In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

4. PREHENSION TRACES – DOMINANT VARIABLE: MATERIAL WORKED distribution differ from those in hide use-wear. Given that schist is harder, scarring is greater, and while both use polishes are intrusive, hide use polish is overall more evenly distributed over the used edge and the inner surface. Schist use polish has a better developed zone on the outer edge, with a clear impact on the edge, from where the polish gradually diminishes towards the inner surface. Striations in the sense of grooves can be present, but they are usually very small. When tools are used in the hand, the prehension polish is totally different for the two tool uses: it is very extensive for use on schist while being nearly absent for use on hide. Schist worked in wet conditions results in totally different use-wear. It is very smooth and bright and no confusion with other uses seems possible. On exp. 13/12, use traces (polishing) are slightly different as a result of raw material coarseness. The surface is not as smooth and less bright. This polish closely resembles that observed on archaeological artefacts (Rots 2002a). 4.1.1 Macroscopic analysis Macroscopic scarring is present only after extensive use, such as on exp. 12/1, 12/13 and 12/14. Limited scarring is observed on exp. 12/15. On tools which experienced extensive use a general light prehension gloss is present over the whole tool without concentrations. 4.1.2 Microscopic analysis 4.1.2.1 Polish The prehension polish morphology is comparable to that for use polish; it is equally rough and moderately bright. Rounding is frequently associated with it. The better developed prehension polish is, the more rounded the edge, the more it intrudes into the inner surface, and the more it is linked up. Prehension schist polish differs from use schist polish in extent and distribution: there is no real impact on the edge, it is present all over the non-active part, it intrudes far into the distal zone (no clear boundary), and its highest concentration is generally on the dorsal ridges and ventral surface (both non-functional zones except for polishing). On the perforating tool, exp. 12/1, prehension polish is present all over the tool, with a more or less continuous distribution. It is highly linked and interpretable. It is best developed in the zones where the hand exerts most pressure (ridges, ventral distal and medial surface). The polish is frequently associated with bright spots, sometimes with scarring and ridge rounding. Well-polished surfaces also show smoothing, defined as a kind of surface “polishing”. On the grooving tools, the prehension polish pattern 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). He distinguished prehension polish from other polishes based on the lack of definition on the edges and the occurrence of a medium lustre on projecting points which dims in concavities . While prehension wear was partly dealt with in chapter 3, particular attention is devoted to the variable which determines the formation of prehension traces: the material being worked. Tools with differing uses are examined . While prehension wear may vary depending on the material being worked, the overall pattern should be consistent within each toolset. Several prehension wear characteristics have already been noted (see section 3.5.2.3): (1) its uneven distribution over both lateral edges, (2) the frequent occurrence of a general light gloss all over the tool, and (3) the correspondence between use and prehension polish. The number of particles which detach from the material being worked appears to be the key issue: these particles gradually cover the hands and the subsequent friction eventually causes prehension polish. The “dirtier” a material worked is, the more pronounced the prehension polish will be (as long as the hands are not cleaned intermittently). The selected tool uses are therefore representative for different stages of “dirtiness”: schist, bone, antler, pyrite are classified as “dirty” materials; wood is “moderately dirty”; while hide – when no abrasives are used – is “least dirty”. Since bone/ antler and woodworking tools were discussed in chapter 3, only tools used on schist, pyrite and hide are included here. 4.1 SCHIST WORKING Eleven tools are included: three tools used for polishing, exp. 13/2, 13/3 and 13/12, five tools for scraping, exp. 12...

Share