The branch of experimental archaeology focused on the recognition of knapping mistakes and marks, on the basis of the débitage products achieved either by beginners or experts knappers, nowadays can rely on a noteworthy bibliography. In the present study the author presents the results of a comparative analysis carried out taking into account, on the one hand, the experimental material obtained by beginner flintknappers and, on the other, two archaeological samples: Ca 'Belvedere di Monte Poggiolo (FC) (Peretto et al., 1998) and Guado San Nicola 1 (IS) (Arzarello et al., 2009), which allow to individualize peculiar errors for the different débitage methods, since they are two different contexts of the Lower Paleolithic. On the basis of some common features recognized and highlighted by the comparative approach adopted, is possible to isolate a series of knapping mistakes among the Paleolithic assemblage analyzed, also making a distinguish between between error and accident. An accident is something unexpected, that produces a different morphology precluding the stone-tool functionality (Baena, 1998) and that implies a chance that can happen to a skilled person in the act of doing what it can do. The error term is used instead to highlight a feature found in the different phases of the learning process and therefore attributable to a beginner flintknapper (Shelley, 1990): thus, the error is due to inexperience and incompetence and it happens to those who lack the skills to perform a particular action doing it in a wrong way. In this way is possible to recognize beginners flintknappers and, through the stigmata on the stone-tools, the peculiarities of the theoretical and practical knowledge, of the manuality skill ("knowledge and know-how” Harlacker 2006), of savoir-faire, which fit into the broader framework of the flintknapping learning process.
Characterization of human knapping behaviors: an experimental approach for the recognition of knapping errors and novice flint-knappers.
BUONSANTO, Cecilia;PERETTO, Carlo
In corso di stampa
Abstract
The branch of experimental archaeology focused on the recognition of knapping mistakes and marks, on the basis of the débitage products achieved either by beginners or experts knappers, nowadays can rely on a noteworthy bibliography. In the present study the author presents the results of a comparative analysis carried out taking into account, on the one hand, the experimental material obtained by beginner flintknappers and, on the other, two archaeological samples: Ca 'Belvedere di Monte Poggiolo (FC) (Peretto et al., 1998) and Guado San Nicola 1 (IS) (Arzarello et al., 2009), which allow to individualize peculiar errors for the different débitage methods, since they are two different contexts of the Lower Paleolithic. On the basis of some common features recognized and highlighted by the comparative approach adopted, is possible to isolate a series of knapping mistakes among the Paleolithic assemblage analyzed, also making a distinguish between between error and accident. An accident is something unexpected, that produces a different morphology precluding the stone-tool functionality (Baena, 1998) and that implies a chance that can happen to a skilled person in the act of doing what it can do. The error term is used instead to highlight a feature found in the different phases of the learning process and therefore attributable to a beginner flintknapper (Shelley, 1990): thus, the error is due to inexperience and incompetence and it happens to those who lack the skills to perform a particular action doing it in a wrong way. In this way is possible to recognize beginners flintknappers and, through the stigmata on the stone-tools, the peculiarities of the theoretical and practical knowledge, of the manuality skill ("knowledge and know-how” Harlacker 2006), of savoir-faire, which fit into the broader framework of the flintknapping learning process.I documenti in SFERA sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
