A.R. Lada. The challenges of identifying intentional blade fragmentation in Paleolithic industries
Download | Go to Issue #1. 2025
A.R. Lada - Institute for the History of Material Culture of the Russian Academy of Sciences
St. Petersburg, Russian Federation
Е-mail: an7on1ada @ gmail.com
ORCID: 0000-0002-2066-5224
Аннотация
Fragmented tools and blanks are widely found in the assemblages of the Stone age sites. It is therefore vital that researchers are equipped with the necessary knowledge to assess the nature of such fragmentation. However, the available data on this issue is limited and somewhat contradictory, which leaves this important question unanswered at the moment.The primary objective of the current study was ascertaining whether the identification of intentionally fragmented blanks is feasible. This study is based on statistical analysis of experimentally fragmented blades of various types. The results suggest that there is no statistically significant difference in the morphology of blades fragmented by different methods. With regard to the analysis of archaeological assemblages, this indicates that demonstrating intentional blade fragmentation is a highly challenging task, and therefore should be better avoided.
Key words: intentional fragmentation, blades, lithic technology, experimental archaeology, statistical analysis, Palaeolithic
UDC 902/904
DOI: 10.31250/2658-3828-2025-1-26-41
For citation: Lada A.R. The challenges of identifying intentional blade fragmentation in Paleolithic industries. Camera praehistorica. 2025, no. 1 (14), рр. 26–41. DOI: 10.31250/2658-3828-2025-1-26-41 (in Russian).
1 Funding: The research was carried out with the support of grant Russian Scientific Found No. 23-78-10205, https://rscf.ru/project/23-78-10205/, “Technological innovations of the Middle and Upper Paleolithic as criteria for specifying periodization and industrial variability”.
References
Barnes, A.S., Manufacture of Gunflints, Antiquity, 1937, vol. 11, no. 42, pp. 201–207.
Bergman, C.A., Barton, R.N.E., Collcutt, S.M., Morris, G., Intentional Breakage in a Late Upper Paleolithic Assemblage from Southern England, in: The Human Uses of Flint and Chert, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987, pp. 21–32.
Bordes, F., Notules de typologie paléolithique. I. Outils mousteriens a outil volontaire, Le Bulletin de la Société préhistorique française, 1953, vol. 50, no. 4. pp. 224–226.
Cotterell, B., Kamminga, J., Formation of Flakes, American Antiquity, 1987, vol. 52, no. 4, pp. 675–708.
Damlien, H., Striking a Difference? The Effect of Knapping Techniques on Blade Attributes, Journal of Archaeological Science, 2015, vol. 63, pp. 122–135.
Driscoll, K., Alcaina, J., Égüez, N., Mangado, X., Fullola, J.-M., Tejero, J.-M., Trampled under Foot: AQuartz and Chert Human Trampling Experiment at the Cova del Parco Rock Shelter, Spain, Quaternary International, 2016, vol. 424, pp. 130–142.
Driscoll, K., García-Rojas, M., Their Lips are Sealed: Identifying Hard Stone, Soft Stone, and Antler Hammer Direct Percussion in Palaeolithic Prismatic Blade Production, Journal of Archaeological Science, 2014, vol. 47, pp. 134–141.
Eren, M.I., Durant, A., Neudorf, C., Haslam, M., Shipton, C., Bora, J., Korisettar, R., Petraglia, M., Experimental Examination of Animal Trampling Effects on Artifact Movement in Dry and Water Saturated Substrates: ATest Case from South India, Journal of Archaeological Science, 2010, vol. 37, pp. 3010–3021.
Eritsian, B.G., Nekotorye osobennosti namerennogo rassecheniia orudii must’erskoi epokhi (po materialam Erevanskoi peshchernoi stoianki) [Some Peculiarities of Intentional Fragmentation of Tools of the Mousterian Epoch (on the Materials of the Yerevan Cave Site)], Kratkie soobshcheniia Instituta arkheologii, 2017, vol. 131, pp. 53–60, (in Russian).
Giria, E.Yu., Tekhnologicheskii analiz kamennykh industrii. Metodika mikro-makroanaliza drevnikh orudii truda. Chast’ 2 [Technological Analysis of Lithic Industries. Methods of Micro-macroanalysis of Ancient Tools. Part 2], St.Petersburg: IIMK RANPubl., 1997, 198 p., (in Russian).
Jennings, T., Experimental Production of Bending and Radial Flake Fractures and implications for Lithic technologies, Journal of Archaeological Science, 2011, vol. 38, no. 12, pp. 3645–3651.
Karmanov, V.N., Galimova, M.Sh., Namerennaia fragmentatsiia kremnevykh izdelii v neolite (po materialam stoianki Pezmogty 3Ana srednei Vychegde, Respublika Komi) [Intentional Fragmentation of Flint Wares in the Neolithic (on the Materials of the Pezmogty 3ASite on the Middle Vychegda River, Komi Republic)], Povolzhskaia arkheologiia, 2017, no. 3, pp. 48–69, (in Russian).
Keeley, L.H., Experimental Determination of Stone Tool Uses: A Microwear Analysis, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980, 212 p.
Kuhn, S.L., Li, F., Abundant Blade Segments at Shuidonggou, Locality 1: Intentional or Accidental?, Archaeological Research in Asia, 2019, vol. 17, pp. 62–69.
Kulakov, S.A., Giria, E.Yu., K voprosu o «zubchatykh orudiiakh» v svete eksperimental’nykh dannykh (po materialam Akhshtyrskoi peshchernoi stoianki, Severo-Zapadnyi Kavkaz) [To the Question of Denticulate Tools in the Light of Experimental Data (on the Materials of the Akhshtyr Cave Site, North-West Caucasus)], in: Drevnii chelovek i kamen’: tekhnologiia, forma, funktsiia, St.Petersburg: Peterburgskoe vostokovedenie Publ., 2017, pp. 65–76, (in Russian).
Liubin, V.P., K metodike izucheniia fragmentirovannykh skolov i orudii v paleolite [Towards a Methodology for Studying Fragmented Chips and Implements in the Palaeolithic], in: Problemy sovetskoi arkheologii, Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1978, pp. 23–32, (in Russian).
López-Rodríguez, M.C., Martín-Lerma, I., Marín De Espinosa Sánchez, J.A., Gutiérrez Sáez, C., Breaking Blades: Experimental Programme on Intentional Fracturing Systems of Lithic Tools, Journal of Lithic Studies, 2016, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 455–479.
Matiukhin, A.E., Tekhnologiia fragmentatsii skolov [Technology of Fragmentation of Flakes], in: Eksperimental’no-trasologicheskie issledovaniia v arkheologii, St.Petersburg: Nauka Publ., 1994, pp. 62–84, (in Russian).
Pradel, L., Intention et fractures moustériennes, Le Bulletin de la Société préhistorique française, 1957, vol. 54, no. 7–8, pp. 382–386.
Roche, H., Tixier, J., Les accidents de taille, Studia Praehistorica Belgica, 1982, vol. 2, pp. 65–76.
Shchelinskii, V.E., K izucheniiu tekhniki, tekhnologii izgotovleniia i funktsii orudii must’erskoi epokhi [Towards the Study of the Technique, Production Technology and Functions of Mousterian Tools], in: Tekhnologiia proizvodstva v epokhu paleolita, Leningrad: Nauka Publ., 1978, pp. 72–133, (in Russian).
Slavinsky, V.S., Rybin, E.P., Khatsenovich, E.M., Belousova, N.E., Intentional Fragmentation of Blades in the Initial Upper Paleolithic Industries of the Kara-Bom Site (Altai, Russia), Archaeological Research in Asia, 2019, vol. 17, pp. 50–61.
Tixier, J., Typologie de l’Epipaléolithique du Maghreb, Paris: Art et métiers graphiques, 1963, 212 p. (Mémoires du Centre de Recherches anthropologiques et préhistoriques et ethnographiques; vol. 2)
Tsirk, A., Fractures in Flintknapping, Oxford: Archaeopress, 2014, 261 p.
Venables, W.N., Ripley, B.D., Modern Applied Statistics with S, New York: Springer, 2002, 498 p.
Wickham, H., Averick, M., Bryan, J., Chang, W., McGowan, L.D., François, R., Grolemund, G., Hayes, A., Henry, L., Hester, J., Kuhn, M., Pedersen, T.L., Miller, E., Bache, S.M., Müller, K., Ooms, J., Robinson, D., Seidel, D.P., Spinu, V., Yutani, H., Welcome to the Tidyverse, Journal of Open Source Software, 2019, vol. 4, Article number 1686, 6 p., DOI: 10.21105/joss.01686.