You're viewing our updated article page. If you need more time to adjust, you can return to the old layout.

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Environ. Archaeol.

Sec. Zooarchaeology

From Edge to Mark. Investigating the relationship between cut marks and lithic raw materials

  • 1. Institute of Archaeology, Faculty of Humanities, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jersualem, Israel

  • 2. Griffith University, Australian Research Centre for Human Evolution, Brisbane, Australia

  • 3. Universite de Perpignan Via Domitia, Perpignan, France

  • 4. Universidade do Algarve Centro Interdisciplinar de Arqueologia e Evolucao do Comportamento Humano, Faro, Portugal

  • 5. Zinman Institute of Archaeology, Haifa, Israel

  • 6. De la Prehistoire a l'Actuel Culture Environnement et Anthropologie, Talence, France

  • 7. Instititut Catala de Paleoecologia Humana i Evolucio Social, Tarragona, Spain

  • 8. Centre for Early Sapiens Behaviour (SapienCE), Department of Archaeology, History, Cultural Studies and Religion, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway

  • 9. Inrap Nouvelle-Aquitaine & Outre-Mer, Bègles, France

  • 10. Arkéo Fabrik, Exoudun, France

  • 11. Laboratoire Archéorient, Maison de l’Orient et de la Méditerranée – Jean Pouilloux, Lyon, France

Article metrics

View details

45

Views

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

Abstract

Understanding the relationship between animal processing practices and stone tool use is essential for interpreting Palaeolithic lifeways. These activities leave behind two key forms of archaeological evidence: butchery marks (“cut marks”) and lithic tools. While both faunal and lithic remains are critical to understanding past behaviours, they are rarely studied in an integrated framework. In particular, the characterisation of cut marks produced by tools made from different raw materials remains underexplored. This study presents an experimental protocol designed to address this gap by establishing a baseline for identifying cut marks created using dacite, flint, and obsidian tools. Both retouched and unretouched edges were used in controlled cutting actions on bone. The results show that the different raw materials exhibited varying degrees of cutting performance. However, statistical analyses of the resulting cut marks revealed limited patterns that could reliably distinguish between raw material types. These findings highlight the need for more refined analytical approaches capable of linking cut mark features to specific tool types or materials. Such advancements hold significant potential for regions as the southern Caucasus, where diverse raw material use and reduction strategies complicate the interpretation of butchery practices.

Summary

Keywords

Butchery, Caucasus, Experimental archaeology, Middle Palaeolithic, Subsistence strategies

Received

03 November 2025

Accepted

13 February 2026

Copyright

© 2026 Martellotta, Vettese, Nora, Reshef, Mistri, Courtenay, d'Errico, Brenet, Vosges, Herzlinger and Malinsky-Buller. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Eva Francesca Martellotta

Disclaimer

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Outline

Share article

Article metrics