Abstract

ABSTRACTA previous use‐wear and residue analysis of backed artefacts from Deep Creek Shelter showed that they had a range of functions and had been used with a variety of raw materials. Were non‐backed retouched flakes at Deep Creek used for different purposes? To answer this question, 40 non‐backed specimens were selected for microscopic use‐wear and residue analysis. Not all of these non‐backed artefacts had been used, but we identified that many were scrapers, knives, incisors and saws. These tools were used for bone‐working and wood‐working, and possibly skin‐working and non‐woody plant‐processing. Some of these non‐backed retouched artefacts were hafted. For the first time, these results allow comparison of the tool use of backed and non‐backed artefacts in Australia. At Deep Creek, the range of functions for the non‐backed component was extremely similar to that of the backed artefacts. Although both artefact categories displayed similar tool use, they are distinguished in one interesting way: non‐backed specimens were often single purpose, dedicated to one function, whereas backed artefacts were often multifunctional and multipurpose. These results help us understand the structure of tool use in Australia.

Full Text
Paper version not known

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

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.