DOCSLIB.ORG

1999 Excavations at Mounds State Park (12-M-2) and the New Castle Site (12-Hn-1)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
1999 Excavations at Mounds State Park (12-M-2) and the New Castle Site (12-Hn-1) 1999 Excavations at Mounds State Park (12-M-2) and the New Castle Site (12-Hn-1) by Beth McCord Reports of Investigation 73 October 2008 Archaeological Resources Management Service Ball State University Muncie, Indiana 47306 1999 Excavations at Mounds State Park (12-M-2) and the New Castle Site (12-Hn-1) by Beth McCord Reports of Investigation 73 October 2008 Archaeological Resources Management Service Ball State University Muncie, Indiana 47306 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This project could not have been completed without the assistance of several people. Kent Parks, Manager, and Karen Dalman, Naturalist, of Mounds State Park were always standing by to provide assistance and support for the project. The field school students worked in hot, humid and wet, cold conditions with few complaints. The students included undergraduates Laura Barnett, Paul Butler, Andy Castor, Diana Hall, Melissa Klinder, Nadia Kousari, Aimee Smith, Lori Sowell, Melinda Townsend; and graduates John Hale, Amy Keeney, Jeff Laswell, Jeff Mayronne, Rebecca Sick and Emily Tucker. Ball State Students Cameron Cox and Kari Carmany worked most of the time at Mounds State Park. Other volunteers included Larry Swan, Ronnie Robbins and Mark Wolpof. Laboratory processing was completed in part by the field school students and the remainder by ARMS employees. I would like to thank Rebecca Sick, Emily Tucker, Kim Nagle and Sarah Cole for their work in cleaning and cataloguing. The creation of several maps was assisted by Tim Ritchey and Andy Martin. Thank you all. I hope that I have not forgotten anyone in the delay between the fieldwork and this report. i ABSTRACT The 1999 Ball State University archaeological field school was held at the Anderson Mounds complex located in Mounds State Park and the New Castle complex. These two sites represent the best preserved Middle Woodland earthwork complexes in east central Indiana. Limited excavations were conducted at several of the earthworks at Anderson Mounds and one habitation site. Investigations at New Castle re-opened areas previously excavated to expose intact profiles in Mound 4. Information concerning artifact types, radiocarbon dates and construction of the earthworks were recovered. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...............................................................................................................i ABSTRACT.................................................................................................................................... ii TABLE OF CONTENTS...............................................................................................................iii LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................ v LIST OF TABLES......................................................................................................................... vi INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................1 METHODS ..................................................................................................................................... 4 Survey ......................................................................................................................................... 4 Excavation .................................................................................................................................. 6 Laboratory................................................................................................................................... 7 ANDERSON MOUNDS ................................................................................................................ 8 Background................................................................................................................................. 8 Results....................................................................................................................................... 15 Habitation -12-M-2hh........................................................................................................... 15 Results............................................................................................................................... 17 Artifacts ........................................................................................................................ 18 Features......................................................................................................................... 20 Conclusions....................................................................................................................... 21 12-M-2a - The Great Mound ................................................................................................ 22 Results............................................................................................................................... 23 Conclusions....................................................................................................................... 24 12-M-2b ................................................................................................................................ 25 Results............................................................................................................................... 26 Conclusions....................................................................................................................... 27 12-M-2e ................................................................................................................................ 28 Results............................................................................................................................... 29 Conclusions....................................................................................................................... 30 Fiddleback Enclosure - 12-M-2h .......................................................................................... 31 Results............................................................................................................................... 32 Unit 99H1...................................................................................................................... 32 Unit 99H2...................................................................................................................... 36 Unit 99H3...................................................................................................................... 41 Unit 99H4...................................................................................................................... 43 Unit 99H5...................................................................................................................... 45 1985 Unit ...................................................................................................................... 46 Conclusions....................................................................................................................... 46 12-M-2i ................................................................................................................................. 46 Results............................................................................................................................... 48 Conclusions....................................................................................................................... 49 12-M-2k ................................................................................................................................ 51 Results............................................................................................................................... 51 iii Conclusions....................................................................................................................... 52 12-M-2tt - Dalman Mound ................................................................................................... 52 Results............................................................................................................................... 54 Conclusions....................................................................................................................... 57 Discussion................................................................................................................................. 57 NEW CASTLE SITE.................................................................................................................... 59 Background............................................................................................................................... 59 Results....................................................................................................................................... 65 Trench A ............................................................................................................................... 66 Trench B................................................................................................................................ 73 Discussion................................................................................................................................. 80 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................... 85 REFERENCES CITED................................................................................................................. 86 APPENDIX
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Late Mississippian Ceramic Production on St
    LATE MISSISSIPPIAN CERAMIC PRODUCTION ON ST. CATHERINES ISLAND, GEORGIA Anna M. Semon A dissertation submitted to the faculty at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Anthropology. Chapel Hill 2019 Approved by: Vincas P. Steponaitis C. Margaret Scarry R. P. Stephen Davis Anna Agbe-Davis John Scarry © 2019 Anna M. Semon ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii ABSTRACT Anna M. Semon: Late Mississippian Ceramic Production on St. Catherines Island, Georgia (Under the direction of Vincas P. Steponaitis) This dissertation examines Late Mississippian pottery manufacturing on St. Catherines Island, Georgia. Data collected from five ceramic assemblages, three village and two mortuary sites, were used to characterize each ceramic assemblage and examine small-scale ceramic variations associated with learning and making pottery, which reflect pottery communities of practice. In addition, I examined pottery decorations to investigate social interactions at community and household levels. This dissertation is organized in six chapters. Chapter 1 provides the background, theoretical framework, and objectives of this research. Chapter 2 describes coastal Georgia’s culture history, with focus on the Mississippian period. Chapters 3 and 4 present the methods and results of this study. I use both ceramic typology and attribute analyses to explore ceramic variation. Chapter 3 provides details about the ceramic typology for each site. In addition, I examine the Mississippian surface treatments for each assemblage and identified ceramic changes between middle Irene (A.D. 1350–1450), late Irene (A.D. 1450–1580), and early Mission (A.D. 1580–1600) period.
    [Show full text]
  • Identifying Major Transitions in the Evolution of Lithic Cutting Edge Production Rates
    RESEARCH ARTICLE Identifying Major Transitions in the Evolution of Lithic Cutting Edge Production Rates Antoine Muller*, Chris Clarkson School of Social Science, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, Queensland, Australia * [email protected] Abstract The notion that the evolution of core reduction strategies involved increasing efficiency in cutting edge production is prevalent in narratives of hominin technological evolution. Yet a number of studies comparing two different knapping technologies have found no significant differences in edge production. Using digital analysis methods we present an investigation a11111 of raw material efficiency in eight core technologies broadly representative of the long-term evolution of lithic technology. These are bipolar, multiplatform, discoidal, biface, Levallois, prismatic blade, punch blade and pressure blade production. Raw material efficiency is assessed by the ratio of cutting edge length to original core mass. We also examine which flake attributes contribute to maximising raw material efficiency, as well as compare the dif- ference between expert and intermediate knappers in terms of cutting edge produced per OPEN ACCESS gram of core. We identify a gradual increase in raw material efficiency over the broad sweep of lithic technological evolution. The results indicate that the most significant transition in effi- Citation: Muller A, Clarkson C (2016) Identifying Major Transitions in the Evolution of Lithic Cutting ciency likely took place with the introduction of small foliate biface, Levallois and prismatic Edge Production Rates. PLoS ONE 11(12): blade knapping, all introduced in the Middle Stone Age / Middle Palaeolithic among early e0167244. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0167244 Homo sapiens and Neanderthals. This suggests that no difference in raw material efficiency Editor: Roberto Macchiarelli, Universite de Poitiers, existed between these species.
    [Show full text]
  • A NEOLITHIC FLINT ASSEMBLAGE and ASSOCIATED PALYNOLOGICAL SEQUENCE at GATCOMBE, ISLE of WIGHT by DAVID TOMALIN and R
    Proc. Hants. Field Club Archaeol. Soc. 36, 1980, 25-33. 25 A NEOLITHIC FLINT ASSEMBLAGE AND ASSOCIATED PALYNOLOGICAL SEQUENCE AT GATCOMBE, ISLE OF WIGHT By DAVID TOMALIN AND R. G. SCAIFE THE SITE The material may be summarised as follows: Gatcombe Withy Bed is situated in the Cores 28 River Medina Valley two miles south of Core rejuvenation flakes 7 Newport, adjacent to the area of Blackwater Hammerstones 5 Mill and Whitecroft Hospital (SZ 502858). Hammerstone spalls 3 The peats and sediments occurring here were End scrapers 56 chosen for detailed pollen and stratigraphical analyses in 1974 and subsequently found to Side scrapers 20 show the complete Flandrian vegetational Hollow scrapers 8 sequence. Notched flakes 16 In addition to pollen diagrams spanning the Denticulate flakes 3 whole period, a detailed close-sampled analysis Piercers 7 was undertaken to elucidate the events taking Awls 1 place in the Neolithic period. In order to do Burins 1 this the elm decline horizon was located in the Steeped end scrapers 7 peat stratigraphy and contiguous 2 mm Fabricators 2 samples were pollen analysed. A degree of Utilized flakes 20 resolution not usually found in pollen dia­ Axes and adzes 2 grams was thus obtained and has proved of 1 interest in relation to archaeological material Sickles obtained from within 100 metres of the mire. Waste 104 It is a selection of struck flints which is dis­ Push plane 1 cussed here; and a brief account is also given of 'the phases of human activity distinguished Total 292 in the pollen record. Pollen diagrams and a full palaeoecological discussion will be pub­ Twenty-eight cores were recovered, of which lished at a later date (R.G.S.).
    [Show full text]
  • Constraints on Levallois Core Technology: a Mathematical Model
    Journal of Archaeological Science (2001) 28, 747–761 doi:10.1006/jasc.2000.0594, available online at http://www.idealibrary.com on Constraints on Levallois Core Technology: A Mathematical Model P. Jeffrey Brantingham* and Steven L. Kuhn Department of Anthropology, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721, U.S.A. (Received 3 April 2000; revised manuscript accepted 17 May 2000) Recent volumetric definitions of Levallois core technology are amenable to mathematical modelling. We present a simple geometric model that permits controlled manipulation of a few of the key parameters defining Levallois core morphology. The models indicate that Levallois cores are relatively efficient at minimizing raw material waste while at the same time maximizing productivity in terms of total number of tool blanks and amount of cutting edge produced. Deviations from an ideal Levallois geometry produce significant declines in both efficiency and productivity. These results implicate mechanical and economic constraints as factors underlying the broad geographic distribution and temporal persistence of Levallois core technologies during the Middle and Late Pleistocene. 2001 Academic Press Keywords: LEVALLOIS, CORE REDUCTION STRATEGIES, MIDDLE PALEOLITHIC, INITIAL UPPER PALEOLITHIC, MATHEMATICAL MODELS, STONE RAW MATERIAL ECONOMY, LITHIC TECHNOLOGY, ARCHAEOLOGY. Introduction Bergman, 1990; Svoboda & Svoboda, 1985; Svoboda, Lozek & Vlcek, 1996). The apparent stability of the he ubiquity of Middle Paleolithic prepared core basic model of Levallois core technology in these reduction strategies, commonly referred to as diverse contexts demands explanation. Levallois or Mode III technology, across much It is the contention of this paper that the ubiquity Tof Eurasia and Africa during the Middle and Late and apparent stability of Levallois core technology is Pleistocene is surprising from both ecological and due in large part to economic and mechanical con- evolutionary standpoints.
    [Show full text]
  • Middle-To-Late-Pleistocene.Pdf
    Quaternary International 382 (2015) 200e214 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Quaternary International journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/quaint Middle to Late Pleistocene human habitation in the western Nefud Desert, Saudi Arabia * Eleanor M.L. Scerri a, , Paul S. Breeze b, Ash Parton c, Huw S. Groucutt c, Tom S. White c, Christopher Stimpson c, Laine Clark-Balzan c, Richard Jennings c, Abdullah Alsharekh d, Michael D. Petraglia c a PACEA, University of Bordeaux, UMR 5199 Batiment^ B8, Allee Geoffrey St Hilaire, CS 50023, 33615 Pessac Cedex, France b Department of Geography, King's College London, K4U.06 Strand Campus, London WC2R 2LS, United Kingdom c School of Archaeology, Research Laboratory for Archaeology and the History of Art, University of Oxford, 28 New Barnett House, Little Clarendon Street, Oxford OX1 2HU, United Kingdom d Department of Archaeology, King Saud University, P.O. Box 2627, Riyadh 12372, Saudi Arabia article info abstract Article history: The Nefud Desert is crucial for resolving debates concerning hominin demography and behaviour in Available online 8 October 2014 the Saharo-Arabian belt. Situated at the interface between the Mediterranean Westerlies and African Monsoonal climate systems, the Nefud lies at the centre of the arid zone crossed by Homo sapiens Keywords: dispersing into Eurasia and the edges of the southernmost known extent of the Neanderthal range. In Pleistocene Palaeoenvironments 2013, the Palaeodeserts Project conducted an intensive survey of the western Nefud, to: (1) evaluate Lower Palaeolithic Pleistocene population dynamics in this important region of the Saharo-Arabian belt and (2) Middle Palaeolithic contribute towards understanding early modern human range expansions and interactions between different hominin species.
    [Show full text]
  • Stone Tools in the Paleolithic and Neolithic Near East: a Guide John J
    Stone Tools in the Paleolithic and Neolithic Near East: A Guide John J. Shea New York: Cambridge University Press, 2013, 408 pp. (hardback), $104.99. ISBN-13: 978-1-107-00698-0. Reviewed by DEBORAH I. OLSZEWSKI Department of Anthropology, Penn Museum, 3260 South Street, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; [email protected] n reading the Preface and Introduction to Shea’s book Stone Age Prehistory,” and lists the origins of genus Homo Iwhere he discusses why he wrote this volume on Near in the Lower Paleolithic period, which is incorrect both Eastern stone tools, I had to smile because his experience as temporally and geographically (Homo ergaster appearing ca a graduate student was analogous to mine. Learning about 1.8 Mya in Africa, or Homo habilis ca 2.5 Mya in Africa, if one stone tools in this world region was not easy because no accepts this hominin as sufficiently derived as to belong to single typology had been developed, at least in the sense genus Homo). And the same is true in this table for several of a widely accepted set of terminology that could be ap- other major evolutionary events for which our earliest evi- plied to the Paleolithic and Epipaleolithic there, or even the dence is African rather than Levantine. Neolithic period. In retrospect, it is somewhat surprising For Chapter 2 (Lithics Basics), the reader is immedi- that in the several decades since no one, until this book by ately immersed in how stone fractures (using terminol- Shea, undertook producing a compendium of information ogy from mechanics), is abraded, and is knapped.
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of Raw Material Differences in Stone Tool Shape Variation: an Experimental Assessment
    Journal of Archaeological Science 49 (2014) 472e487 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Archaeological Science journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jas The role of raw material differences in stone tool shape variation: an experimental assessment * Metin I. Eren a, b, , Christopher I. Roos c, Brett A. Story d, Noreen von Cramon-Taubadel e, Stephen J. Lycett e a Department of Anthropology, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, 65211, USA b Department of Archaeology, Cleveland Museum of Natural History, Cleveland, OH 44106-1767, USA c Department of Anthropology, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, TX 75275, USA d Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, TX 75275, USA e Department of Anthropology, University at Buffalo SUNY, 380 MFAC-Ellicott Complex, Buffalo, NY 14261-0005, USA article info abstract Article history: Lithic raw material differences are widely assumed to be a major determining factor of differences in Received 27 March 2014 stone tool morphology seen across archaeological sites, but the security of this assumption remains Received in revised form largely untested. Two different sets of raw material properties are thought to influence artifact form. The 29 May 2014 first set is internal, and related to mechanical flaking properties. The second set is external, namely the Accepted 30 May 2014 form (size, shape, presence of cortex) of the initial nodule or blank from which flakes are struck. We Available online 12 June 2014 conducted a replication experiment designed to determine whether handaxe morphology was influ- enced by raw materials of demonstrably different internal and external properties: flint, basalt, and Keywords: “ ” Raw material obsidian.
    [Show full text]
  • Defining-Modernities.Pdf (1.145Mb)
    Defining Modernities Interpretations of Cultural Modernity in the Southern African Middle Stone Age Jonathan Siqveland Masters thesis in Archaeology Spring 2015 Defining Modernities I Defining Modernities Preface First and foremost, I would like to thank my supervisor Dr. Sheila Coulson for detailed comments, and assistance in creating a realistic scope for the project. It was also very valuable to have a supervisor with insights and interests in the dispute over cultural modernity. I would also like to thank Dr. Sarah Wurz, for the opportunity to be a part of the Klasies River Mouth 2015 field team. Excavating at Klasies River Mouth was an invaluable experience. I thank all of my friends who have made the writing process enjoyable. Thanks to my fellow students, especially Anette Sand-Eriksen, Eirik Haug Røe, Isak Roalkvam, Erlend Kirkeng Jørgensen, Maria Svendsen, and Stine Urke Brunstad for constructive comments and tips. Further, I must give many thanks to the rest of my friends and flatmates for being social. Thanks also to Håvard N. Sønsteby for constructive comments and discussions. I thank my parents for general support, and constructive comments. Last, but not least, I thank Sofie Scheen Jahnsen for encouragement, discussions and support. Oslo, May 2015 Jonathan Siqveland II Defining Modernities III Defining Modernities Contents Preface....................................................................................................................................... II Contents ..................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • A Virtual Paleolithic: Assays in Photogrammetric Three-Dimensional Artifact Modelling
    A Virtual Paleolithic: Assays in Photogrammetric Three-Dimensional Artifact Modelling T. AlExAndrA SuMnEr Department of Anthropology, University of Toronto, 19 Russell Street, Toronto, Ontario, M5S 2S2 CANADA; [email protected] AndrEw T.r . RiddlE Department of Anthropology, University of Toronto, 19 Russell Street, Toronto, Ontario, M5S 2S2 CANADA; [email protected] ABSTRACT Access to Paleolithic artifact collections is often constrained due to the cost of travel, governmental restrictions, and the rare nature of unique specimens. In the current high-tech climate, researchers are turning their attention to alternative ways of gaining information about and analysing these materials. The recent boom in three-dimension- al replication of cultural materials including lithic, bone, and fossilized specimens, has provided researchers with an invaluable analytical tool with which to carry out new and innovative studies. In this paper, the authors review a cost-effective, photogrammetric-based three-dimensional modelling system that utilizes digital artifact images and commercial software. Requiring only a notebook computer and standard digital camera, this methodology allows for the production of digital computer models from which important morphological information can be ob- tained. The modelling process is exemplified through two case studies—the replication of an Acheulian handaxe and the ongoing modelling and analysis of Middle Paleolithic refitted cores from the site of Taramsa Hill, Egypt. In both cases, the forensic software package iWitnessTM was used to identify points on the artifact surface that were then converted into points in three-dimensions. The wireframe models produced from these points were then im- ported into 3DS Max 9TM where the model was skinned and subsequently manipulated to produce cross-sections and calculate morphometrics such as surface area, volume and center-of-mass.
    [Show full text]
  • Late Maritime Woodland (Ceramic) and Paleoindian End Scrapers: Stone Tool Technology Pamela J
    The University of Maine DigitalCommons@UMaine Electronic Theses and Dissertations Fogler Library 2001 Late Maritime Woodland (Ceramic) and Paleoindian End Scrapers: Stone Tool Technology Pamela J. Dickinson Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/etd Part of the Archaeological Anthropology Commons, Geomorphology Commons, and the Paleontology Commons Recommended Citation Dickinson, Pamela J., "Late Maritime Woodland (Ceramic) and Paleoindian End Scrapers: Stone Tool Technology" (2001). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 659. http://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/etd/659 This Open-Access Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@UMaine. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@UMaine. LATE MARITIME WOODLAND (CERAMIC) AND PALEOINDIAN END SCRAPERS: STONE TOOL TECHNOLOGY BY Pamela J. Dickinson B. A. University of New Brunswick, 1993 A THESIS Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science (in Quaternary Studies) The Graduate School The University of Maine December, 200 1 Advisory Committee: David Sanger, Professor of Anthropology and Quaternary and Climate Studies, Advisor Daniel H. Sandweiss, Associate Professor of Anthropology and Quaternary and Climate Studies Woodrow Thompson, Physical Geologist, Maine Geological Survey LATE MARITIME WOODLAND (CERAMIC) AND PALEOINDIAN END SCRAPERS: STONE TOOL TECHNOLOGY By Pamela J. Dickinson Thesis Advisor: Dr. David Sanger An Abstract of the Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science (in Quaternary Studies) December, 2001 Archaeologists tend to view lithic assemblages from a predominately morphological perspective, stressing the importance of the fluted point as the defining characteristic of the Paleoindian culture period (ca.
    [Show full text]
  • Ain Ghazal Excavation Reports 2: Evolution of Lithic Economies
    bibliotheca neolithica Asiae meridionalis et occidentalis Editors-in-Chief: Hans Georg K. Gebel Gary O. Rollefson Editors of the ‘Ain Ghazal Excavation Reports Gary O. Rollefson Zeidan A. Kafafi Alan H. Simmons Cooperating Institutions for Publishing this Volume: Faculty of Archaeology and Anthropology, Yarmouk University, Irbid Department of Antiquities, Amman Financial Support for Printing this Volume: Whitman College, Walla Walla ex oriente e.V., Berlin Managing Editor of this Volume, Layout: Hans Georg K. Gebel ‘Ain Ghazal Excavation Reports Volume 2 Evolution of Lithic Economies in the Levantine Neolithic: Development and Demise of Naviform Core Technology, as Seen at ‘Ain Ghazal Leslie A. Quintero bibliotheca neolithica Asiae meridionalis et occidentalis & Monograph of the Faculty of Archaeology and Anthropology (Yarmouk University) ex oriente, Berlin (2010) address of the bibliotheca neolithica Asiae meridionalis et occidentalis: ex oriente e.V., c/o Institut für Vorderasiatische Altertumskunde, Freie Universität Berlin, Hüttenweg 7, 14195 Berlin, Germany Copyright: ex oriente e.V., Berlin (2010) Printed in Germany by dbusiness GmbH, Berlin ISSN 1616-9360 (bibliotheca neolithica Asiae meridionalis et occidentalis) ISBN 978-3-9811888-4-4 Cover design by Yusuf Zu'bi, Yarmouk University (supported by G. Rollefson, Z. Kafafi, and S. Schaefer). Cover photo of ‘Ain Ghazal MPPNB blade cache by author, of ‘Ain Ghazal Central Field 1993 by Yusuf Zu'bi. ‘AIN GHAZAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH PROJECT Joint Enterprise of the Institute of Archaeology
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of Experimental Knapping in Empirically Testing Key Themes in the Evolution of Lithic Technology: Reduction Intensity, Efficiency and Behavioural Complexity
    The role of experimental knapping in empirically testing key themes in the evolution of lithic technology: reduction intensity, efficiency and behavioural complexity Antoine Muller BA (archaeology) BA Honours (archaeology) A thesis submitted for the degree of Master of Philosophy at The University of Queensland in 2017 School of Social Science Abstract Experimental knapping has complimented and stimulated lithic analyses for over a century. Throughout this period, the discipline has witnessed an increase in the scientific rigour and theoretical grounding with which these studies are conducted. This thesis charts these key trends and in doing so establishes a best-practice model of experimental knapping, the veracity of which is in turn tested using four new lithic experiments. These case-studies employ experimental knapping to advance our understanding of flake platform measurement, reduction intensity, technological efficiency, and behavioural complexity. The first case-study, Chapter 3, offers a more accurate and precise calliper-based method of flake platform measurement that relies on simple geometric approximations of platform shape rather than the inflexible and unreliable existing method of multiplying platform width by thickness. In Chapter 4, a new reduction intensity metric for backed blades, a hitherto overlooked tool-type, is developed and tested on the backed blades from an early Neolithic site in Turkey. This new metric allows a reconstruction of the raw material consumption patterns at the site, finding that the backed blades likely contributed to conserving the inhabitants’ scarce lithic raw material. Meanwhile, Chapter 5 outlines the results of a comparison of the raw material efficiency of eight different lithic technologies, finding that lithic technological efficiency was a generally ascending trend over the last 3.3 million years and that the main transition in efficiency occurred between the Lower to Middle Palaeolithic.
    [Show full text]