skip to navigation
ADS Main Website
Help
|
Login
/
Browse by Series
/
Series
/ Journal Issue
Lithics 16
Title
The title of the publication or report
Title:
Lithics 16
Series
The series the publication or report is included in
Series:
Lithics
Volume
Volume number and part
Volume:
16
Number of Pages
The number of pages in the publication or report
Number of Pages:
111
Publication Type
The type of publication - report, monograph, journal article or chapter from a book
Publication Type:
Journal
Editor
The editor of the publication or report
Editor:
Alison Roberts
Year of Publication
The year the book, article or report was published
Year of Publication:
1995
Note
Extra information on the publication or report.
Note:
Editorial Expansion: Lithic Studies Society Newsletter 16; Issue dedicated to the archaeology of pre-modern humans
Source
Where the record has come from or which dataset it was orginally included in.
Source:
BIAB (biab_online)
Relations
Other resources which are relevant to this publication or report
Relations:
URI:
http://www.lithics.org/lithics/lithics16.html
Created Date
The date the record of the pubication was first entered
Created Date:
12 Aug 2014
Please click on an Article link to go to the Article Details.
Article Title
Access Type
Author / Editor
Page
Start/End
Abstract
A matter of form; instruction sets and the shaping of early technolo...
John A J Gowlett
2 - 16
Discusses the form of early stone tools, and what can be deduced regarding technology and human evolution. Recent challenges to the concept of form are dealt with, and a proposition is put forward that stone artefacts must have 'form', or they would not be recognised. Form need not necessarily be diagnostic of humans, but is diagnostic of artefacts: tool-making by chimpanzees could contribute towards a comparative framework. The level to which tools can be said to be designed is considered, with reference to instruction sets and routines and how these relate to form. A concluding section makes some broad points on the effectiveness of measures of intelligence. It seems likely that the brain/mind may have evolved in facets; it is considered that archaeological evidence offers some prospects of disentangling these facets and the time-relationships in their evolution. LD
The Start of the British Lower Palaeolithic; some new and old thoughts and speculations
Derek A Roe
17 - 26
Updated overview of the British Lower and Middle Palaeolithic periods, focusing mainly on the opening stage of the Lower Palaeolithic. For British Palaeolithic archaeologists, the principal changes over the past fifteen years include a substantially altered understanding of the British Pleistocene sequence, the discovery of several major new sites, and important reinterpretations of old ones on the basis of new fieldwork. New information has also been extracted from assemblages through the application of new techniques or approaches, and comparable advances have been made by specialists in other fields of Quaternary research. The article considers mainly what has been learned from the excavation or re-excavation of sites in Britain, and is necessarily highly selective; two particularly important sites are Boxgrove and High Lodge. LD
Technology of early Palaeolithic western Europe; innovation, variability and a unified framework
Mark J White
Paul B Pettitt
27 - 40
Three main problematic areas in the technology of Early Palaeolithic Europe are identified. Whilst these are directly addressed by lithic research, each is approached individually: there is an absence of an overall conceptual approach. This article takes a homogenising approach, interpreting the technological behaviour of the Early Palaeolithic from the initial hominid colonisation to the terminal Middle Palaeolithic in terms of a broad technological framework. After outlining the framework, examples from the archaeology of Palaeolithic Europe are discussed. It is concluded that the entire Early Palaeolithic can be characterised by the use of two very simple approaches to raw materials. There appears to be a simple linear trend, not of increasing sophistication, but of a gradual increase in one type of technological system over another: systems of faconnage, notably geared toward the production of bifaces, develop into variable systems of flake-producing debitage. LD
Bifaces in a Clactonian context at Little Thurrock, Grays, Essex
Bernard W Conway
41 - 46
Although the Pleistocene deposits of the Little Thurrock area in Grays, Essex, are well known, faunal remains and lithic material having been recovered in the 19th century, little interest in the artefacts was shown by early workers; this is attributed to the absence of bifaces within the assemblage. Between 1959 and 1964 the author collected 288 artefacts consisting of core and flake material from a series of sections exposed at the Celcon Works; after examination these were described by J Wymer as Clactonian. On re-examining the assemblage recently, the author identified what he now perceived to be two bifaces of non-classic form and two biface thinning flakes. These are described and illustrated here. The raw materials of the assemblage as a whole are also noted, and the stratigraphic context is described. The author concludes with the question, 'Can this site still be regarded as Clactonian?' LD
A re-examination of the British biface data
Shannon J Patrick McPherron
47 - 63
During the 1960s, Roe defined a new way of measuring the shape of bifaces, leading to our current understanding of morphological variability in British Lower Palaeolithic assemblages. However, new studies have de-emphasised traditional stylistic and functional modes of explanation. This paper argues that the variability documented by Roe is due largely to differences in the intensity of bifacial reduction; this hypothesis is based on studies of Acheulian assemblages in northern France. Roe's methodology is explained in detail. A reduction model focusing on tip length is then tested, and it is found that shape is highly correlated with tip length. The results of the study are discussed in the light of other recent work focusing on the role of raw materials and reduction intensity in structuring variability. It is concluded that the variability of Acheulian bifaces cannot be addressed by simply comparing average morphology between sites '“ reduction strategies must be compared instead. LD
Studying biface butchery at Boxgrove; Roe deer butchery with replica handaxes
John C Mitchell
64 - 69
Describes the recent butchery of a roe deer carcass using replica flint handaxes, undertaken as part of a wider investigation into Lower Palaeolithic handaxe function. The primary functions of experiments within the study are to produce use-wear traces for comparison with traces seen on archaeological implements, and to discover how practical and efficient the implements are in accomplishing tasks likely to have been carried out in the Lower Palaeolithic. The study centres on material from Boxgrove in West Sussex; a large amount of the flint material at this site is in situ, and preliminary analysis and contextual evidence suggest the use of handaxes as butchery tools. For the present experiment an experienced butcher was enlisted to skin, bone and joint the meat from the deer carcass. Some detailed observations on the butcher's findings and experience in relation to the tools are recounted. Preliminary results from analysis of the replica implements indicate that the clear traces formed during the experiment are very similar to those recorded on a growing number of handaxes from Boxgrove. LD
A Reply to Pettitt
Harold L Dibble
80 - 89
Addresses points made by Pettitt in an article published in Lithics 13, in which he states three reasons why an acceptance of tool reduction as a major factor of Mousterian lithic assemblage variability is premature. Dibble acknowledges that much of the work presented in Pettitt's article is rigorous and sound but explains some methodological errors that may affect his conclusions, particularly the combining of data from different assemblages. The role of consciousness in different models is discussed, and the move towards a processual approach to virtually all aspects of chipped-stone technology is described. It is concluded that whilst Pettitt's analysis raises useful points, it would seem premature to dismiss tool reduction as a significant factor in artefact and assemblage variability. The importance of understanding all of the factors that affect the evidence available to us, including processes of discard and post-depositional alteration of artefacts, is emphasised. LD