Cited by 4

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Techno-morphological aspects of microlithic projectile implements: Examples from the levantine Geometric Kebaran and the east European Epigravettian

Yaroshevich, A.·2006·Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia

Abstract

Throughout human history, the use of stone tools underwent a number of essential changes, one of which is the transition to microlithic tools. These appeared in Africa, Europe, and Southwestern Asia during the fi nal Pleistocene. By the Last Glacial Maximum, ca 20 ka BP, tool assemblages from prehistoric sites in these regions include a signifi cant microlithic component. The observed variability in morphological, metric and technological attributes of microliths has long been employed in establishing chronological sequences and distinguishing between prehistoric cultural entities. In the Southern Levant, microlithic production began during the Upper Paleolithic about 30,000 BP. Straight, pointed bladelets and twisted Dufuor bladelets with inverse or alternate fi ne or semi-abrupt retouch are characteristic of the Ahmarian and the Aurignacian, respectively. The transition from the Upper Paleolithic to the Epipaleolithic took place ca 20 ka BP and involved certain important changes in lithic technology which included signifi cant increases in the proportion of microliths and the frequency of abrupt retouch. The techno-morphological characteristics of microliths form the foundation for the cultural divisions of this period (Bar-Yosef, 1970, 1998; Goring-Morris, 1998). Backed bladelets characterize the Kebaran (ca 20 – 14.5 BP); the

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1134/s1563011006040025

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 33

  1. Bar-Oz G., Dayan T. 2003 Testing the use of multivariate inter-site taphonomic comparisons: The faunal analysis of Hefzibah in its Epipalaeolithic cultural context. Journal of Archaeological Science, vol. 30/7: 885–900. · DOI
  2. Bar-Oz G., Dayan T., Kaufman D. 1999 The Epipaleolithic faunal sequence in Israel: A view from Neve David. Journal of Archaeological Science, vol. 26: 67–82. · DOI
  3. Bar-Yosef O. 1970 The Epi-Palaeolithic cultures of Palestine. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis. Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
  4. Bar-Yosef O. 1987 Direct and indirect evidence for hafting in the Epi-Palaeolithic and Neolithic Southern Levant. In La main et l’outil. Manches et emmanchements préhistoriques. Travaux de la Maison de L’Orient, vol. 15: 155–164.
  5. Bar-Yosef O. 1998 Prehistoric chronological framework. In T.E. Levy (ed.). The Archaeology of Society in the Holy Land. London: Leicester Univ. Press: pp. XIV–XVII.
  6. Bergman C.A, McEvaen E., Miller R. 1988 Experimental archery: Projectile velocities and comparison of bow performance. Antiquity, vol. 62: 658–670. · DOI
  7. Bergman C.A., Newcomer M.H. 1983 Flint arrowhead breakage, examples from Ksar Akil. Journal of Field Archaeology, vol. 10: 238–243.
  8. Bocquentin F., Bar-Yosef O. 2004 Early Natufian remains: Evidence for physical conflict from Mt. Carmel, Israel. Journal of Human Evolution, vol. 47/1: 19–23. · DOI
  9. Caspar J.-P., De Bie M. 1996 Preparing for the hunt in the Late Palaeolithic Camp at Recem, Belgium. Journal of Field Archaeology, vol. 23: 437–460. · DOI
  10. Clark J.D., Phillips J.L., Staley P.S. 1974 Interpretations of prehistoric technology from Ancient Egypt and other sources. Pt. 1: Ancient Egyptian bows and arrows and their relevance for African prehistory. Paleorient, vol. 2: 323–388. · DOI
  11. Clark D. 1975 Interpretations of prehistoric technology from Ancient Egypt and other sources. Pt. 2: Prehistoric arrow forms in Africa as shown by surviving examples in traditional arrows of San Bushmen. Paleorient, vol. 3: 127–150. · DOI · Paper page
  12. Crombe P., Perdaen Y., Sergant J., Caspar J.-P. 2001 Wear analysis on Early Mesolithic microliths from the Verrebroek site, East Flanders Belgium. Journal of Field Archaeology, vol. 28: 253–269. · DOI · Paper page
  13. Dockall J.E. 1997 Wear traces and projectile impact: A review of experimental and archaeological evidence. Journal of Field Archaeology, vol. 24: 321–331. · DOI
  14. Fisher A., Hansen P.V., Rassmussen P. 1984 Macro-and micro-wear traces on lithic projectile points. Experimental results and prehistoric examples. Journal of Danish Archaeology, vol. 3: 19–46. · DOI · Paper page
  15. Gir’ia E., Pitulko V.V. 1994 High Arctic Mesolithic culture of Zokhov Island: Insert tools and knapping technology. Arctic Anthropology, vol. 31/2: 17–29.
  16. Goring-Morris A.N. 1987 At The Edge: Terminal Pleistocene Hunter-Gatherers in the Negev and Sinai. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports. (Int. Ser.; N 361).
  17. Goring-Morris A.N. 1998 Complex hunter/gatherers at the end of the Palaeolithic. In T.E. Levy (ed.). The Archaeology of Society in the Holy Land. London: Leicester Univ. Press, pp. 141–168.
  18. Hayden B. 1979 Ho-Ho Nomenclature Committee. The Ho-Ho Classification and Nomenclature Committee Report. In B. Hayden (ed.). Lithic Use-Wear Analysis. New York: Academic Press, pp. 133–135
  19. Henry D.O. 1989 From Foraging to Agriculture. Philadelphia: Univ. of Pennsylvania Press. · DOI
  20. Kaufman D. 1976 Typological and Technological Comparisons of Two Epi-Paleolithic Assemblages from the Coastal Plain of Israel. Unpublished M.A. Thesis. Univ. of Tel Aviv.
  21. Kaufman D. 1987 Excavations at the Geometric Kebaran site of Neve David, Israel: A preliminary report. Quartar, vol. 37/38: 1989–1999.
  22. Kaufman D. 1988 New radiocarbon dates for the Geometric Kebaran. Paleorient, vol. 14: 107–109. · DOI
  23. Nuzhnyi D. 1990a Projectile damage on Upper Paleolithic microliths and the use of bow and arrow among Pleistocene hunters in the Ukraine. In Proceedings of the International Conference of Lithic Use-Wear Analysis, 15–17th February 1989 in Uppsala, Sweden. Uppsala: n.p., pp. 113–124. (Societas Archaeologica Upsaliensis; N 14).
  24. Nuzhnyi D. 1990b Vidy povrezhdenyi na vkladyshevykh mikroliticheskikh detalyakh metatelnykh orudyi v pozdnem paleolite. In Voprosy arkheologii yuga Vostochnoi Evropy. Elista: Kalmytsky Gos. Univ., pp. 14–26.
  25. Nuzhnyi D. 1992 Razvitie mikrolithicheskoi tekhniki v kamennom veke. Kiev: Naukova dumka.
  26. Nuzhnyi D. 2000 Development of mierolithic projectile weapons in the Stone Age. In La chasse dans la Préhistoire. Actes du Colloque International de Tregnes 3–7 octobre 1990. Bruxelles: n.p., pp. 95–101. (Bulletin de la Société Royale Belge d’Anthropologie et de Préhistoire; T. 111).
  27. Nuzhnyi D. 2002 Assemblages of three Epigravettian sites in the Middle Dnieper Basin: A case of variability of residential patterns of mammoth hunters during the warm season. In Trends in the Evolution of East European Paleolithic (Proceedings of Kostenki Expedition), vol. 1. St. Petersburg: n.p., pp. 123–137.
  28. Odell G.H., Cowan F. 1986 Experiments with spears and arrows on animal targets. Journal of Field Archaeology, vol. 13: 195–212. · DOI · Paper page
  29. Pitulko V.V. 1997 Obschie tendentsii v razvitii vkladyshevykh orudiy. In Kamennyi vek evropeiskikh ravnin: Materialy mezhdunarodnoj konferentsii Zamosti e: n.p., pp. 161–167.
  30. Ronen A., Kaufman D., Gofna R., Backler N., Smith P., Amiel A. 1975 The Epipaleolithic site Hefziba, Central Coastal Plain of Israel. Quartar, vol. 26: 53–72.
  31. Shaul N. 1999 The Geometric Kebaran Site in Neve David. Unpublished M.A. Thesis. University of Haifa, (Hebrew). Haifa.
  32. Shimelmitz R., Barkai R., Gopher A. 2004 The Geometric Kebaran microlithic assemblage of Ain Miri, Northern Israel. Paleorient, vol. 30/2: 127–140. · DOI · Paper page
  33. Zakheim O., Bar-Oz G. 1998 Hefzibah. Hadashot Archeologiot: Excavations and Surveys in Israel, vol. 109: 45–46.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Yaroshevich, A.
Venue
Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia
Published
2006-12
Volume
28
Issue
1
Pages
8-17
ISSN
  • 1563-0110
  • 1531-832X
Cited by
4
References
0
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review