Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-jr42d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T14:30:01.202Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Stone tool experiments and reduction methods at the Acheulean site of Isampur Quarry, India

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

C.B.K. Shipton ,
M.D. Petraglia  and
K. Paddayya
C.B.K. Shipton*
Affiliation:
1Leverhulme Centre for Human Evolutionary Studies, Henry Wellcome Building, Fitzwilliam Street, Cambridge, CB2 1QH, UK
M.D. Petraglia
Affiliation:
1Leverhulme Centre for Human Evolutionary Studies, Henry Wellcome Building, Fitzwilliam Street, Cambridge, CB2 1QH, UK
K. Paddayya
Affiliation:
2Deccan College Post-Graduate and Research Institute, Yerwada, Pune, Maharashtra, India
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

What better way to understand how to make a handaxe or cleaver than getting into an Acheulean quarry and doing it yourself. The authors experimented at Isampur Quarry in India, finding that handaxes were best produced by reducing a slab to shape, while cleavers were best made by striking large flakes. There was a good correspondence with the ancient implements, and the authors deduced that Acheulean hominins were learning and transmitting standardised manufacturing methods to each other.

Keywords

IndiaAcheuleanlithic experimentsreduction sequences
Type
Research
Information
Antiquity , Volume 83 , Issue 321 , September 2009 , pp. 769 - 785
Copyright
Copyright © Antiquity Publications Ltd 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Biaggi, P., Kazi, M. M. & Negrino, F.. 1996. An Acheulian workshop at Ziarat Pir Shaban on the Rohri Hills (Sindh, Pakistan). South Asian Studies 12: 49–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradley, B. & Sampson, C. G.. 1986. Analysis by replication of two Acheulian artefact assemblages, in Bailey, G. N. & Callow, P. (ed.) Stone Age prehistory: studies in memory of Charles McBurney: 29–45. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Carbonell, E., Mosquera, M., Olle, A., Rodirguez, X. P., Sala, R., Verges, J. M., Arsuaga, J. L. & Bermudez De Castro, J. M.. 2003. Did the earliest mortuary practices take place more than 350,000 years ago at Atapuerca? L'Anthropologie 107: 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corvinus, G. 1983. A survey of the Pravara River system in Western Maharashtra, Volume 2: the excavations of the Acheulean site of Chirki-on-Pravara, India (Tübinger Monographien zur Urgeschichte 7). Tubingen: Archaeologica Venatoria.Google Scholar
Edwards, S. W. 2001. A modern knapper's assessment of the technical skills of the Late Acheulean biface workers at Kalambo Falls, in Clark, J. D. (ed.) Kalambo Falls prehistoric site. Volume III: 605–11. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gonen, S. & Beaumont, P.. 2006. Victoria West: a highly standardized prepared core technology, in Goren-Inbar, N. & Sharon, G. (ed.) Axe age: Acheulian toolmaking from quarry to discard: 181–200. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
Jones, P. R. 1994. Results of experimental work in relation to the stone industries of Olduvai Gorge, in Leakey, M. D. & Roe, D. A. (ed.) Olduvai Gorge. Volume 5: excavations in Beds III, IV and the Masek Beds 1968-1971: 254–98. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Madsen, B. & Goren-INBAR, N.. 2004. Acheulian giant core technology and beyond: an archaeological and experimental case study. Eurasian Prehistory 2: 3–52.Google Scholar
Meltzoff, A. 1995. Understanding the intentions of others: re-enactment of intended acts by 18 month old children. Developmental Psychology 31: 838–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paddayya, K., Blackwell, B.A.B., Jhaldiyal, R., Petraglia, M. D., Fevrier, S., Chaderton, D. A. II, Blickstein, J.I.B. & Skinner, A. R.. 2002. Recent findings on the Acheulian of the Hunsgi and Baichbal valleys, Karnataka, with special reference to the Isampur excavation and its dating. Current Science 83: 5.Google Scholar
Paddayya, K., Jhaldiyal, R., Petraglia, M. D.. 2006. The Acheulian quarry at Isampur, Lower Deccan, India, in Goren-Inbar, N. & Sharon, G. (ed.) Axe age: Acheulian toolmaking from quarry to discard: 45–74. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
Petraglia, M. D., Laporta, P. & Paddayya, K.. 1999. The first Acheulean quarry in India: stone tool manufacture, biface morphology, and behaviours. Journal of Anthropological Research 55: 39–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petraglia, M. D., Shipton, C. & Paddayya, K., K. 2005. Life and mind in the Acheulean: a case study from India, in Gamble, C. & Porr, M. (ed.) The hominid individual in context: archaeological investigations of Lower and Middle Palaeolithic landscapes, locales and artefacts: 197–219. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Shipton, C. 2003. Sociality and cognition in the Acheulean: a case study on the Hunsgi-Baichbal Basin, Karnataka, India. Unpublished MPhil dissertation, University of Cambridge.Google Scholar
Shipton, C. 2007. Cognition and sociality in the Acheulean. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Cambridge.Google Scholar
Stout, D., Toth, N. & Schick, K.. 2006. Comparing the neural foundations of Oldowan and Acheulean toolmaking: a pilot study using positron emission tomography (PET), in Toth, N. & Schick, K. (ed.) The Oldowan: case studies into the earliest Stone Age (Stone Age Institute publication series 1): 321–32. Gosport: Stone Age Institute.Google Scholar
Wynn, T. 2002. Archaeology and cognitive evolution. Behavioural and Brain Sciences 25: 4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed