Memory Scrapers: Readymade Concepts and Techniques as Reflected in Collecting and Recycling Patinated Lower Palaeolithic Items at Qesem Cave, Israel

Abstract

This paper argues that certain early Palaeolithic artefacts can be viewed as reflecting Readymade concepts and techniques from the world of modern art. I will focus on presenting a theoretical framework for this claim as well as a case study from Late Lower Palaeolithic Qesem Cave, Israel (420,000–200,000 bp). The case study is based on the ‘double patina’ phenomenon (old tools that became patinated by exposure to the elements and were then shaped again). These items, characterized by outstanding colours and textures, were produced following Readymade concepts and techniques applied in the production of tools that are both functional and mnemonic. I suggest that these items acted as mnemonic memory tools that reconnected their users to ancestral (human and non-human) beings as well as to familiar experiences, events, and places.

Function, life histories, and biographies of Lower Paleolithic patinated flint tools from Late Acheulian Revadim, Israel

“…We work under the assumption that in the process of ‘collection’, it is mnemonic memory that dictates the recognition and collection of ‘old’ human-made items. In the process of ‘modification’, it is mnemonic memory again that dictates the pattern of recycling to preserve the original surfaces and visual markers of the original collected item while adding new features to it 58 , 60 . We put forward the hypothesis that these items served as significant ‘memory objects’ for their collectors, for whom they played the following roles: To preserve past human creation.…”

“…Moreover, in the process of recycling, the knapper might intentionally have chosen to preserve the previous modified surfaces and active edges of the old patinated tool out of appreciation for the work of earlier humans (ancestors? ), as well as out of a sense of familiarity with the process of knapping 58 , 91 . To preserve the biographies and itineraries that are visually presented on the item itself 58 , 59 , 68 , 69 , 91 , in order to relate, remember, appreciate, and preserve the journey the item has made until the point of its collection.…”

“…), as well as out of a sense of familiarity with the process of knapping 58 , 91 . To preserve the biographies and itineraries that are visually presented on the item itself 58 , 59 , 68 , 69 , 91 , in order to relate, remember, appreciate, and preserve the journey the item has made until the point of its collection. To serve as mnemonic devices for their new owners, for whom they might have evoked private memories and experiences.…”

“…Regardless of exactly who collected them and under what circumstances, we contend that their selection, collection, and recycling were intentional, conscious, and carried out regularly by early humans during Lower Paleolithic times 34 , 53 , 54 . We further assume that the collectors were motivated by a combination of practical and perceptual reasons, and not solely by straightforward economic constraints 55 – 58 .…”

“…In doing so, we apply an integrated and multidisciplinary methodology that combines: (1) different analytical techniques for describing and interpreting use-wear traces and use-related residues on stone tools; and (2) recent theoretical and methodological advancements for reconstructing the probable role of these assumed mnemonic items in the worldviews of the site’s inhabitants. Our hypothesis is that the collected items’ characteristics were intentionally preserved; in order to maintain the desired properties of the functional tool, to preserve the item’s biographies, and to serve as an item of memory to a site occupied throughout time 58 – 69 .…”