Distinguishing features between man made tools and naturally fragmented alleged tools

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Distinguishing features between man made tools and naturally fragmented alleged tools"

Cordelia York
5 years ago
Views:

Distinguishing features between man made tools and naturally fragmented alleged tools Introduction: There are certain degrees of differences between the man made tools what we frequently called

On the other hand there are also some naturally fragmented rocks which possess certain similar characters like those of the man made tools with some specific purposes.

1 Distinguishing features between man made tools and naturally fragmented alleged tools Introduction: There are certain degrees of differences between the man made tools what we frequently called artifacts and the naturally fragmented or made alleged tools. On the other hand there are also some naturally fragmented rocks which possess certain similar characters like those of the man made tools with some specific purposes. Such similar characters sometimes make confusion which mislead the archaeologists while identifying and classifying the Artifacts specimens. The archaeologists sorted out the basic attributes which are possessed by each man made or modified tool with a purpose and apply while identifying and classifying the tools. Hence archaeologists try to find out the sign of intentional knapping, because the purpose of intentional knapping is to make tools, in the broader sense of the term (as it will always leave similar scars on man Alleged tools made tools). The technological interpretation of any worked stone artifact will therefore be specific to that artifact, and based on the precise observation and recognition of those scars. A (man made) stone artifact can only be defined as such by removal scars, both positive and negative. Resulting from either the pressure flaking or percussion technique, such scars obey physical laws and are identical whether the knapping is intentional (man-made) or not (natural). The diagnosis of intentional knapping is best indicated when the artifacts are discovered in a well defined archaeological context. In the case of chance discoveries or surveys, the main criteria for recognizing intentional knapping is the organization of removals. Caution is required when flakes or even pebble tools are found on a beach, for they may well result from natural phenomena (so called naturally made alleged tools); to the contrary, the discovery of a single handaxe or a single Levallois core can prove intentional knapping (man-made): the organization of removals follows so specific a sequence that the 1

possibility of chance knapping due to random impacts can be dismissed.

However one must bear in mind that it is not always easy to distinguish (man-made) intentional from naturally made (unintentional knapping), and the often arises as to whether the modifications

The concept of man made tools : Man first conceptualizes the would be shape, size, working edge and butt of the tool beforehand, and accordingly he selects the suitable raw material, then chose the

2 possibility of chance knapping due to random impacts can be dismissed. The number of pieces found and their geological position provide additional information concerning the context and further help to established the possible presence of a site. However one must bear in mind that it is not always easy to distinguish (man-made) intentional from naturally made (unintentional knapping), and the often arises as to whether the modifications reflect intent or accident. The present topic aims at discussing the points of difference between the man-made and naturally made or fragmented alleged tools. The concept of man made tools : Man first conceptualizes the would be shape, size, working edge and butt of the tool beforehand, and accordingly he selects the suitable raw material, then chose the flaking techniques to make it. Therefore, man made tools have generally a regular pattern. Regularly patterned tools are therefore considered as the signs of culture. Stone is the most imperishable of all the materials which were used by our prehistoric man for the manufacturing of his tools. He made stone tools by Bulb of percussion percussion flaking technique (striking a stone with another stone). There is evidence of gradual technological evolution in the man-made tools. The resultant character of the blow may be understood first, that a sharp blow directed vertically at a point on the surface of the block of rock, say flint, knocks out a solid cone called conchoidal fracture. However, when the blow is directed obliquely near the edge of a slab, a flake is detached with half of the cone of percussion. This halfformed cone of percussion at the point Conchoidal fracture of impact on the flake is called the positive bulb of percussion, and the corresponding hollowed flake scar on the parent lump or core is called the negative bulb of percussion. There are also Direction of the blow 2

low concentric ripples around the bulb of percussion corresponding to the force of the blow and the amount of the resistance in the block. This is, according to L.S.B.

3 low concentric ripples around the bulb of percussion corresponding to the force of the blow and the amount of the resistance in the block. This is, according to L.S.B. Leakey, because of the fact that the force from a blow does not travel in the direction of the blow but at an angle to it, and not in one straight line, but along a curve representing the ever-widening circles. He further stated that if the direction of the blow is at an angle to the surface of the flint only a small part of the cone affects the flint, and the rest is absorbed outside the flint. Manufacturing techniques of man-made tools : Researches on the techniques of making stone tools by prehistoric man have now established various ways of flaking. These can be grouped under three categories - (a) Direct percussion flaking, (b) Indirect percussion flaking and (c) Pressure flaking. In the direct percussion flaking, the hammer strikes directly on the surface of the block of stone for detaching a desired flake. The flakes detached by using different hammers will exhibit different characters. For example, the flake struck off the core by using large heavy hammer stone will exhibit very prominent bulb of percussion on the main flake surface, while light stone hammer produces flakes with small and flatter bulb of percussion. At times some of the massive flakes are also Prominent bulb of percussion used in making tools like cleavers and hand axes. This will be hard to believe in case of the nature. The prehistoric man in making the stone tools also employs step flaking and bi-polar techniques. These two techniques are the evidence of preconceived ideas of man for making the stone tools. The naturally fragmented alleged tools do not exhibit such preconceived ideas. Flakes produced by the levallois or discoid core technique will always have a regular pattern, and the levallois flakes could be used as tool without further modification. But nature cannot produce such flakes with regular patterns. Another convincing character of the man made tools is the presence of the alternate secondary flaking that nature cannot produce. The purpose of the alternate and secondary flaking is for 3

producing sharp working edge and blunt suitable handholding or hafting place. Pressure flaking is a highly specialized technique adopted by the prehistoric man in making tools like leaf-shaped points.

4 producing sharp working edge and blunt suitable handholding or hafting place. Pressure flaking is a highly specialized technique adopted by the prehistoric man in making tools like leaf-shaped points. This technique produces very thin flake scars resembling the fish scales arranging in a regular systematic pattern. However, such regular set of meaning full fish scale-like scars are not present on the naturally made alleged tools. Prehistoric man had also adopted the techniques of pecking, sawing, grinding and polishing in making Neolithic stone tools; and these techniques were applied purposefully. There is no evidence of such purposeful techniques in the naturally produced tools. Types of man made tools and naturally fragmented alleged tools : Man made tools are best represented by the types such as Chopper, Chopping tool, various types of Hand-axes and Cleavers, Pick, Handazes, Scraper, Point, Borer, Blade, Burins, Micro-blades, Denticulates, various types of celts, Ringstones or Mace-heads and naturally made alleged tools are called Eoliths. Even the oldest Hand-axes from the earliest Pleistocene deposits have standardized forms, whereas the eoliths though used as tools by the immediate forerunners of man lack such character. K.P.Oakley (1965) stated, The possibility of discovering evidence of man in the Pliocene was being considered towards the end of the last century, and in 1891 Prestwich published an account of some crudely shaped flints, looking like simple tools which had been found in patches of the Pre-glacial plateau drift on the North Downs of Kent by an amateur archaeologist, Benjamin Harrison, of Ightham. They came to be known as Eoliths, since it was suggested that they were the earliest recognizable implements, and represented the dawn of tool making. However, detailed studies have shown that all the Kent and Sussex Eoliths can be matched exactly by stones chipped by natural agencies. Thus, any among them which have been chipped by man would not be distinguishable from the probably far greater number which has been shaped through the accidents of nature. 4

5 Knapping Accident A knapping accident, which may occur during flaking, shaping or retouching, is an unforeseen and unintentional accident generating products with a specific morphology. Archaeologically observed and experimentally produced knapping accidents are identical, thus strengthening the credibility of the analogy-based experimental approach. They come as a certain number of types and are due either to flow flaws in the raw material (such as joints, vesicles, saccharoid, nodules etc.) or to some mismanagement on the knapper s part. Knapping accidents have varying repercussions on the continuation of the knapping sequence to which they belong. They can be irreversible (for instance, the fracture of a large leaf-shaped bifacial piece, pluging Levallois point etc.) put right (hinged blade removed from a core with two striking platforms : in the case, a single removal struck off from the opposite platform is sufficient for debitage to proceed unimpaired), or of no consequence (bulb scars, fracture of a burin spall when the later is a waste product, etc.) Although unintentionally obtained, the products resulting from knapping accidents can also be used as blanks. Knapping accidents can broadly be divided into four groups. They are : (1) Breaks, (2) Plunging flakes, (3) Hinged flakes, and (4) Miscellaneous. 1. Breaks : Breaks are accidental snapping of a flake upon removal, or of any artifact in the process of being knapped. The occurance of breaks is irrespective of technique employed (percussion, pressure etc.). The main type of breaks are : i) Clean breaks, ii) Siret accidental breaks, iii) Languatte breaks and iv) Nacelle breaks. i) Clean break : It is the type of the break whose surface is perpendicular to the dibitage axis and the lower face. ii) Siret accidental break : It refers to the snapping of a flake into two aligning the debitage axis. Such accidents were long mistaken for burins; they leave but a partial arris on the core (when it is at all visible), on the distal part of the removal negative. iii) Languette breaks : They usually occurs on the upper or lower face. They can be simple or double, in which (the latter case) they sometimes generate characteristic waste products. iv) Nacelle breaks : It is initiated by bulb scars which arch suddenly 5

6 towards the upper face, removing parts of the two edges, and then intersected suddenly at the lower face. The small waste product corresponding to the Nacelle has a very specific shape. Such incidents are very common when pressure rather than percussion is applied. 2. Pluging flakes : They result from phenomenon causing the fracture plane, whose proximal part is normal, to plunge suddenly away from the exterior surface and remove a whole section of the blank, be it a core, a debitage product or a tool. 3. Hinged flakes : They are the opposite of plunging flakes, although they probably share the same physical causes (variation in the propagation speed of the fracture front). A hinged flake is a removal whose fracture plane, normal in its proximal part, arches suddenly and intersects prematurely with the upper face of the blank, resulting in a rounded fistal end (hinge-fracture) or an abrupt clean break (stepfracture). The blank is therefore shorter than what was expected. Hinge pieces and their removal negatives are very prominient. It is the most common accident that befalls the beginners when they try their hand at knapping. 4. Miscellaneous : These includes incipient fractures, lipped flakes, parasitical flakes, and spontaneous removals. 6

Agencies for producing naturally made alleged tools : We need to know the various agencies in nature that cause flaking of stone to distinguish these characters from

$Thermal change termed as thermal fracture is one of the chief accidental agencies by which stones are flaked. K.P.$ $In Blade-core like fracture due to Thermal changes deserts, for example, the exposed surfaces of some types of rock are continually flaking as a result of the difference$ $A flake or flake-scar due to frost or other thermal fracture is easily recognized for the surface of fracture has either a roughish, blank appearance, or shows ripples$

7 Agencies for producing naturally made alleged tools : We need to know the various agencies in nature that cause flaking of stone to distinguish these characters from those of the man made tools. Flaking could also be done by the natural agencies. Thermal change termed as thermal fracture is one of the chief accidental agencies by which stones are flaked. K.P.Oakley (1965:9 10) stated that Rapid changes of temperature cause unequal expansion or contraction of the surface of the stone or rock relative to its interior. In Blade-core like fracture due to Thermal changes deserts, for example, the exposed surfaces of some types of rock are continually flaking as a result of the difference between the day and night temperature. In the cold regions, flakes are commonly split off by frost the outer layer of the stone expanding through the freezing of absorbed water. A flake or flake-scar due to frost or other thermal fracture is easily recognized for the surface of fracture has either a roughish, blank appearance, or shows ripples concentric about a central A residual frost-pitted lump point.. Flakes with round in outline are produced by the frost action, and the residual frost-pitted lump of appropriate shape is easily mistaken as implement. Thermal changes are sometimes cause flint to break into prisms resembling blade-cores; and stones 7

splintered by fire or facetted by sandstorms are occasionally mistaken as blades.

When heavy stones carried by the waves of sea or heavy torrential water or the glacier strike against the fixed stone in the beach or gravel bed the detached flakes will flatter and more diffused

After Friction sometime the flaked stone is eroded and redeposited at another location, and again strikes by another heavy stone in the same process as above resulting to the detaching of another

8 splintered by fire or facetted by sandstorms are occasionally mistaken as blades. However, in closure examination it could be noticed that such splintered blades break through the joint-plane or the strains setup by slow internal shrinkages. When heavy stones carried by the waves of sea or heavy torrential water or the glacier strike against the fixed stone in the beach or gravel bed the detached flakes will flatter and more diffused bulb of percussion will be formed. After Friction sometime the flaked stone is eroded and redeposited at another location, and again strikes by another heavy stone in the same process as above resulting to the detaching of another flake either unidirectionally or bidirectionally to the previous flake scar. Such repeated course of action may produce the stone resembling the shape of an implement. Since the flakings are not done simultaneously, the flake scars exhibit different rate of weathering or patination and are also not purposeful. Another evidence of man-made tool is the presence of purposeful secondary flakings. But thin pieces of stone can be chipped through friction against another stone as occurs in soil-creep (solifluxion), in torrent action, or in glacier. Such naturally chipped flakes lack logical design, the flakescars occur in uneconomical profusion, the edges have brushed appearance, and the flake-surfaces are usually scratched. 8

Difference between the man made and naturally flaked alleged tools : In short, there are many differences between the man made and naturally fragmented or made alleged tools.

In contrast to it, the naturally made alleged tools, the cone of percussion is either flatten or almost absent.

around a central point. Regarding the primary and secondary flakings, these are purposefully present in case of man made tools but irregular and uneconomical in those naturally made alleged tools.

9 Difference between the man made and naturally flaked alleged tools : In short, there are many differences between the man made and naturally fragmented or made alleged tools. Six points of differences are discussed here. In the case of man made tools the cone of percussion is prominent. In contrast to it, the naturally made alleged tools, the cone of percussion is either flatten or almost absent. Similar, in the man made Point of impact tool the flaking ripples are concentrated to the point of impact whereas in the naturally flaked or made alleged tools the flaking ripples are concentrated around a central point. Regarding the primary and secondary flakings, these are purposefully present in case of man made tools but irregular and uneconomical in those naturally made alleged tools. In addition to these characters, alternate flaking is present in the case of man made tools but absent in the case of naturally made alleged tools. Moreover, the patination of the flaking scars are uniform in the case of man made tools but different patinations are found in Naturally chipped flake the naturally made alleged tools. Above all, there is a regular set pattern in the case of man made tools but it is irregular in the naturally made alleged tools. Thus, we may summarise the differences between the man made tools and naturally made alleged tools in a tabular form as below: 9

Archaeologia Cantiana Vol

Archaeologia Cantiana Vol. 65 1952 SURFACE PAL^OLITHS FROM STANDARDHILL FARM, NEAR ELHAM By P. J. TESTER THE seven Palaeolithic implements shown in the accompanying illustrations were collected by the