MILLN MOZOTA HOLGUERAS

E. Tcnicos Especializados OPIS A2

Departamento de Antropologa & Arqueologa
IMF-CSIC
Doctor Vinculado IIIPC
Universidad de Cantabria

COVALEJOS (PILAGOS, CANTABRIA)

107 retouchers from 2 archaeological layers (J, K)

MORN (VILLAESCUSA, CANTABRIA)

24 retouchers from one archaeological layer (17)

PRADO VARGAS (CORNEJO, BURGOS)

15 retouchers from one archaeological layer (4)

AXLOR (DIMA, BIZKAIA)

492 retouchers from 6 archaeological layers
(N, M, F, D, C, B)

PEA MIEL (NIEVA DE CAMEROS, LA RIOJA)

162 retouchers from one archaeological layer (G)

OTHER SITES
Amalda (Gipuzkoa)
Cueva Milln (Burgos)
Valdegoba (Burgos)
El Esquilleu (Cantabria)

Common a priori traits shared by layers with

important assemblages of retouchers:

Abundant faunal assemblages with a

reasonably good preservation.
Most of them: dated to the more recent part of
the Middle Paleolithic (Late Neanderthals).
In most of them: evidences of human
management of space including domestic
structures (the most typical = fireplace).

Central research question: How are these

tools managed from the procuring stage to
its final discard?

Analytical techniques (I)

Taphonomical study of the assemblage To

clarify which alterations and modifications are
related to human agency.
Taxonomic and anatomical assessment of the
tool blanks -To know the species and
particular bones providing the splinters that
were selected as tools.

Analytical techniques (II)

Morphometric analysis of tools:

Interested on possible:
Selection of blanks, and how it was made
Production of blanks, and how it was made.

Traceological analysis of use traces (more in

the next slide)
A series of experimental programs to both
test my hypothesis and produce new ones.

Main focuses during use-wear

analysis

Specific mode of use (percussion vs.

pressure, handling, etc.)
Amount of use for each tool.
Actual lithic material that was retouched
with the tool.
General type of retouching technique
Operations to upkeep and recycle tools
Final discarding of retouchers.

Shared traits for the assemblages of

retouchers (I)
Bone retouchers are typical, and typically abundant
for Late Middle Paleolithic sites on my area of study.
Not in all the existing sites, but
They are present in most of the Middle Paleolithic
deposits that delivered faunal remains in a
reasonably good state of preservation.
No evidence of pressure retouch. Tools showed traits
related to percussion-based retouch.
Blanks were splinters obtained from green bone.
Almost all of them were used while the bone was still
green or at least not completely dry.

Shared traits for the

assemblages of
retouchers (II)

300
250
200

150
100
50
0

Theres a clear preference for

the bones of middle and large
sized ungulates, particularly
cervids, and also the Bos
genus.
In most cases, theres no
evidence of manufacturing
processes. Instead, there is a
selection of the blanks.
In general terms, these blanks
show a low degree of size
variability Strong selection.

menos 4,01 a 6 6,01 a 8 8,01 a 10,01 a ms de

de 4 cm cm
cm
10
12 cm 12 cm
500

400
300
200
100
0
menos de 2 2,01 a 3 cm 3,01 a 4 cm ms de 4 cm
cm
500

400
300
200
100
0
menos de 0,5 a 1 cm 1,01 cm a
0,5 cm
1,5 cm

1,51 a 2
cm

ms de 2
cm

Main differences between assemblages (I)

Some assemblages of retouchers showed more

size variability: this fact suggests different
degrees of selection between sites and layers.

Main differences
between
assemblages (II)

Pea Miel Layer

G = combination
of selection and
posible
production of
retouchers
(deer metapods)

Main differences between assemblages (III)

Type of retouch made with the tools: Tasks performed in the
different sites and layers can be grouped in two categories:
Retouching strategies similar to Quina retouch (abrupt retouch/

angle-changing strategy/ intensive component/ on thick flakes).

Another category related to a more simple non-invasive retouch.

Main differences between assemblages (IV)

Differences in the amount of use of the retouchers:

In some sites/layers individual retouchers are much
more used (before discarding) than in other ones.

Prado Vargas 4
Covalejos K
Pea Miel G
Axlor N
Axlor M

Axlor F
Axlor D
Axlor B
1,65

1,7

1,75

1,8

1,85

1,9

1,95

2,05

Main differences between assemblages (V)

Two different strategies to upkeep these tools:

Simply changing the way the retoucher is held, and

using another part of it (per example the opposite end).

Cleaning and smoothing the active area by scraping it
with a lithic tool (before use and in some cases
during).
Axlor B

0,34

0,07

Axlor D

0,24

0,05

Axlor F

0,12

0,09

Axlor M

0,17

0,18

Axlor N

0,05

0,16

Pea Miel G

0,26

0,03

Covalejos K

0,16

0,15

Prado Vargas 4

0,06

0,06

SYNTHESIS EXAMPLE: AXLOR Level N

Bone retouchers
Ad hoc selected from faunal remains
Selection of best splinters - technical criteria.
Preference for medium/large ungulates; long
bones and metapods.
Each blank scarcely used (compared to other
sites and layers) Suggests regular and
relatively abundant incoming of animal
resources.
Retouching -Mostly simple retouch; bone
was still green or just partially dry.

SYNTHESIS
EXAMPLE: AXLOR
Level N

Variety of bone
implements: In
addition to bone
retouchers, there
are other tools: a
chisel, and
retouched and unretouched scraperlike tools.

SYNTHESIS EXAMPLE: AXLOR Level N (I)

General information about the layer = a palimpsest of relatively stable

occupations - domestic context - resource consumption and tool upkeep.

SYNTHESIS EXAMPLE: AXLOR Level N

Lithic assemblage:
Varied and (mostly) non specialized tools, no intensive use (in the
time-limited sense).
Combines: a production in local raw materials with the import of
already manufactured tools that are upkeep or recycled on site.
Presence of small & slim lithic points that researchers (Lazun, Rios
Garaizar) has been associated with projectile weapons for short
distance, stalking hunts.

Fauna:
Hunting is focused on red deer,
Goats and chamois from also present.
Presence of roe deer and wild boar
Combined with lithic evidence = suggest hunting resources acquired
from a wooden environment (+) & rocky environment (-).

SYNTHESIS EXAMPLE: AXLOR Level N

Taphonomic study of faunal remains

Intense processing and consumption of the animal

resources, including its bones.
Bone retouchers and other implements were
separated from the rest of faunal remains at the
beginning stage of domestic processes (much larger
than the typical large flakes on the faunal samples;
much less fire-related alteration).

SYNTHESIS EXAMPLE: AXLOR Level N

General picture:
Consumption-related context for long-term, stable occupations.
Also evidences of upkeep and recycling of tools, both related to
consumption activities and other activities like hunting.
The whole picture also helps to understand the role of the bone
retouchers in the economic management system:
Bone retouchers are ad hoc tools, but they are not fortune
tools, or impromptu tools.
Economic system in planned and organized as a cycle, with
relatively simple but extremely efficient ways of providing
what is needed = regular incoming of animal remains is the
basal condition for the procuring of bone tools. And these
bone tools are an essential part of the management of lithic
resources and lithic tools (and they also seem to cover other
minor domestics needs).