New Approaches to the Bipolar Flaking Technique: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Kinematic Perspectives

IF 3.2 1区 历史学 Q1 ANTHROPOLOGY
Görkem Cenk Yeşilova, Adrián Arroyo, Josep Maria Vergès, Andreu Ollé
{"title":"New Approaches to the Bipolar Flaking Technique: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Kinematic Perspectives","authors":"Görkem Cenk Yeşilova, Adrián Arroyo, Josep Maria Vergès, Andreu Ollé","doi":"10.1007/s10816-024-09639-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The bipolar technique is a flaking strategy that has been identified from 3.3 Ma until the twentieth century, with no geographical or chronological homogeneous distribution. It is represented by the intentional contact of an active percussive element against a core rested on an anvil. This tool composite has been described by some researchers as a sign of low-skill of hominins, unable to perform successfully free-hand flaking or for flaking low-quality raw materials. Based on this premise, our research focused on the following question: Are there any quantitative and qualitative differences in terms of both kinematic parameters and technical skills between knappers with different levels of expertise when flaking using the bipolar technique? To get an answer, we developed a systematic experimental program with 12 volunteer participants with different levels of expertise. Then, to assess potential quantifiable differences and to understand the mechanics of bipolar technology, we did a video motion analysis based on kinematic parameters (including position, velocity, acceleration, and kinetic energy of the hammerstone). In addition, we performed a technological analysis of the experimental lithic assemblages to assess the technological differences between knappers based on their levels of expertise. In kinematic parameters, both statistical analysis and observations from the experiment clearly show that there are differences between the levels of expertise in this technique. Intermediate knappers have been observed to apply more velocity and kinetic energy than experts and novices. Also, differences were observed in the flaking strategies. Expert knappers show a longer reduction sequence, while intermediates show shorter one. Moreover, some of the novice knappers did not even obtain a single flake. The results of our experiment stress the complexity of bipolar flaking and that previous assumptions about it might be reconsidered, especially in terms of reconsidering the negative connotations attributed to this flaking technique.</p>","PeriodicalId":47725,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-024-09639-8","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The bipolar technique is a flaking strategy that has been identified from 3.3 Ma until the twentieth century, with no geographical or chronological homogeneous distribution. It is represented by the intentional contact of an active percussive element against a core rested on an anvil. This tool composite has been described by some researchers as a sign of low-skill of hominins, unable to perform successfully free-hand flaking or for flaking low-quality raw materials. Based on this premise, our research focused on the following question: Are there any quantitative and qualitative differences in terms of both kinematic parameters and technical skills between knappers with different levels of expertise when flaking using the bipolar technique? To get an answer, we developed a systematic experimental program with 12 volunteer participants with different levels of expertise. Then, to assess potential quantifiable differences and to understand the mechanics of bipolar technology, we did a video motion analysis based on kinematic parameters (including position, velocity, acceleration, and kinetic energy of the hammerstone). In addition, we performed a technological analysis of the experimental lithic assemblages to assess the technological differences between knappers based on their levels of expertise. In kinematic parameters, both statistical analysis and observations from the experiment clearly show that there are differences between the levels of expertise in this technique. Intermediate knappers have been observed to apply more velocity and kinetic energy than experts and novices. Also, differences were observed in the flaking strategies. Expert knappers show a longer reduction sequence, while intermediates show shorter one. Moreover, some of the novice knappers did not even obtain a single flake. The results of our experiment stress the complexity of bipolar flaking and that previous assumptions about it might be reconsidered, especially in terms of reconsidering the negative connotations attributed to this flaking technique.

Abstract Image

双极剥落技术的新方法:定性、定量和运动学视角
双极技术是一种剥落策略,从 3.3 Ma 到 20 世纪都有发现,但没有地域或年代上的均匀分布。它的表现形式是将一个活动的打击件有意地与放置在铁砧上的核心接触。一些研究者将这种工具复合体描述为低技能类人猿的标志,他们无法成功地进行徒手剥片或剥片低质量的原材料。基于这一前提,我们的研究集中在以下问题上:在使用双极技术进行剥片时,不同专业水平的打制者在运动学参数和技术技能方面是否存在定量和定性差异?为了找到答案,我们制定了一个系统的实验计划,由 12 名具有不同专业水平的志愿者参加。然后,为了评估潜在的可量化差异并了解双极技术的力学原理,我们根据运动学参数(包括锤石的位置、速度、加速度和动能)进行了视频运动分析。此外,我们还对实验性石器组合进行了技术分析,以评估不同专业水平的打制者之间的技术差异。在运动参数方面,统计分析和实验观察都清楚地表明,不同水平的专业人员在这一技术上存在差异。据观察,与专家和新手相比,中级打制师使用的速度和动能更大。此外,在削片策略方面也发现了差异。专家级打制者的削片顺序较长,而中级打制者的削片顺序较短。此外,一些新手甚至没有获得一块薄片。我们的实验结果强调了双极剥片的复杂性,并认为可以重新考虑以前的假设,特别是重新考虑赋予这种剥片技术的负面含义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
8.70%
发文量
43
期刊介绍: The Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, the leading journal in its field,  presents original articles that address method- or theory-focused issues of current archaeological interest and represent significant explorations on the cutting edge of the discipline.   The journal also welcomes topical syntheses that critically assess and integrate research on a specific subject in archaeological method or theory, as well as examinations of the history of archaeology.    Written by experts, the articles benefit an international audience of archaeologists, students of archaeology, and practitioners of closely related disciplines.  Specific topics covered in recent issues include:  the use of nitche construction theory in archaeology,  new developments in the use of soil chemistry in archaeological interpretation, and a model for the prehistoric development of clothing.  The Journal''s distinguished Editorial Board includes archaeologists with worldwide archaeological knowledge (the Americas, Asia and the Pacific, Europe, and Africa), and expertise in a wide range of methodological and theoretical issues.  Rated ''A'' in the European Reference Index for the Humanities (ERIH) Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory is rated ''A'' in the ERIH, a new reference index that aims to help evenly access the scientific quality of Humanities research output. For more information visit: http://www.esf.org/research-areas/humanities/activities/research-infrastructures.html Rated ''A'' in the Australian Research Council Humanities and Creative Arts Journal List.  For more information, visit: http://www.arc.gov.au/era/journal_list_dev.htm
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信