A Statistical Examination of Flake Edge Angles Produced During Experimental Lineal Levallois Reductions and Consideration of Their Functional Implications

Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory

Volumn 23, Issue 1, 2016, Pages 379-398

  Eren, Metin I ^a,b   Lycett, Stephen J ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI   (United States)

^b CLEVELAND MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY AT BUFFALO   (United States)

Author keywords

Edge angles; Levallois; Middle Palaeolithic

Indexed keywords

EID: 84957973165     PISSN: 10725369     EISSN: 15737764     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10816-015-9245-z     Document Type: Article

References (70)

1. Adler, D. S., Wilkinson, K. N., Blockley, S., Mark, D. F., Pinhasi, R., Schmidt-Magee, B. A., Nahapetyan, S., Mallol, C., Berna, F., Glauberman, P. J., Rasczynski-Henk, Y., Wales, N., Frahm, E., Jöris, O., MacLeod, A., Smith, V. C., Cullen, V. L., & Gasparian, B. (2014). Early Levallois technology and the Lower to Middle Paleolithic transition in the Southern Caucasus. Science, 345, 1609–1613.
2. Atkins, T. (2009). The science and engineering of cutting: the mechanics and processes of separating, scratching and puncturing biomaterials, metals and non-metals. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
3. Beck, C. (1995). Functional attributes and differential persistence of Great Basin dart forms. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology, 17, 222–243.
4. Bleed, P. (2001). Artifice constrained: what determines technological choice? In M. B. Schiffer (Ed.), Perspectives on Technology (pp. 151–162). Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.
5. Boëda, E. (1995). Levallois: a volumetric construction, methods, a technique. In H. L. Dibble & O. Bar-Yosef (Eds.), The Definition and Interpretation of Levallois Technology (pp. 41–68). Madison: Prehistory Press.
6. Bordes, F. (1950). Principes d’une méthode d’étude des techniques de debitage et de la typologie du Paléolithique ancien et moyen. L'Anthropologie, 54, 19–34.
7. Borel, A., Gaillard, C., Moncel, M.-H., Sala, R., Pouydebat, E., Simanjuntak, T., & Sémah, F. (2013). How to interpret informal flake assemblages? Integrating morphological description, usewear and morphometric analysis gave better understanding of the behaviors of Anatomically Modern Humans from Song Terus (Indonesia). Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 32, 630–646.
8. Bradley, B., (1977). Experimental Lithic Technology with Special Reference to the Middle Palaeolithic. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Archaeology, Cambridge University.
9. Brantingham, P. J., & Kuhn, S. L. (2001). Constraints on Levallois core technology: a mathematical model. Journal of Archaeological Science, 28, 747–761.
10. Brantingham, P. J., Olsen, J. W., Rech, J. A., & Krivoshapkin, A. I. (2000). Raw material quality and prepared core technologies in Northeast Asia. Journal of Archaeological Science, 27, 255–271.
11. Braun, D. R., Plummer, T., Ferraro, J. V., Ditchfield, P., & Bishop, L. C. (2009). Raw material quality and Oldowan hominin toolstone preferences: evidence from Kanjera South, Kenya. Journal of Archaeological Science, 36, 1605–1614.
12. Chazan, M. (1997). Redefining Levallois. Journal of Human Evolution, 33, 719–735.
13. Clarke, D. L. (1972). Models and paradigms in contemporary archaeology. In D. L. Clarke (Ed.), Models in Archaeology (pp. 1–60). London: Methuen.
14. Collins, S. (2008). Experimental investigations into edge performance and its implications for stone artefact reduction modelling. Journal of Archaeological Science, 35, 2164–2170.
15. Commont, V. (1909). L’industrie moustérienne dans la region de nord de la France. Congrés Préhistorique de France, 5ième session. Bureaux de la Société Préhistoire de France, Paris, pp 115–157.
16. Delagnes, A. (1995). Variability within uniformity: three levels of variability within the Levallois system. In H. L. Dibble & O. Bar-Yosef (Eds.), The Definition and Interpretation of Levallois Technology (pp. 201–213). Madison: Prehistory Press.
17. Dibble, H. L. (1989). The implications of stone tool types for the presence of language during the Lower and Middle Palaeolithic. In P. Mellars & C. Stringer (Eds.), The human revolution: behavioural and biological perspectives on the origins of modern humans (pp. 415–432). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
18. Dibble, H. L., & Bernard, M. C. (1980). A comparative study of basic edge angle measurement techniques. American Antiquity, 45, 857–865.
19. Dytham, C. (2011). Choosing and using statistics: a biologist’s guide (3rd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell Science.
20. Eerkens, J. W., & Bettinger, R. L. (2001). Techniques for assessing standardization in artifact assemblages: can we scale variability? American Antiquity, 66, 493–504.
21. Eren, M., & Bradley, B. (2009). Experimental evaluation of the Levallois “core shape maintenance” hypothesis. Lithic Technology, 34, 119–125.
22. Eren, M. I., & Lycett, S. J. (2012). Why Levallois? A morphometric comparison of experimental ‘preferential’ Levallois flakes versus debitage flakes. PLoS ONE, 7, e29273. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0029273.
23. Eren, M. I., Bradley, B., & Sampson, C. G. (2011a). Middle Paleolithic skill-level and the Individual knapper: an experiment. American Antiquity, 76, 229–251.
24. Eren, M. I., Lycett, S. J., Roos, C., & Sampson, C. G. (2011b). Toolstone constraints on knapping skill: Levallois reduction with two different raw materials. Journal of Archaeological Science, 38, 2731–2739.
25. Eren, M. I., Patten, R. J., O’Brien, M. J., & Meltzer, D. J. (2013). Refuting the technological cornerstone of the Ice-Age Atlantic crossing hypothesis. Journal of Archaeological Science, 40, 2934–2941.
26. Feltz, C. J., & Miller, G. E. (1996). An asymptotic test for the equality of coefficients of variation from k populations. Statistics in Medicine, 15, 647–658.
27. Ferguson, W. C. (1980). Edge-angle classification of the Quininup Brook implements: testing the ethnographic analogy. Archaeology and Physical Anthropology in Oceania, 15, 56–72.
28. Gould, R. A. (1980). Living Archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
29. Gould, R. A., Koster, D. A., & Sontz, A. H. L. (1971). The lithic assemblage of the Western Desert Aborigines of Australia. American Antiquity, 36, 149–169.
30. Hayden, B., Franco, N., & Spafford, J. (1996). Evaluating lithic strategies and design criteria. In G. H. Odell (Ed.), Stone tools: theoretical insights into human prehistory (pp. 9–50). New York: Plenum Press.
31. Hovers, E., & Belfer-Cohen, A. (2013). On variability and complexity. Current Anthropology, 54, S337–S357.
32. Hublin, J.-J. (2009). The origin of Neandertals. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 106, 16022–16027.
33. Jensen, H. J. (1986). Unretouched blades in the Late Mesolithic of South Scandinavia: a functional study. Oxford Journal of Archaeology, 5, 19–33.
34. Kardong, K. V. (2006). Vertebrates: comparative anatomy, function, evolution. Boston: MA, McGraw-Hill.
35. Key, A. J. M., & Lycett, S. J. (2015). Edge angle as a variably influential factor in flake cutting efficiency: an experimental investigation of its relationship with tool size and loading. Archaeometry. doi:10.1111/arcm.12140.
36. Kuhn, S. L. (1994). A formal approach to the design and assembly of mobile toolkits. American Antiquity, 59, 426–442.
37. Kuhn, S. L., & Hovers, E. (2013). Alternative pathways to complexity: evolutionary trajectories in the Middle Paleolithic and Middle Stone Age. Current Anthropology, 54, S176–S182.
38. Lycett, S. J. (2009). Are Victoria West cores ‘proto-Levallois’? A phylogenetic assessment. Journal of Human Evolution, 56(2), 175–191.
39. Lycett, S. J., & Eren, M. I. (2013a). Levallois lessons: the challenge of integrating mathematical models, quantitative experiments and the archaeological record. World Archaeology, 45, 519–538.
40. Lycett, S. J., & Eren, M. I. (2013b). Levallois economics: an examination of ‘waste’ production in experimentally produced Levallois reduction sequences. Journal of Archaeological Science, 40, 2384–2392.
41. Lycett, S. J., & Gowlett, J. A. J. (2008). On questions surrounding the Acheulean ‘tradition’. World Archaeology, 40, 295–315.
42. McBrearty, S., Bishop, L., Plummer, T., Dewar, R., & Conard, N. (1998). Tools underfoot: human trampling as an agent of lithic artifact edge modification. American Antiquity, 63, 108–129.
43. McPherron, S. P., Braun, D. R., Dogandžić, T., Archer, W., Desta, D., & Lin, S. C. (2014). An experimental assessment of the influences on edge damage to lithic artifacts: a consideration of edge angle, substrate grain size, raw material properties, and exposed face. Journal of Archaeological Science, 49, 70–82.
44. Meignen, L., Delagnes, A., & Bourguignon, L. (2009). Patterns of lithic material procurements and transformation during the Middle Palaeolithic in western Europe. In B. Adams & B. S. Blades (Eds.), Lithic Materials and Palaeolithic Societies (pp. 15–24). Chichester: Blackwell.
45. Moncel, M.-H., Moigne, A.-M., Sam, Y., & Combier, J. (2011). The emergence of Neanderthal technical behavior: new evidence from Orgnac 3 (Level 1, MIS 8), southeastern France. Current Anthropology, 52, 37–75.
46. Noble, W., & Davidson, I. (1996). Human evolution, language and mind: a psychological and archaeological enquiry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
47. O’Brien, M. J., Holland, T. D., Hoard, R. J., & Fox, G. L. (1994). Evolutionary implications of design and performance characteristics of prehistoric pottery. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 1, 259–304.
48. Okumura, M., & Araujo, A. G. (2014). Long-term cultural stability in hunter–gatherers: a case study using traditional and geometric morphometric analysis of lithic stemmed bifacial points from Southern Brazil. Journal of Archaeological Science, 45, 59–71.
49. Pelegrin, J. (2005). Remarks about archaeological techniques and methods of knapping. In V. Roux & B. Bril (Eds.), Stone Knapping: the Necessary Conditions for a Uniquely HomininBehaviour (pp. 23–33). Cambridge: McDonald Institute Monographs.
50. Pepère, M. (1986). Apport de la typométrie à la definition des éclats Levallois: l'exemple d'Ault. Bulletin de la Société préhistorique française, 83, 115–118.
51. Picin, A., Vaquero, M., Weniger, G. C., & Carbonell, E. (2014). Flake morphologies and patterns of core configuration at the AbricRomaní rock-shelter: a geometric morphometric approach. Quaternary International, 350, 84–93.
52. Pool, C. A., & Britt, G. M. (2000). Ceramic perspective on the Formative to Classic transition in Southern Veracruz, Mexico. Latin American Antiquity, 11, 139–161.
53. Sandgathe, D. M. (2004). Alternative interpretation of the Levallois reduction technique. Lithic Technology, 29, 147–159.
54. Schiffer, M. B., & Skibo, J. M. (1987). Theory and experiment in the study of technological change. Current Anthropology, 595–622.
55. Schlanger, N. (1996). Understanding Levallois: lithic technology and cognitive archaeology. Cambridge Archaeological Journal, 6, 231–254.
56. Skibo, J. M., & Schiffer, M. B. (2001). Understanding artifact variability and change: a behavioral framework. In M. B. Schiffer (Ed.), Perspectives on Technology (pp. 139–149). Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.
57. Simão, J. (2002). Tools evolve: the artificial selection and evolution of Paleolithic stone tools. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 25, 419.
58. Smith, R. A. (1911). A Palaeolithic industry at Northfleet, Kent. Archaeologica, 62, 512–532.
59. Sokal, R. R., & Rohlf, F. J. (1995). Biometry. Third Edition ed. W.H. Freeman & Co, New York.
60. Spurrell, F. C. J. (1884). On some Palaeolithic knapping tools and modes of using them. Journal of the Anthropological Institute, 13, 109–118.
61. Tringham, R., Cooper, G., Odell, G., Voytek, B., & Whitman, A. (1974). Experimentation in the formation of edge damage. Journal of Field Archaeology, 1, 171–196.
62. Tryon, C. A., & Faith, J. T. (2013). Variability in the Middle Stone Age of eastern Africa. Current Anthropology, 54, S234–S254.
63. Turq, A. (1992). Raw material and technological studies of the Quina Mousterian in Perigord. In: Dibble H, Mellars P (eds) The Middle Paleolithic: adaptation, behavior, and variability. The University Museum, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, pp 75–85.
64. Van Peer, P. (1992). The Levallois Reduction Strategy. Madison: Prehistory Press.
65. White, J. P., & Thomas, D. H. (1972). What means these stones? Ethno-taxonomic models and archaeological interpretations in the New Guinea Highlands. In D. L. Clarke (Ed.), Models in archaeology (pp. 275–308). London: Duckworth Press.
66. White, J. P., Modjeska, N., & Hipuya, I. (1977). Group definitions and mental templates: an ethnographic experiment. In R. V. S. Wright (Ed.), Stone tools as cultural markers. Change, evolution and complexity (pp. 380–390). Camberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.
67. Wilmsen, E. N. (1968). Functional analysis of flaked stone artefacts. American Antiquity, 33, 156–161.
68. Wurz, S. (2013). Technological trends in the Middle Stone Age of South Africa between MIS 7 and MIS 3. Current Anthropology, 54, S305–S319.
69. Wynn, T., & Coolidge, F. L. (2004). The expert Neandertal mind. Journal of Human Evolution, 46, 467–487.
70. Wynn, T., & Coolidge, F. L. (2010). How Levallois reduction is similar to, and not similar to, playing chess. In A. Nowell & I. Davidson (Eds.), Stone tools and the evolution of human cognition (pp. 83–103). Boulder: University Press of Colorado.