How many techniques to retouch a backed point? Assessing the reliability of backing technique recognition on the base of
- PDF / 4,341,620 Bytes
- 21 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 89 Downloads / 125 Views
ORIGINAL PAPER
How many techniques to retouch a backed point? Assessing the reliability of backing technique recognition on the base of experimental tests Nicolò Fasser 1
&
Federica Fontana 1 & Davide Visentin 1
Received: 28 February 2019 / Accepted: 23 May 2019 # Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019
Abstract Backing techniques represent one of the most relevant technical aspects involved in the manufacturing processes of backed tools. In this paper, we present results of an experimental programme focused on the manufacture of backed points, a kind of tool that has played a key role in Upper Palaeolithic technical systems. In order to identify which retouch techniques are effective to produce backed points, different combinations of retouchers (lithic vs. organic) and force application modes (percussion vs. pressure vs. abrasion) were tested. Through a morphoscopic analysis, it was possible to identify and describe numerous mesoscopic and macroscopic criteria useful for the identification of retouch techniques. The results of this experimental activity were then validated through a series of blind tests. Furthermore, these criteria were applied to an archaeological assemblage of backed points from the Late Epigravettian series of Riparo Tagliente (Verona, North-Eastern Italy). It was thus possible to determine the use of two retouch techniques: soft stone percussion on anvil and pressure by a soft stone retoucher. If percussion on anvil had already been attested in several Late Glacial sites, pressure by soft stone is here identified for the first time in an archaeological context. Keywords Retouch techniques . Experimental archaeology . Blind tests . Late Epigravettian . Riparo Tagliente
Introduction Projectile implements—and namely backed points—are one of the most represented categories of retouched blanks in Upper Palaeolithic assemblages. The frequency of these artefacts is mostly related to their relevant role in hunter-gatherers’ daily life mostly in connection to cynegetic activities. Another aspect which reveals the importance of such tools is their high variability through time and space. Since the early stages of the development of prehistoric studies, these tools have been
* Nicolò Fasser [email protected] Federica Fontana [email protected] Davide Visentin [email protected] 1
Dipartimento di Studi Umanistici, Sezione di Scienze Preistoriche e Antropologiche, Università degli Studi di Ferrara, Corso Ercole I d’Este 32, 44100 Ferrara, Italy
thus attributed a key role (the so-called fossiles directeurs) in the definition of specific cultural Btechno-complexes^ or Bcultural facies^. As suggested by several ethnographic studies, the reason for this variability is most probably to be searched in two main factors: the hunting techniques (e.g. spear thrower vs. bow) adopted in relation to different environments and the pursued preys and the recognized role of these tools as elements for the identification of ethnic and personal identities (Wiessner 1983, 1984;
Data Loading...
