Behavioral and Cultural Origins of Neanderthals: A Levantine Perspective

Goren‐Inbar, Naama

doi:10.1007/978-94-007-0492-3_8

Cited by 12 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A technological analysis of the lithic assemblage from GBY suggests that soft percussors were used to manufacture handaxes 80 . Although no convincing bone or wood knapping tools have been identified at GBY, Goren-Inbar 81 illustrates a modified cervid antler that is interpreted as a possible knapping hammer; details of this intriguing find have yet to be fully published.…”

Section: Lower Palaeolithic Organic Soft Hammersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Taphonomic and technological analyses of Lower Palaeolithic bone tools from Clacton-on-Sea, UK

Parfitt

Lewis

Bello

2022

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The exceptional survival of Middle Pleistocene wooden spears at Schöningen (Germany) and Clacton-on-Sea (UK) provides tantalizing evidence for the widespread use of organic raw materials by early humans. At Clacton, less well-known organic artefacts include modified bones that were identified by the Abbé Henri Breuil in the 1920s. Some of these pieces were described and figured by Hazzledine Warren in his classic 1951 paper on the flint industry from the Clacton Channel, but they have been either overlooked in subsequent studies or dismissed as the product of natural damage. We provide the first detailed analysis of two Clactonian bone tools found by Warren and a previously unrecognized example recovered in 1934 during excavations directed by Mary Leakey. Microscopic examination of percussion damage suggests the bones were used as knapping hammers to shape or resharpen flake tools. Early Palaeolithic bone tools are exceedingly rare, and the Clacton examples are the earliest known organic knapping hammers associated with a core-and-flake (Mode 1) lithic technology. The use of soft hammers for knapping challenges the consensus that Clactonian flintknapping was undertaken solely with hard hammerstones, thus removing a major technological and behavioural difference used to distinguish the Clactonian from late Acheulean handaxe (Mode 2) industries.

show abstract

Section: Lower Palaeolithic Organic Soft Hammersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Taphonomic and technological analyses of Lower Palaeolithic bone tools from Clacton-on-Sea, UK

Parfitt

Lewis

Bello

2022

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Between 1.5 Ma and the second half of the Middle Pleistocene, the archaeological record yielded only a handful of evidence for the use or modification of osseous remains for technological purpose. Most often, these items correspond to bone retourchers, i.e., bone fragments used in stone knapping activities (Goren-Inbar, 2011;Smith, 2013;Moigne et al, 2016), or bifaces made on Elephantidae long bone fragments (Kretzoi and Dobosi, 1990;Mania and Mania, 2003;Rabinovich et al, 2012;Sano et al, 2020). In rare occasion, hard animal remains bearing incised patterns (Mania and Mania, 1988;Sirakov et al, 2010;Joordens et al, 2015) are interpreted as early experimentations with this raw material either to permanently record information or to express some form of symbolic behaviors.…”

Section: Pleistocene Osseous Technology In Africa and Europementioning

confidence: 99%

Animals for Tools: The Origin and Development of Bone Technologies in China

Doyon

2021

Front. Earth Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The origin and development of bone technologies in China are reviewed in the light of recent discoveries and compared to trends emerging from the European and African archaeological records. Three categories of osseous tools are targeted: 1) unmodified bone fragments bearing traces of use in technological activities; 2) bone fragments modified to a variable extent with techniques generally used in stone technologies; 3) osseous fragments entirely shaped with techniques fit for the manufacture of formal bone tools. Early evidence of bone technologies in China are sporadically found in contexts dated between 1.8 and 1.0 Ma. By the late MIS6–early MIS5, bone tools are well-integrated in the technological systems of Pleistocene populations and the rules guiding their use appear increasingly standardized. In addition, the first evidence for the use of osseous material in symbolic activities emerges in the archaeological record during this period. Finally, between 40 and 35 ka, new manufacturing techniques and products are introduced in Late Palaeolithic technological systems. It is first apparent in the manufacture of personal ornaments, and followed by the production and diversification of formal bone tools. By that time, population dynamics seem to become materialized in these items of material culture. Despite regional specificities, the cultural trajectories identified for the evolution of bone technologies in China seem entirely comparable to those observed in other regions of the world.

show abstract

“…Processing of large game was associated with the production, manipulation and use of handaxes and cleavers [18,[42][43][44]. This entailed knowledge of animal behaviour together with a complex range of techno-morpho-typological expertise in stone tool production and manipulation (e.g.…”

Section: Mapping the Hominins' Cognitive Abilities (A) Exploitation Omentioning

confidence: 99%

“…-Knapping involved percussors of different types and sizes, evidenced by various flake attributes and the recovery of hard and soft percussors. Basalt percussors range from boulders to fistsized pebbles, limestone pebbles occur in all of the archaeological horizons and antler percussors have been reported [18,45,57,58]. Although the production process reflects various technological strategies, the final large flakes were all modified into extremely homogeneous bifacial tools of similar sizes and shapes [11,31] (figure 5).…”

Section: Mapping the Hominins' Cognitive Abilities (A) Exploitation Omentioning

confidence: 99%

Culture and cognition in the Acheulian industry: a case study from Gesher Benot Yaʿaqov

Goren‐Inbar

2011

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Acheulian presence in the Dead Sea Rift and its environs is characterized by the discontinuity of its cultural manifestations. Nevertheless, the long stratigraphic sequences of the Acheulian Technocomplex provide a unique opportunity for synergetic examination along a temporal trajectory. Hominin cognitive and cultural behaviour are studied at Gesher Benot Ya , aqov through analyses of lithic, palaeontological and palaeobotanical assemblages, as well as the Early -Middle Pleistocene environment, ecology and climate. The study attempts to reconstruct reduction sequences of some major artefact groups at the site, which include raw material acquisition, production, technology, typology, usage and discard. Experimental archaeology illustrates artefact mobility on the palaeolandscape. Strategies of biomass-exploitation are studied in detail, with other aspects yielding additional information on hominin subsistence and adaptive responses to their environment. The cultural marker of fire and the spatial association of selected categories of finds are integrated in the general synthesis, allowing reconstruction of the cultural and cognitive realm of Acheulian hominins. The synthesis attempts to reassess the abilities, social structure, subsistence and adaptability to the changing environment of hominins in the Levantine Corridor.

show abstract

Behavioral and Cultural Origins of Neanderthals: A Levantine Perspective

Cited by 12 publications

References 47 publications

Taphonomic and technological analyses of Lower Palaeolithic bone tools from Clacton-on-Sea, UK

Taphonomic and technological analyses of Lower Palaeolithic bone tools from Clacton-on-Sea, UK

Animals for Tools: The Origin and Development of Bone Technologies in China

Culture and cognition in the Acheulian industry: a case study from Gesher Benot Yaʿaqov

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About