Following the so-called material turn, in archaeology much attention is devoted to the affective response to objects, the physical affordances of items, or the agency of materials on one another.... Show moreFollowing the so-called material turn, in archaeology much attention is devoted to the affective response to objects, the physical affordances of items, or the agency of materials on one another. However, such aspects have been partially overlooked in experimental use wear research. Issues surrounding contact material selection and its degree of representativity against the larger archaeological sample are some of the problems that a well-considered approach in experimental archaeology and wear analysis should take into account. These problems are inherently linked with the discussion over controlled lab experiments vs actualistic layouts: one of the most contentious debates in experimental archaeology. More broadly, these issues are further tied to the crisis of confidence in experimental results and issues such as replicability and reproducibility. These concerns are even more significant in research attempting to simulate and investigate combat wear traces, where these problems also intertwine with the challenges that these layouts pose in terms of best practices to follow to ensure ethics and sustainability. In this paper, the methodological framework implemented in two experimental campaigns studying prehistoric bronze weaponry is discussed. The examples are then used to illustrate some of the challenges in these types of set-ups and to provide discussion points regarding potential solutions. In addition, steps to take in order to increase confidence in the interpretation of experimental results are proposed. While replication of experimental results is paramount, it is also necessary to reduce the ambiguity of experimental results. Show less
The ability to control fire is a pivotal trait of human culture and likely influenced both the physical and cultural development of our evolutionary lineage. We know fire fundamentally changed our... Show moreThe ability to control fire is a pivotal trait of human culture and likely influenced both the physical and cultural development of our evolutionary lineage. We know fire fundamentally changed our relationship with the world by making previously uninhabitable climates tolerable, inedible foods palatable and more nutritious, and providing a focal point around which complex social relationships could develop. It remains uncertain, however, when and in what manner fire became an integral part of the technological repertoire of our early ancestors. This gap in our knowledge prevents a full understanding of how fire affected our physical form and cultural lifeways. The long and drawn out process by which fire progressed from simply being a close companion in the natural environment to becoming a resource xploited opportunistically by hominins eventually led to greater control of fire. At this point, fire was largely ‘tamed’ through careful maintenance and transported from place to place. Ultimately, likely through a combination of serendipity and experimentation, humans discovered that they could make fire for themselves whenever and wherever they liked, providing a profound new freedom to control their environment, cook their food and produce new materials at will.This article provides an overview of the current state of our understanding of fire use, and more specifically, fire-making in the Paleolithic. There is currently much debate in the field surrounding this issue, and it is stressed herein that the only way to definitively infer any one hominin group could make fire is to identify the tools they used to do so. Therefore, much attention is paid to how archaeologists have attempted to identify fire-making tools in the archaeological record, primarily using experimental archaeology coupled with microwear analysis. Through these efforts, it appears stone-on-stone percussive fire-making using flint and pyrite was a skill first practiced by at least some groups of late Neanderthals, though its origins could be much older. Conversely, preservational problems associated with the wood-on-wood friction fire-making make it extremely difficult to assess the antiquity of this method. Lingering questions regarding early fire-making innovations and possible avenues for future research are discussed. Show less
