1

Stone Tool Technologies

Introduction:

The appearance of stone tool technology in course of hominid evolution marks a radical
behavioral shift from the rest of the animal world. These stone tools constitute the first
definitive evidence in the prehistoric record of a simple cultural tradition (i.e., one based
upon learning). Although other animals (such as the Egyptian vulture, the California sea
otter, and C.Darwin’s Galapagos finch) may use simple unmodified tools, or even
manufacture and use simple tools (as in the termiting and nut-cracking behavior of wild
chimpanzees), a fundamental aspect of human adaptation is a strong dependency upon
culture and technology for survival and adaptation. Archaeological evidence shows a
geometric increase in the sophistication and complexity of hominid stone technology over
time since its earliest beginnings at 3–2Ma.

Stone is the principal material found in nature that is both very hard and able to produce
sharp working edges when fractured. A wide range of tasks can be executed with even a
simple stone technology, including animal butchery (hide slitting, disarticulation, meat
cutting, bone breaking), woodworking (chopping, scraping, sawing), hide scraping, plant
cutting, and bone and antler working. Although other perishable materials, such as wood,
bone, horn, and shell, were probably used early in the evolution of hominid technology,
tools made of stone are relatively indestructible and so provide the longest and most
detailed record of prehistoric tool manufacture. Stone tools supplemented biology as a
means of adapting to the environment during the course of human evolution, and the study
of their manufacture and potential uses reveals important information about the evolution
of human culture.

Earliest Stone Tools:

The oldest-known archaeological sites bearing unambiguous flaked-stone artifacts

(Oldowan or Omo industry) include those found in Member F from the Omo Valley
(Ethiopia), dated to ca. 2.4Ma, the archaeological sites from the Gona region of Hadar
(Ethiopia), at 2.5–2.6Ma, the sites at Lokalalei (Kenya) at 2.34Ma and possibly Senga-5
(Zaire), perhaps between 2.3 and 2Ma. Other sites believed to be at least 1.5 Mya include
those in Member E at Omo; Koobi Fora (Kenya) in and above the KBS Tuff; Olduvai
Gorge (Tanzania) Beds I and II; and Peninj, west of Lake Natron (Tanzania). The stone
artifacts from the South African caves of Swartkrans and Sterkfontein (Member 5) may be
within this time range as well.

Raw Materials for Stone Tools:

The typical types of rock from which flaked-stone artifacts are produced are relatively fine
grained and hard and tend to fracture easily in any direction (i.e., they are isotropic).
Commonly used rock types are flint or chert, quartzite, quartz, and various volcanic rocks,
including obsidian (volcanic glass). Some materials, such as many flints or cherts, can be
 2

more easily worked after heat treatment (a controlled heating that alters crystal structure),
a practice that may have begun in Late Paleolithic times.

The different types of raw materials vary widely in their overall geographic distributions
and in the size, shape, quantity, and quality of material found at any one location. They
may be found in primary geological context (at their site of origin or formation), such as a
lava flow, quartz vein, quartzite layer, or flint nodule seam, or they may be in secondary
(redeposited) context, such as cobbles in river gravels or rocks forming the pavement of
desert surfaces.

Both the cultural rules regarding artifact design and the intended use of a tool influence
what types of tools are found in the prehistoric record. Cultural norms and functional
requirements for tools aside, the size, shape, quality, and flaking characteristics of the stone
material also can strongly affect what sort of artifact may be made. More sophisticated,
delicately flaked artifacts can generally be made in fine-grained materials like high-quality
cherts and flints than are usually made in coarse-grained rocks. The relative abundance or
scarcity of stone suitable for flaking affects the quantities and sizes of artifacts left behind
at archaeological sites, so that artifacts made in rock available locally often tend to be larger
and to be found in greater numbers than artifacts made from stone transported over greater
distances.

In general, there is increasing selectivity in use of stone materials over time in the
Paleolithic. Later Stone Age peoples tended to concentrate more on finer-grained, higher
quality rock sources, often quite localized in distribution and transported some distance to
the archaeological site, than did hominids in the earlier phases of the Paleolithic, who
appear to have exploited available rock sources in a more opportunistic fashion.

Fracture mechanics of Stone:

The type of fracture or mechanical failure of rocks observed in stone-tool manufacture is

often called conchoidal fracture, named after the shell—or conchlike ripples or swirls
generally evident in the artifacts manufactured in finer-grained materials. In stone-tool
manufacture, a force is applied to the stone sufficient to break it in a controlled fashion.
The stone usually fractures in alignment with its crystalline structure; thus, noncrystalline
or finer-grained materials, especially isotropic materials with no preferential cleavage
planes (such as obsidian or flint), tend to produce a smoother, more predictable fracture.

The stone is deliberately fractured (or flaked) either through a sharp, percussive blow
(direct or indirect percussion flaking) or through the application of a compressive force
(pressure flaking). The parent piece of rock is the core, and the spalls so removed are flakes.

The key to producing fracture in stone by flaking is to find core edges with acute angles
(less than 90°). Thus, in manufacturing tools from rounded pieces of rock, such as stream
cobbles, those with pronounced overhangs or with flattened edges tend to be easier to flake
than more spherical pieces. When a hammer strikes the core obliquely and with sufficient
 3

force near one of these edges, a flake is detached, producing an associated scar (flake scar)
on the core (see Figure I).

Figure I: Core and Flake (modified from Whittaker, 1994) .

Characteristics of flakes include, on the ventral, or release, surface (the face detached from
the inside of the core), a striking platform (butt) at the top of the flake with a definite point
of percussion, a bulb of percussion, a bulbar scar (éraillure), ripples or waves, and fissures;
and on the dorsal, or outer, surface of the flake (representing the surface of the core), a
cortex (weathered surface of the core) and/or scars of previous flakes removed from the
core. Cores and retouched pieces exhibit the negative features of flake release, particularly
a negative (concave) bulb of percussion and the conchoidal ripples or waves of percussion
(see figure II).

Although some natural processes (e.g., high-energy fluviatile or glacial forces) can produce
percussion flaking on pieces of stone, they do not exhibit the controlled, patterned removal
of flakes characteristic of even the earliest stone industries. Early hominids clearly had a
sound intuitive sense of geometry when flaking rock and expertly exploited acute angles
on cores.
 4

Figure II: Flake Landmarks (Modified from Whittaker, 1994).

Some Terminological Understanding:

The mechanics of flake formation in stone tool making and use are basically the same and
any differences that occur can be attributed to scale. As much as possible archaeologists
and anthropologists use nonspecific language to describe the phenomenon of flaking, and
here following Cotterell and Kamminga, (1987) some such terms are described, most of
which is indicated in the following figure (Figure III).

Figure III: Flake Terminology (modified from Cotterell and Kamminga, 1987).
 5

A Flake is any fragment detached from a nucleus; it is not limited to the conchoidal variety.
A nucleus or core is any object from which a flake is detached. A nucleus may be a core
from which a primary flake is struck, a stone artifact that is being shaped by retouch, or the
edge of a tool from which a flakelet is detached during use.
An indenter is an object that applies a force to a nucleus, even if the fracture initiates away
from the indenter. In tool making this may be a hammer, punch or pressure-flaking
implement; in tool use it may be the part of the worked material that is applying load to the
tool's edge, or a small hard particle acting between the worked material and the tool surface.
The initiation face is that surface of the nucleus in which the crack originates. The
conventional term for an initiation surface on a core is "striking platform."
The side face of a nucleus is the surface behind which the fracture develops and from which
the dorsal surface of the flake is derived.
The edge angle of the nucleus is that made by the initiation surface and the side face of the
nucleus from which the flake is formed.
The initiation angle of a flake is the angle between its initiation and ventral face. The
initiation angle of the flake scar is the angle between the initiation face and the scar surface.
The direction of the indenter motion is the direction in which the indenter moves during
the flaking event.
The flaking angle is the angle between the direction of the indenter motion and the side
face of the nucleus.
The flaking force is the force applied by the indenter in the process of flake detachment.
The force angle is the angle between the flaking force and the side face of the nucleus. In
general this angle is not the same as the flaking angle. The direction of the flaking force
depends primarily on the stiffness of the developing flake.
The stiffness of a partially formed flake is its resistance to deformation. More precisely, it
is the flaking force required to produce a unit deflection of the indenter. There are two
components: bending stiffness transverse to the flake's length, and compression stiffness
in the direction of the flake's length.

Basic Stone Tool Making Techniques:

The Basic stone tool making techniques can be divided in the following way-
 6

Basic Techniques of
Stone Reduction

Percussion Pressure Grinding

Direct Indirect

Anvil or Block on Block

Technique

Hard hammer or Stone

Hammer Technique

Soft hammer or Cylinder

hammer Technique

Bi-Polar Technique

Brief description of all these technique are given below-

Percussion Technique:

The simplest and most obvious way to remove a flake is by directly striking the stone
with another object. The earliest crude stone tools were made by direct percussion,
but later work can show great refinement in indirect percussion. There are two
major forms, referred to somewhat misleadingly by Knappers or experimental stone
tool makers as “hard hammer” and “soft hammer” percussion. Beside these one of
the earliest form of percussion method used by prehistoric people was Anvil
technique or Block-on-block technique.

In Anvil technique or Block-on-block technique a core is struck against a stationary

anvil to produce flakes. This percussion technique is sometimes used in flaking very large
cores. The features on flakes and cores are similar to hard-hammer percussion (Figure IV).

Figure IV: Anvil or Block-on-block technique (Modified from Whittaker, 1994).

 7

Hard hammer percussion usually refers to the use of a stone hammer to strike the
core In addition; hard hammer percussion most often implies working a simple core
and removing relatively large flakes by striking a flat platform, as in Figure V.

Figure V: Hard hammer percussion with a stone hammer. The knapper uses a precision
grip on the pebble hammer stone because not much force is needed. The blow strikes the
top of the core, and the flake comes off the underlying surface (Modified from Whittaker,
2004).

Soft hammer percussion (Figure VI), on the other hand, often means the use of a hammer
of antler, wood, bone, or other material softer and more resilient than stone. Many modern
knappers now use copper in soft hammer percussion. Such tools are often called batons or
billets. Soft hammers are less effective than hard for removing large flakes from normal
cores, so the use of a soft hammer often implies that bifaces are being worked. In working
a biface, the blows fall on the edges, rather than on the flat platform surfaces of normal
cores. The edges of bifaces in production are generally strengthened by intentionally
dulling them, because a thin, sharp edge will crush under the blow rather than transmitting
the force to a clean flake fracture. The flakes produced in making bifaces have somewhat
different traits from the normal hard hammer core flake and are often referred to as biface
thinning flakes. Some confusion arises because it is possible for a skilled knapper to thin
bifaces and makes the typical flakes using a stone hammer, especially if the hammer stone
is relatively soft. Hammers of all degrees of hardness can be used somewhat
interchangeably, and the difference in the kinds of flakes produced depends in part on how
the hammer is used and what form of artifact is being worked. Nevertheless, it is easier and
more usual to use relatively hard hammers on cores, and relatively soft hammers on bifaces.
Quite often, a large flake struck with a hard hammer is thinned and shaped with a soft
hammer to make a finished bifacial tool, or a preform that can be finished by pressure
flaking as described below.
 8

Figure VI: Soft hammer Percussion using wood or antler (Modified from Whittaker, 1994,
2004).

Bipolar technique simply involves Setting a core on an anvil and hitting the core from
above with a hammer stone. This technique was often used for very small or intractable,
hard-to-flake raw materials. Flakes tend to have thin or punctiform (very small circular to
oval) platforms and very flat release surfaces with small bulbs of percussion. Cores tend to
be barrel shaped in platform and thin, with flakes removed from both ends (Figure VII).

Figure VIII: Bipolar Technique(Modified from Whittaker, 1994)..

 9

Indirect percussion or Punch technique means that the blow is transmitted to the
stone through an intermediate punch, usually made of antler. This is a relatively
uncommon technique, though there are several modern knappers who use different
styles of indirect percussion to thin bifaces. However, because the punch can be small,
and can be placed very precisely, indirect percussion has some advantages over direct
percussion techniques and is also sometimes used for making blades (long, straight
flakes) or for notching projectile points. The disadvantage is that tools must be held
with both hands, making it more difficult to stabilize the piece that is being worked,
and many modern Knappers find it slow and clumsy. Those modern knappers who
are expert at indirect percussion, however, consider it every bit as good as more
common techniques (Figure IX).

Figure IX: Indirect percussion with a large Antler punch (Modified from Whittaker,
2004).

Pressure Flaking:

The final category of knapping techniques is pressure flaking. In pressure flaking, the
force is applied by pressing instead of striking. This allows great precision, but
generally limits the amount of force. Pressure flaking is most often used for the final
work on refined tools like arrow points and for notching and other details that cannot
be done by percussion.

In pressure flaking, the point is held on a pad of some sort in the hand or occasionally
on a bench or table, while the other hand presses the tool against the edge of the stone,
 10

directing the force both inward, to make the flake run across the face being worked,
and downward, which begins the fracture. Pressure flaking can be made more
powerful by adding the pressure of the legs, or the leverage of a longer tool, called an
Ishi stick by many knappers, which is held under the arm. It is also possible to remove
very long flakes (called blades by archaeologists) from a core by pressing with a chest
crutch or other tool that allows the body weight to be brought to bear (Figure X, XI
and XII).

Figure X: Pressure flaking on a bench. Figure XI: Pressure flaking into hand
pad with an Ishi’s stick. punch (Modified from Whittaker, 2004)
 11

Figure XII: Making obsidian Pressure Blade with a Chest crutch punch (Modified from
Whittaker, 2004).

Grinding:

It involves smoothing and shaping a rock (sometimes previously flaked into a rough shape)
by grinding it against another rock. Such forms as axes and adzes were manufactured by
this technique. Sometimes, abrasive sand and water were used in the grinding process. This
technique is often associated with Neolithic farming communities in southwestern Asia,
Europe, and North Africa, but it can be found also among some hunter-gatherer
communities, as in parts of Australia.

Basic Tool Making Technologies:

A number of flaking technologies were used during lower and middle paleolithic
times to make blanks and to shape a core in to a finished tool. Here a chart is given
which shows some basic flaking technologies used during lower and middle
paleolithic.

Basic Tool Making

Technologies

Clactonian Levalloisian Mousterian

Technology Technology Technology

However beside these a number of other techniques like crested blade technology
and Kombewa technology were also present at that time. Brief description of these
basic technologies are given below-

Clactonian Technology:

It originally involves use of anvil technique to produce large flake tools. From the
name of the type site Clacton this technology is known as clactonian technology. The
flakes produced by this technique present large striking platform with very
pronounced interior platform angle (greater than 105 degrees) and diffuse bulb of
percussion. The lack of any surface preparation makes these flakes highly variable in
structure and thickness.

Levalloisian Technology:
 12

This is a prepared-core technology named after a suburb of Paris where flakes and cores
of this type were first recovered and defined. Levallois technology is most characteristic of
Middle Paleolithic industries but begins to appear before 200Ka, in some cases in
association with Early Paleolithic industries.

Levallois cores were carefully preshaped, or prepared, for the striking of flakes of a
controlled shape and thickness. Centrally directed removals were generally used to create
a square, ovoid, or other regularly shaped block of stone, which was more or less flat on
the upper surface and markedly convex on the lower surface (planoconvex). The sides of
the block were also convex (lateral convexities). A striking platform, at an acute angle to
the upper, or flatter, surface was prepared at one end of the core by roughening or faceting.
The Levallois flake was then removed from the upper surface by bringing the striking
platform down sharply at an angle on an anvil. The large flake that often resulted was
extremely thin for its size, conformed closely to the oudine of the prepared core, and
retained the pattern of centrally directed removals on its upper surface, as well as the facets
of the striking platform. Although not all of these features characterize every Levallois
flake or core, the distinctive thinness of Levallois flakes, together with their regular shape,
are suggestive of the use of the technology in a particular assemblage. Definitive
determination of Levallois technology, however, can be made only by reconstructing the
entire knapping process through refitting.

Mousterian Technology:

The Mousterian or disc core technology is characterized by centripetal flaking around the
entire core margin on one or both surfaces. Although it is not dissimilar to levallois in both
the technique and form of removed flakes it lacks clear evidence that the surface
morphology of the core was specially prepared to achieve a flake of a particular form. Two
characteristic products of this technology are the pseudo levallois point and the disc core
itself. The later is generally circular in form with centripetal flake scars and typically has a
flaking surface that is quite high or even pointed at the mid point.

Retouching and Blunting:

The term retouching involves Removal of flakes from a piece of stone. Sometimes the term
primary retouch refers to the initial, roughing-out stages of stone reduction, while
secondary retouch designates the more refined reduction of stone material, as in the case
of bifacial thinning or the shaping of flake tools. Some archaeologists restrict the term to
refer to the formation of flake tools. Where as blunting is a form of retouching which is
done such a way that a sharp edge of a flake turns in to a blunt one. Most developed form
of retouching and blunting were actually developed in the later part of Stone Age especially
during Upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic to make various type of points and microliths.

Summery and Conclusion:

The study of stone technology does not entail simply observing the techniques or
procedures of artifact manufacture; ideally, it considers a complex series of prehistoric
 13

actions that surround the creation of a set of tools at an archaeological site. It is useful to
view stone technology as a system that encompasses the procurement of raw materials, the
manufacture of tools from those materials, the transport of tools and raw materials, tool
use, the resharpening and reshaping of the tools, artifact discard or loss, and the final
incorporation of the stone tools within the archaeological record. Within each major
component of this system, there are some basic questions that can yield important
information about prehistoric behavior.

Suggested Readings

1. Whittaker, John. 1994. Flint Knapping : Making and Understanding Stone tools.
University of Texas Press, Austin.

2. Semenov, S.A. 1964. Prehistoric Technology. Cory Adams and Mackay, London.

3. Sankalia, H.D. 1964. Stone Age Tools : Their techniques of manufacture, name
and Use. Pune, Deccan College.

4. Leakey, L.S.B. 1958. Working with stone, Bone and Antler. In History of
Technology vol – 1 ed. by C. Singer, E.J Holmyard and A.R Mall Clarendon Press,
Oxford.

References Cited

Andrefsky, W. 2005. Lithics: Macroscopic approaches to Analysis. Cambridge University

Press. Cambridge.

Cotterell, B. and J. Kamminga (1987). The Formation of Flakes. American Antiquity,

50:755 – 779.

Dibble, H. and A. Debenath. 1994. Hand Book of Paleolithic Typology (Vol I): Lower and
Middle Paleolithic Europe. University of Pennsylvania. Philadelphia.

Leakey, L.S.B. 1958. Working with stone, Bone and Antler. In History of Technology vol
– 1 ed. by C. Singer, E.J Holmyard and A.R Mall Clarendon Press, Oxford.
 14

Sankalia, H.D. 1964. Stone Age Tools : Their techniques of manufacture, name and Use.
Pune, Deccan College.

Semenov, S.A. 1964. Prehistoric Technology. Cory Adams and Mackay, London.

Whittaker, J. C. 2004. American Flintknappers. University of Texas Press. Austin.

Whittaker, John. 1994. Flint Knapping : Making and Understanding Stone tools.
University of Texas Press, Austin.

Probable Questions

1. What were the basic technologies used during lower and middle paleolithic? Write
a short note on Levallois Technology.

2. What do you mean by the term ‘flake’? Describe different feature of a flake with
suitable diagram.

3. Classify major stone reduction methods used by prehistoric people. Write a short
note on the pressure flaking technique with suitable diagram.

4. Discuss briefly the direct percussion method with suitable diagram.

5. Mention name of at least three sites from which earliest stone tools are discovered.
What types of raw materials were used to make stone tools?

6. What do you mean by the term lithic technology? Why study of lithic technology
is important in prehistory?

7. What type of rock fracture was used to make stone tools? Define the following
terms with diagram: Indenter, Edge angle, Flaking angle, and Force angle.

8. Write a short note on soft hammer percussion with suitable diagrams.

9. What is bi-polar technique? What do you mean by the terms retouching and
blunting?
 15

10. Write a short note on pressure flaking technique with suitable diagram.

________________________