Percorrer por autor "Ortiz, Joseph D."
A mostrar 1 - 2 de 2
Resultados por página
Opções de ordenação
- Examining the distribution of middle paleolithic nubian cores relative to chert quality in southern (Nejd, Dhofar) and south‐central (Duqm, Al Wusta) OmanPublication . Eren, Metin I.; Bebber, Michelle R.; Singer, David; Pearson, Chloe; Ortiz, Joseph D.; Buchanan, Briggs; Beshkani, Amir; Chlachula, Dominik; Dellmour, Rudolf; Garba, Roman; Marks, Anthony E.; Usyk, Vitaly; Rose, Jeffrey IanLithic raw material properties are often invoked to explain the presence, absence, form, or ontogeny of Paleolithic stone tools. Here, we explore whether the frequency of the Middle Paleolithic Nubian core form and core-reduction systems co-varies with toolstone quality in two neighboring regions in Oman: the southern region of Nejd, Dhofar, and the south-central region of Duqm, Al Wusta. Specifically, we predicted that if raw material differences were influencing the distribution of Nubian cores, the chert would be of higher quality in the southern region, where Nubian cores were frequent, and of lower quality in the south-central region, where they were scarce. We tested this prediction by collecting 124 chert samples from 22 outcrops and then quantitatively assessed two geochemical variables that are widely thought to influence knapping: impurity amount and silica content. We also examined the mineralogical composition, and the crystallite size and lattice strain for quartz (crystalline alpha-SiO2) of representative chert samples. Our results suggest that the cherts in the two regions are similar, which is not consistent with the hypothesis that lithic raw material quality contributed to Nubian core spatial distribution in Oman. We discuss potential alternative hypotheses to explain Nubian core geographic patterning, and provisionally suggest that the scarcity of Nubian cores in south-central Oman may be due to a concomitant scarcity of toolmakers, given a lack of water availability.
- What can lithics tell us about hominin technology's ‘primordial soup’? an origin of stone knapping via the emulation of mother naturePublication . Eren, Metin I.; Lycett, Stephen J.; Bebber, Michelle R.; Key, Alastair; Buchanan, Briggs; Finestone, Emma; Benson, Joseph; Gürbüz, Rebecca Biermann; Cebeiro, Adela; Garba, Roman; Grunow, Anne; Lovejoy, C. Owen; MacDonald, Danielle; Maletic, Erica; Miller, G. Logan; Ortiz, Joseph D.; Paige, Jonathan; Pargeter, Justin; Proffitt, Tomos; Raghanti, Mary Ann; Riley, Teal; Rose, Jeffrey Ian; Singer, David M.; Walker, Robert S.The use of stone hammers to produce sharp stone flakes—knapping—is thought to represent a significant stage in hominin technological evolution because it facilitated the exploitation of novel resources, including meat obtained from medium-to-large-sized vertebrates. The invention of knapping may have occurred via an additive (i.e., cumulative) process that combined several innovative stages. Here, we propose that one of these stages was the hominin use of ‘naturaliths,’ which we define as naturally produced sharp stone fragments that could be used as cutting tools. Based on a review of the literature and our own research, we first suggest that the ‘typical’ view, namely that sharp-edged stones are seldom produced by nonprimate processes, is likely incorrect. Instead, naturaliths can be, and are being, endlessly produced in a wide range of settings and thus may occur on the landscape in far greater numbers than archaeologists currently understand or acknowledge. We then explore the potential role this ‘naturalith prevalence’ may have played in the origin of hominin stone knapping. Our hypothesis suggests that the origin of knapping was not a ‘Eureka!’ moment whereby hominins first made a sharp flake by intention or by accident and then sought something to cut, but instead was an emulative process by hominins aiming to reproduce the sharp tools furnished by mother nature and already in demand. We conclude with a discussion of several corollaries our proposal prompts, and several avenues of future research that can support or question our proposal.