and up to 36.7% of the nanopoints; note S3 (Archaeological results) and table S1].
Presenting results and findings
Commenti