A microwear study regarding the function of lithic tools in Moravian Epigravettian

Quaternary International xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Quaternary International journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/quaint

A microwear study regarding the function of lithic tools in Moravian Epigravettian Katarzyna Pyżewicza, Zdeňka Nerudováb,∗ a b

Institute of Archaeology, Adam Mickiewicz University, ul. Uniwersytetu Poznańskiego 7, Poznań, Poland Centre for Cultural Anthropology, Moravian Museum, Zelný trh 6, Brno, 659 37, CZ, Czech Republic

A R T I C LE I N FO

A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Epigravettian Lithic tools Use-wear analysis

Use-wear analyses on lithic pieces from Brno-Štýřice III presented in this article are the first studies of this type conducted on Epigravettian Late Upper Paleolithic (LUP) assemblages from the Czech Republic and the broader region. A total of 187 artefacts classified as formal tools as well as pieces with macroscopic traces of marginal – discontinuous – retouch (edge damage) have been microscopically analyzed. Different types of use-wear traces were noticed on 57 of these artefacts. The traces are mainly associated with animal carcass treatment (the tools were usually used for cutting or scraping), including hide processing, butchering activities, or, to a lesser extent, bone/antler processing. Although there are only sporadic traces associated with plant or wood processing, they support the use of plants during LUP. Recognized use-wear traces are located mainly along unretouched edges or on burins around the negative bulbs of spalls. The spatial distribution of the artefacts with the use-wear traces corresponds to the settlement density. The character and intensity of the use-wear traces fit well with both faunal remains and palynological analyses and illustrates the complexity of everyday life for Epigravettian hunters.

1. Introduction After the Gravettian occupation in its Willendorf-Kostenki phase during further cooling of the climate (Djindjian, 2016; Kozłowski, 2015; Küssner, 2010; Montet-White, 1994; Nerudová et al., 2016; Terberger, 2013; Terberger and Street, 2002) in central Europe, the Epigravettian and Epiaurignacian societies appeared as the first representatives of Late Upper Paleolithic occupation (Nerudová and Neruda, 2015, 2019; Demidenko et al., 2018, 2019). In contrast to the Gravettian occupation, Epigravettian types of communities were different in their adaptation to everyday life, including their ways of living, processing of flint raw materials (including the formation of tools), species of hunted game, hunting strategies, and other activities (Nerudová and Neruda, 2019). Gravettian groups are usually associated with multi-seasonal, extensive areas of occupation, and hunting strategies related to mammoths and big game and the processing of their carcasses, although small game was also important. In contrast, Epigravettian societies, less represented in the occupied area, are associated, according the type of faunal remains, with short-term specialized settlements (Nerudová and Neruda, 2015, 2019). According the Weniger's model (Weniger, 1989) we can characterize Moravian Epigravettian sites as a generally small. Hunting strategies were related not only to small and to medium-sized animals like reindeer and horses, but also to the last mammoths, ∗

especially in the Moravia region (Nerudová, 2016). The life-style had a direct impact on LUP societies and flint technology as well as the function of lithic tools. Diversity in the strategies of forming and using tools among Epigravettian societies is visible at the macroscopic level across the settled regions. In some regions, for example in Poland, new types of toolkits are indicated. Epigravettian groups in Poland usually preferred to use blanks made from massive, unidirectional cores, and a group of formal tools include burins, endscrapers, retouched blades and flakes, and rarely backed pieces (see, among others, Sobczyk, 1995; Wilczyński, 2016). The unidirectional blade core reduction and burins which significantly prevails in other types of tools, is also documented in Moravia (Nerudová, 2016). This study presents, for the first time, an overview and the results of microwear analysis made on lithic artefacts from the Epigravettian open-air site Brno-Štýřice III (Moravia, Czech Republic). The main focus of this study is the identification of possible use-wear and a description of selected artefacts. Based on microwear, we can also describe the technological characteristics of the industry. The presented results are important in the context of current discussions concerning the character of Epigravettian and Epiaurignacian industries. We discuss new information related to Epigravettian knapping technology and the usage of lithic artefacts in the Late Upper Paleolithic in central Europe.

Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (K. Pyżewicz), [email protected] (Z. Nerudová).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2019.11.045 Received 28 May 2019; Received in revised form 26 November 2019; Accepted 28 November 2019 1040-6182/ © 2019 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Please cite this article as: Katarzyna Pyżewicz and Zdeňka Nerudová, Quaternary International, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2019.11.045

Quaternary International xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

K. Pyżewicz and Z. Nerudová

Fig. 1. Position of the Brno-Štýřice III site (A) and plan of the site. All available data was used for GIS reconstruction. Finds without 3D measurement are not displayed (B). Distribution of use-wear traces according to type (C). Artefacts without the 3D measurement are not displayed. GIS digitalization Z. Nerudová.

2. The site

Nerudová et al., 2012, 2016; Nerudová and Neruda, 2014, 2015; Roblíčková et al., 2015). Additionally, malacofauna and charcoals were found (Fig. 1B). This abundant evidence of human activities fall within the Epigravettian period (Nerudová, 2015; Valoch, 1975). The results of pollen and anthracological analysis have been recently published, making it possible to perform palaeobotanic analysis (Nerudová et al., 2016). The set of latest obtained radiocarbon dates: OxA-26961: 15,625 ± 75 BP; OxA-28298: 15,215 ± 70 BP; OxA-28114: 14,870 ± 90 BP (Nerudová, 2016) confirms not only the first radiocarbon dating (Valoch, 1980, 1996) but also the dating performed by A. Verpoorte (2004).

The Brno-Štýřice III site is one of a cluster of sites situated along the northeastern slope of a cliff of Lower Devonian conglomerates known as Červený kopec (Red Hill). Brno-Štýřice III is located in the south-western part of Brno (South Moravia, Czech Republic), approximately 300 m to the south of the current bank of the Svratka River (GPS: WGS84: 49° 11ʹ 2.5505ʹʹ N, 16° 35ʹ 41.6602ʹʹ E; S-JTSK: 1161873.78, 599243.33 – the center of the locality; Fig. 1A). The elevation of the site is 210 m above sea level (10 m above the river). The site lies on a step in the terrain (river terrace) which rises on the west side to a low but steep cliff of the previously mentioned Red Hill. It has a maximum height of 311.42 m a. s. l. The Quaternary cover of the region is formed by an accumulation of eolian (loesses) and colluvial sediments deposited on a terrace consisting of clay fluvial gravels and sandy gravels of the Quaternary age (Nerudová et al., 2012). The sequence of Pleistocene sediments at the locality is up to 10 m thick in places and is not divided by any distinct fossil soils. Archaeological finds of the Paleolithic age were found in the uppermost part of the Upper Weichselian loess cover, which formed a 25 cm (approx.) thick layer of orange-brown loess-like sediment (weakly developed soil; Nerudová et al., 2012; Nerudová et al., 2016). The site was first investigated at the beginning of the 1970s (Valoch, 1975); the next large-scale rescue excavations were carried out in 2009 and then in 2011–2014. They revealed the extent of settlement, a new site (Štýřice IIIa in 2009), and yielded a large amount of lithic (including small splinters as well as bladelets) and osteological material, which was gradually analyzed and evaluated (Nerudová, 2016;

3. Materials Five lithic concentrations were collected during the excavations carried out in the 1970s, in 2009, and during 2011–2014 at the site. More than 9,000 artefacts were obtained (Table 1). Many small splinters and bone fragments were found using water sieving. The lithic inventory contains mainly debitage products, such as flakes, blades and tools (Fig. 1B). Paleolithic hunters used different types of local Moravian cherts (Krumlovský Les-type, Olomučany-type, spongolite), radiolarite and erratic flint (Table 1; Nerudová, 2016). There is no evidence of preferential selection, supply strategy or differentiation of raw material type because three dominant raw materials were used for knapping using the same technology (Nerudová, in press). The high variability of raw material at Brno-Štýřice III corresponds to the shortterm occupation of the site, which is interpreted as the recurrent 2

Quaternary International xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

K. Pyżewicz and Z. Nerudová

Table 1 The overall number of lithic artefacts from the Brno-Štýřice III site, according to the type of raw material. KR – Krumlovský les type chert, OLOM – Olomučany type chert, MJR – Moravian Jurassic chert, SGS – erratic flint, SP – spongolite, burnt – burnt piece, ? – undetermined, TR-ZD – probably Troubky-Zdislavice type chert, ROH – undetermined chert, RA – radiolarite, FLYSCH – chert from The Carpathian flysh zone, OR_ROH – local orange-colored chert. Others* – unstratified pieces from Neolithic or Medieval context. Category

KR_LES

pebbles flakes blades cores fragments others* Σ N of pcs % of N

56.0 1,361.71 258.9 1,028.9 81.0 160.9 299 3.26

OLOM

MJR

SGS

SP

BURNT

4,322.54 1,416.7 2,056.0

14.7 29.3 56.3 3.1

2,864.64 1,571.82 1,361.1 4.7 4,088.51 1,596 17.44

90.6 2,121.3 1,021.5 2,352.4 32.6 618.3 1,768 19.32

667.3 225.8 307.8 43.2 150.7 183 2.0

742.7 4,799 52.45

31 0.33

The laboratory protocol from the 1970s is not known. The lithics from the 2009 and 2011–2014 excavations were gently cleaned of sediment in the laboratory using water (without brushing). Unfortunately, at the time of the excavations we had no opportunity to collaborate with a residue specialist. Before and after cleaning no macroscopically evident residues were documented. On some artefacts

103 68 19 9 7 7 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 246 1 1

ROH

RA

OR_ROH

389.1 393.5 130.6 195.9 20.71

252.5 116.9 120.5

119.9 27.9

164.8 52.0 74.3

87.3 7.2 50.9

162.2 57.8

84.9 87 0.95

7.5 11 0.12

10.9 48 0.52

11.8 56 0.61

25 0.27

Σ N of pcs 44 1,972 986 124 5,301 722 9,149 100.0

5. Experimental reference collection

Table 2 Retouched tools from the Brno-Štýřice III site (excavations conducted between 1972, 2009–2014).

Burin Edge damage Lateral retouch Backed bladelet Notch Endscraper Denticulated Scraper Bilateral retouch Ventral retouch End retouch Point Endscraper-burin Oblique truncation Splinters? Notch-burin Borer Burin-scraper ∑ Endscraper - like core Burin – like core

FLYSCH

sinter (CaCo3) is occasionally present (Figs. 12 and 13). Microscopic analysis was used to investigate the technological and functional aspects of the Epigravettian materials. A Nikon LV150 (with magnification from 50 × to 200 × ) metallographic microscope connected to a digital camera was used to carry out the procedure. Also used for analysis was a Keyence VH-Z100R digital microscope (with magnification from 20 × to 300 × ) transmitting the image to a computer. The lithic artefacts were cleaned before the microscopic analysis. Contaminants on surfaces were removed with warm water and detergent as well as with pure acetone. 186 specimens covered by macrotraces were selected for detailed microscopic analysis. Initially, low magnification was used to specify the type and location of characteristic traces, including micro-flake scars and roundings. Then high magnification analysis allowed for detailed identification of microscopic traces. All artefacts were observed using both low and high magnifications. During the analysis, special attention was paid to linear traces and polish. Observed use-wear traces were recorded with digital equipment. The images were processed in GIMP. In addition, schematic drawings were made showing the location of use-wear traces and the location of the taken pictures. The interpretation of microscopic postdepositional, technological, hafting and use traces was mainly based on data from experimental studies, but also on data from the published literature (cf. Keeley, 1980; Moss, 1983; Vaughan, 1985; Levi Sala, 1996; Juel Jensen, 1988; Van Gijn, 1990; Rots, 2010). The analyses were made on materials from the Brno-Štýřice III site and were then compared with Epigravettian use-wear data from the literature.

4. Method

Number

TR-ZD?

246 2.68

habitation of micro-climatically favourable micro-regions near watercourses (Nerudová et al., 2016). Due to the huge amount of material and the restricted time for analysis, only a small part of the collection could be analyzed. As a first step, we tested only six pieces – generally burins – with which we had success. For this reason, we decided to put the main focus on formal tools and occasionally on unretouched blanks. 186 artefacts out of 246 formal tools and blanks from Brno-Štýřice III were selected for use-wear analysis, using macro traces identified among the lithic inventory. Only a few tools with macroscopic lateral retouch (edge damage) were excluded (Table 2). The most numerous group of formal tools are truncation, dihedral, and multiple burins on blades. Retouched blades, endscrapers, backed bladelets, denticulates, notched and other types were infrequent in the collection. Numerous groups of blanks – blades and flakes covered by some type of functional scarring – were also recognized. To include informal tools in the sample, we analyzed a number of blades with edge damage.

Tools

?

These experiments were conducted in previous years by the author of this use-wear analysis (Kaszia Pyżewicz) together with students and researchers of the Institute of Archaeology, Adam Mickiewicz University and State Archaeological Museum in Warsaw. These studies are part of a wider project focusing on methods of knapping and use of lithic tools during the Upper and Late Paleolithic and Mesolithic in Central Europe. The experiments were carried out at the Archaeological Museum in Biskupin and the State Archaeological Museum in Warsaw. All experimental artefacts were made from various types of siliceous rocks, corresponds to the materials from Brno-Štýřice III (compare Přichystal, 2013). The documentation of experimental studies and microscopic observations is kept at the Institute of Archaeology, Adam Mickiewicz University. Table 3 presents the types of experiments carried out so far in the context of identification of microscopic traces. Additionally, some detailed results of conducted research are presented in separate publications. These include technological, hafting and use traces on the diverse tools (Pyżewicz, 2013), technological traces (Grużdź et al., 2012; Pyżewicz et al., 2014), and storage and hafting traces on projectiles (Pyżewicz and Grużdź, 2014). Due to the particular character of microwear analysis the conducted experiments include tests of knapping techniques (Fig. 2) and using of formal burins and 3

Quaternary International xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

K. Pyżewicz and Z. Nerudová

preservation were noticed. The analyzed artefacts were usually covered by traces which were created as a result of physical and chemical processes occurring during the burial of lithics in the sediments. Two alterations, which limited the use-wear analysis, are white patina and surface sheen, which in many cases cover the entire surface of artefacts from Brno-Štýřice III (Table 6; Fig. 5). When intense, these post-depositional deformations had an impact on the interpretation of technological and use-wear traces, in particular subtle traces such as meat polish. Intense white patina and surface sheen often prevented further detailed analysis whereas weakly developed alteration did not cause problems. Previous studies have shown that patina can form on artefacts as the result of natural soil processes. The type of patina usually depends on the properties of the environment (such as acidity, alkalinity, and humidity) surrounding the artefacts (among others Plisson and Mauger, 1988; Van Gijn, 1990, 51–53; Kamińska and Szymczak, 1994; Levi Sala, 1996, 71; Burroni et al., 2002). The formation of surface sheen on lithics is associated with mechanical and chemical processes, primarily the activity of water and sand (Plisson and Mauger, 1988; Van Gijn, 1990, 53; Levi Sala, 1993, 1996, 31–32, 71). Also, in the case of artefacts from Brno-Štýřice III, the mentioned natural processes should be considered. The micromorphological analyses of thin section made on a sample of loess-like sediment (archaeological layer) confirm weakly developed striatitic B fabrix matrix, influenced by pedogenetic processes (freezing, thawing or humidification; Nerudová et al., 2012, 594).

Table 3 Experimental reference collection. Knapping techniques

Number of experimental blocks

direct percussion using mineral hammer direct percussion using antler hammer direct percussion using wooden hammer indirect percussion using antler billet indirect percussion using wooden billet pressure technique using the organic tip (from the antler) tools use

20 15 2 20 2 20

projectile points an barbs of throwing weapon scraping, cutting, piercing hide butchering activities cutting, planing, scraping, grooving, incising, drilling, splitting of antlers and bones cutting, planing, scraping, grooving, incising, drilling, splitting of wood cutting herbaceous, silicious plants bast treatment use as strike-a-lights shell processing processing of mineral material processing of pigments processing of amber digging soil

Number of experimental tools 19 29 23 31 43 6 7 6 15 7 1 5 1

blades (referring to Upper Paleolithic artefacts used for both animal carcasses and plant processing (Figs. 3 and 4)).

6.1. Microscopic technological traces

6. Results of microwear analysis

Microscopic traces related to the technological aspect were observed on both blanks and formal tools. Based on the results, it can be concluded that individual elements of chaîne opératoire are associated with the application of a stone hammer or retoucher. We observed distinctive linear striations which were visible as deep scratches, together with strips of abrasive and very bright polished areas on crested

Detailed microscopic analysis was performed in order to determine the function of lithics from Brno-Štýřice. The analysis indicates that 58 pieces are covered by use-wear (Fig. 1C; Tables 4 and 5). During the use-wear analysis, some problems related to the lithic surface

Fig. 2. 1- Flintknapping experiment. Microscopic traces visible on core platforms at the point of contact of the billet with the flint surface left by: 2–3 - mineral hammer; 4 - antler billet; original magnification. 2–3 - 100 × , 4–400 × . Photo: K. Pyżewicz. 4

Quaternary International xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

K. Pyżewicz and Z. Nerudová

Fig. 3. Butchering experiments with using formal burins (1) and blades. Use-wear traces of: 2,4 - separation of soft tissue from bones; 3 – cutting antler. 2–3 - 400 × , 4–500 × . Photo: K. Pyżewicz.

Fig. 4. Experimental plant and wood (1) processing using formal burins and blades. Use-wear traces of: 2 – wood planing and scraping; 3 – separating bast from wood; 4 –reed cutting. 2–300 × , 3–4 - 400 × . Photo: K. Pyżewicz.

turn, traces of surface cresting are located near the negatives of flakes. It should also be noted that blades were trimmed with stone before blade detachment, but these deformations are located away from the point of impact and are differently aligned. These observations suggest that stone hammers were applied during

surfaces, butts of blades, flakes, and formal tools (Table 5, Figs. 6 and 7). The morphology of the observed technological microtraces is the same, but localization varies depending on the trajectory of the tool (billet or retoucher). Traces resulting from detachment of the blade or flake are located at the point of impact, where the force was applied. In 5

Quaternary International xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

K. Pyżewicz and Z. Nerudová

Table 4 Summary of retouched tools from the Brno-Štýřice III site covered by use-wear traces.

Table 6 Types of post-depositional alterations observed on lithic artefacts from BrnoŠtýřice III.

Type of use-wear traces

Nr of tools

Type of alteration

∑

plant bone/antler or wood bone/antler bone/antler and/or hide bone/antler/organic bone/antler/and/or plant plant/hide hide hide and/or plant hide and/or organic organic undetermined material ∑ probable hafting traces technological traces (stone billets)

3 1 9 9 8 1 4 11 2 1 7 1 57 2 22

white patina (intense) white patina (not intense) surface sheen (intense) surface sheen (not intense) white patina (intense) + surface sheen (not intense) white patina (not intense) + surface sheen (intense) white patina (not intense) + surface sheen (not intense) none burned postdepositional edge damage

11 20 29 75 10 4 35 1 1 12

the first stage of lithic reduction as well as on the advanced steps of detachment of the blanks. At the same time, stone billets were used during the process of tool shaping. Linear traces associated with the use of a mineral billet were observed on some negatives of formal retouch and the negative bulbs of burin spalls. The microscopic technological traces were observed also by macroscopically on numerous blanks. 6.2. Use-wear traces As a result of microscopic analysis, it can be concluded that lithic tools made from blades and flakes were used for purposes related to the processing of animal carcasses (Figs. 8 and 9) and plants (Figs. 10 and 11). Use-wear traces were mainly observed on various types of burins, as well as on retouched blades and flakes (Table 5). Burin forms are a functionally diverse group. Edges, formed using the burin blow technique, were used for scraping, grinding, and incising bone, antler and soft tissue and hide. Also, along the lateral, unretouched edges there are visible traces formed as a result of animal tissue processing. Due to the poor preservation of the lithic tools, traces, which may be the result of contact with meat and fresh hide, were often hard to observe with any certainty. There are some examples of burins which were used for bone or antler processing i.e., incising, cutting or/and scraping. These types of use traces are usually placed around the negatives of burin spalls. Moreover, some burins were observed which were used, according to the position of linear traces, for hide processing, mainly cutting and sometimes for other purposes (Fig. 12). The traces of hide processing are usually located along negative bulbs of burin spalls and lateral

Fig. 5. Brno-Štýřice III. Macroscopic photo of artefact covered by intensive white patina (A) and artefact with surface sheen (B). Photo: Z. Tvrdý.

edges (Fig. 13). Among the group of burins, there are some examples of tools which are covered with traces of plant or hide processing or a both types of traces together (Table 7, Figs. 10 and 12). There are distinctive polish and linear traces visible along the lateral edges. Their distribution indicates scraping and cutting activities. Special attention was paid to a burin in which a large part of the surface is covered by intense plant

Table 5 Brno-Štýřice III. Overview of technological and use-wear traces depending on the tool-type. Tool- type Borer Straight Dihedral burin Multiple dihedral burin Burin on truncation Burin on oblique retouched truncation Burin on concave retouched truncation Multiple mixed burin Truncated blade Laterally retouched blade Notch Denticulated Scraper Other Blade with edge damage Non retouched blank ∑

Technological traces

1 1

Use-wear

Multifunctional use

2 2 2 4 3

1 1 5 1 2 1 1

1

3 1 2 2 1

2 16 22

6 1 29

1

6

Hafting

1 1

15

1

28

2

∑ 1 3 7 4 7 4 1 3 2 3 3 2 24 17 81

Quaternary International xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

K. Pyżewicz and Z. Nerudová

above, it can be concluded that cutting and scraping processes were undertaken with the use of selected burins. However, longer unretouched edges were used for these purposes. Considering all the data into account, it should be acknowledged that many formal burins were used as functional knives for animal carcasses or plant processing. This is evidenced both by the polished areas, their location, and the direction of the linear traces. Blades and flakes, usually intentionally retouched, were used in the processing of animal carcasses, bone, antler, and hide (Figs. 8 and 13). There are visible traces of bone or antler processing such as incising, cutting or scraping along one or two lateral edges. Based on the results of the use-wear analysis (the observed traces are the compilation of polish located along the edges resulting from contact with fresh hide/ meat and scattered spots of polish formed during contact with bones), it can be assumed that most of these tools were used for butchering activities. The edges of blades, which were created by intentional retouch, are usually not covered by use-wear traces. It can be assumed that those parts of the tools were probably fitted in hafts. The traces of hafting being observed only in two cases. The first example is a distal part of an unretouched blade with a dorsal notch, the traces being along the unused edge and ridges (Fig. 7). This tool was used for the hide cutting. The second example is a proximal blade with unilateral retouch. This tool is covered by use-wear traces of butchering activities. Along the unused edge, there is polish that is somewhat hide-like. The observed traces are visible in the form of polish occurring on both sides, mainly along the edges and ridges. These polished areas are dull, slightly “greasy” and penetrate the microtopography of the flint (Fig. 16). They are accompanied by rounding of protruding parts (compare i. a. Rots, 2003; Rots, 2008, Rots, 2008; 2009, 2010; Rots and Vermeersch, 2004; Rots et al., 2011; Van Gijn, 2010). The observed hafting traces are logically distributed with respect to use-wear traces. They are located opposite the used parts and have a regular course along the entire lateral edge and the ridges. The presented description of the hafting traces refers to the both of the mentioned tools. The angle of edge of the unretouched blade is less than 60°; the angle of the retouched blade is between 70 and 75°. In some cases, traces of plant processing like cutting or scraping were observed on blades. Blades without intentionally retouched parts were also used for activities associated with animal carcass processing, mainly cutting. These types of tools were usually used as knives for soft tissue and hard material such as bones and antler. Simultaneously, some use-wear traces were identified on retouched flakes. These tools were also used for butchering activities or working with skin, bone, antler but more often were used not as knives but rather as scrapers. We expected the presence of dynamic fractures on backed bladelet and points but there were no impact fractures and it indicates both backed bladelets and points registered at the site were not used. 7. Discussion The results of the analysis, which are presented above, are linked to two aspects – technology and usage of lithic artefacts by the Epigravettian society. We can compare the technological aspect with analyses of materials from selected Epigravettian sites in Poland, i.e., Kraków-Piekary IIa (Wilczyński, 2006), Kraków-Spadzista (Wilczyński, 2007), Targowisko 10 (Wilczyński, 2009), Sowin 7 (Wiśniewski et al., 2012), and in the Czech Republic, at Brno-Štýřice III (Nerudová, 2016, 2018). Generally, the results of this research indicate the preference of blade debitage and the domination of the strategy related to the removal of massive blanks (Figs. 8, 10 and 14) from unidirectional cores (Nerudová, 2016, Figs. 25 and 27), as well as a lack of intensive preparation of the cores. At Brno-Štýřice III, core platforms were prepared and repaired by the detachment of single flakes and sometimes other parts of the cores were crested. The applied technique was direct percussion using a soft (mineral) hammer (Figs. 12, 13 and 15). The blades

Fig. 6. Brno-Štýřice III. Artefact no. 118967, erratic flint. Microscopic technological traces - linear traces originating from forming retouch with the use of a stone tool. 1–50 × , 2–200 × . Photo: K. Pyżewicz and Z. Tvrdý, drawing T. Janků.

polish. In some places the traces observed on this burin are like those created during hide processing. This tool can be assumed to be multifunctional, i.e., it was used for both hide and plant processing. It can also be assumed that this type of tool was used for specific material like bast, splitting plant fibers or roots (compare Juel Jensen, 1994; Van Gijn, 1990, 2010, 147; Osipowicz, 2019; Sobkowiak-Tabaka and KufelDiakowska, 2019). Based on the detailed identification of the use-wear traces described 7

Quaternary International xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

K. Pyżewicz and Z. Nerudová

Fig. 7. Brno-Štýřice III. Artefact no. 119764, erratic flint. Microscopic technological traces – linear traces left by a mineral hammer are visible on the butt. 1–100 × . Photo: K. Pyżewicz, drawing T. Janků.

obtained by this method have a sharp flaking angle, are relatively regular (Figs. 9 and 11), their bulbs are not well pronounced, and they are accompanied by a lip (Figs. 8 and 12), as well as occurrence of esquillements du bulbe on some of the blades (Fig. 15; Pelegrin, 2000). These characteristics are typical of Late Upper Paleolithic blades. Additionally, Epigravettian artefacts do not display additional characteristic procedures associated with the preparation of the core platform, which would affect the possibility of easier recognition of the technology of the described units among the other groups (for example, en éperon technology in Magdalenian). The results of the detailed technological studies of Epigravettian materials (e.g., from Kraków-Piekary IIa, Kraków-Spadzista, Targowisko 10, Sowin 7, and Brno-Štýřice III) indicate that the lithic technology was significantly diversified, which negatively affects the possibility of showing generalized schemes of lithic debitage. One can conclude that the methods of flint reduction were highly individualized and depended on the initial forms of the nodules or current production needs and thus related to the preferred knapping toolkit related to the site's function. Also noteworthy is the lack of sophisticated methods of specific types of production of retouched forms and the production of tools ad hoc. Although, the

production of blanks (refits of core and blank) and rejuvenation of tools (refits of formal tools and resharpening blanks) is confirmed (Nerudová, 2015) we have no refit between core(s) and tool(s). Many aspects of the lithic technology of Gravettian, Epigravettian, as well as Magdalenian groups (Wilczyński, 2007; Wiśniewski et al., 2012; Maier, 2015) can be observed based on the data regarding the methods of obtaining blanks and formal tools. Therefore, it is important to present also the technological features at the microscopic level. This allows the possibility to indicate potential areas of overlap or differentiation of data relating to the Paleolithic groups mentioned above. Unfortunately, as opposed to studies of Magdalenian artefacts (Pyżewicz et al., 2014; Pyżewicz, 2015a, Pyżewicz, 2015b), there are no representative results of microscopic analysis of traces associated with the toolkit used in the processing of flint raw material by Gravettian or Epigravettian groups in the area of central Europe. The studies of Magdalenian artefacts (Pyżewicz et al., 2014; Pyżewicz, 2015a, Pyżewicz, 2015b) indicate that despite numerous similarities at the macroscopic level among the Magdalenian materials and the BrnoŠtýřice III Epigravettian material, the microscopic image is characterized by differentiation. Macrolithic forms among the Magdalenian Fig. 8. Brno-Štýřice III. Artefact no. 118897, erratic flint. Use-wear traces of butchering activities. 1–2 – traces of bone/antler and hide processing visible along the lateral edges. 1–200 × , 2–300 × . The blade has dorsal preparation, dihedral butt and lip typical of a mineral hammer. Photo: K. Pyżewicz and Z. Tvrdý, drawing T. Janků.

8

Quaternary International xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

K. Pyżewicz and Z. Nerudová

which is different from Magdalenian technology in Moravia (Nerudová and Moník, in press). The second aspect linked to the analysis of materials from BrnoŠtýřice III is the usage of lithic tools including discussion of whether the tools were made at the site or were a part of transported kits. When we consider the whole reduction strategy and the character of the cores, we can suppose that blank and tool production was performed at the site. All stages of the reduction strategy are present at the site, including different blanks with complete or partial cortex, crested blades, secondary crested blades, blades struck from the sides (Fig. 12), or preparation flakes (Nerudová, 2016, Fig. 24), final products, small splinters, and chunks. In the assemblage, both initial cores and extensively exploited or exhausted cores are present (Nerudová, 2016, Fig. 23). The final blanks (flakes and blades without cortex, blades with parallel edges) are a significant part of the collection (Nerudová, 2016, Fig. 22). Moreover, some refits were done (for example the conjoining of three flakes with the rest of the cortex, a core with a sequence of preparation flakes, another core with two rejuvenation flakes, a burin with broken burin spall, amongst others). Based on these facts we can deduce that whole process of tool making (starting up with preparation of cores, theirs reduction, preparation and reduction of tools) was carried out at the site. Many of the traces indicate bone/antler working at the site. The bones at the site are very poorly preserved, and many of them are present in small undeterminable fragments (less than 1 cm). A high number of bone fragments are burnt and as has been emphasized in Brno-Štýřice III, burnt animal bones significantly prevailed over wood charcoals (Nerudová et al., 2016). The number of positively identified individuals at the site (MNI) is very low. When all of the animal osteological material obtained over the entire course of excavations since 1972 is taken into consideration, then at least three mammoths, one horse, one reindeer, one wolf, one megaloceros or elk, possibly one woolly rhinoceros, and possibly one red deer can be determined to have been processed here (Roblíčková et al., 2015). Unfortunately, the bad taphonomy and high fragmentation of the bones do not allow identification of some anthropic traces, butchery activities, processing, or final tools. For these reasons, we have only indirect evidence of bone/ antler working. If we have faunal remains, our next question must be associated with hunting. The list of formal tools (Table 2) shows the presence of backed bladelet (which represent the composite tools) and points (projectile) as well. Unfortunately, there are no impact fractures on these artefacts. Many of the analyzed forms were used for different tasks during their functioning as tools in daily activities within Epigravettian society (Tables 5 and 7). According to our current hypothesis, these tools were not recycled from one typological form to another but were utilized for more complex activities that could result in different traces. A good example of such tasks is butchering, which consisted of processing stages that leave different traces (e.g. the cutting of the soft tissue, defleshing). Most frequently this multifunctionality is evident between the burins (multiple dihedral, strait dihedral, on concave retouched truncation, multiple mixed), and less so on other tool-types such as denticulates, borers or sidescrapers. In many cases, simple blanks were used without intentional retouching (i.e. they were not formal tools). In these cases, the macroscopical visible edge damage on the lateral section resulted from, probably, intensive use (Table 4). The preference to use primary blanks with parallel edges (Figs. 9 and 11) or burins is evident over the other tool-types. Cutting (31 examples) or incising (14 examples) were the most frequent activities at the Brno-Štýřice III site, documented mostly on the same artefact (Fig. 12). We assume that it is most likely that many of the analyzed artefacts which are covered by functional traces could have been mounted in hafts. For many of the analyzed artefacts, some uncharacteristic traces were recorded on unused parts, especially at the protruding parts of the tools. However, their character was not so distinctive that we could be

Fig. 9. Brno-Štýřice III. Artefact no. 119077, erratic flint. Use-wear traces of butchering activities. 1–2 – traces of hide processing visible along the lateral edge and spots of bone/antler traces (1). 1–200 × , 2–100 × . Proximal part of blade, with a typical lip and dorsal preparation. The butt is unmeasurable. Linear traces originating from forming retouch using a stone tool. Photo: K. Pyżewicz and Z. Tvrdý, drawing T. Janků.

groups were obtained using instruments made from organic raw materials, most probably antler (Maier, 2015). Based on the microscopic studies carried out on flint materials from the Brno-Štýřice III site, it can be concluded that all elements of the chaîne opératoire regarding obtaining macrolithic blanks, as well as the process of shaping formal tools, were related to the use of toolkits made of stone. Mineral hammers or retouchers were applied not only during the first and advanced stages of reduction but also during the shaping and repair of formal tools (Figs. 12 and 13). Macroscopic observation shows, that most of the butts have signs of knapping with a soft mineral hammer, i.e. dorsal abrasion of artefacts and punctiform butt. The frequency of the punctiform butt is 21.8% from the analyzed artefacts (Nerudová and Moník, in press, Table 1). Mineral hammer, punctiform butts, and dorsal abrasion of artefacts seem to be characteristic for the Epigravettian, 9

Quaternary International xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

K. Pyżewicz and Z. Nerudová

Fig. 10. Brno-Štýřice III. Artefact no. 118997, erratic flint. Use-wear traces of plant processing (1,3–4) and use-wear traces similar to hide (2) visible along the lateral edge. 1-2 – 100 × , 3-4 – 50 × . Intentionally broken (dynamic fracture) blade. The butt is punctiform. The ventral side has a characteristic lip. Photo: K. Pyżewicz and Z. Tvrdý, drawing T. Janků.

with traces related to projectile use. In the structure “KSB” hide scraping on the three carinated endscrapers is more represented; the microliths were mainly used as armatures (Rios-Garaizar et al., 2019). There are some examples of use-wear analysis of Epigravettian materials from southern Europe. For example, lithic tools from the Epigravettian layers in the Temnata Cave were used for cutting, engraving, boring bone and wood, scraping and perforating skin, or animal carcass processing, and even for plant treatment (Gurova and Schtchelinski, 1994; Gurova, 1995). From the Italian site Grotta del Clusantin (Peresani et al., 2011), different categories of scrapers, including endscrapers were used for scraping skin, burins for bone and antler scraping, while the backed knife and blades were used for animal carcass processing. Some unretouched debitage products were used for wood processing. A large functional diversity of flint tools is also shown by the results of research into the Epigravettian materials from a second Italian site, Val Lastari (Ziggiotti, 2008). Endscrapers were used for skin treatment, while burins, backed blades and retouched blades and flakes were selected mainly for various types of activities related to animal carcass treatment, but unretouched blades were used for cutting soft animal tissue. In summary, it can be proposed that the lithic tools from BrnoŠtýřice III, like other inventories dated to the Late Upper Paleolithic, were commonly used for bone and antler processing and for butchering activities. At the same time, the recognition of tools for plant or wood processing is rather unique. The evidence for plant use is available especially in the Gravettian, Late Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic (Jones, 2009). In Brno-Štýřice III, these were identified by pollen and anthracological analyses of species in which we can suppose a medical use (Salix sp.); dietary supplement for animals/people (Glyceria sp., Rubus sp.); raw materials; probable poisonous species; as well as the highly nutritious species Corylus and Pinus cembra (Nerudová et al., 2016). It can be suggested that some plants which were identified in BrnoŠtýřice III could be processed by the identified lithic tools. These

sure that these were hafting traces. Also, it is possible that one of the factors that influenced a small number of identified hafting traces could be the short-term nature of holding the lithic tools in hafts (compare i. a. Levi Sala, 1993; 1996; Rots 2003; 2008a; 2008b; 2009; 2010; Rots and Vermeersch 2004; Rots et al. 2011; Van Gijn 2010). Some analogies can be noted based on the comparison of functional studies of lithics from other sites dated to the end of the Upper Paleolithic related to Epigravettian, for example in Poland, or in the Czech Republic (Mohelno-Plevovce, which is slightly older and associated with the Epiaurignacian). Microwear analysis of Epigravettian lithics has been performed on two inventories from Poland – Targowisko 10 (Kufel-Diakowska and Wilczyński, 2014) and Kraków Spadzista (Stefański, 2007). It is worth adding that a diverse and numerous set of artefacts including both debitage products and formal tools was analyzed from Targowisko 10. From Kraków Spadzista only burin forms were analyzed. Therefore, it should be point out that the results obtained from these studies do not reveal the range of ways of using stone tools by Epigravettian societies. The microscopic analysis of lithic materials from Targowisko 10 indicates that most activities associated with endscrapers were those related to scraping hides. Individual unretouched blades and truncated blades were used as tools for the processing of animal carcasses. A small number of artefacts indicate that they were used in the treatment of an unspecified hard material. The researchers were able to identify traces on the individual artefacts (mainly blades and burins) associated with the processing of raw materials of plant origin (cutting, scraping, splitting). The formal burins from the Kraków Spadzista site were used for cutting and scraping, but also for piercing and incising various types of material. The unique refit of carinated endscrapers (micro-core) with a sequence of microblades (Demidenko et al., 2018) as well as use-wear analyses was published for the Epiaurignacian site Mohelno-Plevovce (Rios-Garaizar et al., 2019). The use-wear analyses on lithics made on the structure “KSA” identified mostly bone and antler work (cutting, scraping, grooving, and boring of different materials), as well as pieces 10

Quaternary International xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

K. Pyżewicz and Z. Nerudová

Fig. 11. Brno-Štýřice III. Artefact no. 120228, erratic flint. Use-wear traces of plant processing and other organic material (?) visible along the lateral edge. 1–50 × , 2–300 × , 3–100 × . Undetermined type of butt. Photo: K. Pyżewicz and Z. Tvrdý, drawing T. Janků.

Shelter (Drudi, 2014), and Temanta Cave (Gurova and Schtchelinski, 1994; Gurova, 1995). It should be added that some unretouched bladelets were also distinguished as hunting elements among materials from Temnata Cave (Gurova, 1995). The spatial distribution of artefacts from Brno-Štýřice III, as well as the results of the use-wear traces, should be discussed here. The overall spatial distribution of blanks and animal bones found at the BrnoŠtýřice III site shows the placement of the findings in five isolated concentrations (Fig. 1B), which could be the result of individual settlement events (Nerudová, 2016). Each concentration is characterized by the presence of blanks, tools, animal bones, retouchers/hammerstones, as well as pieces with use-wear traces. The frequency of organic, hide and bone/antler use-wear (Fig. 1C) is slightly more common on the spatial plan and together the bone/antler processing overlap with the first and second mammoth jaws (compare Fig. 1B and C).

activities could be related to the harvesting of plants for medical purposes, as food products, or as the elements of planned containers, baskets, composite tools etc. A similar use of plants is supposed at the Cova de les Cendres and Całowanie sites. The excavation of the Middle and Upper Magdalenian site at Cova de les Cendres (Spain) provided thirty-seven different plant taxa, including fruits (Martínez Varea and Badal García, 2017). Remains of plant, including charred plant remains, which served as food are described at the Całowanie site (Poland), dated to the terminal Paleolithic and early Mesolithic (Kubiak-Martens, 1996). It is worth adding that specific functional tools among lithics from Brno-Štýřice III, which are known from other sites dated to the Late Upper Paleolithic, such as strike-a-lights, were not recognized. Based on microwear analysis of lithics not only from Brno-Štýřice III but also from Targowisko and Kraków Spadzista, a lack of information on the use of flint tools as projectiles can be observed, even though this type of tool usage was common among Upper Paleolithic societies (like the above-mentioned Epiaurignacian). Epigravettian societies inhabited the territories of the Czech Republic and Poland probably used alternative materials (organic) for hunting equipment. However, this interpretation would be too simple. The inability to recognize lithic projectiles is probably due, among other things, to the state of knowledge and the low number of use-wear studies of Epigravettian inventories. It should be added that the flint elements in hunting weapons were identified among the lithic materials obtained from Epigravettian sites from other European areas. For example this type of function is attributed to the backed pieces from Italian sites, such as Val Lastari (Ziggiotti, 2008), Grotta del Clusantin (Peresani et al., 2011), Castello's

8. Summary This paper is the first complete use-wear analysis of the Epigravettian (LUP) inventory from the Czech Republic, made on both formal tool-types as well as on blades and flakes. To summarize, it can be stated that lithic tools were used primarily during activities related to butchering, hide, and bone/antler processing. At the same time, there were no recognized tool kits related to hunting. It can be supposed that animal carcass treatment was one of the activities in the everyday life of societies which occupied the Brno-Štýřice III site during the Late Upper Paleolithic period. At the same time, it should be noted that the discussed societies used lithic tools for plant processing, but based on 11

Quaternary International xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

K. Pyżewicz and Z. Nerudová

Fig. 12. Brno-Štýřice III. Artefact no. 119779, Olomučany chert. Use-wear traces of cutting or/and incising hide (?) visible around the negatives of burin spalls. Linear technological traces originating from cresting using a stone tool. 1-3 – 200 × . The artefact has a punctiform butt, dorsal preparation, and a lip on the ventral side. Photo: K. Pyżewicz and Z. Tvrdý, drawing T. Janků.

Fig. 13. Brno-Štýřice III. Artefact no. 120447, erratic flint. Use-wear traces of bone/antler and hide processing visible along the lateral edge. 1–200 × , 2–100 × . The butt is covered by microscopic technological traces left by a mineral hammer. The butt is linear. Photo: K. Pyżewicz and Z. Tvrdý, drawing T. Janků.

12

Quaternary International xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

K. Pyżewicz and Z. Nerudová

Table 7 Type of use-wear traces according to type of artefact. Type of use-wear traces

∑

Type of artefact borer

plant plant or/and hide hide and/or plant hide hide or organic material bone/antler bone/antler and hide bone/antler and organic material bone/antler and/or plant bone/antler or wood organic material undetermined material ∑

3 5 1 11 1 9 9 8 1 1 7 1 57

burin

oblique truncation

1 4

1

3 1 4 1 4

2

backed bladelet

lateral retouch

ventral retouch

notch

denticulated

scraper

edge damage

unretouched blank

1 1

1 1

1

1

23

3

1

5 5 3

1

1 1 3 1

1

3

1

1

use-wear studies, these activities were not as intense and common as processing animal carcasses. Due to post-depositional effects and underdeveloped use-wear traces there were some problems with the identification of traces, which were not intense, but had delicate forms, e.g. hafting traces, or traces resulting from meat processing. It should be added that the activity of post-depositional processes is not the only limitation that influences the readability of the hafting traces. Based on the results of archeo-zoological analysis (Roblíčková et al., 2015), it can be assumed that carcasses and bones of recognized animals at the Brno-Štýřice III site, such as mammoths, horses, reindeer, wolves, megaloceros/red-deer, rhinoceros, and probably red-deer were processed by tools which are covered by use-wear traces. It should be added that the spatial distribution of lithics covered by use-wear traces and animal bones corresponds with the settlement density and tools for activities associated with animal carcasses processing were placed near bone concentrations (Fig. 1C). Although only a few artefacts were associated with plant processing, the detection of plant processing is very important in the context of current knowledge. The results bring new insight into the Epigravettian lifestyle, especially in the Moravia region, and fit well with the wider area of the

1 1

1

1

2

3

1

2 1

20

1

Fig. 15. Brno-Štýřice III. 1- artefact no. 118873, Olomučany chert. 1 – artefact no. 118856, Olomučany chert. A detail view of the ventral side with splinter characteristic of a mineral hammer. Photo: Z. Nerudová.

Epigravettian. The identification of animal carcass processes confirms the contemporaneity of the site with the presented hunted fauna, i.e., mammoth-steppe species (Roblíčková et al., 2015). A detailed study of plant traces will be the next step of our analysis. Last, but not least, the Fig. 14. Brno-Štýřice III. Artefact no. 120406, erratic flint. Use-wear traces of hide processing visible along the lateral edge. 1–50 × , 2–100 × , 3–300 × . Punctiform butt. Photo: K. Pyżewicz and Z. Tvrdý, drawing T. Janků.

13

Quaternary International xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

K. Pyżewicz and Z. Nerudová

Fig. 16. Figure z. Brno-Štýřice III. Artefact no. 119149, erratic flint. Use-wear traces of hide cutting. 1- hafting traces visible along ridges. 1–200 × . Photo: K. Pyżewicz, drawing T. Janků.

use of soft mineral hammers for blank and tool production must be mentioned as the most significant characteristic distinguishing the Epigravettian and Magdalenian assemblages. Dorsal abrasion of artefacts, punctiform butt as characteristics for soft mineral hammer been observed on numerous blanks from Brno-Štýřice III. Because Epigravettian and Magdalenian overlap some thousand years in the same regions (Wisniewski et al., 2017), their precise technological differentiation is one of the topics currently discussed.

microscopy: a review of west European research. J. World PreHistory 2 (2), 53–87. Juel Jensen, H., 1994. Flint Tools and Plant Working: Hidden Traces of Stone Age Technology: a Use Wear Study of Some Danish Mesolithic and TRB Implements. Århus University Press, Åarhus. Jones, M., 2009. Moving North: Archaeobotanical Evidence for Plant Diet in Middle and Upper Paleolithic Europe. In: Hublin, J.-J., Richards, M.P. (Eds.), The Evolution of Hominin Diets. Springer Netherlands, pp. 171–180. Kamińska, J., Szymczak, K., 1994. Patyna powierzchni zabytków krzemiennych jako wyznacznik chronologiczny. Światowit 39, 215–223. Keeley, L.H., 1980. Experimental Determination of Stone Tool Uses: a Microwear Analysis. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Kozłowski, J.K., 2015. The origin of the Gravettian. Quat. Int. 359–360, 3–18. Kubiak-Martens, L., 1996. Evidence for possible use of plant foods in Palaeolithic and Mesolithic diet from the site of Całowanie in the central part of the Polish Plain. Veg. Hist. Archaeobotany 5, 33–38. Kufel-Diakowska, B., Wilczyński, J., 2014. The camp of Upper Palaeolithic hunters in Targowisko 10 (S Poland). In: Marreiros, J., Bicho, N., Gibaja Bao, J. (Eds.), International Conference on Use-Wear Analysis. Use-Wear 2012. Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Newcastle upon Tyne, pp. 173–182. Küssner, M., 2010. The Late Upper Palaeolithic in the catchment area of the river Saale – facts and considerations. Quartar 57, 125–137. Levi Sala, I., 1993. Use-wear traces: process of development and post-depositional alterations. In: In: Anderson, P.C., Beyries, S., Otte, M., Plisson, H. (Eds.), Traces et function, les gestes retrouvés. Actes du colloque international de Liège, 8-9-10 décembre 1990, vol. 50. ERAUL, Liège, pp. 401–416. Levi Sala, I., 1996. A Study of Microscopic Polish on Flint Implements. British Archaeological Reports, vol. 626 BAR International Series, Oxford. Martínez Varea, C.M., Badal García, E., 2017. Plant use at the end of the Upper Palaeolithic: archaeobotanical remains from Cova de les Cendres (Teulada-Moraira, Alicante, Spain). Veg. Hist. Archaeobotany 1–12. Montet-White, A., 1994. Alternative Interpretations of the Late Upper Paleolithic in Central Europe. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 23, 483–508. Moss, E., 1983. The Functional Analysis of Flint Implements. Pincevent and Pont d'Ambon: Two Cases from the French Final Paleolithic. British Archaeological Reports, vol. 177 BAR International Series, Oxford. Nerudová, Z., 2015. On site settlement activities: the example of the Epigravettian site of Brno-Štýřice III (Czech Republic). Anthropologie (Brno) 53, 245–256. Nerudová, Z., 2016. Lovci posledních mamutů na Moravě. Moravské zemské muzeum, Brno. Nerudová, Z., (in press). Quantifying How Much Raw Material Is Needed: A Case Study Based on the Weight of the Lithic Artefacts from the Brno‐Štýřice III Epigravettian Site (Moravia, Czech Republic). Archaeometry. Nerudová, Z., Doláková, N., Novák, J., 2016. New information augmenting the picture of local environment at the LGM/LGT in the context of the Middle Danube region. Holocene 26, 1345–1354. Nerudová, Z., Moník, M. (in press): Epigravettian of Kůlna Cave, a revision of artefacts. Archeol. Rozhl. Nerudová, Z., Neruda, P., 2014. Chronology of the Upper Palaeolithic sequence in the Kůlna Cave (okr. Blansko/CZ). Archaol. Korresp. 44, 307–324. Nerudová, Z., Neruda, P., 2015. Moravia between Gravettian and Magdalenian. In: Sázelová, S., Novák, M., Mizerová, A. (Eds.), Forgotten Times and Spaces: New Perspectives in Paleoanthropological, Paleoetnological and Archeological Studies. Brno: Institute of Archeology of the Czech Academy of Sciences. Masaryk University, pp. 378–394. Nerudová, Z., Neruda, P., 2019. Moravia between Gravettian and Magdalenian – GIS study. In: Maier, A., Mayr, C. (Eds.), Workshop: the Last Glacial Maximum in Europe. State of Knowledge in Geosciences and Archaeology. 20th to 22nd March 2019. Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, pp. 23–25. Nerudová, Z., Neruda, P., Lisá, L., Roblíčková, M., 2012. Záchranný výzkum mladopaleolitických lokalit v Brně-Štýřicích v kontextu osídlení Brněnska. Archeol. Rozhl. 64, 591–627. Osipowicz, G., 2019. Plant processing in the Late Mesolithic Poland: in search for function of the mysterious ‘curved knives’. Archaeol. Anthropol. Sci. 11, 3613–3628. Peresani, M., Duches, R., Miolo, R., Romandini, M., Ziggiotti, S., 2011. Small specialized

Declaration of competing interest The both authors declare no Conflict of Interest. Acknowledgement The co-authors would like to thank all anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments on this text, to Zdeněk Tvrdý for his kind help with macrophotos and to Petr Neruda and Zdeněk Tvrdý for their help with the manuscript. The research was carried out under the Center of Cultural Anthropology and Anthropos Institute (Moravian Museum). This paper was financially supported by the Ministry of Culture of the Czech Republic through institutional financing of the long-term conceptual development of the research institution (the Moravian Museum, MK000094862) for the years 2019–2023. References Burroni, D., Donahue, R.E., Pollard, A.M., 2002. The surface alteration features of flint artefacts as a record of environmental processes. J. Archaeol. Sci. 29, 1277–1287. Demidenko, Y.E., Škrdla, P., Rios-Garaizar, J., 2018. European perspectives of the East European LGM Epi-Aurignacian with Sagaidak-Muralovka-type microliths. In: ValdeNowak, P., Sobczyk, K., Nowak, M., Źrałka, J. (Eds.), Multas per gentes et multa per saecula: Amici magistro et collegae suo ioanni Christopho Kozłowski dedicant, pp. 85–92 Kraków. Demidenko, Y.E., Škrdla, P., Rios-Garaizar, J., 2019. In between Gravettian and Epigravettian in Central and Eastern Europe: a peculiar LGM Early Late Upper Paleolithic industry. Přehled výzkumů 60 (1), 11–42. Djindjian, F., 2016. Territories and economies of hunter–gatherer groups during the last glacial maximum in Europe. Quat. Int. 412 (Part A), 37–43. Drudi, S., 2014. Experimentation and functional analysis of the backed point tools from the Castello's shelter at Termini imerese (PA, Italy) preserved from the Museo delle Origini (Rome). In: Marreiros, J., Bicho, N., Gibaja Bao, J. (Eds.), International Conference on Use-Wear Analysis. Use-Wear 2012. Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Newcastle upon Tyne, pp. 232–240. Grużdź, W., Pyżewicz, K., Migal, W., Przeździecki, M., 2012. Multi-aspect analysis of the flint materials from Suchodółka, site 3, the Świętokrzyskie Voivodeship. Światowit, Fascykuł B, Archeologia pradziejowa i średniowieczna. Archeol. Pol. 9 (50), 245–258. Gurova, M., 1995. Use-wear analysis: two Late Palaeolithic sites. In: Bailey, D.W., Panayotov, I. (Eds.), Prehistoric Bulgaria. Monographs in World Archaeology 22. Prehistory Press, Madison Wisconsin, pp. 55–72. Gurova, M., Schtchelinski, V.E., 1994. Étude tracéologique des outillages gravettiens et épigravettiens. In: Kozlowski, J.K., Laville, H., Ginter, B. (Eds.), Temnata Cave: Excavations in Karlukovo Karst Area, Bulgaria 1. 2. Jagellonian University Press, Kraków, pp. 123–168. Juel Jensen, H., 1988. Functional analysis of prehistoric flint tools by high-power

14

Quaternary International xxx (xxxx) xxx–xxx

K. Pyżewicz and Z. Nerudová

Rots, V., Van Peer, P., Vermeersch, P.M., 2011. Aspects of tool production, use, and hafting in Palaeolithic assemblages from Northeast Africa. J. Hum. Evol. 60, 637–664. Sobczyk, K., 1995. Osadnictwo wschodniograweckie w dolinie Wisły pod Krakowem. Uniwersytet Jagielloński, Kraków. Sobkowiak-Tabaka, I., Kufel-Diakowska, B., 2019. The shining piece of the puzzle: evidence of plant use in the Late Palaeolithic. Archaeol. Anthropol. Sci. 11, 1373–1389. Stefański, D., 2007. Functional analysis of burins. Folia Quat. 77, 97–116. Terberger, T., 2013. Le Dernier Maximum glaciaire entre Rhine et le Danube, un réexamen critique. In: In: Bodu, P., Chehmana, L., Klaric, L., Mevel, L., Soriano, S., Teyssandier, N. (Eds.), Le Paléolithique supérieur ancien de l'Europe du Nord-Ouest Réflexions et synthèses à partir d’un projet collectif de recherche sur le centre et le sud du Bassin parisien. Actes du colloque de Sens (15-18 avril 2009), vol. 56. Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Francaise, Memoire, pp. 415–443 Paris 2013. Terberger, T., Street, M., 2002. Hiatus or continuity? New results for the question of pleniglacial settlement in Central Europe. Antiquity 76, 691–698. Valoch, K., 1975. Paleolitická stanice v Koněvově ulici v Brně. Archeol. Rozhl. 27, 3–17. Valoch, K., 1980. La fin des temps glaciaires en Moravie (Tchécoslovaquie). LℙAnthropologie 84, 380–390. Valoch, K., 1996. Le Paléolithique en Tchéquie et en Slovaquie. Jérôme Millon, Grenoble. Verpoorte, A., 2004. Eastern Central Europe during the Pleniglacial. Antiquity 78, 257–266. Van Gijn, A.L., 1990. The Wear and Tear of Flint. Principles of Functional Analysis Applied to Dutch Neolithic Assemblages. Analecta Praehistorica Leidensia, vol. 22 University of Leiden, Institute of Prehistory, Leiden. Van Gijn, A.L., 2010. Flint in Focus. Lithic Biographies in the Neolithic and Bronze Age. Sidestone Press, Leiden. Vaughan, P.C., 1985. Use-Wear Analysis of Flaked Stone Tools. University of Arizona Press, Tucson. Weniger, G.C., 1989. The Magdalenian in Western Central Europe: settlement pattern and regionality. J. World PreHistory 3, 323–372. Wilczyński, J., 2006. Upper Paleolithic workshop at the site Piekary IIA sector XXII layer 5. Sprawozdania Archeologiczne 58, 175–203. Wilczyński, J., 2007. The Gravettian and Epigravettian lithic assemblages from KrakówSpadzista B+B1: dynamic approach to the technology. Folia Quat. 77, 37–96. Wilczyński, J., 2009. Targowisko – a new Late Glacial site in southern Poland. Eurasian Prehistory 6, 95–118. Wilczyński, J., 2016. A new beginning: modern humans in Poland. Epigravettian (22,000–18,000 cal BP). In: In: Kabaciński, J. (Ed.), The Past Societies. Polish Lands from the First Evidence of Human Presence to the Early Middle Ages, vol. 1. Institute of Archaeology and Ethnology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warszawa, pp. 123–126 500 000-5500 BC. Wiśniewski, A., Furmanek, M., Borowski, M., Kądziołka, K., Rapiński, A., Winnicka, K., 2012. Lithic raw material and Late Palaeolithic strategies of mobility: a case study from Sowin 7, SW Poland. Antropologi 50 (4), 391–409. Wiśniewski, A., Połtowicz-Bobak, M., Bobak, D., Jary, Z., Moska, P., 2017. The Epigravettian and the Magdalenian in Poland: New Chronological Data and an Old Problem. Geochronometria 44 (1), 16–29. https://doi.org/10.1515/geochr-20150052. Ziggiotti, S., 2008. The complexity of an Epigravettian site viewed from use-wear traces. Insights for the settlement dynamics in the Italian eastern Alps. In: Longo, L., Skakun, N. (Eds.), “Prehistoric Technology” 40 Years Later: Functional Studies and the Russian Legacy. British Archaeological Reports. BAR International Series 1783, Oxford, pp. 131–139.

hunting sites and their role in Epigravettian subsistence strategies. A case study in northern Italy. In: In: Bon, F., Costamagno, S., Valdeyron, N. (Eds.), Hunting Camps in Prehistory. Current Archaeological Approaches, Proceedings of the International Symposium, May 13-15 2009, vol. 3. University Toulouse II - Le Mirail. P@lethnology, pp. 251–266. Pelegrin, J., 2000. Les techniques de debitage laminaire au Tardiglaciaire: criteres de diagnose et quelques reflexions. In: In: Valentin, T., Bodu, P., Christensen, M. (Eds.), L'Europe Centrale et septentrionale au Tardiglaciare. Actes de la Table-Ronde internationale de Nemours, 13–16 mai 1997, Paris, vol. 7. Mémoires du Musée de Préhistoire d'Ile de France, pp. 73–86. Plisson, H., Mauger, M., 1988. Chemical and mechanical alteration of microwear polishes: an experimental approach. Helinium 28, 3–16. Přichystal, A., 2013. Lithic Raw Materials in Prehistoric Times of Eastern Central Europe. Masaryk University, Brno. Pyżewicz, K., 2013. Inwentarze krzemienne społeczności mezolitycznych w zachodniej części Niżu Polskiego. Analiza Funkcjonalna. Wydawnictwo Fundacji Archeologicznej, Zielona Góra. Pyżewicz, K., 2015. The use-wear analysis of the artefacts found at the Magdalenian site in Klementowice. In: Wiśniewski, T. (Ed.), Klementowice. A Magdalenian Site in Eastern Poland. Uniwersytet Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej w Lublinie, Lublin, pp. 184–214. Pyżewicz, K., Grużdź, W., 2014. Possibilities of identifying transportation and use-wear traces of Mesolithic microliths from the Polish Plain. In: Marreiros, J., Bicho, Gibaja Bao, J. (Eds.), International Conference on Use-Wear Analysis. Use-Wear 2012. Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Newcastle upon Tyne, pp. 479–487. Pyżewicz, K., 2015. Biographies of Magdalenian lithic tools from Poland. An in-depth look at two cases from the Kielecka Upland. Anthropologie (Brno) 53 (3), 519–529. Pyżewicz, K., Migal, W., Grużdź, W., 2014. Magdalenian blade technology from the northeastern European perspective. In: In: Riede, F., Tallavaara, M. (Eds.), Lateglacial and Postglacial Pioneers in Northern Europe. British Archaeological Reports 2599. BAR International Series, Oxford, pp. 67–78. Rios-Garaizar, J., Škrdla, P., Demidenko, Y., 2019. Use-wear analysis of the lithic assemblage from LGM Mohelno-Plevovce site (southern Moravia, Czech Republic). Comptes Rendus Palevol 18, 353–366. Roblíčková, M., Nerudová, Z., Nývltová Fišáková, M., 2015. Analýza zvířecích kostí z epigravettienské lokality Brno-Štýřice III, výzkumné sezóny 2012–2014. Archeol. Rozhl. 67, 627–653. Rots, V., 2003. Towards an understanding of hafting: the macro- and microscopic evidence. Antiquity 77, 805–815. Rots, V., 2008. Hafting and raw materials from animals. Guide to the identification of hafting traces on stone tools. Anthropozoologica 43, 43–66. Rots, V., 2008. Hafting traces on flint tools. In: Longo, L., Skakun, N. (Eds.), “Prehistoric Technology” 40 Years Later: Functional Studies and the Russian Legacy. Proceedings of the International Congress Verona (Italy), 20–23 April 2005. British Archaeological Reports. 1783. BAR International Series, Oxford, pp. 75–84 Oxford. Rots, V., 2009. The functional analysis of the mousterian and micoquian assemblages of Sesselfelsgrotte, Germany: aspect of tool use and hafting in the European Late Middle Paleolithic. Quartär 56, 37–66. Rots, V., 2010. Prehension and Hafting Traces on a Flint Tools. A Methodology. Leuven University Press, Leuven. Rots, V., Vermeersch, P.M., 2004. Experimental characterization of hafting traces and their recognition in archaeological assemblages. In: Walker, E.A., Wenban-Smith, F., Healy, F. (Eds.), Lithics in Action. Papers from the Conference “Lithic Studies in the Year 2000”. Oxbow, Oxford, pp. 156–168.

15