Stone tool use and function on the margins of northern Europe, 400,000 years ago

四十万年前，东英吉利位于欧洲古人类分布区的北方。这一时期的遗址在整个欧洲大陆都很罕见，但特殊的保存条件使英格兰东部成为研究人类适应性的国际重要地区。几十年的研究已经揭示了古环境条件的细节，古人类生活在哪里，他们制造了什么样的石器，但知识上的巨大差距仍然存在：这些工具是用来做什么的？自20世纪70年代以来，没有进行过关于工具使用的功能性研究，自这些开创性研究以来，使用磨损分析领域有了很大的发展。该项目通过对东安格利亚的一系列地点（包括比奇坑和巴纳姆东农场）的关键石器组合进行功能和空间分析的综合方法，解决了知识上的差距。功能将利用目前最先进的石材工具功能分析方法来确定。分析方法结合了光学和冶金显微镜，以评估石材工具边缘上特征使用磨损痕迹的形成。然后将这些痕迹与已知用途的实验复制工具的专用综合参考收集进行比较，其分析将使用盲测进行评估。高质量的参考资料库为解释过程的可靠性提供了基础，并使使用磨损分析能够以更大的规模和更高的精度进行。使用磨损分析将解决该地区两种当代工具制造传统的行为意义的长期争论。一个传统是公认的对称，双面形状的工具的阿舍利工业（手斧）和其他，没有手斧和石鳞片为主的工具包的克拉克顿工业。争论围绕着这样一个假设，即这两种传统代表着不同的共存文化群体，而不是单一文化传统中功能不同的工具。功能分析提供了一种解决这一持续争论的手段，同时提供有关技术在适应北方生境中的作用的信息。

Four hundred thousand years ago, East Anglia lay at the northern extremity of the European hominin range. Sites from this time are rare across the continent, but exceptional conditions of preservation make Eastern England a region of international importance for studying hominin adaptations. Decades of research have revealed details of palaeoenvironmental conditions, where hominins lived, what kinds of stone tools they made, but a large gap in knowledge remains: what were the tools used for? No functional studies have been undertaken since the 1970s on tool-use, and the field of use-wear analysis has developed greatly since these pioneering studies. This project addresses that gap in knowledge by applying an integrated approach of functional and spatial analysis of key stone tool assemblages from a selection of sites from East Anglia including Beeches Pit and Barnham East Farm. Functions will be determined utilising the current state of the art methods of stone tool functional analysis. The analytical approach combines optical and metallurgical microscopy to assess the formation of characteristic use-wear traces on the edges of stone tools. These traces are then compared with those from a purpose built comprehensive reference collection of experimental replica tools of known use, the analysis of which will be assessed using blind testing. A high-quality reference collection underpins the reliability of the interpretative process and enables use-wear analysis to be conducted with greater scale and precision.Use-wear analysis will address a long-running debate about the behavioural significance of two contemporary traditions of tool-making in the region. One tradition is recognised by symmetrical, bifacially shaped tools of the Acheulean Industry (handaxes) and the other, by the absence of handaxes and stone flake dominated toolkits of the Clactonian Industry. Debate revolves around the hypothesis that the two traditions represent different coexisting cultural groups, as opposed to functionally different tools in the repertoire of a single cultural tradition. Functional analyses offer a means of resolving this ongoing debate, whilst simultaneously contributing information about the role of technology in adapting to northern habitats.