Current Science

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

An Early Case of Lithic Recycling In India:Evidence from the Acheulian Site at Damdongri, Madhya Pradesh


Affiliations
1 Archaeological Survey of India, Takhatmal Colony, Sherpura, Vidisha 464 001, India
2 Deccan College, Pune 411 006, India
 

Research on recycled lithic artefacts in Indian prehistory is extremely limited when compared to the world scenario. In the present study we group the recycled activity of lithic artefacts into two categories – (1) artefact that is created and recycled during one ‘cultural age’ and (2) artefact that is created by the ‘ancestors’ and recycled during subsequent cultural ages. It is a fact that the earliest evidence of recycled artefacts belonging to Acheulian hominin is extremely limited and as such, the Damdongri site in Madhya Pradesh, India is the only Acheulian site where recycled artefacts have been identified pushing back the antiquity of such human behaviour to Acheulian culture for the first time in the country. Keeping in view this uncommon evidence and considering the nature of recycled artefacts from Damdongri, it is clear that recycling of lithic artefacts to put them back to use was uncommon during the Acheulian cultural phase in India. The present evidence from Damdongri is unique, where lithic analysis has shown that recycled activity on lithic artefacts was carried out during the Acheulian cultural phase with no intention to reuse them. Rather this action can be ascribed to certain symbolic activity. Finally, based on these evidences it has been hypothesized that recycling activity on ancestral lithic artefact during the Acheulian was probably considered ‘taboo’ and evidence from Damdongri was probably indicative of a site where artefacts were presented as symbolic object connected with some belief system during the Acheulian.

Keywords

Archaeology, Cultural Age, Prehistory, Recycled Lithic Artefacts.
User
Notifications
Font Size

  • Barkai, R., Lemorini, C. and Vaquero, M., The origin of recycling: a palaeolithic perspective. Quaternary Int., 2015, 361, 1–3.

  • Odell, G. H. (ed.), Economizing behavior and the concept of ‘Curation’. In Stone Tools: Theoretical Insights into Human Prehistory, Plenum Press, New York, USA, 1996, pp. 51–80.

  • Schiffer, M. B., Archaeological context and systemic context. Am. Antiquity, 1972, 37, 156–165.

  • Schiffer, M. B., Behavioral Archeology, Academic Press, New York, USA, 1976.

  • Schiffer, M. B., Toward a unified science of the cultural past. In Research Strategies in Historical Archaeology (ed. South, S.), Academic Press, New York, USA, 1977, pp. 13–50.

  • Schiffer, M. B., Downing, T. E. and McCarthy, M., Waste not, want not: an ethnoarchaeological study of reuse in Tucson, Arizona. In Modern Material Culture: The Archaeology of Us (eds Gould, R. A. and Schiffer, M. B.), Academic Press, New York, USA, 1981, pp. 67–86.

  • Amick, D. S., Behavioral causes and archaeological effects of lithic artifact recycling. In Tools Versus Cores: Alternative Approaches to Stone Tool Analysis (ed. McPherron, S.), Cambridge Scholars Publications, Newcastle, 2007, pp. 223–252.

  • Galup, S. M., Postclassic Maya Lithic tool maintenance, recycling, and consumption patterns at Laguna de On Island. In Occasional Publication No. 13, Institute for Mesoamerican Studies, Department of Anthropology, University of Albany, NY, USA, 2007.

  • Hiscock, P., Reduction, recycling, and raw material procurement in Western Arnhem Land, Australia. In Lithic Materials and Paleolithic Societies (eds Adams, B. and Blades, B. S.), Blackwell Publishing Ltd, Chichester, UK, 2009, pp. 78–93.

  • Vaquero, M., New perspectives on recycling of lithic resources using refitting and spatial data. Quartär, 2011, 58, 113–130.

  • Vaquero, M., Alonso, S., García-Catalan, S., García-Hernandez, A., Gomez de Soler, B., Rettig, D. and Soto, M., Temporal nature and recycling of Upper Paleolithic artifacts: the burned tools from the Molí del Salt site (Vimbodí i Poblet, northeastern Spain). J. Archaeol. Sci., 2012, 39(8), 2785–2796.

  • Barkai, R., Lemorini, C. and Vaquero, M. (eds), Quaternary International No. 361, Elsevier Ltd, Oxford, UK, 2015.

  • Rolland, N. and Dibble, H. L., A new synthesis of Mousterian variability. Am. Antiquity, 1990, 55, 480–499.

  • Rolland, N., The interpretation of middle paleolithic variability. Man, 1981, 16, 15–42.

  • Kuhn, S. L., Mousterian Lithic Technology. An Ecological Perspective, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, USA, 1995.

  • Amick, D. S., The recycling of material culture today and during Palaeolithic. Quaternary Int., 2015, 361, 4–20.

  • Toro-Moyano, I. et al., L'industrielithique des gisements du Pleistocene inferieur de Barranco Leon etFuente Nueva 3 aOrce, Grenade, Espagne. L’Anthropologie, 2009, 113(1), 111–124.

  • Iovita, R., Fitzsimmons, K. E., Dobos, A., Hambach, U., Hilgers, A. and Zander, A., DealulGuran: evidence for Lower Palaeolithic (MIS 11) occupation of the Lower Danube loess steppe. Antiquity, 2012, 86, 973–989.

  • Goren-Inbar, N., The lithic assemblage of Berekhatram Acheulian site, Golan Heights. Paleorient, 1985, 11(1), 7–28.

  • Agam, A. and Barkai, R., Small flake Acheulian: further insights into lithic recycling at Late Acheulian Revadim, Israel. J. Inst. Archaeol., 2018, 45(2), 170–192; doi:10.1080/03344355.2018.1494783.

  • Agam, A., Marder, O. and Barkai, R., Small flake production and lithic recycling at Late Aceulian Revadim, Israel, Quaternary Int., 2015, 361, 46–60.

  • Barkai, R., Lemorini, C., Shimelmitz, R., Lev, Z., Stiner, M. C. and Gopher, A., A blade for all seasons? Making and using Amudian blades at Qesem Cave, Israel. Hum. Evol., 2009, 24(1), 57–75.

  • Gopher, A., Barkai, R., Shimelmitz, R., Khalaily, M., Lemorini, C., Hershkovitz, I. and Stiner, M., Qesem cave: an Amudian site in central Israel. J. Israel Prehist. Soc., 2005, 35, 69–92.

  • Lemorini, C., Venditti, F., Assaf, E., Parush, Y., Barkai, R. and Gopher, A., The function of recycled lithic items at late Lower Paleolithic Qesem cave, Israel: an overview of the use-wear data. Quaternary Int., 2015, 361,103–112.

  • Assaf, E., Parush, Y., Gopher, A. and Barkai, R., Intra-site variability in lithic recycling at Qesem Cave, Israel. Quaternary Int., 2015, 361, 88–102.

  • Parush, Y., Assaf, E., Gopher, A. and Barkai, R., Looking for sharp edges: modes of flint recycling at Middle Pleistocene Qesem Cave, Israel. Quaternary Int., 2015, 361, 61–87.

  • Rollefson, G. O., The Late Acheulean site at Fjaje, Wadi el-Bustan, southern Jordan. Paleorient, 1981, 7(1), 5–21.

  • Roy, B., Use of recycled stone tools in the prehistoric culture of Mandla. Curr. Sci., 2011, 101(6), 718–719.

  • Roy, B., Tool recycling in India. In Encyclopaedia of the History of Science, Technology, and Medicine in Non-Western Cultures, Springer Science + Business Media Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2015, pp. 1–9; doi:10.1007/978-94-007-3934-5_10064-1.

  • Deo, S. G., Ota, S. B. and Mishra, S., Recent Investigations (2010–2011) of Acheulian occurrences around Tikoda, District Raisen, Madhya Pradesh. Bull. Deccan Coll. Res. Inst. Pune, 2013, 72–73, 183–192.

  • Ota, S. B. and Deo, S. G., Investigation of Acheulian localities TKD-I and TKD-II at Tikoda, District Raisen, Madhya Pradesh (2010–12). In Recent Advances in Acheulian Culture Studies in India (eds Paddayya, K. and Deo, S. G.), Indian Society for Prehistoric and Quaternary Studies, Pune, 2014, pp. 57–66.

  • Ota, S. B., Deo, S. G., Srivastava, N. and Pandey, S., Acheulian assemblage at Damdongri locality-2: an indicator of ‘belief’ or ‘usage activity. In Paper presented in the 21st Congress of the IndoPacific Prehistory Association, Hue, Vietnam, 23–28 September 2018.


Abstract Views: 168

PDF Views: 83




  • An Early Case of Lithic Recycling In India:Evidence from the Acheulian Site at Damdongri, Madhya Pradesh

Abstract Views: 168  |  PDF Views: 83

Authors

S. B. Ota
Archaeological Survey of India, Takhatmal Colony, Sherpura, Vidisha 464 001, India
Niharika Srivastava
Deccan College, Pune 411 006, India
Suman Pandey
Deccan College, Pune 411 006, India

Abstract


Research on recycled lithic artefacts in Indian prehistory is extremely limited when compared to the world scenario. In the present study we group the recycled activity of lithic artefacts into two categories – (1) artefact that is created and recycled during one ‘cultural age’ and (2) artefact that is created by the ‘ancestors’ and recycled during subsequent cultural ages. It is a fact that the earliest evidence of recycled artefacts belonging to Acheulian hominin is extremely limited and as such, the Damdongri site in Madhya Pradesh, India is the only Acheulian site where recycled artefacts have been identified pushing back the antiquity of such human behaviour to Acheulian culture for the first time in the country. Keeping in view this uncommon evidence and considering the nature of recycled artefacts from Damdongri, it is clear that recycling of lithic artefacts to put them back to use was uncommon during the Acheulian cultural phase in India. The present evidence from Damdongri is unique, where lithic analysis has shown that recycled activity on lithic artefacts was carried out during the Acheulian cultural phase with no intention to reuse them. Rather this action can be ascribed to certain symbolic activity. Finally, based on these evidences it has been hypothesized that recycling activity on ancestral lithic artefact during the Acheulian was probably considered ‘taboo’ and evidence from Damdongri was probably indicative of a site where artefacts were presented as symbolic object connected with some belief system during the Acheulian.

Keywords


Archaeology, Cultural Age, Prehistory, Recycled Lithic Artefacts.

References





DOI: https://doi.org/10.18520/cs%2Fv118%2Fi1%2F132-139