Palaeoloxodon exploitation at the Middle Pleistocene site of La Polledrara di Cecanibbio (Rome, Italy)

Santucci, Ernesto; Marano, Federica; Cerilli, Eugenio; Fiore, Ivana; Lemorini, Cristina; Palombo, Maria Rita; Anzidei, Anna Paola; Bulgarelli, Grazia Maria

doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2015.08.042

Cited by 53 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Other examples of tools made from modified animal bones include flaked bone tools, such as bifaces made from flaked elephant bones that have been found in several Acheulean contexts, bone flakes and bone retouchers, unearthed in numerous Middle and Late Pleistocene sites789101112131415. Further evidence of specialised bone tool production comes from the Middle Palaeolithic sites of Pech de l’Azé I and Abri Peyrony in France.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Early evidence of stone tool use in bone working activities at Qesem Cave, Israel

Zupancich

Nunziante-Cesaro

Blasco

et al. 2016

Sci Rep

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For a long while, the controversy surrounding several bone tools coming from pre-Upper Palaeolithic contexts favoured the view of Homo sapiens as the only species of the genus Homo capable of modifying animal bones into specialised tools. However, evidence such as South African Early Stone Age modified bones, European Lower Palaeolithic flaked bone tools, along with Middle and Late Pleistocene bone retouchers, led to a re-evaluation of the conception of Homo sapiens as the exclusive manufacturer of specialised bone tools. The evidence presented herein include use wear and bone residues identified on two flint scrapers as well as a sawing mark on a fallow deer tibia, not associated with butchering activities. Dated to more than 300 kya, the evidence here presented is among the earliest related to tool-assisted bone working intended for non-dietary purposes, and contributes to the debate over the recognition of bone working as a much older behaviour than previously thought. The results of this study come from the application of a combined methodological approach, comprising use wear analysis, residue analysis, and taphonomy. This approach allowed for the retrieval of both direct and indirect evidence of tool-assisted bone working, at the Lower Palaeolithic site of Qesem Cave (Israel).

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Early evidence of stone tool use in bone working activities at Qesem Cave, Israel

Zupancich

Nunziante-Cesaro

Blasco

et al. 2016

Sci Rep

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This Low-Power approach (Odell 2004;Thringam et al 1974;Lemorini 2010, p. 8) provided a general understanding of how the tool was used and the material worked (e.g., cutting soft material or scraping medium hard material). Since archaeological materials are not exportable from Kenya, the edges of selected tools were moulded with Provil Novo Light Fast Heraeus © at the NMK for analysis in Italy (for the proven utility of this moulding technique for use-wear analyses see Asryan et al 2014;D'Errico and Henshilwood 2007;Dubreuil 2004;Perdegnana and Ollé 2017;Ollé and Vergès 2013;Romagnoli et al 2015;Santucci et al 2015; for a first attempt to test this moulding technique for metrological analyses see Mcdonald et al 2018). Lemorini et al (2014) inferred the function of quartzite tools through observing use-wear on both the matrix and embedded quartz crystals.…”

Section: Selection Of the Archaeological Artifacts And Observation Mementioning

confidence: 99%

Old stones’ song—second verse: use-wear analysis of rhyolite and fenetized andesite artifacts from the Oldowan lithic industry of Kanjera South, Kenya

Lemorini

Bishop

Plummer

et al. 2019

Archaeol Anthropol Sci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Revadim (Marder et al, 2011;Rabinovich et al, 2012) in Israel, La Ficoncella (Aureli et al, 2015;, Isernia la Pineta (Peretto et al, 2015), Notarchirico (Piperno, 1999), La Polledrara di Cecanibbio (Santucci et al, 2016) and Castel di Guido (Saccà, 2012;Boschian and Saccà, 2015), in Italy, Torralba and Ambrona (Freeman 1994;Villa et al, 2005), Barranc de la Boella (Mosquera et al, 2015) and Áridos 2 (Yravedra et al, 2010) in Spain, where there are hominin modifications on elephant bones, as well as on other herbivore taxa.…”

Section: Marathousa 1 In Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…More importantly, at many of those sites (Galotti and Peretto 2015;Peretto et al, 2015;Aureli et al, 2016;Rocca et al, 2016;Santucci et al, 2016), "small tool" assemblages are associated with the faunal remains (cf. Barkai et al, 2010 for microwear evidence of meat processing on small flakes).…”

Section: Marathousa 1 In Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Lower Palaeolithic site of Marathousa 1, Megalopolis, Greece: Overview of the evidence

Panagopoulou

Tourloukis

Thompson

et al. 2018

Quaternary International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Marathousa 1 is a Lower Palaeolithic open-air site located in the Megalopolis basin, an area in Southern Greece known for its fossiliferous sediments. Mining activities in the basin uncovered a thick sequence of Middle Pleistocene lacustrine deposits representing the environment of a palaeolake. Marathousa 1 was discovered in 2013 during a targeted palaeoanthropological survey and excavated subsequently by an interdisciplinary team from

show abstract

Palaeoloxodon exploitation at the Middle Pleistocene site of La Polledrara di Cecanibbio (Rome, Italy)

Cited by 53 publications

References 46 publications

Early evidence of stone tool use in bone working activities at Qesem Cave, Israel

Early evidence of stone tool use in bone working activities at Qesem Cave, Israel

Old stones’ song—second verse: use-wear analysis of rhyolite and fenetized andesite artifacts from the Oldowan lithic industry of Kanjera South, Kenya

The Lower Palaeolithic site of Marathousa 1, Megalopolis, Greece: Overview of the evidence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About