| (A) Class, Fragment, Type |
During the experimental knapping, it was determined that two categories were needed to record what was known about the debitage, and how they would be perceived without this knowledge. Therefore two entries were recorded in the database – the actual class/fragment/type termed the (A) Class/Fragment/Type, and the perceived class/fragment/type termed the (P) Class/Fragment/Type; the actual and perceived attributes could then be compared |
| Bipolar core |
A bipolar core is a core derived from knapping with a bipolar technique, which involves an impactor striking the top of core which rests on an anvil, with flakes being initiated from both ends of the core. The force is therefore considered as compressive and the flake is initiated by wedging (Cotterell and Kamminga 1987, 685). A bipolar core generally contains evidence of impact marks from the impactor and the anvil |
| Bipolar flake |
A bipolar flake is the result of a bipolar knapping technique. During the experimental knapping the quartz bipolar flakes were generally characterised by a rounded platform with the steep side on the ventral face of the flake, with the platform angle reversed compared with direct percussion platforms. The bipolar platforms can also fracture in a triangular fashion, leading to triangular-shaped platform fragments. The majority of the experimental bipolar flakes had feather terminations |
| Blade |
A blade is often defined as a flake with a length/width ratio of 2:1 or greater (e.g. Inizan et al. 1999, 130; for an argument against this metrical definition see Sørensen 2006). With very few of the experimental flakes having length/width ratio of 2:1 or greater, the category of blade was excluded in the present analysis |
| Collapsed platform |
A collapsed platform is defined as a platform which collapsed at the point of impact; a platform fragment is when the platform has fractured away from the point of impact |
| Conical piece |
Conical pieces were noted by Knutsson as occurring through different knapping techniques, and described as “hav[ing] one point of impact formed by several converging, negative and positive fracture facets. The point of impact may be crushed. Opposite this point of impact is a flat surface created by an already existing fracture in the piece of raw material or natural plane. These pieces are produced when a detaching blow crushes the 'flake' and at a point where the fracture front meets a flat fracture face that runs perpendicular to the line of the detaching blow” (Knutsson 1988a, 90-1). During the present experimental knapping experiments conical pieces only occurred during bipolar knapping where the top or bottom of a bipolar core has fractured perpendicular to the impact point, and have been defined as bipolar core fragments |
| Core |
A core is a piece of lithic raw material which is struck in order to remove flakes |
| Cortex |
While quartz does not form cortex in the same manner as flint, the term is used here as a shorthand for the exterior surface which become altered due to weathering, natural abrading, and so forth. |
| Cortical core/debitage/flake |
A piece with at least 1% of exterior surface covered with cortex |
| Debitage |
Debitage refers to all “removals resulting from the knapping of a core, i.e. to all flakes in the broader sense of the term: those resulting from preparation, potential tool blanks, and all waste products” (Inizan et al. 1999, 138). herefore debitage also includes tool types formed on flakes or debris. |
| Debris |
“[S]hapeless fragments whose mode of fracture cannot be identified, and which cannot be assigned to any category of objects” (Inizan et al. 1999, 138). See also ‘Sliver’ |
| Diagnostic type |
The term diagnostic type is used here to distinguish between retouched and non-retouched artefacts, and includes ‘types’ such as scrapers, projectiles and so forth which are generally seen as ‘tool types’ and forming a typology, as well as retouched flakes/blades/cores |
| Direct percussion |
Direct percussion is a technique whereby a core is struck at an angle of less than 90º, which removes debitage from the core. This distinguishes itself from bipolar percussion where the striking angle is around 90º. The cores and debitage resulting from direct percussion core are also called a platform cores and debitage |
| Dual, alternate core |
A direct percussion/platform core with two striking platforms on alternate faces of the core |
| Dual, opposed core |
A direct percussion/platform core with two striking platforms on opposite ends of the core |
| Indeterminate piece |
An indeterminate piece is used here to categorise a piece that cannot definitively described as an artefact but cannot be deemed to be natural. Another category of ‘possible’ is used which is more likely to be an artefact than an indeterminate piece, but again cannot be definitively assigned as such |
| Irregular flake |
Flakes are divided into regular and irregular flakes. A regular flake has at least 10mm of an acute straight edge while irregular flakes do not |
| Fissures |
Small fracture lines |
| Flake |
A flake is a removal from a core through knapping with characteristic attributes, which can be used as a tool in the form it was knapped or may be retouched or modified before use |
| Method |
“[A]ny carefully thought out sequence of interrelated actions, each of which is carried out according to one or more techniques” during knapping (Inizan et al. 1999, 30). |
| Modified |
This term indicates artefacts that have been modified by retouch or use wear, therefore modified pieces would be included as diagnostic types |
| Multiplatform core |
A direct percussion/platform core with more than two striking platforms |
| Natural piece |
A natural piece is used here to categorise material that has noted been knapped or does not show evidence of use or modification |
| Platform |
Shorthand for striking platform: the area on a flake which received the strike during knapping |
| Platform fragment |
See collapsed platform |
| Platform core/debitage |
Platform core/debitage is a shorthand phrase for direct percussion core/debitage |
| (P) Class, Fragment, Type |
See above, (A) Class, Fragment, Type |
| Possible artefact |
See Indeterminate piece |
| Radially split piece |
These are pieces that are often shaped like a segment of an orange, and in quartz knapping can result from both bipolar and direct percussion (e.g. Knutsson 1988a) |
| Regular flake |
See Irregular flake |
| Retouch/wear mark |
The term retouch/wear mark is used in order to include both possible types of modification in the identification without differentiating them. |
| Single platform core |
A direct percussion/platform core with one striking platform |
| Siret break |
A siret break occurs at the point of impact, creating a longitudinal fracture |
| Sliver |
A sliver is used to sub-divide debris by size – slivers are debris that are <3mm thick |
| Sequential break/fragment |
During the experimental knapping it was noted that the quartz often fractured sequentially (see Figure 6‑7), occurring when a fragment was removed from either the dorsal or ventral face of the debitage. This sequential fracture sometimes occurred when a fracture had been initiated from a previous strike and subsequently the second strike removed the main flake and the previous incipient flake. Also, the use of the bipolar technique in a sense produces sequential fragments because a single strike will result in a number of flakes. The category of sequential was used to classify both a fragment and a break. These sequential flakes were difficult to identify correctly, and the majority became categorised as debris, in the (P) Class categories (see above).These sequential breaks and fragments were consequently difficult to identify consistently in the archaeological assemblages, and therefore were excluded as categories |
| Support – elastic |
Elastic support used during knapping could be the knapper’s hand or leg, or could be soft material used as an anvil such as wood or leather etc. |
| Support – inelastic |
Inelastic support used during knapping such as a hard anvil |
| Technical procedures |
“[S]hort systematic sequences of actions involved in any kind of preparation, such as: the abrasion of an overhang [etc]” (Inizan et al. 1999, 30). |
| Technique |
“Physical actions – a deft flip of the hand, the use of a hard or soft hammer, the interposition of a punch – are all examples of techniques” (Inizan et al. 1999, 30). The techniques used in the experimental knapping were bipolar and soft and hard hammer direct percussion |