Title Page, Copyright

pdf iconDownload PDF

pp. 1-4

read more

Acknowledgements

pdf iconDownload PDF

pp. v-vi

The research presented in this book relies on the doctoral research I performed during 1997-2002 at the Prehistoric Archaeology unit at Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (Belgium) under the supervision of Pierre M. Vermeersch. I thank him sincerely for his guidance, his input and the numerous discussions I had with him. ...

Contents

pdf iconDownload PDF

pp. vii-viii

List of Figures

pdf iconDownload PDF

pp. ix-xiv

List of Plates

pdf iconDownload PDF

pp. xv-xix

List of Tables (CD-rom)

pdf iconDownload PDF

pp. xx-20

Glossary

pdf iconDownload PDF

pp. xxi-xxii

read more

1. Introduction

pdf iconDownload PDF

pp. 1-6

As long as prehistoric research goes back, people have been interested in what stone tools were used for. Semenov (1957, English translation 1964) was the first to deal systematically with this question and to come up with a technique that made answers conceivable. ...

read more

2. Research Methodology

pdf iconDownload PDF

pp. 7-36

The turbulent background of use-wear studies necessitates an extensive discussion of the research methodology. After all, one of the main causes of scepticism and disbelief towards microscopic functional research in its initial phases was the lack of a sound methodology, ...

read more

3. Prehension and Hafting Traces: Dream or Reality?

pdf iconDownload PDF

pp. 37-72

To test whether prehension and hafting traces are produced, it is sufficient to analyse the stone tool before and after it was used hand-held / hafted; when the results from the latter analysis differ from the first, the issue is proven. Two procedures are followed. In the first test, tools are drawn (not analysed) before use and it is examined whether macroscopic wear, in particular scarring, forms. ...

read more

4. Prehension Traces – Dominant Variable: Material Worked

pdf iconDownload PDF

pp. 73-76

Semenov once stated: “However hard the stone, traces of rubbing by the hand were usually left on it, if the tool was used without a handle. Friction of flint against skin, particularly when dusty and covered with sandy particles, gradually polished the surface.” (Semenov 1964: 14). ...

read more

5. Hafting Traces – Dominant Variables I: Use Motion and Material Worked

pdf iconDownload PDF

pp. 77-122

Several variables influence the formation of hafting traces. Dominant variables partially determine the process of hafting trace formation, while secondary variables merely cause some variations on an existing pattern. It is assumed that lack of understanding of dominant variables may result in misinterpretations, ...

read more

6. Hafting Traces – Dominant Variables II: Hafting Material and Hafting Arrangement

pdf iconDownload PDF

pp. 123-172

Understanding the impact of hafting material and hafting arrangement on the formation of hafting traces is essential for any identification beyond the distinction between hand-held and hafted tools. The influence of both variables is identified and it is examined whether it proves to be independent of other predominant variables. ...

read more

7. Hafting Traces – Secondary Variables

pdf iconDownload PDF

pp. 173-182

Secondary variables do not determine the formation of hafting traces; they merely cause slight variations on an existing pattern. Knowledge of their impact is nevertheless important but it will not fundamentally change interpretations, or influence their certainty level. Six secondary variables are dealt with: ...

read more

8. Indirect Evidence of Hafting

pdf iconDownload PDF

pp. 183-188

Some evidence may indirectly indicate hafting. Tangs and notches are probably what come to mind right away, but their link with hafting needs to be addressed in a systematic way on an archaeological level (Rots 2002c). Other wear data may however provide proven clues for hafting; the most obvious examples are the distribution of use-wear traces over the active part and fractures. ...

read more

9. Blind Test

pdf iconDownload PDF

pp. 189-196

The final blind test can be categorised as gradual in approach. All methods were used, but one after the other and more or less independently of each other. This test, as well as a more integrated one, was published (Rots et al. 2006). Tools were first analysed on a macroscopic level, next on a low power level, and finally on a high power level. ...

read more

10. Discussion

pdf iconDownload PDF

pp. 197-202

The importance of functional studies which include hafting and integrate other site information (typology, technology, spatial data) lies at different levels. On an artefact level, not just use (Plisson 1982; Vaughan 1985; Symens 1986; Beyries 1987a), but also the prehensile mode can be determined, ...

read more

11. General Conclusions

pdf iconDownload PDF

pp. 203-206

While prehistoric stone tool hafting has been considered important for decades, in terms of both technological and cognitive evolutions, it has been hard to design methods which allow detailed insight into the introduction of hafting and its evolution through time. The main reason is that handles were manufactured from organic materials and these are only rarely preserved. ...

Annex I: Trace Attributes

pdf iconDownload PDF

pp. 207-212

Annex II: General Table of Experiments

pdf iconDownload PDF

pp. 213-226

References

pdf iconDownload PDF

pp. 227-238

Plates

pdf iconDownload PDF

pp. 239-274