Palanth Forum
May 23, 2012, 02:29:49 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1
  Print  
Author Topic: The ghost of Raymond Dart …  (Read 1134 times)
Jacques Cinq-Mars
Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1156



« on: October 26, 2003, 08:45:31 AM »

 … or an "osteodontokeratic" revival?

 
Quote
d'Errico, Francesco and Lucinda R. Backwell. 2003. Possible evidence of bone tool shaping by Swartkrans early hominids. Journal of Archaeological Science 30(12): 1559-1576.

Abstract:

Ever since Dart (J. Phys. Anthrop. 7 (1949) 1) interpreted certain bones from Makapansgat as tools, scientific consensus has fluctuated as to whether some bone objects from early hominid sites should be interpreted as artefacts, or the result of non-human taphonomic processes, which are known to produce pseudo-bone tools morphologically similar to human modified or used artefacts. Here we present possible evidence of bone tool shaping from Swartkrans (Members 1–3; ca. 1.8–1.0 Mya). Four horncores and the proximal end of an ulna used as tools in digging activities also have facets covered by parallel spindle-shaped striations characteristic of grinding. Identification of these traces as possibly resulting from deliberate shaping or re-sharpening of the bone tools is based on the characterisation of the use-wear pattern and other taphonomic modifications observed on the Swartkrans bone tools. This interpretation is also supported by the study of the remainder of the horncores from Swartkrans, horncores from other southern African Plio-Pleistocene sites (Sterkfontein, Makapansgat, Gondolin), modern horncores affected by pre- and post-mortem modification, ethnographic, LSA, African Iron Age and experimental bone tools shaped by grinding. These data suggest that early hominids had the cognitive ability to modify the functional area of bone implements to achieve optimal efficiency.

Keywords: Swartkrans; southern Africa; Early hominid; Bone tools; Taphonomy; Plio-Pleistocene

Copyright © 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Logged
Mikey Brass
Palanth Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 207



« Reply #1 on: October 26, 2003, 03:21:49 PM »

… or an "osteodontokeratic" revival?


On what basis ? Dart's hypothesis was with regards to using those objects as weapons of war, essentially. I don't see the authors proposing anything but a prosaic explanation, by contrast.
Logged

Best, Mikey Brass
Ph.D. student, Institute of Archaeology, UCL
Website: http://www.antiquityofman.com

- !ke e: /xarra //ke
("Diverse people unite": Motto of the South African Coat of Arms, 2002)
Jacques Cinq-Mars
Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1156



« Reply #2 on: October 26, 2003, 05:52:05 PM »

On what basis ? Dart's hypothesis was with regards to using those objects as weapons of war, essentially. I don't see the authors proposing anything but a prosaic explanation, by contrast.

Where is your sense of (scientific) humour, Mikey?

Jacques
Logged
Pages: 1
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.5 | SMF © 2006-2008, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!