The Mesolithic Hunter-Gatherer toolkit
Experimental Archaeology Essay
Zizi Rico Neves
S1261266
Zizi Rico Neves
s1261266
Experimental Archaeology
104AS6Y-1314ARCH
Ms. Drs. A Verbaas & Prof. A.L. van Gijn
Universiteit Leiden, Faculteit der Archeologie
Leiden, 1 December 2013, 1st version
Index
Introduction………………………………………………………. 2
An Archaeological experiment in Archeon……………………. 4
The Mesolithic Period…………..………………………. 4
Archaeologial Experiments………………………………6
Conclusion…….…………………………………………............ 8
References……………………………………………………….. 9
Images…………………………………………………………….10
Introduction
Over the past 20 years there is a growing interest in experimental studies in
archaeology. The experimental method presents a significant source of basis
data useful to understand a great deal of archaeological matters (Nami, H.G.
2003, 92). The aim of experimental archaeology is to ‘reproduce former
conditions and circumstances’ (Coles 1979, 1). Observable data from known
conditions in archaeology can be reproduced and used for the understanding
of many archaeological questions. Experimental archaeology is all about recreating human behavior, artefacts and structures that emerged in the past.
Outram states that experimentation is a part of a ‘hypothetico-deductive’
process. The scientific process is divided in a few steps and begins with a
hypothesis or conjecture about a certain aspect of nature. When a hypothesis
is formulated it can be tested to see if it can be ‘falsified’. If a hypothesis
resists falsification, and is supported by experimentation, it can be considered
as valid (Outram 2008, 1). The hypothetico-deductive process is more a
scientific approach, testing an archaeological question with the use of
documentation and variables. But experimental archaeology is also about
‘experience’. This type of approach, the experiential approach, has a strong
relationship to public archaeology and is about living experiments and reenactment. Documentation and control over variables are not important.
The experiential approach is useful for visualization, nothing is as powerful as
a visual image. By using open-air centres and reconstructions it gives people
an idea of the past. In this way experimental archaeology becomes a means
to transfer archaeological knowledge. An example of an open-air centre is the
Archeon in Alphen aan de Rijn, the Netherlands. This open-air centre is a
living history theme park, this means a presentation of objects in their ‘original’
surroundings with people interacting with visitors. The power of the Archeon
lies in the interacting part; the past is presented ‘in motion’. This way it’s also
available for people who do not belong to the group of traditional museum
visitors (Marsfelder 1990,1).
The initial objectives of the Archeon are education, recreation and scientific
experimentation. The objective of the foundation is to promote knowledge,
understanding and appreciation of the human society, past and present, by
the means of reconstructions in actual size in an archaeological theme park.
The reconstructions in the Archeon are realized by experimental
archaeological projects because it allows one to move beyond the limited
range of options made available by records of the currently known world
(Outram 2008, 1).
Scientific archaeological experiments are important to contribute towards a
better substantiation of the display. In this essay I have designed my own
experiment to contribute to the credibility of the Archeon.
An Archaeological Experiment in Archeon
In Archeon you find three types of
eras, a Prehistoric era, Roman
period and the Middle Ages. My
experiment is suitable for the
Mesolithic hunter-gatherer
settlement at the Archeon.
This small settlement includes two
huts, fire pits, a lake with a few
canoes and a braided wall for
shelter (image 1).
The Mesolithic Period
The Mesolithic is the period
between the end of the Paleolithic,
the end of the last Ice Age, and the
beginning of the Neolithic. Hunter-
Image 1. Mesolithic settlement at the Archeon
(http://www.vilters-vanhemel.be).
gatherer societies across Europe were
taking advantage of the milder postglacial climate, their number increased and
they colonized previously glaciated northern regions. The Mesolithic
communities were the first to inhabit the northern terrain made available by
the melting of the ice sheets and they are best represented along the coasts
and besides lakes and rivers (Scarre 2009, 383). The hunter-gatherers
gathered plant foods and hunted with the spear and the bow and arrow. They
were dependent on the available natural resources and therefore
characterized by mobility, they exploited resources by moving around their
landscapes. Small standard flakes called microliths characterize the material
culture of the Mesolithic. The hunter-gatherers used microliths to make
composite tools, with flint inserted into bone or wooden hafts (Scarre 2009,
181).
The Mesolithic camp at the Archeon is a reconstruction of a settlement that
was found in Bergummermeer in Friesland dating around 5.500BC. The total
size of the site was estimated to be approximately 1,400 m2 of which 1.100
m2 has been excavated. This camp was in a sandy place near a freshwater
lake. Archaeologists found the remains of fire pits, soil marks and oval shaped
patterns of structural stones that formed the house floor plans and were
probably used for tent-reinforcement (Niekus 2010, 7).
Hunter-gatherers did not live permanent in these camps, they were seasonal
and lived probably in summer and winter settlements. From their basecamp
the hunter-gatherers undertook expeditions to the so-called “activity-camps”
for instance a hunting camp.
Image 2. Excavationmap of Bergumermeer S-64B with the main soil tracks
(Newell 1980, Fig. 3).
When you’re in Archeon at the Mesolithic settlement you’ll find evidence for
the gathering of plant foods. The hunter-gatherers collect different kinds
herbs, roots, fruits and nuts (especially acorn). They were already specialized
in basketry so the collected plant foods were kept in baskets and containers.
Outside there were a few spears with microliths, characteristic for the
Mesolithic, prepared.
In the lake near the settlement they have dugout canoes, for transport and
maybe fishing. The settlement is not large it consists of two huts, a small one
and a bigger one. This is because the hunter-gatherers were not place-bound,
they were characterized by mobility.
The thing I noticed was the little evidence for hunting. There were not many
tools with the exception of the spears. Did the Mesolithic hunter-gatherers
have such a small toolkit? Hunting was their main priority so you would expect
more focus on hunting and a bigger variety of attributes.
Archaeological Experiments
By using experiments I want more emphasis on the hunting part of the
Mesolithic hunter-gatherers in the Archeon. More attention should be paid to
the creating and using part of different tools for a better substantiation of the
display.
In order to carry out an archaeological experiment you need to define an
archaeological problem first:
-The problem in the Archeon is that there need to be more hunting techniques
and tools for a plausible display.
Then you ask yourself a question to test the problem:
-What is the most effective way to hunt small game? is a good question to
create more tools for the settlement and test the possibilities.
To answer this question you need to test different hunting techniques and a
varied composite toolkit that Mesolithic hunter-gatherers were using. Not only
the spears but also bow and arrow, harpoons, knives, snares and traps, fish
traps, fishing rod etc. Each tool should be made by a skilled person, on a
Mesolithic way, and tested for functioning.
For example, bow and arrow:
There are many woods suitable for making
a bow and arrow. Ash and oak are the ones
suitable for making a bow and for arrows
hardwoods like hickory and ash were used.
For the arrow points hunter-gatherers used
microliths, small flakes or chips from stone
(Image 3).
Or: Harpoons can be made from different
materials like bone, antler, wood and stone
Image 3. Reconstructed hafting positions for
segments used in the Pargeter (2007) experiments
(Lombard & Pargeter 2008, Fig. 2: 2525)
(imgage 4).
Imgage 4. Bone harpoons from Aamosen, Denmark (Discussfossils.com).
You should test all kind of materials and tools and collect the data to see
which one works best and which is the most durable. Such as the bow and
arrow or the spear, you can test them on a dead animal to see the impact on
the flesh and the speed of the tool. Different kind of fishhooks or fish traps you
can test with the dugout canoes in the lake (if there is fish), measure the time
between run and catch and compare this with other tools.
The testing or experimental part is also educational and fun to perform with
the visitors of the Archeon. They’ll get a better picture of the life of the huntergatherer and all the possibilities to obtain food. So now this experiment is not
only scientific but also has a experiential approach.
Conlusion
At this stage there is not much to conclude yet, first there must be
experimented with the different hunter techniques and tools. All data from the
experiments must be compared in order to draw conclusions. But I think this
experiment is a good start to work more on the credibility of the Mesolithic
settlement in the Archeon. It is also a much more active and educational way
if you let the visitors join the experiments and this’ll highlight much more the
initial objectives of the Archeon (education, recreation and scientific
experimentation).
References
Coles, J. 1979. Experimental Archaeology. London: Academic Press.
Marsvelder, S. 1990. Archeon en de verbeelding van het verleden.
Archeologie en publiek. Jaargang 1. Nummer 1.
Nami, H.G. 2010. Theoretical Reflections on Experimental Archaeology and
Lithic Technology: Issues on Actualistic Stone Tools Analysis
and
Interpretation. Ediciones de Arqueologi a Contempora, Buenos Aires.
Niekus, M.J.L.Th. 2012. Tussen schijn en werkelijkheid: de Opgraving
Bergumermeer S-64B als mijlpaal van het steentijdonderzoek in Nederland.
Groningen.
Outram. A.K. 2008. Introduction to Experimental Archaeology. World
Archaeology, vol 40. Issue 1.
Scarre, C. 2009. The Human Past. Thames and Hudson Ltd, London.
Images
Image 1. http://www.vilters-vanhemel.be
Image 2. Newell, R.R. 1980. Mesolithic dwelling-structures: fact and fantasy.
Veröffentlichungen des Museums für Ur- und Frühgeschichte Potsdam 14/15,
pp. 235–284.
Image 3. Lombard & Pargeter 2008, Fig. 2: 2525
Image 4. http://www.discussfossils.com