4.4 Article Proceedings Paper

Did stones speak about people? Flint catchment and Neanderthal behavior from Area 3 (Canaveral, Madrid-Spain)

期刊

QUATERNARY INTERNATIONAL
卷 435, 期 -, 页码 144-163

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.quaint.2016.01.019

关键词

Quarrying; Mousterian; Operative chain; Refits; Intra-site analysis

资金

  1. research project Algo mas que bifaces: hacia la definicion tecnica y tecnologica de los conjuntos liticos del pleistoceno de la region de Madrid [HAR2010-20151]
  2. research project Como, quien y donde?: Varia-bilidad de comportamientos en la captacion y transformacion de los recursos liticos dentro de grupos neandertales [HAR2013-48784-C3-3-P]
  3. Spanish government grant entitled: Ayudas del Programa de Formacion del Profesorado Universitario (FPU), MECD

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Middle Paleolithic catchment patterns have been exhaustively studied in the past. However, it is essential to clearly define Neanderthal technical and strategic abilities in relation to raw materials self-provide, from a temporal perspective. Here we present a study of quarrying activities in open air sites occupied during Mousterian period in Madrid (Spain), with different patterns of lithic catchment. At the El Canaveral archaeological complex, several sites have been identified, in relation with natural flint outcrops. From these we have gained information about flint supplying patterns, both in primary and secondary deposits. In addition, different operative chains and diverse systems of ramification and recycling were employed depending on the final objectives. We were able to appreciate additional actions by analyzing the diacritic superposition of knapping series in blanks, cores and supports of different qualities. Changes in categories, dimensions and raw material qualities, allow a first identification of lithic actions throughout time as a proxy of standardized or random human behavior when catchment actions took place. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd and INQUA. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据