Use-wear analysis of the late Middle Pleistocene quartzite assemblage from the Gran Dolina site, TD10.1 subunit (Sierra de Atapuerca, Spain)

Journal Pre-proof Use-wear analysis of the late Middle Pleistocene quartzite assemblage from the Gran Dolina site, TD10.1 subunit (Sierra de Atapuerca, Spain) Antonella Pedergnana, Andreu Ollé PII:

S1040-6182(19)30846-8

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2019.11.015

Reference:

JQI 8048

To appear in:

Quaternary International

Received Date: 13 May 2019 Revised Date:

28 October 2019

Accepted Date: 2 November 2019

Please cite this article as: Pedergnana, A., Ollé, A., Use-wear analysis of the late Middle Pleistocene quartzite assemblage from the Gran Dolina site, TD10.1 subunit (Sierra de Atapuerca, Spain), Quaternary International, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2019.11.015. This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. © 2019 Elsevier Ltd and INQUA. All rights reserved.

Use-wear analysis of the late Middle Pleistocene quartzite assemblage from the Gran Dolina site, TD10.1 subunit (Sierra de Atapuerca, Spain)

a,*

Antonella Pedergnana , Andreu Ollé

a

b,c

TraCEr, laboratory for Traceology and Controlled Experiments, MONREPOS Archaeological Research Centre and Museum

for Human Behavioural Evolution, Schloss Monrepos, 56567 Neuwied, Germany b

IPHES, Institut Català de Paleoecologia Humana i Evolució Social, Zona Educacional 4, Campus Sescelades URV (Edifici

W3), 43007 Tarragona, Spain c

Àrea de Prehistòria, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Fac. de Lletres, Av. Catalunya 35, 43002, Tarragona, Spain

* Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected]; [email protected]

Abstract Quartzite has been poorly studied from a functional point of view since the foundation of use-wear analysis, as the method was largely built upon the observation of wear on fine-grained raw materials (e.g., chert). In the case of the Middle Pleistocene Gran Dolina-TD10.1 site in Spain (ca. 300 kya), the sole raw material that can provide functional information for the artifacts used by the human occupants of the site is quartzite. A sample of 51 quartzite artifacts was mainly analyzed with scanning electron microscopy, and functional interpretation was possible for 36 of them. The activities identified were mostly connected to the butchering of animals, but bone and hide scraping as well as woodworking were also present. The performance of activities other than butchering supports the idea that the site was used as a residential camp during the deposition of the basal part of the TD10.1 subunit (Lower-TD10.1). This study demonstrates the possibility of obtaining functional data from relatively ancient artifacts made of a coarse-grained lithology. Considering that metamorphic quartzose materials often dominate Early and Middle Pleistocene lithic assemblages all over the world, the standardization of the functional reading of quartzite will allow acquiring countless functional data with which to reconstruct ancient human behavior.

Keywords: Gran Dolina site; Middle Pleistocene; Quartzite; Use-wear analysis; Butchery activities; Residential site.

1

1. Introduction Although one of the founders of use-wear analysis focused his research on English Lower Paleolithic assemblages (Keeley, 1980, 1993), this method is not commonly applied to ancient lithic materials. This is mainly for two reasons. First is the general paucity of standards as the method was basically developed through the analysis of fine-grained lithologies (e.g., chert). Since early lithic assemblages are quite often composed of coarsegrained raw materials (e.g., quartz, quartzite, basalt), it is easy to understand why they aroused minor interest within the use-wear analysists community. This is reflected in far fewer published studies compared to research focused on use-wear on chert. Second, the poor preservation of lithic artifact surfaces in old assemblages that are often recovered from lacustrine or fluvial environments (where the incidence of postdepositional processes may be very high) may have prevented researchers from analyzing them. However, parallel to foundational studies involving chert assemblages of the 1980s, some sporadic research focused on very ancient chronologies, such as the study conducted by Keeley and Toth (1981) who analyzed an Oldowan sample from the Koobi Fora region (Kenya). Further studies followed these first trials on ancient materials (Crovetto et al., 1994; Longo, 1994; Vergès, 1996, 2003; Keeley, 1997; Peretto et al., 1998; Shen and Chen, 2000; Sahnouni et al., 2013) (Table 1). Although minor research focused on the initial phases of the Lower Paleolithic, most use-wear studies have analyzed significantly more recent lithic assemblages. Flint handaxes from the Lower Paleolithic site of Boxgrove (ca. 500 ka) in England were microscopically analyzed by Mitchell (1998), who concluded that they were regularly used for short periods of time and then abandoned without resharpening. Donahue and Evans (2012) attempted to analyze the Lower Paleolithic assemblage from Linford Quarry in England. Their analysis did not provide significant functional results due to the poor preservation conditions of the lithic surfaces. Out of 109 artifacts, only two displayed use-wear traces. Postdepositional surface modifications were very abundant and widespread on all the analyzed artifacts. The site of Coudoulous in France is another Middle Pleistocene site whose collections were submitted to use-wear analysis, and date to ca. 300 ka (Jaubert et al., 2005). Quartz is the most abundant material in this assemblage and its high reflectivity index rendered use-wear analysis difficult. Although woodworking and hide working were identified on some specimens, most of the traces documented were connected to butchering activity (Venditti, 2014). Among the available studies on Lower Paleolithic material, work on the Sierra de Atapuerca sites stands out. For example, studies carried out on the Galería site have underlined the presence of woodworking and butchering activities, despite the occasional bad preservation of artifacts of some lithologies (mainly chert; Ollé, 1996, 2003; Sala, 1997; Márquez et al. 1999). The same range of activities is described for samples collected at the Gran Dolina site (Units TD6 and TD10; Vergès, 1996; Carbonell et al., 1999b; Márquez et al., 2001). A recent study 2

combining use-wear and residue analyses focused on two different locations at the Middle Pleistocene site of Shöningen in Germany, and determined the presence of mainly woodworking and butchering activities, with some uncertainties about the evidence for hafting traces on two samples (Rots et al., 2015). Microwear studies dealing with assemblages dating to marine isotope stage (MIS) 9 onwards (e.g., Martínez et al., 2003; Lazuén et al., 2011; Lazuén, 2012; Clemente et al., 2014) are considerably more numerous. The major reason for this is probably that Middle Paleolithic sites are thought to be characterized by less weathered assemblages compared to those with more ancient chronologies. The activities which have most frequently been documented in these assemblages are woodworking and butchery. The site of Biache-St-Vaast (MIS 7) in France is an example of a successful functional study providing very interesting insights. Activities linked to butchery and woodworking were recorded, and, more recently, the practices of hafting and throwing spears have also been documented (e.g., Beyries, 1988; Claud et al., 2013; Rots, 2013, 2015). Although preliminary studies of the artifact collection from Maastricht-Belvédère (the Netherlands; MIS 7) were performed in the past (Van Gijn, 1988), a recent study has identified at least one spear tip (Rots, 2015). Functional data is also available for the Payre site in France (different archaeological layers dated to MIS 7 – 8; and to MIS 5 – 6), where use-wear as well as residue evidence was collected (Moncel et al., 2009; Hardy and Moncel, 2011). Use-wear traces on a sample of convergent flint tools revealed that they were used for performing longitudinal and transversal actions. However, it is unclear what materials were worked due to the poor development of the wear observed. A sample of quartzite tools was also analyzed, and woodworking was identified on several artifacts. Percussive actions were also found on a relatively large tool, which may point to functional differences among different sized tools (Pedergnana et al., 2018). Within the same chronological framework, the analysis of the artifacts from San Quirce del Río Pisuerga in Spain (MIS 5) revealed that wood and vegetal fibers were commonly worked materials at this site (Clemente et al., 2014). Recent studies have also reopened the possibility of analyzing Oldowan quartz and quartzite assemblages (Lemorini et al., 2014). In the Levant, sites with early chronologies have also yielded interesting functional data (Lemorini et al., 2006, 2015). However, functional studies of very old assemblages are still quite rare, mainly due to the often poor preservation of artifact surfaces. Indeed, we should not underestimate the fact that postdepositional alterations, especially when severe, are capable of obliterating wear related to use by compromising its original appearance as well as its distributional patterns. Further work is needed in order to be able to more confidently differentiate use-related wear from postdepositional surface modifications (PDSMs). This is the only way to achieve reliable functional results on ancient and weathered assemblages, as a minimal presence of PSDMs is always to be expected.

3

In this paper, a sample of quartzite implements from the Gran Dolina site (subunit TD10.1) was microscopically analyzed. Quartzite was selected for several reasons. First, chert artifacts at TD10.1 do not present suitable preservation conditions and therefore in most of the cases, surfaces are not functionally readable. Other lithic raw materials, such as sandstone, metasandstone and quarzitic schist, which are present at the site in small quantities, do not show good preservation conditions either (García-Antón, 2016). Conversely, quartzite and quartz present much better macroscopic preservation than the other raw materials found at the site. Although quartz is not very abundant at the site, use-wear analysis on this raw material is also ongoing. As quartzite is the second most abundant raw material at TD10.1, it was selected for analysis with the main aim to obtain extensive functional information.

1.1 Use-wear studies on quartzite Quartzite is a metamorphic rock, mainly originating from quartz-rich sandstones (quartz-arenites). After exposure to high temperatures and pressures, the resulting rock is characterized by an equigranular (consisting of minerals or clasts of approximately the same size) structure (Tucker, 2001). Pure quartzite is white; the variety of colors displayed by quartzite is a consequence of minor amounts of impurities incorporated within the quartz during metamorphism. Although quartz-rich sandstone can look similar to quartzite, a freshly fractured quartzite surface will show breakage across the quartz grains, whereas the sandstone will break around them. Sometimes, silica or calcite cement might redeposit around the quartz grains, which could resemble a sort of ‘matrix’. In the description of sedimentary rocks, the term matrix is used to define the finer-grained sedimentary material in which larger clasts are embedded. As quartzites (and metaquartzites) comprise only metamorphosed rocks whose structure has completely lost all sedimentary relicts and has been rearranged in an equigranular mosaic, no matrix can be present. If matrix is observed on a geological specimen, it therefore cannot be quartzite. Macroscopically, sandstones resemble quartzite and when observed microscopically, they may present both matrix and larger grains or clasts. The only case where two size populations are observed among the quartz grains on quartzites is when there are neoblasts (grains newly formed during metamorphism) growing. Neoblasts are quartz grains that are significantly smaller than the larger quartz grains on quartzite that are often visible to the naked eye. However, there are differences in the common dimensions of regular quartz grains, and neoblasts do not make up the same proportions of the clasts and matrix in clastic rocks (Kornprobst, 1996). It is generally agreed that of all the crystalline lithic materials, quartz (and by extension quartzite) is the most challenging to analyze from a functional point of view because it does not seem to be susceptible to polishing, smoothing, or striating under most conditions (Hayden and Kamminga, 1979). In fact, no striations were observed in early studies. Only worn edges and general surface abrasion were the main features documented (Hayden, 4

1979). Quartz and quartzite were not understood as coherent materials in use-wear analysis until the first solid investigations entirely focusing on these materials filled in this gap (e.g., Knutsson, 1988a, b; Sussman, 1988). While quartz artifacts have recently been the object of several attempts to evaluate use-wear traces (Taipale, 2012; Taipale et al., 2014; Knutsson et al. 2015), investigations focused on quartzite have been patchy and unsystematic. In fact, researchers have analyzed quartzite assemblages mainly by following the methods and terminology developed for flint (among others, Plisson 1986; Alonso and Mansur, 1990; Pereira 1993, 1996; Carbonell et al., 1999b; Igreja et al. 2007; Hroníková et al. 2008; Igreja, 2008; Aubry and Igreja 2009; Cristiani et al., 2009; Lemorini et al. 2014). In a few cases, detailed studies have taken into account the specificities of this rock (Beyries 1982; Gibaja et al. 2002; Leipus and Mansur 2007; Clemente-Conte and Gibaja-Bao 2009). Recently, extensive experimental programs focused on quartzose materials have been carried out and their results have allowed analysts to better differentiate the appearance of use-wear on quartz, quartzite and rock crystal from the use-wear features found on chert (Fernández-Marchena and Ollé, 2016; Ollé et al., 2016; Pedergnana and Ollé, 2017). Much energy was dedicated to clarifying and systematizing the terminology used to describe use-wear on quartzose lithologies and a sound method to analyze quartzose rocks was built up, based on wide and thorough experimental data (Ollé et al., 2016; Pedergnana and Ollé, 2017). Large experimental collections and the use of different microscopic techniques (e.g., optical microscopy [OM], scanning electron microcopy [SEM], laser scanning confocal microscopy [LSCM]) contributed to the advancement of the method by providing more accurate interpretations of microwear found on the archaeological specimens. Specifically concerning quartzite, the combined used of optical and electron microscopy is fundamental to obtaining reliable results (Sussman, 1985, 1988; Knutsson, 1988a; Pedergnana, 2017). In fact, reflected light microscopy is not always capable of imaging quartzite surfaces due to their high topographic irregularities and to their high light reflectivity index (Fig. 1a, c). Scanning electron microscopy is therefore particularly helpful in providing high quality images with higher depth of field compared to light microscopy (Pedergnana and Ollé, 2017; Pedergnana et al., 2018). This is a key aspect to bear in mind when coarse-grained rocks having high reflectivity indexes (such as quartz and quartzite) are analyzed. The use of SEM for analyzing these rock types allows overcoming two technical limitations of optical microscopy at once: it avoids the use of white light to illuminate the specimen to obtain magnified images and it has an increased depth of field that is particularly useful to image uneven surfaces (Fig. 1b, d) (Bogner et al., 2007).

1.2 The site Gran Dolina was originally a cave entrance located in the Sierra de Atapuerca complex in Northern Spain, specifically in the northernmost location of the sector called Trinchera del Ferrocarril (Fig. 2a). The cave was progressively filled with endokarstic and exokarstic sediments during the Early and Middle Pleistocene. After the 5

th

th

construction of a railway trench between the end of the 19 and the beginning of the 20 centuries, and after the subsequent exposure of the cave, the first scientific studies began to take place at Gran Dolina. The first 2

systematic excavations were carried out between 1984 and 1989 on a surface of 30 m (Unit TD10). Afterwards, a 2

9 m test pit was initiated in 1993 and uncovered paleontological material throughout the entire sequence (with the exception of TD1-2; Carbonell et al., 1999a; Fig. 2b). From 1996 onwards, surface excavations took place at TD10 2

2

over a ca. 100 m surface. In 2001, a portion of the test pit area (ca. 12 m ) was extended towards the south, and Units TD10–TD4 were excavated. Currently (2018), the lower subunit of TD10 (TD10.4) and the middle subunits of 2

2

TD4 are under excavation over ca. 90 m and ca. 22 m surfaces respectively. The stratigraphic sequence of the Gran Dolina site is composed of 12 lithostratigraphic units, named TD1 to TD11 from base to top (Parés and Pérez-González, 1999; Pérez-González et al., 2001; Campaña et al., 2017; Fig. 2c). The sequence corresponds to a long chronological frame encompassing ca. 1 myr, which is divided into two main sections by the Matuyama-Brunhes boundary identified in the top of unit TD7 (Parés and Pérez-González, 1999; Campaña et al., 2017; Parés et al., 2018). TD10 is the most recent unit of the site (MIS 11 – 9) bearing evidence of human occupation (Berger et al., 2008; Falguères et al., 2013). It is a 3 m thick deposit, mainly composed of limestone blocks that originated from the degradation of the cave, and a finer reddish-brown clayey matrix. Four lithostratigraphic subunits were identified, named from the top to the bottom, TD10.1 to TD10.4 (Rodríguez et al., 2011; Fig. 2d). Micromorphological studies of the whole TD10 unit are still ongoing; the presently available studies concern only the upper subunit (TD10.1) (Mallol and Carbonell, 2008; Vallverdú i Poch, 2017). The cave entrance was identified at the western sector of the site and a gradient of 15–20° to the northeast is d escribed. The archaeostratigraphic study divided the TD10.1 subunit into 8 main archaeolevels (from top to base, A–H), based on the vertical disposition of the recorded artifacts (Obregón, 2012). TD10.1 is one of the richest subunits of the Gran Dolina site (and of all the Atapuerca sites), having yielded approximately 22,000 lithic artifacts and more than 50,000 faunal remains, all three-dimensionally recorded (Ollé et al., 2013). Two main sedimentary sections compose the subunit: the upper TD10.1 (denominated TD11 in older publications) and the Lower TD10.1, which showed the highest material concentrations. Faunal material is found all over the surface and exhibited a particularly high concentration near the northeastern section of the surface. As this concentration is located on the opposite side of the cave from its entrance, this could be the result of sedimentary infillings which followed the natural slope of the original cave’s basal topography. At the bottom of the unit a bone bed (BB) was identified and was characterized by

remarkably high concentrations of lithic and faunal remains. It

coincides with the archaeolevels G and H (Obregón, 2012), where a total of ca. 48,000 faunal remains has been documented (Rodríguez-Hidalgo, 2015). Sedimentary rates seem to have been very slow at TD10.1 and the 6

presence of organic matter and high moisture content indicate the in situ diagenetic processes of this subunit (Mallol and Carbonell, 2008). The relative sedimentary stasis is confirmed by several studies, which highlighted in situ knapping activities (López-Ortega et al., 2011, 2017) and butchering events (Blasco, 2011; Rodriguez-Hidalgo et al., 2015). Extraordinary events, such as the butchering of a lion carcass (Panthera leo; Blasco et al., 2010) and bone-tool production (Rosell et al., 2011; Rodríguez-Hidalgo et al., 2015) were identified in the TD10.1 subunit. This evidence suggests the presence of multiple occupational events, when the entrance of the cave was used as a base camp (Ollé et al., 2013). Based on the results of the archaeostratigraphic study, only the Lower TD10.1 (archaeolevels G and H, also referred to as TD10.1 BB) should be considered as yielding evidence of long-term hominin use of the site (Obregón, 2012). This hypothesis is also supported by the analysis of the faunal record which provided additional data that are coherent with the understanding of this subunit as a residential base camp (Rodríguez-Hidalgo et al., 2015). The TD10.1 subunit was dated through electron spin resonance (ESR/U-series), giving a date of 379 ± 57 ka (this in addition to two other dates gives a mean age of 372 ± 33 ka) for the bottom and 337 ± 29 ka for the top (Falguères et al., 1999). Another ESR date of 301 ± 40 ka was recently obtained from quartz grains within the basal bone bed (Moreno et al., 2015). Furthermore, a comprehensive geochronological revision of the complete TD10 sequence is currently in progress based on systematic sampling and dating by single grain TT-OSL (thermally transferred optically stimulated luminescence) and pIR-IR (post-infrared infrared stimulated luminescence) (Arnold and Demuro, 2015), as TL (thermoluminescence) and IRSL (infrared stimulated luminescence) results for the underlying TD10.2 had pointed to a younger age (Berger et al. 2008).

2. Materials and methods 2.1 The analyzed sample TD10.1 yielded more than 22,000 lithic artifacts (Ollé et al., 2013). Neogene and Cretaceous cherts, found in the Sierra de Atapuerca, dominate the assemblage (more than 60%; ca. 12,000 pieces). Quartzite (n = 3,608) and sandstone (n = 3,796) were used in similar proportions, followed by poorly represented materials such as quartz (n = 701) and limestone (n = 48). Although use-wear evidence was identified on some of the chert artifacts (Márquez et al., 2001), it was not possible to conduct an extensive use-wear analysis on the chert assemblage. The poor preservation conditions of chert, which mostly affect one of the varieties present at Atapuerca (Neogene chert; Font, 2009; Font et al., 2010; Sala, 1997), impede the observation of wear. There is a severe alteration in the form of a white patina apparently deriving from different factors, such as the raw material characteristics, soil pH, temperature, humidity, water passage, etc. (Burroni et al., 2002; Glauberman and Thorson, 2012), yet the exact combination of those factors is not entirely clear (Font, 2009). Indeed, this alteration appears in such an advanced stage that conservation 7

treatments (i.e. consolidation) are needed to recover the chert artifacts from the archaeological sediments and to further implement lithic technological analysis (Zornoza-Indart et al, 2017). Different alterations, such as the loss of grain cohesion have been observed on sandstone, metasandstone and quartzitic schist artifacts. Conversely, quartzite and quartz artifact surfaces are generally not severely altered. Quartzite is the second most abundant raw material recovered from TD10.1, and it is the only material suitable for microscopic study that may provide functional information about the human use of tools at the site. Therefore, 51 quartzite artifacts were selected to undergo use-wear analysis. The analyzed sample represents around 3% of all quartzite products (non-retouched and retouched flakes, n = ca. 1,700). However, considering only the products larger than 20 mm, the percentage is higher (9.8%, n = 519). These 519 artifacts were considered the most likely to provide positive results of use-wear analysis. Because of that, the percentages discussed in this paper refer to this selected sample (n = 519) and not the entire quartzite assemblage, which comprises all the cores, natural bases, fragments and indeterminate fragments (n = 3,608; Ollé et al., 2013). The analyzed sample includes 19 unmodified flakes; 30 retouched flakes and two large tools, a handaxe and a cleaver-like tool (Table 2). All of the artifacts come from the lower part of the TD10.1 unit (Lower TD10.1) and are currently deposited in the Museo de la Evolución Humana of Burgos (Spain).

2.2 Cleaning procedures We adapted the artifact cleaning procedure described elsewhere (Ollé, 2003; Vergès, 2003; Sahnouni et al 2013; Ollé and Vèrges, 2014). The various steps were consistently maintained when analyzing both experimental and archaeological materials. The only difference concerns baths in hydrochloric acid (HCL) solutions (10–20%), which were only employed to remove sediment carbonate concretions (when present) from archaeological tools. The main steps were as follows: 1) Removal of the ink and varnish used to mark the archaeological tools with acetone; 2) 5–30 minute baths in a 10–20% HCl solution; 3) 15 minute ultrasonic baths in hydrogen peroxide (H2O2, 3%) to remove organic matter; 4) 15 minute ultrasonic baths in a 2% neutral detergent solution (Derquim®); 5) Removal of detergent residues under running water; and 6) 2–5 minute ultrasonic baths in pure acetone (only prior to SEM analysis).

2.3 Microscopy For initial microscopic scanning, a conventional metallographic microscope (Zeiss-AXIO Scope1; objectives: EC Epiplan 10x/0.2; LD Epiplan Neofluar 20x/0.4 HD DIC; LD Epiplan Neofluar 50x/0.5 HD DIC) was used. Images were taken with a 5MP DeltaPix digital camera (Invenio 5SII model) and multifocused images were usually obtained using the DeltaPix Insight and the Helicon Focus software. Although the use of the differential interference 8

contrast (DIC) and the Nomarski interference contrast (NIC; Heath, 2005) can be very useful to avoid light reflection of flat reflective materials such as quartz (Igreja, 2008; Knutsson et al., 2015), it did not always produce similar results when observing quartzite (Ollé et al., 2016; Pedergnana and Ollé, 2017). Since it has been suggested that metallographic microscopes are not the most adequate means to observe coarse-grained and reflective raw materials (Grace, 1989, 1990), most of the data in this research was collected using scanning electron microscopes (SEM). The observations were carried out mainly with two pieces of equipment (JEOL JSM6400, ESEM FEI Quanta 600), the latter used in both high-vacuum and low-vacuum modes. In most of the cases, the secondary electron detector (ETD-Everhart-Thornley) of SEMs was used. For observations at high-vacuum conditions only, it was necessary to coat the samples with a thin layer of gold (20 nm) using a sputter coater machine (EMITHEC K575X). The samples were normally observed with a working distance of 10–15 mm and at a 15–20 kV. After the observations, the gold layer was removed by soaking the samples in an acid solution of Aquaregia (75% HCl + 25% HNO3). As the last step, the samples were submitted to baths in water for ca. 30min to remove any trace of the acid solution. The use-wear observed on the archaeological samples was described in detail and plotted on apposite sketches or photos of the artifacts. The outlines of artifacts were divided into different sectors (10), as suggested by Lombard (2008: Fig. 3). In this way, all use-wear features, postdepositional surface modifications, and fresh parts (i.e., unmodified) of the tool could be recorded. Even if the original magnification of micrographs is always provided, comparison of features imaged with different equipment should consider the field of view (FOV) of the original images which can be deduced by looking at the scale bars.

2.4 Interpretation of wear Wear descriptions and interpretations were based on comparison with experimentally generated wear on quartzite (Pedergnana, 2017; Pedergnana et al., 2017) and on quartz (Knutsson, 1988a). The experimental activity utilized to compile our reference collection comprised several motions (transversal, longitudinal, and rotational actions) and worked materials (animal and vegetal matter). The whole experimental program was set up in order to monitor the processes of use-wear formation and development of wear on quartzite and was therefore based on repetitive observations of the same surfaces after several stages of use. The concept of ‘sequential experiments’ is explained in detail elsewhere (for definition, see Ollé and Vergès, 2014). Our use-wear reference collection includes 49 experimental flakes made of four different varieties of quartzite and only 4 of them were subjected to secondary retouch before being used. Several quartzite varieties were included to evaluate the intra-wear variability on this rock type (Pedergnana, 2017; Pedergnana et al., 2017). Detailed descriptions of the experiments and of the experimental wear have been presented elsewhere 9

(Pedergnana, 2017; Pedergnana and Ollé, 2017). Forty-six experimental flakes were used in 81 sequential experiments and they were always hand-held. The same artifact was normally used in 3 or 4 different experimental stages and the modifications occurring after each stage were systematically observed and documented through microscopy. Three hafted artifacts were also used to work wood branches (longitudinal, transversal and rotational movements). The hafts were made of dry wood (Corylus avellana). These artifacts were used for approximately an hour each (corresponding to ca. 6000 strokes) and then dehafted before analysis. Tumbling experiments were also carried out in order to address the appearance of traces related to soil movement and hydraulic transport (PDSMs) (Pedergnana, 2017).

3 Results 3.1 Microscopic wear and its attribution Out of all the 3,608 artifacts forming the quartzite assemblage of Gran Dolina-Lower TD10.1, 14.4% are composed of complete products (unretouched and retouched flakes) larger than 20 mm. Therefore, considering the percentages related to complete artifacts only, the degree of representability of our results is higher than if we considered the whole quartzite assemblage. Use-wear analysis provided functional results on 70.6% (n = 36) of the analyzed sample (Table 3). When the artifacts were retouched, use-wear was generally, but not always, found on the retouched parts of the edges. Retouched flakes comprised 12 denticulates and 12 scrapers (one of these being a cleaver-like artifact). For 15 implements, no functional interpretation was possible. On 12 of them postdepositional surface modifications are present, although to different degrees (from low to very high). The level of identification (used part of the edge, kinematics, worked material) may vary depending on the preservation of wear and of its degree of development. Sometimes, only the used portion of the edge could be identified, while no additional information about the action could be determined. In other cases, the kinematics was quite clear due to a relatively pronounced presence of linear indicators (i.e., striations). The identification of the worked materials, as in most studies, is more challenging as many details can be missing on archaeological samples. Therefore, in most of the cases, the interpretation of the worked material fell into broad categories of relative hardness (soft, medium, hard, very hard). In a few cases, however, the presence of diagnostic characteristics of the wear observed allowed more in-depth identifications of the worked material’s type (Table 4).

3.2 Postdepositional surface modifications (PDSMs) PDSMs were documented to varying degrees on 47.1 % (n = 24) of the analyzed sample (Table 5). Among these cases, it was not possible to propose any functional interpretation for 12 artifacts because of the high degree 10

of PDSMs as well as of the absence of use-wear. On 12 other artifacts, despite the presence of PDSMs, it was possible to differentiate clear traces related to use. Thus, 47.1% (n = 24) of the analyzed sample presented userelated wear and no PDSMs (Table 5). Only three quartzite implements were characterized by fresh surfaces. Surfaces affected by PDSMs presented characteristic traits, such as randomly oriented, irregular and very deep striations (Fig. 3a - i) or extremely polished areas (Fig. 3l - q). Irregular linear features can be very diverse: from deep furrows (Fig. 2 a, e, i) and grooves (Fig. 2 g, h), to partial Hertzian cones (Fig. 3 b, c). Deep striations and evident partial Hertzian cones might be visible thanks to the “etching” phenomenon described by Knutsson (1988a) for quartz. Polished areas are also indicative of PDSMs when they are extremely developed, present on large areas with irregular patterns and on areas far from the edges. Frequently, polished areas are accompanied by linear features, often grooves or sleeks (Fig. 3l - n) or irregular scratches (Fig. 3o). The relatively high frequency of PSDMs on the studied sample may indicate that the lithic material suffered various degrees of transportation. Deep striations, scratches and large, well-developed polished areas may have been caused by abrasion with sediment and rock chips during postdepositional hydraulic movement.

3.3 The kinematics and the actions performed The kinematics of use actions was identified on 36 artifacts presenting use-wear traces. Thirty-eight used edges are present on these 36 artifacts (two artifacts have two used edges). Kinematics is the only information gathered by use-wear analysis on nine artifacts, while for the remaining ones (26 artifacts, 28 edges) more data is available (type of action, type of worked material, etc.). In only one case, it was not possible to deduce the kinematics and only the used portion of the edge was identified. Nineteen edges were used to perform transversal actions, 16 to perform longitudinal actions and only two were utilized in rotational movements. An example of obtaining only information related to the kinematics comes from the analysis of the most complete refit found at TD10.1 (López-Ortega et al., 2017: refit REM1_3). All of the refitted implements, including the core, were microscopically analyzed but only two of them showed some microwear evidence. The first interesting insight comes from the conjoined pieces shown in Figure 3. The large cortical flake probably broke during the knapping activity, and the larger piece was subsequently retouched by partially removing the cortex and by creating a denticulate frontal delineation of the edge (Fig. 4a). While no use-wear was observed on the distal broken extremity of the original cortical flake, it is precisely on the retouched (denticulate) edge of the larger flake that some use-wear evidence was documented. However, use-wear was not well developed enough to allow identifying the worked material. Only macro and microscars (Fig. 4b, e) and a few polished areas (Fig. 4d) were observed on this edge. Scars were present only on the dorsal face and their arrangement is consistent with transversal movement. Incipient fractures due to retouching the edge were also observed (Fig. 4c). A second flake 11

within the REM1_3 refit group also displayed use-wear traces. These traces, observed as both macro and microremovals, were less clear than on the other artifact in the refit composition. Underdeveloped (i.e. first stage of development) polish was also observed on small areas. The interior surfaces of both refitted artifacts were free from wear, a fact which strengthens the interpretation that the edges showing underdeveloped microwear on these tools had been used to perform transversal actions. There are multiple indicators of kinematics, but the most reliable are definitely linear features or striations. ‘Linear features’ is probably the most correct term to be used, as it includes a larger set of possible wear types (lineal distribution of polish, pits, scratches, etc.; Ollé et al., 2016). The presence of only isolated striations is not sufficient to hypothesize about kinematics, as this requires more detailed information. For instance, the relative quantity and frequency of striations are important parameters to evaluate the type of movement, as well as their relation to the edge (vicinity and orientation). Because of this, it is more useful to provide images of striations within a certain context (for example by showing the extremity of the edge), than to provide only highly magnified images of them. Then, the orientation of the linear features with respect to the edge, and the frequency of similarly oriented patterns can be evaluated and used to provide reliable interpretations of the kinematics of the gesture. At the same time, the absence of randomly oriented striations (normally interpreted as PDSMs) on the whole surface is an additional criterion for determining an artifact to be well preserved and should be always specified. Therefore, striations parallel to the edge usually indicate longitudinal actions (Fig. 5), while linear features perpendicular to the edge are indicative of transversal movements (Fig. 6). Striations slightly oblique to the edge also possibly form during longitudinal actions, mainly when performing unidirectional, forceful strokes (like in butchering activity; Fig. 4e). Generally, linear features related to transverse actions are shorter and narrower than those formed during longitudinal activities. Moreover, their point of initiation is frequently located on the very edge (Fig. 6a, b, e, f). The main actions identified on the Gran Dolina-TD10.1 sample were scraping and sawing on, 10 and 7 artifacts respectively. Five artifacts were utilized in cutting/sawing actions, while minor evidence of chopping, whittling and boring actions were also documented (Fig. 7). Only two artifacts showed evidence of rotational movements. In both of these cases, use-wear was found only on the trihedral formed by the convergence of two edges (tip; Figs. 8 and 9). The first artifact (ATA04-TD10-N18-4; Fig. 8a) showed a naturally pointed lateral extremity; therefore the convergence (or tip) is formed by the distal and proximal edges. Use-wear connected to boring actions was documented on this convergence. Large macroscars were observed as having a regular distribution on both portions of the convergent edges, near the pointed part (Fig. 8b – d, f). Microscars were also documented on the same portions of the edge (Fig. 8e, g). Rare striations, mostly oblique to the edges, were also observed (Fig. 8g). The other artifact displaying evidence of rotational movements is ATA04-0TD10-K21-68 (Fig. 9a). Again, wear is located on the trihedral formed by the convergence of the two lateral edges. The distal portions of these edges 12

were slightly retouched, probably to emphasize the lateral concavities, which eventually made the apical point stand out. In fact, the potential of incising matter with the pointed extremity is increased by the presence of the two lateral notches. Wear is found on the tip as well as on the distal lateral edges mainly in the form of large macroscars (Fig. 9b - e). One of the two artifacts which showed two used edges is a cleaver-like object (ATA01 TD10 N14 320; Fig. 10). It is a large semicortical retouched flake. The lateral right edge shows a very abrupt and invasive retouch. This could also lead us to consider it as a Quina side-scraper. Use-wear related to a longitudinal action was found on the lateral retouched edge. Evidence of a second use was observed on the distal edge where large macroscars are present on both faces pointing to the use of the artifact to perform chopping activities. Moreover, impact points are present on the dorsal face, probably resulting from lithic percussion activities (Fig. 10, white squares). This could point to a recycling phase of the cleaver as well as to a previous use of the raw material block and/or the large flake before being shaped.

3.4 The worked materials The type of worked material was identified on 28 edges (26 artifacts) (Figure 11). More than half of the edges bearing use-wear showed evidence connected to woodworking (n = 9) and to the processing of bone (n = 8). A lower number of edges showed traces which were interpreted as originating from contact with meat (n = 5) and skin (n = 2). The wear found on the other used edges was ascribed to more general categories, such as hard material (n = 3) and greasy material (n = 1). The broad category of soft animal matter is split into meat (n = 2), skin (n= 2) and meat/skin (n = 3), when traces refer to both materials and clearly point to butchering activities (i.e. skinning and removal of muscular tissue) (Fig. 12c). Traces related to the processing of wood displayed characteristics similar to those observed in the experimental record (Fig. 12a). Polish has the same visual appearance that has been observed on experimental implements used on wood. The texture is essentially very smooth (Fig. 13c, d), although in some cases, a mixture of smooth and rough polishes might occur (Fig. 13a, e). When polish is underdeveloped, it is mostly found on high prominences of the microsurface (Fig. 13b) or it only affects the very rim (Fig. 13f). Typical furrows associated to woodworking were also recorded (Fig. 13c), although they were less developed than those observed on experimental tools. Wear connected to working bone also displayed diagnostic features identified based on comparison with experimentally generated data (Fig. 12b). Furrows are less numerous than on implements used on wood and are generally shorter (Fig. 14a). Polish is very smooth, but polished areas are very limited and always found on

13

protruding zones of the microsurface (Fig. 14c, e–f). Scars can affect large portions of the edge rim (Fig. 14d) or be restricted to the edge of single crystals (microscars; Fig. 14b). Traces related to butchering activity, the processing of meat and skin, comprise few polished areas and very rare striations. Polished areas on experimental tools show mixed textural characters ranging from rough to very smooth textures (Fig. 12c). On the archaeological tools, although polish is often restricted to the highest parts of the microtopography, it can frequently display directionality marks. Polished areas are often found oblique to the edge, as a consequence of repeated unidirectional, longitudinal movements, characteristic of the gestures necessary to remove the skin of animals and to deflesh long bones (Fig. 15a – c, e). Protruding, angular zones can also be covered by rough polish during butchering activities (Fig. 15d). Striations on tools used for butchering activities are rare and normally very short (Fig. 15f). Wear formed after contact with hides or skins is very characteristic and normally develops on relatively large areas, as observed on experimental tools (Fig. 12e - f). Edge rounding is present on large portions of the edges and it can be quite invasive when the action performed is transversal (Fig. 16a, c). The polish texture is always rough and pits are sometimes visible on polished areas (Fig. 16e). Micro and macroscars are also visible (Fig. 16b, d). Striations are very rare, but when present, are always very short and narrow (Fig. 16f).

3.5 Hafting traces Possible evidence of hafting was encountered on three artifacts. The suggestion that these three artifacts were hafted is based on a combination of several evidences, mainly the different types of traces found on the hafted parts and on the used edges, their orientation on the surfaces of the tools and comparison with experimental traces. One of the tools on which hafting evidence was documented is a triangular small-sized retouched flake (Fig. 17e; ATA99-TD10-I15-92). Both lateral edges are retouched, the left one by an invasive, semiabrupt denticulated retouch and the right one by a unique invasive removal (notch). Wear connected to a longitudinal action on a hard material was recorded on the lateral edges of the tip, namely furrows parallel to the edges (Fig. 17a, b) and microfractures on the edge rim. On the proximal part, crushing of the edge and abrasion of the surface were observed (Fig. 17c). On the highest part of the dorsal face, polished areas were also documented. Moreover, furrows perpendicular to the edge were visible on crystals found at the extremity of elevated ridges (Fig. 17d). This type of wear was only found on this area and the rest of the mesial part of the artifact was relatively fresh. Wear is very distinct based on its location on this artifact, the clear differentiation of wear patterns allowed us to propose the hypothesis of it having been hafted on the basal part. Interpretation of hafting traces was done through comparison with experimentally generated traces (Fig. 18) as well as considering the technical characters of artifacts (general 14

volume, edge morphology and disposition) described during techno-functional analysis (Pedergnana, 2017). Hafting traces on quartzite were not well-developed, as the duration of the experiments was not prolonged (ca. 60 minutes; average of 6,000 strokes). The main features observed on the hafted parts were light polish on the highest topographical parts (Fig.18a), well-developed polished areas (defined as bright spots when observed under an optical microscope) (Fig. 18e), general edge crushing (Fig. 18c), straight fractures (Fig. 18b) and scars (Fig. 18d, f) on the edges which were in contact with the haft. Another artifact (ATA00-TD10-N20-66) showed traces related to both hafting and to use (Fig. 19e). Use-wear traces pointing to hide scraping were found on the unretouched edge of this sidescraper (Fig. 19c), while the basal part has been interpreted to have been hafted. First, techno-functional analysis demonstrated that the basal part of this flake was subsequently shaped (thinning) (Pedergnana, 2017). This secondary modification of the blank did not confer the technical characteristics necessary for the modified edge to be effective when used (Boëda, 1997). Therefore, the edge was likely modified for another purpose, which may have been to fit a handle. Moreover, hafting traces were observed on both faces of the proximal part. Furrows perpendicular to the proximal edge (therefore, to the haft termination) were present on several quartz grains in the interior of the piece (Fig. 19a). The rock particles causing the formation of such furrows were probably removed from the surface due to the continuous contact with the haft during use. The microridges of protruding quartz grains (Fig. 19b) as well as entire grain borders were found to be rounded and slightly polished. When drastic changes in the height of the microtopography are observed, the ridges of the highest parts are covered by continuous microfractures and light polish (Fig. 19d). The third artifact bearing hafting traces is a sidescraper (ATA04-TD10-K21-132) (Fig. 20e). Evidence of bone sawing was observed on the retouched edge, while a notch was produced on the distal part of the same edge supposedly to fit a handle. Large well-developed rough polished areas (called bright spots when observed under a light microscope) were observed on distinct locations on the distal part of the artifact (Fig. 20a - c), therefore on the hafted part. Large scars are also found on the same part, possibly due to contact with the haft (Fig. 20d).

3.6 Morphopotential units Thirty-eight used edges were identified on the 36 artifacts presenting use-wear traces. Two artifacts showed two used portions. Twenty-four used portions were modified by retouch, while 14 of them are unretouched. For all of them, morphopotential characters are considered (Carbonell et al., 1992, 1995; Ollé, 2003; Vergès, 2003) and data are presented dividing the sample into retouched and unretouched artifacts. We use the term morphopotential unit to refer to tool portions, segments of the tool perimeter presenting unitary morphological features that are potential for use. These units can be isolated from other segments when attributes such as edge angle, frontal and sagittal 15

delineations, presence of cortex, retouch, etc. vary (Ollé, 2003; Vergès, 2003). The description of these units (after the identification of use-wear) helps to clarify what edge characteristics were selected for use. All the used portions can be described as geometric dihedrals, except from two of them, which are identified as trihedral. For these two, no angle measurements are available. As shown in Figure 20a, the angle amplitude of the dihedrals ranges between the average values of 40° and 70°, with a minimal presence of more obtuse one s. This is valid for both retouched and unretouched implements. Frontal delineations (delineation of edges when the artifacts are oriented considering their frontal plane) of the retouched artifacts are clearly mostly denticulate, followed by convex, concave, rectilinear and sinusoidal (Fig. 21b). The unretouched edges showed a prevalence of rectilinear frontal delineations and minor presence of all the other possibilities. Considering the sagittal delineation (delineation of edges when the artifacts are oriented considering their sagittal plane), the retouched edges show a prevalence of curve outlines, although rectilinear ones are also present. Conversely, rectilinear sagittal delineations are predominant on the unretouched edges (Fig. 21c).

3.7 Relation between actions and worked materials By comparing the kinematics and the material hardness, we observe that only two artifacts bear traces of rotational movements and all of them were used on hard materials (wood or bone; Figs. 8, 9). The processing of hard materials is displayed on more than half of the analyzed sample (18 artifacts), 11 of them used to perform transversal actions and 7 used to perform longitudinal actions. Eight artifacts were used to perform transversal (n = 3) and longitudinal (n = 5) movements on soft materials (Fig. 22). When analyzing the activities identified (kinematics and worked materials), there is not a clear predominance of a specific action. Scraping activities are slightly more frequent than longitudinal ones and were performed on wood with 4 artifacts, on bone and on hide with 3 and 2 artifacts respectively. Scraping on greasy materials could relate to the possible removal of periosteum and meat remnants from bones, and it is found on a single implement. Indications of whittling wood and bone were also observed on two and one tools respectively. Chopping is also included into transversal movements and it is present on only one artifact (Fig. 10). Longitudinal actions can be basically divided into cutting and sawing motions, based on the nature of the material worked. Cutting is used when the material which is modified is falls within the general category of soft materials, while sawing is used when the worked material is hard or very hard (Keeley, 1980). Cutting soft animal matter was identified on 5 artifacts, while sawing was found on 7 artifacts. For 6 of them, the type of worked material is identifiable: 3 were used on wood and the other 3 on bone. Regarding the morphopotential characters of the used edges, angles and frontal delineations are considered separately on tools used on hard and soft materials. Obtuse angles are not present in the analyzed sample. In most cases, edge angles are between 50° and 16

70° despite the action performed (Fig. 21a). Very a cute angles are also not common. Frontal delineations of the active edges are diverse, but no clear predominance of a particular feature is seen. Denticulate frontal delineations are present on a considerable number of edges used to modify hard materials. Concave, convex, rectilinear and sinusoidal edges are present in similar quantities. So far, no clear correlations between the morphopotential characters of the used edges and specific functions can be made.

4. Discussion The study presented here demonstrated the possibility to improve the reliability of functional interpretations of microwear on quartzite. There are several criteria which should be fulfilled to propose sound interpretations of lithic microwear. One of these is to have well-documented and explicative experimental data which must be used to propose functional interpretations of the archaeological wear. As such interpretations are traditionally realized through direct analogy of the visual appearance of experimental and archaeological wear observed under the microscope, one should have a thorough understanding of the mechanical properties of each lithic raw material. Thus, the first step to assure solid functional interpretations through the observation of use-wear should be reaching an in-depth understanding on how the intrinsic raw material properties of each lithology may influence the formation of use-wear. Therefore, distinct appearances of use-wear (i.e., variable distribution of polished areas, different striation types, etc.) could be better understood. Extensive experimental programs focused on a variety of lithologies present in the archaeological record are essential. Experiments should be controlled as much as possible to monitor the factors involved in the formation of use-wear. This will allow more confidently proposing functional hypotheses extrapolated from the archaeological record. Although the analysis of certain types of coarse-grained rocks, such as quartzite, has been challenging in the past due to poor methodological developments, nowadays it is becoming common. Nevertheless, when observing use-wear on quartzite, SEM is necessary to guarantee reliable results and it should be used at least on a selected sample. The use of optical microscopy alone to inspect quartzite surfaces does not assure trustworthy results as pointed out elsewhere (Sussman, 1985, 1988; Knutsson, 1988a, 1988b; Grace, 1989; Pedergnana et al., 2018). The most challenging aspect of microscopically imaging use-wear found on reflective surfaces is light reflectance itself. SEM overcomes this obstacle as it does not use white light to obtain enlarged views of the sample (Bogner et al., 2007). As such, knowing that most Early and Middle Pleistocene lithic assemblages are primarily composed of coarsegrained raw materials, it was essential to achieve methodological improvements within the field in order to provide experimental use-wear catalogues specific to quartzite (Ollé, 2003; Vergès, 2003; Pedergnana, 2017; Pedergnana and Ollé, 2017). In the past, most of the use-wear studies of Early and Middle Pleistocene lithic assemblages 17

focused on fine-grained lithologies (e.g. chert), which are normally present in very low percentages at sites. This means that functional interpretations of human occupations at sites and inferences about human behavioral choices were biased, as they were based on the least used lithic raw materials. This lack of fundamental information should be reversed by adding new sources of data. It is logical that by including data from the most frequently used lithic raw materials in Early and Middle Pleistocene chronologies, one can obtain a more complete picture of the human occupations at sites. Hence, the main contribution of our study to the field was the effort to fill in the gap by presenting the application of use-wear analysis on an early quartzite assemblage based on sound experimentally generated use-wear. Our study is considered an example to discuss the importance of having solid experimental data by always using the same rock varieties represented in the archaeological assemblages under study. In fact, the internal variability of use-wear is another challenging issue when it comes to the functional interpretation of stone tools and it has unfortunately been underestimated in the past. Additionally, from this study we understood that if the surface preservation is adequate, use-wear analysis is successfully applicable to ancient lithic assemblages. Moreover, if the degree of PDSMs is not very high, wear evidence related to use can be distinguished from traces caused by postdepositional soil movements. In any event, the presence of PDSMs should not be underestimated as they can provide useful insights about the formation processes of archaeological sites. The use-wear analysis performed on a selection of quartzite tools from Gran Dolina (Lower TD10.1) provided useful insights about the technical behavior of the human groups inhabiting the cave. Despite the limited number of artifacts analyzed, the mosaic character of the functions identified might be representative of the activities which were carried out at the site. Several actions and worked materials were identified, pointing to a diversification of tasks. Butchering activities were found on fewer artifacts than expected. The high presence of cut-marks on the bones of TD10.1 subunit and their distribution and frequency on specific anatomical elements (Blasco et al., 2010; Blasco, 2011; Rodríguez-Hidalgo, 2015; Rodríguez-Hidalgo et al., 2015) suggested that the predominant activity at the site was the processing of animal carcasses. The high number of animal bones with several anthropogenic modifications, the low incidence of carnivores in the formation of the bone record, and the clear human selection of the hunted animals (Rodríguez-Hidalgo, 2015, 2016; Rodríguez-Hidalgo et al., 2015) make it clear that TD10.1 is the result of several occupations where the butchering of carcasses was a central subsistence activity. Moreover, it has been suggested that data derived from the faunal assemblage could have important implications for the understanding of human evolution, mainly on the division of labor and food sharing among different members of a group (Rodríguez-Hidalgo, 2016). Based on this evidence and also considering the large number of lithic artifacts

18

recovered, Lower TD10.1 has been interpreted as a residential base camp (Ollé et al., 2013; Rodríguez-Hidalgo, 2015, 2016). Our research contributes to this interpretation in multiple ways. The low number of artifacts used in butchering activities may simply depend on low sample size. It may also have other explanations. For instance, chert might have been preferred for this task (e chert artifacts at TD10.1 amount to ca. 12,880, of which ca. 5,400 are both unretouched and retouch flakes) (Ollé et al., 2013). Also, as highlighted by ourselves and other use-wear analysts (Gibaja et al., 2002; Berruti et al., 2016; Pedergnana, 2017; Pedergnana and Ollé. 2017), wear on quartzite originating from contact with soft animal matter may be underdeveloped. Hence, the detection of this activity may be sometimes missed due to poorly developed traces. If we consider wear traces connected to soft animal matter (meat, skin), five artifacts were found to be used for skinning and defleshing activities. Hide scraping was identified on two artifacts, showing that animal carcasses were also exploited for purposes other than mere protein intake. Hides (or skins) were then worked, probably to remove meat and fat and prolong their preservation. Hides might then have been used for garments or shelter purposes. Artifacts connected to bone processing can also be related to butchering activities. Those presenting traces of longitudinal actions may have been used to disarticulate or dismember deer, bison or horse carcasses. One artifact used to modify bone likely indicates the intention of obtaining marrow as a dietary component. Five artifacts presented traces of transversal actions on bone and greasy material, which suggest that they were used during the removal of periosteum or muscular tissue from long bones. A single artifact displayed traces related to percussive activities on bone; therefore, this is the only artifact we can directly relate to chopping actions aimed at breaking bones for extracting marrow or for disarticulating carcasses. The same artifact shows pitting marks on its semicortical dorsal face, pointing to multifunctional phases during its life-cycle. The pits could have been produced as a result of the use of the original pebble (or of the preform, large cortical flake) as an anvil before the tool itself was shaped. All of the actions related to the processing of animal carcasses (skinning, defleshing, periosteum removal, bone breakage through percussion) have been identified in the taphonomic analysis of the faunal record of the TD10.1bone bed (Rodríguez-Hidalgo, 2015, 2016; Rodríguez-Hidalgo et al., 2015). Therefore, our results benefit from a well-established contextual panorama, which strengthens the functional hypotheses proposed here. In fact, scraping marks (Fisher, 1995) have been observed on 55 bones of to medium and large sized animals (deer, bison and horse; Rodríguez-Hidalgo, 2015). They are most commonly located on long bones (53 cases), but they have been observed also on a lower jaw (1) and a calcaneus (1). In eight cases these marks have been related to the removal of the periosteum before fracturing the bones, all pertaining to deer or to medium-sized animals (two 19

humeri, two femora and three indeterminate long bones). In the other cases, scraping marks have been related to defleshing and skinning activities (Rodríguez-Hidalgo, 2015). Butchering activity was preponderant at Gran Dolina-Lower TD10.1 and hunting strategies clearly centered on prey species and age selection (red deer and prime-adult individuals) and preferential transport to the site of marrowrich anatomical elements (Rodríguez-Hidalgo et al., 2015). Furthermore, nine quartzite implements displayed evidence of woodworking; longitudinal and transversal (scraping and whittling) actions were identified on 2 and 6 artifacts respectively. Woodworking may be related to several tasks, but all of them imply the interaction of complex conceptions and gestures to modify matter to obtain tools. Whatever the tools are, the applications of different chaînes opératoires, from the collection of wood, the selection of the branches, the production of lithic artifacts with which to modify the wood and the action itself, which probably involves several different gestures, are all evidence of complex cognitive capacities. The end-products of such chaînes opératoires might have been wood poles, handles or spears. Rare evidence of preserved wooden spears from European Lower Paleolithic horizons (e.g., Thieme, 1999; Bigga, 2018) demonstrate that this kind of technology was mastered since at least MIS 9. Recent analyses of 9 spears and other wooden artifacts from Schöningen (Germany) described long and complex operational sequences involved in their production (Schoch et al., 2015). Two different species of wood were selected as the raw material (Picea sp. and Pinus sylvestris) and small trunks were used to produce the spears. After the removal of the bark, wood was worked in order to manufacture the ending points and to eliminate branches or knots. Remarkable traces of polishing the surface and cutting off the branches of the spears are the most ancient direct evidences of woodworking in the world (Schoch et al., 2015). It follows that the employment of wood in everyday activities during the Lower Paleolithic could have been much more frequent than previously thought. Because the preservation of organic matter at prehistoric sites requires extraordinary conditions, use-wear on stone tools may be a key-factor to better assess wood exploitation in prehistory. Moreover, two pointed artifacts at TD10.1 bear traces connected to rotational movements (e.g., boring, drilling) on hard materials (bone or wood). This kind of activity, as well as woodworking, may be indicative of residential occupations. One may hypothesize that these pointed artifacts were used in the manufacture of possible handles or other wooden tools. Relatedly, evidence of hafting has been found on three quartzite artifacts. Use-wear was also found on the edges opposed to the hafted parts on these tools. Two hafted tools were used to perform longitudinal actions on hard materials, while the third one displayed traces of hide scraping. Detailed interpretations of the hafting mode (haft material, binding techniques etc.) are not proposed, as our experimental dataset comprises only one hafting modality. The presence of these three hafted artifacts in the analyzed sample shows complex technological behavior. This feature, already documented in the TD10.2 subunit on a flint artifact 20

(Márquez et al., 2001), has been traditionally considered as evidence of modern human behavior, particularly when the hafted tools are part of composite armatures (for instance, McBrearty and Brooks 2000; Shea, 2006). The presence of hafted implements in MIS 9 – 11 would predate the mastering of hafting techniques by Paleolithic groups in Europe. In fact, up to the present, the available ages for use-wear indicating the appearance of such skills date back to MIS 7 (Rots, 2013, 2015; Rots el al., 2015). Considering that the appearance of hafting technologies in the archaeological record of different continents is a very debatable topic in prehistory (e.g., Wilkins et al., 2012; Rots and Plisson, 2014), we are aware that extending the time depth of hafting behavior would have enormous implications for the understanding of the evolution of technology. In sum, the use-wear evidence at Gran Dolina-TD10.1 sustains the hypothesis which sees the cave functioning as a residential camp, where different activities took place. The exploitation of soft animal materials (hides) and woodworking indicates the performance of activities other than those strictly connected to subsistence (e.g., butchering of animals). Additional sets of data which support the interpretation of Lower TD10.1 as a residential base camp have been found during the refitting analysis. Cross examining data retrieved from use-wear and refit analyses has the potential to clarify the movements and uses of the lithics at TD10.1. Specifically, the refit analysis of the quartzite assemblage provided direct connections (refits and conjoins) and also associations or clusters of several implements which might have been knapped from the same pebble (indirect connections; López-Ortega et al., 2011, 2017). For instance, all the implements composing one refit (REM1_3: 6 pieces) were microscopically analyzed and two artifacts showed traces of transversal actions (Fig. 5). The core, the distal part of a large cortical flake and other smaller flakes did not present any surface modification. All of the artifacts composing this refit were found in a defined area of the surface of the site, while the core and the proximal part of the largest cortical flake showed transportation from what is thought to be the knapping area (Fig. 23, T1). While the movement of the retouched semicortical flake is easier to explain, as this is one of the artifacts bearing traces of a transversal action, the transportation of the core is more cryptic. More work is needed to relate the results of use-wear and refit analyses, which may allow us to locate possible functional areas on the surface of the site. Additionally, this study provided insights about the formation processes of Lower TD10.1 by underlining the presence of postdepositional surface modifications on more than half of the sample analyzed. This means that the lithic material underwent variable degrees of soil and water movement during the formation of the TD10.1 subunit, slightly diverging from observations by Mallol and Carbonell (2008). Considering that no evidence of transportation has been documented on the faunal assemblage, larger lithic samples should be microscopically analyzed in future studies for better evaluation of postdepositional damage patterns. The enlargement of the sample would also provide more functional data and this is essential to reliably reconstruct the function of the site.

21

Conclusions The richness of archaeological and paleontological material from Gran Dolina-TD10.1 subunit allowed initiating long-term multidisciplinary research with the main aim of reconstructing the settlement modalities of the human groups that inhabited the cave. Use-wear analysis is a valid method to infer human activities at sites, therefore several unretouched and retouched quartzite flakes were submitted to use-wear analysis. The level of accuracy of the interpretations varied depending on wear preservation, on its degree of development and on the presence of postdepositional surface modifications. The used portions of the edges were identified in all cases. In fewer cases, the kinematics was quite clear due to a relatively common presence of linear indicators (i.e., striations). The identification of the worked materials, as in most use-wear studies, was more challenging and only when diagnostic characteristics on the worn surfaces were present, the worked material’s type was identified. The functional results of the quartzite assemblage of TD10.1 (Lower TD10.1) contributed to better evaluating the human occupations at the site. As a result, this study shed some light on the lifeways of pre-Neanderthal populations inhabiting the Sierra de Atapuerca during MIS 9 – 11. Our data support the hypothesis that the site was used as a residential base camp during the deposition of Lower TD10.1. The butchering of animals was systematically performed at the site. Some evidence of chopping bones and reutilization of blanks stress the multifunctional character of the human occupations at the site. The presence of activities unrelated to subsistence at Gran Dolina TD10.1, such as woodworking, hide working, hafting technologies and boring actions testimonies the complexity of the preNeanderthal groups occupying the northern Iberian Peninsula during MIS 9 – 11. Certainly, further investigation is needed to better evaluate this complex behavioral mosaic and use-wear analysis may be a key-tool to uncover functional and technological changes during this transitional phase leading to the early Middle Paleolithic. Regarding the methodology, SEM is regarded to be necessary when dealing with irregular and reflective samples (such as quartzite). Knowing that the use of SEM can be time-consuming and costly, optical microscopy can be used to perform preliminary observations. While it proved to be useful on vein quartz (Taipale et al., 2014; Knutsson et al., 2015; Ollé et al., 2016), it can be problematic when it comes to quartzite (Pedergnana, 2017; Pedergnana et al., 2018). Nevertheless, optical microscopy might be a valid choice to image use-wear on particularly fine-grained, thus less irregular varieties. The improvements discussed here allow use-wear analysis to be expanded to new horizons by applying it to old assemblages composed of artifacts of course-grained raw materials in a more confident way. This has the potential of yielding countless data on functional behavior in more diverse geographical locations and chronologies. 22

Considering that coarse-grained raw materials have been used since the appearance of the genus Homo in the fossil record, use-wear documented on such materials has the capacity to add significant data about the evolution of technology and changes in human behavior to the prehistoric record.

Acknowledgements This work was developed within the frame of the projects PGC2018-093925-B-C32 (Spanish MICINN/FEDER), SGR 2017-1040 (AGAUR, Generalitat de Catalunya) and 2018PFR--URV-B2-91 (Univ. Rovira i Virigli). One of the authors (A.P.) was beneficiary of an FI-DGR predoctoral grant from the Generalitat de Catalunya (2014FI B 00539). Excavations and fieldwork have been funded by the Dirección General de Patrimonio Junta de Castilla y León, and the Fundación Atapuerca. The authors would like to acknowledge all the researchers and students involved in the recovery, preparation and study of the archaeological record from Atapuerca. The authors also wish to thank Palmira Saladié and Antonio Rodríguez-Hidalgo for their very helpful comments on a previous version of this manuscript as well as Esther López for providing us with Fig. 23. Finally, the authors want to acknowledge the editor, assistant editor and three anonymous reviewers whose comments enormously improved the quality of this paper. Language assistance by Phil Glauberman is gratefully acknowledged.

23

References

Alonso, M., Mansur, M.E., 1990. Estudo traceológico em quartzo e quartzito de Santana do Riacho (MG). Arquivos do Museu de História Natural UFMG. Belo Horizonte, 11, 173-190.

Arnold, L.J., Demuro, M., 2015. Insights into TT-OSL signal stability from single-grain analyses of known-age deposits at Atapuerca, Spain. Quaternary Geochronology 30, 472–478.

Aubry, T., Igreja, M.d.A., 2009. Economy of lithic raw material during the Upper Paleolithic of the Côa Valley and the Sicó Massif (Portugal): technological and functional perspectives. In: Clemente, I., Igreja, M.d.A. (Eds.), Recent Functional Studies on Non Flint Stone Tools: Methodological Improvements and Archaeological Inferences, proceedings of the workshop 23-25 may 2008, Lisboa - Proceedings of the workshop [CD-ROM], Lisboa.

Aureli, D., Contardi, A., Giaccio, B., Jicha, B., Lemorini, C., Madonna, S., Magri, D., Marano, F., Milli, S., Modesti, V. Palombo, M.P., Rocca, R., 2015. Palaeoloxodon and human interaction: depositional setting, chronology and archaeology at the Middle Pleistocene Ficoncella site (Tarquinia, Italy). PLoS ONE, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0124498

Berger, G.W., Pérez-González, A., Carbonell, E., Arsuaga, J.L., Bermúdez de Castro, J.M., Ku, T.L., 2008. Luminescence chronology of cave sediments at the Atapuerca paleoanthropological site, Spain. Journal of Human Evolution 55, 300-311.

Berruti, G., Rosina, P., Raposo, L., 2016. The use-wear analysis of the quartzite lithic assemblage from the Middle Palaeolithic site of Foz do Enxarrique (Rodão, Portugal). Mediterranean Archaeology and Archaeometry 16, 107-126.

Beyries, S., 1988. Étude tracéologique des racloires du niveaux IIA. In: Tuffreau, A., Somme, J. (Eds.), Le Gisement Paléolithique Moyen de Biache-Saint-Vaast (Pas-de-Calais). Vol I. Stratigraphie, Environnement, Études Archéologiques. Mémoires S.P.F., 21. Société Préhistorique Française, Paris, pp. 215-230.

Bigga, G., 2018. Die Pflanzen von Schöningen. Botanische Makroreste aus den Mittelpleistozänen Ablagerungen und

das

Nutzungspotential

einer

Interglazialen

Zentralmuseums, Mainz.

24

Paläoflora.

Verlag

des

Römish-Germanischen

Blasco, R., 2011. La amplitud de la dieta cárnica en el Pleistoceno medio peninsular: una aproximación a partir de la Cova del Bolomor (Tavernes de la Valldigna, Valencia) y del subnivel TD10-1 de Gran Dolina (Sierra de Atapuerca, Burgos). Ph.D. Dissertation, Universitat Rovira i Virgili.

Blasco, R., Rosell, J., Arsuaga, J.L., Bermúdez de Castro, J.M., Carbonell, E., 2010. The hunted hunter: the capture of a lion (Panthera leo fossilis) at the Gran Dolina site, Sierra de Atapuerca, Spain. Journal of Archaeological Science 37, 2051-2060.

Boëda, É., 1997. Technogenèse de systèmes de Production Lithique au Paléolithique Inférieur et Moyen en Europe Occidentale et au Proche‐Orient. Habilitation à diriger des recherches. Université de Paris X‐ Nanterre.

Bogner, A., Jouneau, P.H., Thollet, G., Basset, D., Gauthier, C., 2007. A history of scanning electron microscopy developments: Towards “wet-STEM”. Micron 38, 390-401.

Burroni, D., Donahue, R.E., Pollard, A.M., 2002. The surface alteration features of flint artefacts as a record of environmental processes. Journal of Archaeological Science 29, 1277-1287.

Campaña, I., Benito-Calvo, A., Pérez-González, A., Ortega, A.I., Bermúdez de Castro, J.M., Carbonell, E., 2017. Pleistocene sedimentary facies of the Gran Dolina archaeo-paleoanthropological site (Sierra de Atapuerca, Burgos, Spain). Quaternary International 433, 68–84.

Carbonell, E., Esteban, M., Martín, A., Mosquera, M., Rodríguez, X.P., Ollé, A., Sala, R., Vergès, J.M., Bermúdez de Castro, J.M., Ortega, A.I., 1999a. The Pleistocene site of Gran Dolina, Sierra de Atapuerca, Spain: A history of the archaeological investigations. Journal of Human Evolution 37, 313-324.

Carbonell, E., García-Antón, M.D., Mallol, C., Mosquera, M., Ollé, A., Rodríguez, X.P., Sahnouni, M., Sala, R., Vergès, J.M., 1999b. The TD6 level lithic industry from Gran Dolina, Atapuerca (Burgos, Spain): Production and use. Journal of Human Evolution 37, 653-693.

Carbonell, E., Giralt, S., Márquez, B., Martín, A., Mosquera, M., Ollé, A., Rodríguez, X.P., Sala, R., Vaquero, M., Vergès, J.M., Zaragoza, J., 1995. El conjunto Lito-Técnico de la Sierra de Atapuerca en el marco del Pleistoceno Medio Europeo. In: Bermúdez de Castro, J.M., Arsuaga, J.L., Carbonell, E. (Eds.), Evolución Humana en Europa y los Yacimientos de la Sierra de Atapuerca / Human Evolution in Europe and the Atapuerca Evidence. Junta de Castilla y León, Valladolid, pp. 445-555. 25

Carbonell, E., Mosquera, M., Ollé, A., Rodríguez, X.P., Sala, R., Vaquero, M., Vergès, J.M., 1992. New elements of the Logical Analytic System. First Meeting on Technical Systems to Configure Lithic Objects of Scarce Elaboration. Cahier Noir 6, 5-61.

Claud, É., Brenet, M., Maury, S., Mourre, V., 2009. Étude expérimentale des macrotraces d’utilisation sur les tranchants des bifaces. Caractérisation et potentiel diagnostique. Les Nouvelles de l’archéologie 118, 55-60.

Claud, E., Thiébaut, C., Coudenneau, A. Deschamps, M., Mourre, V., Colonge, D., 2013. Le travail du bois au Paléolithique moyen: nouvelle données issues de l’étude tracéologique de plusieurs industries lithiques d’Europe occidentale. In: Anderson, P.C., Cheval, C., Durand, A. (Eds.), Regards Croisés sur les Outils Liés au Travail des Vegetaux, XXXIIIe Rencontres Internationales d’Archéologie et d’Histoire d’Antibes. Éditions APDCA, Antibes, pp. 367-381.

Clemente-Conte, I., Gibaja-Bao, J.F., 2009. Formation of use-wear traces in non-flint rocks: the case of quartzite and rhyolite – differences and similarities. In: Sternke, F., Eigeland, L., Costa, L.J. (Eds.), Non-Flint Raw Material Use in Prehistory: Old Prejudices and New Drections/L'utilisation Préhistorique de Matière Premieres Lithiques Alternatives: Anciens préjugés, nouvelles perspectives. Archaeopress, Oxford, pp. 9398.

Clemente, I., Díez, J.C., Terradillos, M., 2014. Use of Middle Paleolithic Tools in San Quirce (Alar del Rey, Palencia, Spain). In: Marreiros, J., Bicho, N., Gibaja, J. (Eds.), International Conference on Use-Wear Analysis (Faro, 2012). Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Cambridge, pp. 152-161.

Cristiani, E., Cura, S., Grimaldi, S., Gomes, J., Oosterbeek, L., Rosina, P., 2009. Functional analysis and experimental archaeology: the Middle Pleistocene site of Ribeira da Atalaia, (Central Portugal). In: Clemente-Conte, I., Igreja, M.d.A. (Eds.), Recent Functional Studies on non Flint Stone Tools: Methodological Iimprovements and Archaeological Inferences. Proceedings of the workshop 23-25 may 2008, Lisboa - Proceedings of the workshop [CD-ROM], Lisboa.

Crovetto, C., Ferrari, M., Longo, L., Peretto, C., Vianello, F., 1994. The carinated denticulates from the Paleolithic site of Isernia la Pineta (Molise, Central Italy): tools or flaking waste? The results of the 1993 experiments. Human Evolution 9, 175–207.

Domínguez-Rodrigo, M., Serrallonga, J., Juan-Tresserras, J., Alcalá, L., Luque, L.,2001. Woodworking activities by early humans: a plant residue analysis on Acheulian stone tools from Peninj (Tanzania). Journal of Human Evolution 40, 289-299. 26

Donahue, R.E., Evans, A.A., 2012. Microwear of the flint artefacts: tool use. In: Boismier, W.A., Gamble, C., Coward, F. (Eds.), Neanderthals Among Mammoths: Excavations at Lynford Quarry, Norfolk. English Heritage, Swindon, pp. 261-273.

Falguères, C., Bahain, J.J., Yokoyama, Y., Arsuaga, J.L., Bermúdez de Castro, J.M., Carbonell, E., Bischoff, J.L., Dolo, J.M., 1999, Earliest humans in Europe: the age of TD6 Gran Dolina, Atapuerca, Spain. Journal of Human Evolution 37, 343-352.

Falguères, C., Bahain, J.J., Bischoff, J.L., Pérez-González, A., Ortega, A.I., Ollé, A., Quiles, A., Ghaleb, B., Moreno, D., Dolo, J.M., Shao, Q., Vallverdú, J., Carbonell, E., Bermúdez de Castro, J.M., Arsuaga, J.L., 2013. Combined ESR/U-series chronology of Acheulian hominid-bearing layers at Trinchera Galería site, Atapuerca, Spain. Journal of Human Evolution 65, 168-184.

Fernández-Marchena, J.L., Ollé, A., 2016. Microscopic analysis of technical and functional traces as a method for the use-wear analysis of rock crystal tools. Quaternary International 424, 171-190.

Fisher, J.W. Jr., 1995. Bone surface modifications in zooarchaeology. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 2, 7–68.

Font, B., 2009. Descripció i caracterització de l’alteració de la indústria lítica en sílex dels jaciments de la Trinchera del Ferrocarril (Sierra de Atapuerca, Burgos), la Cansaladeta (La Riba, Alt Camp) i Orgnac 3 (Ardèche, sudest de França). Graduate Thesis, Universitat Rovira i Virgili.

Font, B., López-Polín, L., Ollé, A., 2010. Description and characterization of the natural alteration of chert artefacts from Atapuerca (Burgos, Spain), Cansaladeta (Tarragona, Spain) and Orgnac 3 (Ardèche, France). Annali dell’Università di Ferrara Museologia Scientifica e Naturalistica 6, 103-110.

García-Antón, M.D., 2016. La captación, selección, y gestión de recursos líticos en la Prehistoria: Una visión diacrónica del uso del territorio y sus recursos en el entorno de la Sierra de Atapuerca (Burgos) durante el Pleistoceno inferior y medio. Ph.D. Dissertation, Universitat Rovira i Virgili.

Gibaja, F.J., Clemente, I., Mir, A., 2002. Análisis funcional en instrumentos

de cuarcita: el yacimiento del

Paleolítico superior de la Cueva de la Fuente del Trucho (Colungo, Huesca). In: Clemente, I., Risch, R., Gibaja, J.F. (Eds.), Análisis Funcional: su Aplicación al Estudio de Sociedades Prehistóricas. Archaeopress, Oxford, pp. 79-86.

27

Glauberman, P.J., Thorson, R.M., 2012. Flint patina as an aspect of “Flaked stone taphonomy”: a case study from the Loess Terrain of the Netherlands and Belgium. Journal of Taphonomy 10.1, 21-43.

Grace, R., 1989. Interpreting the Function of Stone Tools. The Quantification and Computerisation of Microwear Analysis. Archaeopress, Oxford.

Grace, R., 1990. The limitations and applications of functional analysis. In: Gräslund, B., Knutsson, H., Knutsson, K., Taffinder, J. (Eds.), The Interpretative Possibilities of Microwear Studies. Vol. 14, Societas Archaeologica Upsaliensis, Uppsala, pp. 9-14.

Hardy, B.L., Moncel, H.M., 2011. Neanderthal use of fish, mammals, birds, starchy plants and wood 125-250,000 years ago. PLoS One 6, e23768.

Hayden, B. (Ed.), 1979. Lithic Use-Wear Analysis. Academic Press, New York.

Hayden, B., Kamminga, K., 1979. An introduction to use-wear: the first clue. In: Hayden, B. (Ed.), Lithic Use-Wear Analysis. Academic Press, New York, pp. 1-13.

Hortelano-Piqueras, L., 2016. Análisis funcional de utillaje sobre caliza del nivel XII(MIS 6) de la Cova de Bolomor (Tavernes de la Valldigna, Valencia). Estudio experimental y traceológico. PhD Thesis submitted to the University of Valencia (Universitat de Valencia, Facultat de Geografia i Història, España).

Igreja, M.d.A., 2008. A Traceologia: gestos do passado pela objectiva do microscópio. Arqueologia Experimental recriaçoes do passado em ritmos do nosso tempo. Actas das Sessões do Fórum Valorização e Promoção do Património Regional 4, 35-45.

Igreja, M.d.A., Moreno-García, M., Pimenta, C.M., 2007. Um exemplo de abordagem experimental da interface Traceologia lítica/Arqueozoologia: esquartejamento e tratamento da pele de um corço (Capreolus capreolus) com artefactos de pedra lascada. Revista Portuguesa de Arqueologia 10 (2), 17-34.

Hardy, B.L., Moncel, M.H., Despriée, J., Courcimault, G., Voinchet, P., 2018. Middle Pleistocene hominin behavior at the 700ka Acheulean site of la Noira (France). Quaternary Science Reviews 199, 60–82.

Heath, J.P., 2005. Dictionary of Microscopy. Wiley & Sons, England.

Hroníková, L., Priorová, P., Šajnerová, A. 2008. An experimental approach to formation of use-wear traces on quartzite tools. In: Longo, L., Skakun, N. (Eds.), “Prehistoric Technology” 40 Years Later: Functional Studies 28

and the Russian Legacy. Proceedings of the International Congress, Verona (Italy), 20-23 April 2005. Archaeopress, Oxford, pp. 355-357.

Jaubert, J., Kervazo, B., Bahain, J.J., Brugal, J.P., Chalard, P., Falguères, Ch., Jarry, M., Jeannet, M., Lemorini, C., Louchard, A., Maksud, F., Mourre, V., Quinif, Y., Thiébaut, C., 2005. Coudoulous I (Tour-de-Faure, Lot), site du Pléistocène moyen en Quercy. Bilan pluridisciplinaire. In: Molines, N., Moncel, M.H., Monnier, JL. (Eds.), Les Premiers Peuplements en Europe. Données Récentes sur les Modalités de Peuplement et sur le Cadre Chronostratigraphique, Géologique et Paléogéographique des Industries du Paléolithique Ancien et Moyen en Europe. Rennes, 22-25 septembre 2003. John and Erika Hedges Ltd., Oxford, , pp. 227-251.

Keeley, L.H., 1980. Experimental Determination of Stone Tool Uses. A Microwear Analysis. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Keeley, L.H., 1993. The utilization of lithic artifacts. In: Singer, R., Gladfelter, B.G., Wymer, J.J. (Eds.), The Lower Paleolithic Site at Hoxne, England. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 129–138.

Keeley, L.H., 1997. Microwear traces on a selected sample of stone artefacts from Koobi Fora. Appendix 7F. In: Isaac, G.L., Isaac, B. (Eds.), Koobi Fora Research Project, Vol. 5: Plio-Pleistocene Archaeology. Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp. 396–401..

Keeley, L., Toth, N., 1981. Microwear polishes on early stone tools from Koobi Fora, Kenya. Nature 293, 464-465.

Knutsson, K., 1988a. Patterns of Tools Use. Scanning Electron Microscopy of Experimental Quartz Tools. AUN, 10. Societas Archaeologica Upsalensis, Uppsala.

Knutsson, K., 1988b. Making and Using Stone Tools. The Analysis of the Middle Neolithic Sites with Flint in Västerbotten, Northern Sweden. AUN, 11. Societas Archaelogica Upsaliensis, Uppsala.

Knutsson, H., Knutsson, K., Taipale, N., Tallavaara, M., Darmark, K., 2015. How shattered flakes were used: Micro-wear analysis of quartz flake fragments. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 2, 517-531.

Kornprobst, J., 1996. Manual de Petrología Metamórfica y su Contexto Geodinámico. Masson, Barcelona.

Lazuén, T., 2012. European Neaderthal stone hunting weapons reveal complex behaviour long before the appearance of modern humans. Journal of Archaeological Science 39, 2304-2311.

29

Lazuén, T., Fábregas, R., De Lombera, A., Rodríguez, X.P. 2011. La gestión del utillaje de piedra tallada en el Paleolítico Medio de Galicia. El nivel 3 de Cova Eirós. Trabajos de Prehistoria 68, 237-258.

Leipus, M., Mansur, M.E., 2007. El análisis funcional de base microscópica aplicado a materiales heterogéneos, perspectivas metodológicas para el estudio de las cuarcitas de la región pampeana. In: Bayón, C., Pupio, A., González, M.I., Flegenheimer, N., Frére, M. (Eds.), Arqueología en las Pampas, Vol. 1. Sociedad Argentina de Antropología, Buenos Aires, pp. 179-200.

Lemorini, C., Gopher, A., Shimelmitz, R., Stiner, M., Barkai, R., 2006. Use-wear analysis of an Amudian laminar assemblage from Acheuleo-Yabrudian Qesem Cave, Israel. Journal of Archaeological Science 33, 921-934.

Lemorini, C., Plummer, T.W., Braun, D. R., Crittenden, A.N., Ditchfield, P.W., Bishop, L.C., Hertel, F., Oliver, J. S., Marlowe, F.W., Shoeninger, M.J., Potts, R., 2014. Old stones’ song: use-wear experiments and analysis of the Oldowan quartz and quartzite assemblage from Kanjera South (Kenya). Journal of Human Evolution 72, 10-25.

Lemorini, C., Venditti, F., Assaf, F., Purush, Y., Barkai, R., Gopher, A., 2015. The function of recycled lithic items at late Lower Paleolithic Qesem Cave, Israel: an overview of the use-wear data. Quaternernary International 361, 103-112.

Lombard, M., 2008. Finding resolution for the Howiesons Poort through the microscope: micro-residue analysis of segments from Sibudu Cave, South Africa. Journal of Archaeological Science 35, 26-41.

Longo, L., 1994. Le industrie litiche. L'analisi delle tracce d'uso. In: Peretto, C. (Ed.), Le Industrie Litiche del Giacimento Paleolitico di Isernia la Pineta. La Tipologia, le Tracce di Utilizzazione, la Sperimentazione. Cosmo Iannone, Isernia, pp. 355-404.

López-Ortega, E., Bargalló, A., de Lombera-Hermida, A., Mosquera, M., Rodríguez-Álvarez, X.P., 2017. Quartz and quartzite refits at Gran Dolina (Sierra de Atapuerca, Burgos): connecting lithic artefacts in the Middle Pleistocene unit of TD10.1. Quaternary International 433A, 85-102.

López-Ortega, E., Rodríguez, X.P., Vaquero, M., 2011. Lithic refitting and movement connections: the NW area of level TD10-1 at the Gran Dolina site (Sierra de Atapuerca, Burgos, north-western Spain). Journal of Archaeological Science 38(11), 3112-3121.

Mallol, C., Carbonell, E., 2008. The collapse of Gran Dolina Cave, Sierra de Atapuerca, Spain: Site formation processes of layer TD10-1. Geoarchaeology: An International Journal 23, 13-41. 30

Márquez, B., 1998. El nivel TG10 de Galería (Atapuerca, Burgos). Aplicación de un programa experimental para el estudio traceológico de conjuntos líticos del Pleistoceno Medio. Complutum 9, 9-26.

Márquez, B., Ollé, A., Sala, R., 1999. Análisis microscópico de los instrumentos de Galería (Sierra de Atapuerca). Actividades desarrolladas y formas de uso. In: Carbonell, E., Rosas, A., Díez, J.C. (Eds.), Atapuerca: ocupaciones humanas y paleoecología del yacimiento de Galería, Vol. 7. Junta de Castilla y León, Zamora, pp. 353–369.

Márquez, B., Ollé, A., Sala, S., Vergès, J.M., 2001. Perspectives méthodologiques de l’analyse fonctionnelle des ensembles lithiques du Pléistocène inférieur et moyen d’Atapuerca (Burgos, Espagne). L’Anthropologie 105, 281-299.

Martínez, K., Ollé, A., Sala, R., Vergès, J.M., 2003. Discoid technology and usewear analysis from Abric Romaní. In: Peresani, M. (Ed.), Discoid Lithic Technology. Advances and Implications. Archaeopress, Oxford, pp. 241-255.

McBrearty, S., Brooks, A.S., 2000. The revolution that wasn't: a new interpretation of the origin of modern human behavior. Journal of human evolution 39(5), 453-563.

Mitchell, J.C., 1998. A Use-Wear Analysis of Selected British Lower Palaeolithic Handaxes with Special Reference to the Site of Boxgrove (West Sussex): a Study Incorporating Optical Microscopy, Computer Aided Image Analysis and Experimental Archaeology. University of Oxford, Oxford.Moncel, M.H., Chacón, M.G., Coudenneau, A., Fernandes, P., 2009. Points and convergent tools in the European Early Middle Palaeolithic site of Payre (SE, France). Journal of Archaeological Science 36, 1892-1909.

Moncel, M.H., Cachón, M.G., Coudenneau, A., Fernandes, P., 2009. Points and convergent tools in the European middle Paleolithic site of Payre (SE, France). Journal of Archaeological Science 36, 1892–1909.

Moreno, D., Falgueres, C., Pérez-González, A., Voinchet, P., Ghaleb, B., Despriée, J., Bahain, J.J., Sala, R., Carbonell, E., Bermúdez de Castro, J.M., Arsuaga, J.L., 2015. New radiometric dates on the lowest stratigraphical section (TD1 to TD6) of Gran Dolina site (Atapuerca, Spain). Quaternary Geochronology 30, 535-540.

Mosquera, M., Ollé, A., Saladié, P., Cáceres, I., Huguet, R., Rosas, A., Villalaín, J., Carrancho, A., Bourlès, D., Braucher, R., Pineda, A., Vallverdú, J., 2016. The Early Acheulean technology of Barranc de la Boella (Catalonia, Spain). Quaternary International 393, 95-111. 31

Obregón, R.A., 2012. Estratigrafía cultural en el nivel TD10-1 de Gran Dolina, Sierra de Atapuerca (Burgos): secuencia arqueoestratigráfica de los asentamientos contenidos en sediment homogéneo. Ph.D. Dissertation, Universidad de Burgos.

Ollé, A., 1996. Estructura litotécnica i patrons de funcionalitat al Pleistocè mitjà. El nivell TN2 (Complexe Galería, Sierra de Atapuerca, Burgos). Undergraduate Thesis, Universitat Rovira i Virgili.

Ollé, A., 2003. Variabilitat i patrons funcionals en els SistemesTècnics de Mode 2. Anàlisi de les deformacions d'ús en els conjunts lítics del riparo esterno de Grotta Paglicci (Rignano Garganico, Foggia), Áridos (Arganda, Madrid) i Galería-TN (Sierra de Atapuerca, Burgos). Ph.D. Dissertation, Universitat Rovira i Virgili.

Ollé, A., Vergès, J.M., 2014. The use of sequential experiments and SEM in documenting stone tool microwear. Journal of Archaeological Science 48, 60-72.

Ollé, A., Mosquera, M., Rodríguez, X.P., de Lombera-Hermida, A., García-Antón, M.D., García-Medrano, P., Peña, L., Menéndez, L., Navazo, M., Terradillos, M., Bargalló, A., Márquez, B., Sala, R., Carbonell, E., 2013. The Early and Middle Pleistocene technological record from Sierra de Atapuerca (Burgos, Spain). Quaternary International 295, 138-167.

Ollé, A., Pedergnana, A., Fernández-Marchena, J.L., Martin, S., Borel, A., Aranda, V., 2016. Microwear features on vein quartz, rock crystal and quartzite: a study combining Optical Light and Scanning Electron Microscopy. Quaternary International 424, 154-170.

Parés, J.M., Pérez-González, A., 1999. Magnetochronology and stratigraphy at Gran Dolina section, Atapuerca (Burgos, Spain). Journal of Human Evolution 37, 325-342.

Parés, J. M., Álvarez, C., Sier, M., Moreno, D., Duval, M., Woodhead, J., Ortega, A.I, Campaña, I., Rosell, J., Bermúdez de Castro, J.M., Carbonell, E. (2018). Chronology of the cave interior sediments at Gran Dolina archaeological site, Atapuerca (Spain). Quaternary Science Review 186, 1–16.

Pérez-González, A., Parés, J.M., Carbonell, E., Aleixandre, T., Ortega, A.I., Benito, A., Martín Merino, M.Á., 2001. Géologie de la Sierra de Atapuerca et stratigraphie des remplissages karstiques de Galería et Dolina (Burgos, Espagne). L’Anthropologie 105(1), 27-43.

Pedergnana, A., 2017. Microwear and residue analyses of quartzite stone tools. Experimental development of a method and its application to the assemblages from the Pleistocene sites of Gran Dolina-TD10 (Sierra de Atapuerca, Burgos, Spain) and Payre (Ardèche, France). Ph.D. Dissertation, Universitat Rovira i Virgili. 32

Pedergnana, A., Ollé, A., 2017. Monitoring and interpreting the use-wear formation processes on quartzite flakes through sequential experiments. Quaternary International 427, 35–65.

Pedergnana, A., García-Antón, M.D., Ollé, A., 2017. Structural study of two quartzite varieties from the Utrillas facies formation (Olmos de Atapuerca, Burgos, Spain): From a petrographic characterisation to a functional analysis design. Quaternary International 433, 163-178.

Pedergnana, A., Ollé, A., Borel, A., Moncel, M.H., 2018. Preliminary results from the Middle Pleistocene site of Payre (South-eastern France). Journal of Anthropological and Archaeological Sciences 10, 369-388.

Pereira, J.P., 1993. A análise dos vestigios de uso em quartzito. In: Oliveira Jorge, V. (Ed.), Actas do 1° Congresso de Arqueologia Peninsular, 12-18 de Outubro de 1993. Trabalhos de Antropologia e Etnologia 33,51-68.

Pereira, J.P., 1996. Usewear analysis on quartzite artefacts: an experimental approach. In: Moloney, N., Raposo, L., Santonja, M. (Eds.), Non-Flint Stone Tools and the Palaeolithic Occupation of the Iberian Peninsula. Tempus Reparatum, Oxford, pp. 189-191.

Peretto, C., Amore, F.O., Antoniazzi, A., Antoniazzi, A., Bahain, J.J., Cattani, L., Cavallini, E., Esposito, P., Falguères, C., Gagnepain, J., Hedley, I., Laurent, M., Lebreton, V., Longo, L., Milliken, S., Monegatti, P., Ollé, A., Pugliese, N., Renault-Miskovsky, J., Sozzi, M., Ungaro, S., Vannucci, S., Vergès, J.M., Wagner, J.J., Yokoyama, Y., 1998. L'industrie lithique de Ca'Belvedere di Monte Poggiolo: stratigraphie, matière première, typologie, remontages et traces d'utilisation. L'Anthropologie 102, 343-465.

Plisson, H. 1986. Analyse des polis d'utilisation sur le quartzite. In: Owen., L.R., Unrath., G. (Eds.), Actes de la Conférence de Tübingen Février 1985. Early Man News 9/10/11, pp. 47-49.

Rodríguez, J., Burjachs, F., Cuenca-Bescós, G., García, N., Made, J. van der, PérezGonzález, A., Blain, H., Expósito, I., López-García, J.M., García Antón, M., Allué, E., Cáceres, I., Huguet, R., Mosquera, M., Ollé, A., Rosell, J., Parés, J.M., Rodríguez, X.P., Díez, J.C., Rofes, J., Sala, R., Saladié, P., Vallverdú, J., Bennàsar, L., Blasco, R., Bermúdez de Castro, J.M., Carbonell, E., 2011. One million years of cultural evolution in a stable environment at Atapuerca (Burgos, Spain). QuaternaryScience Review 30, 1396-1412.

Rodríguez-Hidalgo, A., 2015. Dinamicas subsistenciales durante el Pleistoceno Medio en la Sierra de Atapuerca: los conjuntos arqueologicos de TD10.1 y TD10.2. Ph.D. Dissertation, Universitat Rovira i Virgili. 33

Rodríguez-Hidalgo, A., 2016. Subsistence dynamics during the Lower Paleolithic in Gran Dolina cave (Atapuerca, Spain). Mitteilungen der Gesellschaft für Urgeschichte 25, 11, 47.

Rodríguez-Hidalgo, A., Saladié, P., Ollé, A., Carbonell, E., 2015. Hominin subsistence and site function of TD10.1 bone bed level at Gran Dolina site (Atapuerca) during the late Acheulean. Journal of Quaternary Science 30, 679–701.

Rodríguez-Hidalgo, A., Saladié, P., Ollé, A., Arsuaga, J.L., Bermúdez de Castro, J.M., Carbonell, E., 2017. Human predatory behavior and the social implications of communal hunting based on evidence from the TD10.2 bison bone bed at Gran Dolina (Atapuerca, Spain). Journal of Human Evolution 105, 89-122.

Rosell, J., Blasco, R., Campeny, G., Díez, J.C., Alonso, R., Menéndez, L., Arsuaga, J.L., Bermúdez de Castro, J.M., Carbonell, E., 2011. Bone as a technological raw material at the Gran Dolina site (Sierra de Atapuerca, Burgos, Spain). Journal of Human Evolution 61, 125-131.

Rots, V., 2013. Insights into early Middle Palaeolithic tool use and hafting in Western Europe. The functional analysis of level IIa of the early Middle Palaeolithic site of Bianche-Saint-Vaast (France). Journal of Archaeological Science 40, 497-506.

Rots, V., 2015. Hafting and the interpretation of site function in the European Middle Palaeolithic. In: Conard, N.J., Delagnes, A. (Eds.), Settlement Dynamics of the Middle Paleolithic and Middle Stone Age. Kerns Verlag, Tübingen, pp. 383-410.

Rots, V., Plisson, H., 2014. Projectiles and the abuse of the use-wear method in a search for impact. Journal of Archaeological Science 48, 154–165.

Rots, V., Hardy, B.L., Serangeli, J., Conard, N. J., 2015. Residue and microwear analyses of the stone artifacts from Shöningen. Journal of Human Evolution 89, 298-308.

Sahnouni, M., Rosell, J., Made, J.v.d., Vergès, J.M., Ollé, A., Kandi, N., Harichane, Z., Derradji, A., Medig, M., 2013. The first evidence of cut marks and usewear traces from the Plio-Pleistocene locality of El-Kherba (Ain Hanech), Algeria: implications for early hominin subsistence activities circa 1.8 Ma. Journal of Human Evolution 64, 137-150.

34

Sala, S., 1997. Formes d’ús i criteris d’efectivitat en conjunts de mode 1 i mode 2: Anàlisis de les deformacions per ús dels instruments lítics del Plistocè inferior (TD6) i mitjà (TG11) de la Sierra d’Atapuerca. Ph.D. Dissertation, Universitat Rovira i Virgili.

Saladié, P., Rodríguez-Hidalgo, A., Marín, J., Vallverdú i Poch, J., Carbonell, E., 2018. The top of the Gran Dolina (Atapuerca, Spain) sequence: A zooarchaeological and occupational perspective. Quaternary Science Review 195, 48–71. Schoch, W. H., Bigga, G., Böhner, U., Richter, P., Terberger, T., 2015. New insights on the wooden weapons from the Paleolithic site of Schöningen. Journal of Human Evolution 89, 214-225.

Shea, J.J., 2006. The origins of lithic projectile point technology: evidence from Africa, the Levant, and Europe. Journal of Archaeological Science 33, 823-846.

Shen, C., Chen, C., 2000. A use-wear study of lithic artifacts from Xiaochangliang and hominid activities in Nihewan Basin. Acta Anthropologica Sinica, 19, 119–125.

Sussman, C., 1985. Microwear on quartz: fact or fiction? World Archaeology 17, 101-111. Sussman, C. 1988. A Microscopic Analysis of Use-Wear and Polish Formation on Experimental Quartz Tools. John and Erika Hedges Ltd., Oxford.

Taipale, N., 2012. Micro vs. Macro. A microwear analysis of quartz artefacts from two Finnish Late Mesolithic assemblages with comments on the earlier macrowear results, wear preservation and tool blank selection. Graduate Thesis, Uppsala University.

Taipale, N., Knutsson, K., Knutsson, H., 2014. Unmodified quartz flake fragments as cognitive tool categories: testing the wear preservation, previous low magnification use-wear results and criteria for tool blank selection in two late Mesolithic quartz assemblages from Finland. In: Marreiros, J., Bicho, N., Gibaja, J.F. (Eds.), International Conference on Use-Wear Analysis. (Faro 2012). Cambridge Scholar Publishing, Cambridge, pp. 352-361.

Thieme, H., 1997. Lower Paleolithic hunting spears from Germany. Nature 385, 807-810.

Tucker, M.E., 2001. Sedimentary Petrology. An Introduction to the Origin of Sedimentary Rocks. Alden Press, UK.

Vallverdú i Poch,

J., 2017. Soil-stratigraphy in the cave entrance deposits of Middle Pleistocene age at the

Trinchera del Ferrocarril sites (Sierra de Atapuerca, Spain). Quaternary International 433A, 199–210. 35

Van Gijn, A. 1988. Appendix I. a functional analysis of the Belvédère flints. In: W. Roebroeks, W. (Ed.), From find scatters to Early hominid Behaviour: a study of Middle Palaeolithic Riverside settlements at MaastrichtBelvédère (the Netherlands), University of Leiden, Leiden, pp. 151-157.

Venditti, F., 2014. Use-wear analysis on quartz and quartzite tools. Methodology and application: Coudoulous I (Midi-Pirénées, France). In: Marreiros, J., Bicho, N., Gibaja, J.F. (Eds.), International Conference on UseWear Analysis. (Faro 2012). Cambridge Scholar Publishing, Cambridge, pp. 124-137.

Vergès, J.M., 1996. Impacte antròpic i pautes tecnofuncionals la Plistocè mitjà: la indústria lítica del nivell TD10 de Gran Dolina (Sierra de Atapuerca, Burgos). Undergraduate Thesis, Universitat Rovira i Virgili.

Vergès, J.M., 2003. Caracterització dels models d’instrumental lític del mode 1 a partir de les dades de l’anàlisi funcional dels conjunts litotècnics d’Aïn Hanech i El-Kherba (Algèria), Monte Poggiolo i Isernia La Pineta (Itàlia). Ph.D. Dissertation, Universitat Rovira i Virgili.

Wiederhold, J.E., 2004. Toward the standardization of use-wear studies: constructing an analogue to prehistoric hide work. Graduate Thesis, Texas A&M University.

Wilkins, J., Schoville, B.J., Brown, K.S., Chazan, M., 2012. Evidence for early hafted hunting technology. Science 338, 942–946.

Zornoza-Indart, A., López-Arce, P., López-Polín, L., 2017. Durability of traditional and new nanoparticle based consolidating products for the treatment of archaeological stone tools: Chert artifacts from Atapuerca sites (Burgos, Spain). Journal of Cultural Heritage. 24, 9–21.

36

Tables: Table 1. List of the main archaeological sites mentioned in the text, chronology of the sites and the references for use-wear data. The analyzed raw material types are also specified.

Publication

Chronology

Sites

Raw materials

Keeley and Toth 1981

Lower Pleistocene

Koobi Fora (Kenya)

Basalt, chert

Crovetto et al. 1994; Longo

Lower Pleistocene

Isernia la Pineta (Italy)

Flint

Keeley 1997

Lower Pleistocene

Koobi Fora (Kenya)

Chert, basalt, ignimbrite

Sala 1997

Lower Pleistocene

Gran Dolina-TD6

Chert, quartzite

1994; Vergès, 2003

(Spain) Peretto et al. 1998; Vergès,

Lower Pleistocene

2003

Ca´Belvedere di Monte

Chert

Poggiolo (Italy)

Shen and Chen 2000

Lower Pleistocene

Xiaochangliang

Chert

Domínguez-Rodrigo et al. 2001

Lower Pleistocene

Peninj (Tanzania)

Basalt- residue analysis

Vergès 2003; Sahnouni et al

Aïn Hanech and El-

Chert, limestone

2013

Kherba (Algeria)

Lemorini et al. 2014

Lower Pleistocene

Kanjera South (Kenia)

Quartz, quartzite

Mosquera et al. 2016

Lower Pleistocene

La Boella (Spain)

Chert

Keeley 1980, 1993

Middle Pleistocene

Swanscombe Lower

Flint

Loam, Clacton Golf Course, Hoxne (UK)

Beyries 1998; Claud et al. 2009;

Middle Pleistocene

Rots 2013, 2015

Van Gijn 1988; Rots, 2015

Biache-St-Vaast

Flint

(France)

Middle Pleistocene

Maastricht-Belvédère

Flint

(the Netherlands) Mitchell 1998

Middle Pleistocene

Boxgrove (UK)

Flint

Márquez 1998; Márquez et al.

Middle Pleistocene

Gran Dolina-TD10,

Chert, quartzite

2001; Ollé, 2003 Ollé 2003

Galería Middle Pleistocene

Áridos (Spain) and Riparo Esterno Grotta Paglicci (Italy)

37

Chert, quartzite

Lemorini et al. 2006, 2015

Middle Pleistocene

Quesem cave (Israel)

Flint

Moncel et al. 2009; Hardy and

Middle Pleistocene

Payre (France)

Flint, quartzite

Hardy et al. 2018

Middle Pleistocene

La Noire (France)

Chert

Donahue and Evans 2012

Middle Pleistocene

Linford Quarry (UK)

Flint

Clemente et al. 2014

Middle Pleistocene

Moncel 2011; Pedergnana et al., 2018

San Quirce del Río

Quartzite

Pisuerga (Spain)

Venditti 2014

Middle Pleistocene

Coudoulous (France)

Quartz

Aureli et al. 2015

Middle Pleistocene

Ficoncella (Italy)

Flint, limestone

Rots et al. 2015

Middle Pleistocene

Localities 12 and 13,

Flint

Shöningen (Germany)

Hortelano-Piqueras 2016

Middle Pleistocene

Bolomor (Spain)

Limestone, flint

Lazúen 2012

Late Middle- Upper

Cova Eirós, Cueva

Flint, quartz, quartzite,

Pleistocene

Morín, El Castillo, La

and silicified sandstone

Verde and Lezetxiki (Spain Lazúen et al. 2011

Upper Pleistocene

Cueva Eiròs (Spain)

Quartz, quartzite

Martínez et al. 2003

Upper Pleistocene

Abric Romaní (Spain)

Chert

38

Table 2: The lithic artifacts from Gran Dolina - Lower TD10.1 that were subjected to use-wear analysis, sorted into different technological categories.

Technological category

Number of pieces

%

Unretouched pieces

19

37.2%

Retouched pieces

30

58.8%

Large tools

2

3.9%

TOT

51

100%

39

Table 3: Presence/absence of wear on the analyzed artifacts, which are sorted into technological categories. Percentages are calculated considering the entire analyzed sample (n = 51).

Functional results on different technological categories Technological

Use-wear

%

category

Wear non-

%

related to

Fresh

%

Tot.

1

2%

19

surfaces

use Unretouched pieces

12

23,5%

6

11.8 %

Retouched pieces

23

45%

5

9.8%

2

3.9%

30

Large tools

1

2%

1

2%

-

-

2

Total

36

70.5%

12

23.6

3

5.9%

51

%

40

Table 4: Results of the use-wear analysis performed on the GD-TD10.1 quartzite sample. Location of the use-wear observed, type of movement, action and worked material type (when known) are listed. The presence/absence and the degree of PDSM are also specified.

No.

Reference

Retouched

Position used

Angle

Movement

Action

edge

Material

Material type

PDSM

hardness

1

ATA98 TD10 L22 8

scraper

lat. left

60°

longitudin al

-

-

—

low

2

ATA99 TD10 I11 107

denticulate

lateral left

60°

t ransversal

—

—

—

absent

3

ATA99 TD10 I15 92

denticulate

lateral left

55°

lo ngitudinal

sawing

hard

hafting traces

low-absent?

4

ATA00 TD10 J16 183

no

lateral left

45°

longitudin al

—

soft

animal matter

absent

5

ATA00 TD10 N13 71

scraper

lateral left

65°

transv ersal

scraping

very hard

bone

absent

6

ATA00 TD10 N15 121

denticulate

lateral left

70°

t ransversal

scraping

hard

wood

absent

7

ATA00 TD10 N13 46

denticulate

lateral left

60°

tr ansversal

scraping

hard

wood

absent

8

ATA 00 TD10 N20 66

scraper

lateral left

60°

trans versal

scraping

soft

skin

low

Hafting traces 9

ATA01 TD10 N12 251

scraper

lateral left

60°< α<50°

transversal

—

—

—

absent

10

ATA01 TD10 N14 320

cleaver

lateral right;

90°< α<80°

longitudinal

sawing

hard

wood/bone

absent

distal

60°< α<50°

transversal

chopping

11

ATA01 TD10 L14 60

denticulate

lateral right

60°

transversal

whittling

hard

wood

absent

12

ATA01 TD10 N16 190

no

lateral right

45°

longitud inal

—

—

—

low

13

ATA01 TD10 K21 144

scraper

lateral left

65°

tran sversal

—

—

—

absent

14

ATA02 TD10 O20 248

denticulate

lateral right

65°

—

—-

—

—

high

15

ATA02 TD10 L13 77

denticulate

lateral left

60°

t ransversal

scraping

soft

skin

medium

16

ATA02 TD10 L16 55

scraper

distal

55°

longitudina l

sawing

hard

wood

absent

17

ATA02 TD10 M22 520

no

distal

35°< α<40°

longitudinal

butchery

soft

meat, skin

absent

18

ATA02 TD10 N22 20

no

lateral left

55°

longitudin al

butchery

soft

tendons

absent

19

ATA02 TD10 O21 279

scraper

distal

60°

longitudin al

—

—

—

absent

41

20

ATA03 TD10 J10 63

denticulate

lateral left

65°

t ransversal

scraping

very hard

bone

absent

21

ATA03 TD10 N22 42

no

lateral left

60°

longitudin al

cutting

soft

meat

absent

22

ATA04 TD10 L22 738

no

lateral left,

55°, 55°

transversal

whittling

40°

longitudinal

sawing

very hard

bone

absen t

distal 23

scraper

lateral left

very h ard

bone

low

ATA04-TD10-K21-132 hafting traces 24

ATA04 TD10 K22 206

scraper

lateral left

55°

tran sversal

scraping

very hard

bone

low

25

ATA04 TD10 L22 151

denticulate

lateral left

65°

longitudinal

sawing

hard

wood

low

26

ATA04 TD10 L21 235

denticulate

lateral left

65°

transversal

scraping

soft

greasy matter,

absent

meat 27

ATA04 TD10 L22 152

no

lateral right

50°

longitud inal

—

hard

—

absent

28

ATA04 TD10 N21 566

no

lateral left

45°

transvers al

—

—

—

absent

29

ATA04 TD10 M20 548

scraper

lateral left

50°

long itudinal

cutting

soft

meat

low

30

ATA04 TD10 N18 4

no

lateral right

—

rotational

boring

hard

—

absent

denticulate

lateral right

70°, 80°

31

rotational

boring

hard

—

low

ATA04 TD10 K21 68 lateral left 32

ATA05 TD10 N20 97

no

lateral left

60°

transversa l

whittling

—

—

very low

33

ATA05 TD10 L21 105

no

lateral right

45°

longitud inal

sawing

very hard

bone

absent

34

ATA05 TD10 M21 1158

scraper

lateral left

50°

lon gitudinal

cutting/sawing

—

—

absent

35

ATA05 TD10 M21 273

denticulate

lateral right

65°

transversal

scraping

hard

wood

absent

36

ATA05 TD10 L22 323

no

lateral right

45°

transver sal

scraping

hard

wood

absent

42

Table 5: Combination of the presence/absence of use-wear and postdepositional surface modifications on the analyzed sample; and degree of postdepositional modifications on the analyzed sample and number of cases where they hindered or allowed the identification of use-wear. Percentage values are based on the total number of analyzed artifacts (n = 51).

Combination of use-wear and PDSM Use-wear, no PDSM

24

47.1%

Use-wear + PDSM

12

23.5%

PDSM, no use-wear

12

23.5%

Fresh

3

5.9%

Total

51

100%

Postdepositional modifications Degree

Number

Hinder

Allow

Very low

2

1

1

Low

13

4

9

Medium

4

3

1

High

5

4

1

Total

24 (47.1%)

12 (23.5%)

12 (23.5%)

43

Figure captions:

Figure 1: Comparison of two surfaces bearing use-wear on two experimental quartzite flakes imaged with OM (a, c) and SEM (b, d).Polish on quartzite, although well-developed, is hard to observe with OM due to poor depth of field and high reflectivity of the samples (a, c). SEM overcomes these two obstacles (b, d). Original magnifications: a) 200x; b) 500x; c, d) 50x. Figure 2: a) Geographical location of the Gran Dolina site in the northern part of the Iberian Peninsula and in the Trinchera del Ferrocarril complex (Sierra de Atapuerca, Burgos); b) The sequence of the site exposed during the 2

excavation of the 9 m test-pit started in 1993 (photo by IPHES-Atapuerca Research Team); c) Stratigraphic sequence of the site (Rodríguez et al., 2011). The Matuyama-Brunhes boundary is identified in TD7; d) Location of the TD10 unit in the sequence of the Gran Dolina site and the main dates obtained with different methods (modified after Rodríguez-Hidalgo et al., 2017).

Figure 3:

Examples of postdepositional surface modifications on archaeological samples. Different types of

striations: a) Irregular furrow; b) Partial Hertzian cones; c) Furrow and partial Hertzian cones; d) Furrows and irregular scratches; e) Furrows and scratches; f, g) Furrows and grooves h) Grooves; i) Furrows. l – q) Extremely polished surfaces. Original magnifications range between 500× and 3000×.

Figure 4: a) ATA99-TD10-I11-107: lateral denticulate on a broken quartzite flake. The edge was retouched after the flake broke into two pieces; ATA03-TD10-N22-571: distal part of the flake that joins with I11-107. These two implements are part of the biggest refit found in the assemblage (REM1_3); b – e) SEM micrographs showing evidence of scars: b, e) orig. mag., 200×; c) Incipient fractures due to retouching (orig. mag., 65×); d) A slightly rounded edge (orig. mag., 400×).

Figure 5: Microwear related to longitudinal actions on archaeological implements. All linear features are parallel to the used edges. a) Relatively short furrows, orig. mag., 1500×; b) Several furrows having a starting point on a prominent crest, orig. mag., 300×; c) Numerous furrows on a flat crystal, orig. mag., 500×; d) A bunch of furrows on a linear depression of a quartz crystal, orig. mag., 1000x; e) Long furrows, oblique to the edge; the large flat and regular area of this crystal allowed the formation of particularly large furrows, orig. mag., 250×; f) Partial Hertzian cones and a groove (the linear, deep line), orig. mag., 3000×.

44

Figure 6: Microwear related to transversal actions on archaeological implements. All linear features are perpendicular to the used edges. Original magnifications: a) 1500×; b – d) 2600×; e) 1300×; f) 2300×.

Figure 7: The main activities performed identified on 26 artifacts (two of them have two used edges). Scraping, sawing and cutting are the main actions identified. Whittling, boring and chopping are also present.

Figure 8: a) ATA04-TD10-N18-4: use-wear related to boring actions on hard materials located at the convergence of the proximal and distal edges. Macroscars (b - d, f), microscars (e) and striations (g). Original magnifications: b, f) 30×; c) 70×; d) 130×; e) 300×; g) 2000×.

Figure 9: a) ATA04 TD10 K21 68: use-wear related to a boring action (rotational movement). Large macroscars on the tip and on the lateral edges (b - e). Original magnifications: b, e) 20×; c) 50×; d) 400×.

Figure 10: ATA01-TD10-N14-320. Cleaver-like artifact with a lateral abrupt retouched edge. The apical part shows macrodetachments related to chopping activities. An invading scar, possibly formed during the chopping activity, is visible on the ventral side of the artifact. The close-up photograph in the upper right corner shows some impact points.

Figure 11: The worked materials identified on 26 artifacts (28 used edges). Wood and bone predominate, while general categories refer to soft animal matter (meat and skin). Hard material is used for wood/bone (when a clear differentiation was not possible).

Figure 12: Experimentally produced use-wear traces: a) Polish and furrows parallel to the edges after 30’ of sawing a wood branch; b) Very smooth polished surface after 45’ of sawing bone; c) Polish on a tool used to remove the skin of an animal for 30’; d) Edge fractures and light polish on the higher topographical parts of a tool used to remove muscular tissue from a bone for 15’; e, f) Rough polishes formed after scraping fresh hide for 15’. Original magnifications and scale bars: a, b) 1000x, 50 µm; c, d, e) 500x, 100 µm; f) 250x, 200 µm.

Figure 13: Use-wear traces on archaeological material derived from woodworking. a) Extensively polished area, orig. mag., 500×; b, d) Small polished areas on high microtopographical relief, orig. mag., 1000× and 1500×, respectively; c) Smooth polished area and furrows on a flat crystal (indicated by arrows), orig. mag., 1500×; f) Scars on the edge, orig. mag., 500×. 45

Figure 14: Use-wear traces on archaeological material related to the processing of bone. a) Microrounding of the very rim, localized polish on the highest part of a quartz crystal and furrows perpendicular to the edge (circle); b) Microrounding of the edge of a quartz crystal and microscars on the very rim; c) Localized smooth polished area on a prominent spot; d) Continuous scarring of the edge; e) Smooth polish and rounding; f) Smooth polished areas on the highest part of a quartz crystal.

Figure 15: Use-wear traces on archaeological material due to butchering activity. a, b) Lines of rough polish, distributed obliquely to the edge; c) Line of rough polish, distributed obliquely to the edge and microrounding of a single quartz grain; d) Polished area on a prominent, angular zone; c) Line of polish, oriented obliquely to the edge 500×; f) Short striations parallel to the edge located on a flat crystal and polish on the edge of the same crystal, 1000×. In panels a and b, the angle between the lines of polish and the edge is measured (red lines).

Figure 16: Use-wear traces on archaeological material connected to hide scraping. a) Continuous edge rounding, orig. mag., 500×; b) Edge rounding, microscars and microstriations, perpendicular to the edge, 1000×; c) Continuous edge rounding, orig. mag., 100×; d) Large scar and small polished area, orig. mag., 500×; e) Detailed image of the rough texture of a polished area, orig. mag., 1000×; f) Polish on the rim and tiny striations (indicated by arrows), perpendicular to the edge, orig. mag., 500×.

Figure 17: ATA99-TD10-I15-92 (e): Evidence of hafting on a fine-grained quartzite lateral denticulate. Use-wear associated with a longitudinal action (sawing) performed on a hard material was recorded on the distal part. Striations are parallel to the lateral edges of the trihedral (a, b), whereas abrasion signs (c) are located on the proximal edge. Large and extremely marked striations were found on the proximal part of the tool and only on the most prominent portions of the ventral face (d). Dots indicate areas exhibiting use-wear, whereas crosses illustrate where the traces associated with the handle were recorded. Original magnifications: a) 750×; b) 2000×; c) 200×; d) 1000×.

Figure 18: Experimental hafting traces on quartzite (ca. 60 minutes of use and an average of 6,000 strokes per tool). Light polish on the highest topographical parts (a), straight fractures (b), general edge crushing (c), scars (d) and well-developed polished areas (e), were observed on the edges which were in contact with the haft. Original magnifications: a, e) 1000x; b) 135x; c) 80x; d) 500x; f) 1500x.

46

Figure 19: Hafting traces on the distal part of a side-scraper (ATA00-TD10-N20-66) (e): Long furrow on a flat quartz crystal (a); crushing on a microridge of a quartz crystal (b); Microabrasion and crushing of ridges found on the highest topographical areas (c, d). Note the removals aimed at thinning the basal part of the artifact (e). Dots indicate areas exhibiting use-wear, whereas crosses illustrate where the traces associated with the handle were recorded. Original magnifications: a) 40x; b, c) 1000x; d) 300x. Figure 20: Hafting traces on a sidescraper (ATA04-TD10-K21-132) (e): Smooth polish on the very rim (a); Large worn-out surfaces (bright spots under an optical microscope) (b, c); Large quadrangular scar (d). Dots indicate areas exhibiting use-wear, whereas crosses illustrate where the traces associated with the handle were recorded. Original magnifications: a, d) 100x; b, c) 250x; d) 300x.

Figure 21: a) Average values of angle amplitude of the used edges; b) Frontal delineation of the used edge portions; c) Sagittal delineation of the used edge portions.

Figure 22: The actions performed and the worked materials in the analyzed sample. Longitudinal and transversal actions were performed on both hard and soft materials, while boring and chopping actions were found to be only related to hardmaterials (wood or bone).

Figure 23: A) Artifacts composing the REM1_3 refit and their original locations within the excavation grid. B) Structural categories (SLA) of the pieces composing the REM1_3 refit: green color represents the knapping area (T1) and the subsequent movement of the core and the retouched flake towards the southwestern part of the cave.

47

The Authors have no conflict of interest.