Blank Concerns: Issues of Skill and Consistency in the Replication of Scottish Later Mesolithic Blades

Skill is central to the identification of the individual within lithic analysis. Modern replication tends to focus on the proficient flintknapper, and emphasises complex, technically demanding implements and high quality raw materials. Yet, acquiring lithic skill is a universal process that manifests itself in various ways depending on technological strategy and raw material. This paper presents the results of a programme of experimental replication that explores notions of consistency and identity. Based on Mesolithic blade technology, using direct percussion reduction and variable pebble resources, it compares knappers with different experience and identifies some salient parameters of individual performance.

[1]  W. Andrefsky.  Raw-Material Availability and the Organization of Technology , 1994, American Antiquity.

[2]  Raymond Mauldin,et al.  Experiments in Lithic Technology , 1989 .

[3]  Robson Bonnichsen,et al.  Understanding Stone Tools: A Cognitive Approach , 1984 .

[4]  Micaela di Leonardo,et al.  Gender at the crossroads of knowledge : feminist anthropology in the postmodern era , 1992 .

[5]  P. Crown,et al.  Life Histories of Pots and Potters: Situating the Individual in Archaeology , 2007, American Antiquity.

[6]  M. Dobres,et al.  Gender and prehistoric technology: On the social agency of technical strategies , 1995 .

[7]  Blandine Bril,et al.  Stone knapping : the necessary conditions for a uniquely hominin behaviour , 2005 .

[8]  J. R. Cross.  Twigs, Branches, Trees, and Forests: Problems of Scale in Lithic Analysis , 1983 .

[9]  J. Sabloff,et al.  American Archaeology Past and Future , 1988 .

[10]  Jeffrey J Flenniken,et al.  The Past, Present, and Future of Flintknapping: An Anthropological Perspective , 1984 .

[11]  Phillip H. Shelley.  Variation in Lithic Assemblages: An Experiment , 1990 .

[12]  Hansjürgen Müller-Beck,et al.  A History of Flint-Knapping Experimentation, 1838-1976 [and Comments and Reply] , 1978, Current Anthropology.

[13]  S. Milne.  Palaeo-Eskimo Novice Flintknapping in the Eastern Canadian Arctic , 2005 .

[14]  Kenn Hirth,et al.  Mesoamerican lithic technology : experimentation and interpretation , 2003 .

[15]  S. Mithen,et al.  Hunter-gatherer landscape archaeology: the Southern Hebrides Mesolithic project 1988-1998 , 2000 .

[16]  Etienne Wenger,et al.  Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation , 1991 .

[17]  Deborah Olausson.  Different Strokes for Different Folks. Possible Reasons for Variation in Quality of Knapping , 1998 .

[18]  Kathryn Weedman Arthur,et al.  Gender and stone tools: An ethnographic study of the Konso and Gamo hideworkers of southern Ethiopia. , 2005 .

[19]  Nicole Pigeot,et al.  Magdaléniens d'étiolles : économie de débitage et organisation sociale (l'unité d'habitation U5) , 1987 .

[20]  Peter Bleed,et al.  Trees or Chains, Links or Branches: Conceptual Alternatives for Consideration of Stone Tool Production and Other Sequential Activities , 2001 .

[21]  Kathryn Weedman Arthur,et al.  Gender and hide production. , 2005 .

[22]  H. D. Cros,et al.  Women in Archaeology a Feminist Critique , 1993 .

[23]  P. Bodu.  Les Chasseurs Magdaleniens De Pincevent; Quelques Aspects De Leurs Comportements. , 1996 .

[24]  John C. Whittaker,et al.  Individual Variation as an Approach to Economic Organization: Projectile Points at Grasshopper Pueblo, Arizona , 1987 .

[25]  Christopher A Bergman,et al.  Experimental studies in the determination of flaking mode , 1982 .

[26]  J. Gunn,et al.  The Individual in prehistory : studies of variability in style in prehistoric technologies , 1978 .

[27]  Kjel Knutsson,et al.  Skilled production and social reproduction , 2006 .

[28]  K. Weedman,et al.  On the Spur of the Moment: Effects of Age and Experience on Hafted Stone Scraper Morphology , 2002, American Antiquity.

[29]  Jenny Moore,et al.  Invisible people and processes : writing gender and childhood into European archaeology , 1997 .

[30]  Douglas B. Bamforth,et al.  Technological Efficiency and Tool Curation , 1986, American Antiquity.

[31]  J. Whittaker,et al.  American Flintknappers: Stone Age Art in the Age of Computers , 2004 .

[32]  R. Milo,et al.  Tools, language and cognition in human evolution , 1995, International Journal of Primatology.

[33]  Dietrich Stout,et al.  The social and cultural context of stone knapping skill acquisition , 2005 .

[34]  Earl Herbert Swanson,et al.  Lithic technology: Making and using stone tools , 1975 .

[35]  Marcia-Anne Dobres,et al.  Agency in Archaeology , 2000 .

[36]  A. Sinclair.  The technique as a symbol in Late Glacial Europe , 1995 .

[37]  J. S. Derevenski.  Children and Material Culture , 2000 .

[38]  D. Stout.  Skill and Cognition in Stone Tool Production , 2002, Current Anthropology.

[39]  N. Pigeot,et al.  Technical and Social Actors. Flintknapping Specialists and Apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles , 1990 .

[40]  Arthur S. Keene,et al.  Archaeological hammers and theories , 1983 .

[41]  Douglas B. Bamforth,et al.  Technological Organization and Hunter-Gatherer Land Use: A California Example , 1991, American Antiquity.