Abstract

This research represents a first approach to the characterization of blade fractures produced intentionally using various techniques, according to an experimental protocol. The objective is to establish a reference base of marks which serve to define the fractures documented in the archaeological record.
 The fractured blade being a very common element in different sites throughout in the Iberian Peninsula during the Neolithic and Chalcolithic Ages. In fact, from the Late Neolithic a new concept applied to the creation of lithic tools arose, involving the fracturing of blades through the improvement of fracturing techniques. In addition, a preference for obtaining the mesial fragments of the blades or those which have more regular measurements can be observed. This type of lithic instrument represents high percentages of all the retouched material, and may possess only one fractured end or, more commonly, both, bi-fractured.
 With the archaeological evidence, we decided to carry out an experiment to define and classify the marks that result during the intentional fracturing of laminar fragments, contemplating different variables. We used three types of techniques for fracturing blades: flex, direct percussion and indirect percussion, and we used different types of hammer, made of stone, antler and copper.
 For the results, we have standardized the descriptions of different parts of the fracture distinguishing: types of fracture, fracture planes, fracture marks and macrowear. However, we should point out that this experimentation is the beginning of a line of research that, over time, must integrate a wider experimental base which also considers the other mentioned causes of fracture, as well as the functional objective of these tools.
 The preliminary study through this experimentation has made it possible to define and describe the types of fractures resulting from the use of different blade fracturing methods. We also have described the main types of fracture marks generated from each fracturing technique.

Highlights

  • We have standardized the descriptions of different parts of the fracture distinguishing: types of fracture, fracture planes, fracture marks and macrowear

  • We have described the main types of fracture marks generated from each fracturing technique

  • The approach to this issue arosen during the study of the lithic industry in Humanejos (Madrid, Spain)

Read more

Summary

Variables

We have focused on the two most common fracturing techniques mentioned in the bibliographic collection: flexing-bending and percussion. We have used the subvariable of the face of the blade on which the impact occurs, but adding other specific knapping processes. These are the following: the types of percussion, either direct or indirect; the type of hammer, hard (stone) or soft (antler), for the direct percussion; and the type of chisel, hard (copper) or soft (antler), for indirect percussion. The set of blades that make up the sample were produced by various techniques with the aim of obtaining different thicknesses that could be fractured by percussion or manual bending. 94 samples were used in the study (see Table 1)

Results
Direct and indirect fractures
Types of fracture
Types of direct fractures
Types of indirect fractures
Conclusions
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call