A Comparison of Châtelperronian and Protoaurignacian Core Technology Using Data Derived from 3D Models

Q1 Social Sciences Journal of Computer Applications in Archaeology Pub Date : 2019-03-20 DOI:10.5334/JCAA.17
Samantha T Porter, Morgan Roussel, M. Soressi
{"title":"A Comparison of Châtelperronian and Protoaurignacian Core Technology Using Data Derived from 3D Models","authors":"Samantha T Porter, Morgan Roussel, M. Soressi","doi":"10.5334/JCAA.17","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study uses data extracted from 3D models to compare blade cores from the Châtelperronian and Protoaurignacian stone tool industries. These technocomplexes are at the center of the debate surrounding the interactions between Neanderthals and anatomically modern humans approximately 45 to 40,000 years ago. We created 3D models of lithic cores from the sites of Roc de Combe and Les Cottes using a standardized photogrammetry protocol. We then used data derived from these 3D models to make quantitative comparisons of artifact attributes that have previously been argued to distinguish the two stone tool industries in question. These attributes include the angle between the platform and flaking surfaces, the shape of core cross sections, and the angle between core axes. The conception of this study was not to privilege the use of new technological and statistical approaches over more traditional or qualitative forms of lithic analysis. Rather, our aim was to experiment with using digital tool to develop nuanced, reproducible ways to describe variability in lithic artifacts. Our results support the hypothesis that there is a difference in the angle between core surfaces between these two industries. Our analysis also indicates a difference in the angle between core axes, although we are more cautious in interpreting these results. An elliptical Fourier analysis of core cross section shape was inconclusive. We discuss what archaeological and methodological factors may have contributed to our results, and the roles of both qualitative and quantitative observations in archaeological research. 3D artifact models generated for this study are included as supplemental data and are available for use by other researchers.","PeriodicalId":32632,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Computer Applications in Archaeology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Computer Applications in Archaeology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/JCAA.17","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

Abstract

This study uses data extracted from 3D models to compare blade cores from the Châtelperronian and Protoaurignacian stone tool industries. These technocomplexes are at the center of the debate surrounding the interactions between Neanderthals and anatomically modern humans approximately 45 to 40,000 years ago. We created 3D models of lithic cores from the sites of Roc de Combe and Les Cottes using a standardized photogrammetry protocol. We then used data derived from these 3D models to make quantitative comparisons of artifact attributes that have previously been argued to distinguish the two stone tool industries in question. These attributes include the angle between the platform and flaking surfaces, the shape of core cross sections, and the angle between core axes. The conception of this study was not to privilege the use of new technological and statistical approaches over more traditional or qualitative forms of lithic analysis. Rather, our aim was to experiment with using digital tool to develop nuanced, reproducible ways to describe variability in lithic artifacts. Our results support the hypothesis that there is a difference in the angle between core surfaces between these two industries. Our analysis also indicates a difference in the angle between core axes, although we are more cautious in interpreting these results. An elliptical Fourier analysis of core cross section shape was inconclusive. We discuss what archaeological and methodological factors may have contributed to our results, and the roles of both qualitative and quantitative observations in archaeological research. 3D artifact models generated for this study are included as supplemental data and are available for use by other researchers.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
使用3D模型数据比较Châtelperronian和Protauriganian核心技术
这项研究使用从3D模型中提取的数据来比较Châtelperronian和Protauriganian石器行业的刀片芯。这些技术复合体是围绕大约45至40000年前尼安德特人和解剖学上的现代人类之间相互作用的争论的中心。我们使用标准化摄影测量协议创建了Roc de Combe和Les Cottes遗址的石器时代岩芯的3D模型。然后,我们使用从这些3D模型中获得的数据对人工制品属性进行定量比较,这些属性以前被认为是区分这两个有问题的石器行业的依据。这些属性包括平台和剥落表面之间的角度、芯横截面的形状以及芯轴之间的角度。这项研究的概念并不是要优先使用新的技术和统计方法,而不是更传统或定性的石器分析形式。相反,我们的目标是尝试使用数字工具来开发细致入微、可重复的方法来描述石器时代文物的可变性。我们的研究结果支持这样一种假设,即这两个行业的核心表面之间的角度存在差异。我们的分析还表明,核心轴之间的角度存在差异,尽管我们在解释这些结果时更加谨慎。芯横截面形状的椭圆傅立叶分析没有结论。我们讨论了哪些考古和方法因素可能对我们的结果有贡献,以及定性和定量观察在考古研究中的作用。为这项研究生成的3D伪影模型作为补充数据,可供其他研究人员使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
审稿时长
19 weeks
期刊最新文献
Open-Access Archaeological Predictive Modeling Using Zonal Statistics: A Case Study from Zanzibar, Tanzania Architecture Reality and Perception: The Multicultural Nature of Egyptian Domestic Architecture in the Roman Period Geographic Information Systems in Archaeology: A Systematic Review Automatic Normalization of Temporal Expressions Executable Map Paper (EMaP) for Archaeological LiDAR
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1