Fig 1.
Map showing the localization of Fumane Cave (Verona, Italy).
Fig 2.
The Protoaurignacian and Aurignacian pebbles discovered in Fumane Cave (Verona, Italy).
Table 1.
Information on archaeological sample.
US, dimensions, raw material, integrity, colour and morphology.
Fig 3.
Schematic representation of the methodology applied for the creation of 3D models and the spatial analysis of the utilised areas of the tools.
Table 2.
List of experimental samples used in different phases of the chipped tools production.
Fig 4.
(a) Production of marginal and abrupt retouch; (b) production of scaled retouch on the lateral edge of a laminar flake; (c) blank retouch through edge abrasion.
Fig 5.
Schematization of the gestures used during the retouching experimental activity.
(a) The marginal and abrupt retouch: a rapid and consequential gesture was performed. The knapper’s arm moved following an oblique dragging trajectory against the blank’s edge, striking it very quickly using the tool’s flat face along the apical area; (b) the scaled retouch: this action followed a perpendicular trajectory, with respect to the blank edge, with a movement from the top to the bottom of the arm and a final flexion downwards(drawings by Giulia Formichella).
Fig 6.
Experimental bipolar percussion and retouch on anvil.
(a) Bipolar percussion for flake production; (b) hinged laminar flake retouch on anvil adopting a rectilinear trajectory; (c) bladelet retouch on anvil adopting an oblique trajectory.
Fig 7.
FSPM-13 use wear on experimental replica used in overhang abrasion.
(a) Macro-traces (30x) long, deep striations alternate with more superficial striations, with different orientations. They are located on the flat and/or on the long edge of the instrument; (b) micro-traces (200x), striations with polishes on the bottom, with rough texture; (c) 3D microtopography of the unused surface and profile; (d) 3D microtopography of the used surface and profile.
Fig 8.
FBR-2 use wear on an experimental replica used in the configuration of the striking platform of the core.
(a) Macro-traces (30x) highlight the presence of overlapping pits with sub-oval morphology, located all around the marginal perimeter of the object; (b) micro-traces (200x) are extended onto the top of the grains, with smooth texture, flat topography, striation with the same orientation, and concentrated-separated distribution; (c) 3D microtopography of the unused surface and profile; (d) 3D microtopography of the used surface and profile.
Fig 9.
FA-8 use wear on experimental replica used in passive percussion.
(a) Macro-traces (40x) consisted of large pits with sub-quadrangular/triangular morphology, grains appeared fractured, located in the central area of the flat surface of the pebble; (b) the micro-traces (200x) are absent, the bottom of the pits appear rough; (c) 3D microtopography of the unused surface and profile; (d) 3D microtopography of the used surface and profile.
Fig 10.
FRS-1 use wear on experimental replica used in scaled retouch.
(a) Macro-traces (30x), contiguous pits of linear form (half-moon), with rough bottom, and triangular section; the traces are located in the centre of the apical area; (b) polishes (200x) are absent; (c) 3D microtopography of the unused surface and profile; (d) 3D microtopography of the used surface and profile.
Fig 11.
FRP-1 use wear on experimental replica used in marginal retouch.
(a) Macro-traces highlight area characterized by a concentration of micro-pits (25x) with sub-circular morphology; (b) long striation (20x) associated with the pits and with the same orientations; the traces are located in apical top with oblique orientation; (c) micro-traces (200x), band of polishes with striations, covered-closed distribution, rough texture and domed topography; (d) 3D microtopography of the unused surface and profile; (e) 3D microtopography of the used surface and profile (striations and pits).
Fig 12.
List of experimental activity and use wear associated.
Description of activities, macro and micro traces, use wear localisation and pictures.
Fig 13.
Experimental use wear related to the prehension.
(a-b) Patch of polishing visible through the metallographic microscope (100x), localised on the top of the grain; (c-d) smooth/flat patch of polishing visible through the metallographic microscope (200x).
Fig 14.
Comparison of the surface topography before and after the use of the tool to produce scaled and marginal retouch, percussion activities and bladelet production.
Digital Surface Maps of Slope, TRI and VRM respectively.
Fig 15.
Experimental objects utilized for scaled retouch (I) and marginal retouch (II).
(a) Spatial distribution of the identified wear; (b) slope; (c) terrain roughness index; (d) vector roughness measure.
Table 3.
Morphometric features of the wear identified on the utilised areas of the experimental replicas.
In detail, scaled retouch (FSR-1), marginal retouch (FRP-1), bipolar percussion (FA-8), striking platform maintenance (FSPM-13) and bladelet removal (FBR-2).
Fig 16.
Experimental object utilized in passive percussion (I) and core ridge adjustment (II).
(a) Spatial distribution of the identified wear; (b) slope; (c) terrain roughness index; (d) vector roughness measure.
Fig 17.
Experimental object utilized for bladelet production.
(a) Spatial distribution of the identified wear; (b) slope; (c) terrain roughness index; (d) vector roughness measure.
Fig 18.
(a) Dimensions of the wear identified over the utilized areas of the experimental replicas; (b) mean distance of the identified wear from the object centre; (c) mean distance of the identified wear from the object edge; (d) dispersion of the identified wear over the tool surface defined by the elongation of the standard deviational ellipse.
Table 4.
Archaeological sample and use wear description and interpretation.
Fig 19.
Use wear identified on artefact RF127.
(a) Macro-traces (25x), overlaid pits with sub-circular morphology; (b) macro-traces (10x), pits located around the short edge of the artefact; (c) 3D microtopography of the used surface and profile.
Fig 20.
Use wear identified on artefact RF73.
(a) Macro-traces (20x), long striations with different orientations located on the flat surfaces in the central area; (b) pits (20x) on the marginal surface, overlapping, covered by the patina. The artefact is affected by dissolution; (c) 3D microtopography of the used surface and profile.
Fig 21.
RF127b archaeological sample with intense rounding of the grains over the central area of the flat surface.
(a) Polishing (100x) affecting the top of the grains; (b) patch of polish characterised by a flat topography and smooth texture (200x).
Fig 22.
Use wear identified on artefact RF92.
(a) Macro-traces (20x), micro-pits with sub-circular morphology associated with long parallel striations, located in the apical top with oblique orientation; (b) micro-traces (200x) are absent, a general rounding is visible; (c) macro-traces (20x), pits with triangular morphology, located in the centre area of the flat surface; (d) polishing is absent (200x); (e) 3D microtopography and profile of the used surface related to (a-b); (f) microtopography and profile of the used surface related to (a-b).
Fig 23.
Use wear identified on artefact RF67.
(a) Macro-traces (10x), contiguous pits of linear form (half-moon), with rough bottom and triangular section, located on the centre of apical area; (b) micro-traces (200x) are absent; (c) 3D microtopography of the used surface and profile.
Fig 24.
Use wear identified on artefact RF127.
(a) Macro-traces (30x), contiguous pits of linear form (half-moon), with rough bottom, located on the centre of apical area; (b) pits with rough bottom (200x); (c) 3D microtopography of the used surface.
Fig 25.
Use wear identified on artefact RF80.
(a) Macro-traces (20x), small circular pits associated with long parallel striations, located in apical top with oblique orientation; (b) micro-traces (200x), polishing is absent, a general rounding of the artefact can be observed; (c) 3D microtopography of the used surface.
Fig 26.
Archaeological items, RF67 (I) and RF80 (II), utilized in scaled retouching and marginal retouching.
(a) Spatial distribution of the identified wear; (b) slope; (c) terrain roughness index; (d) vector roughness measure.
Table 5.
Morphometric features of the wear identified on the utilised areas of the archaeological specimens.
Fig 27.
Archaeological items RF92 (I) and RF73 (II) utilised in retouch and percussion activities (RF92) and core ridge adjustment (RF73).
(a) Spatial distribution of the identified wear; (b) slope; (c) terrain roughness index; (d) vector roughness measure.
Fig 28.
The surface of the tool (I) has been used in retouch activities while its edge (II) was used to produce bladelets/core adjustment. (a) Spatial distribution of the identified wear; (b) slope; (c) terrain roughness index; (d) vector roughness measure.
Fig 29.
(a) Dimension of the wear identified over the utilized areas; (b) mean distance of the identified wear from the object centre; (c) mean distance of the identified wear from the object edge; (d) dispersion of the identified wear over the tool surface defined by the elongation of the standard deviational ellipse.
Fig 30.
Comparison between the perimeters of the wear observed on the experimental = green, and archaeological = blue specimens.
Fig 31.
Comparison between the mean distances from the centre and the edge of the tool observed on the experimental and archaeological specimens.
Fig 32.
Comparison between the mean perimeter of the wear identified on the experimental and archaeological specimens.
In detail, crosses = retouch activities; diamonds = bipolar percussion; triangles = striking platform management; square = bladelets production).
Fig 33.
Comparison between the experimental and archaeological use wear and their distribution.
(a) Experimental striations (10x) related to the overhang abrasion, localised (b) on the flat surface of the pebble; (c) archaeological striations (10x), localised (d) on the flat surface of the sample; (e) experimental pits (15x) related to core maintenance/bladelets removal, with sub-oval morphology, localised (f) around the short edge of the pebble; (g) archaeological pits (10x) with sub-oval morphology, (h) localised around the short edge of the sample; (i) experimental pits (40x) related to scaled retouching, with linear (half-moon) morphology, rough bottom, localised (l) on the apices of the flat surface; (m) archaeological pits (40x) with linear (half-moon) morphology, rough bottom, localised (n) on the apices of the flat surface; (o) experimental pits (20x), related to the anvil used for the flakes detachment, with sub-triangular morphology, localised (p) in the centre of the pebble; (q) archaeological pits (20x), with sub-triangular morphology, localised (r) in the centre of sample; (s) experimental circular pits associated with the striations (20x), related to marginal retouching, localised (t) on the apices of the flat surface with oblique orientation; (u) archaeological circular pits and striations associated (20x), localised on the apices of the flat surface with oblique orientation.