# First traceological study of the lithic assemblage from Marathousa 1 and contextualization of the results within the European Lower Palaeolithic

Juliette Guibert-Cardin, Vangelis Tourloukis, Eleni Panagopoulou, Katerina Harvati, Elisa Nicoud, Sylvie Beyries

► To cite this version:

Juliette Guibert-Cardin, Vangelis Tourloukis, Eleni Panagopoulou, Katerina Harvati, Elisa Nicoud, et al. First traceological study of the lithic assemblage from Marathousa 1 and contextualization of the results within the European Lower Palaeolithic. Harvati, Katerina; Ioannidou, Melanie. Human Evolution at the CROSSROADS, Tuebingen Paleoanthropology book series - Contributions in Paleoanthropology 3, Tübingen University Press, pp.103-112, 2025, Tuebingen Paleoanthropology, 978-3-98945-002-8. 10.15496/publikation-97669. hal-05216865

HAL Id: hal-05216865

https://hal.science/hal-05216865v1

Submitted on 20 Aug 2025

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>
# 11 FIRST TRACEOLOGICAL STUDY OF THE LITHIC ASSEMBLAGE FROM MARATHOUSA 1 AND CONTEXTUALIZATION OF THE RESULTS WITHIN THE EUROPEAN LOWER PALAEOLITHIC

Juliette Guibert-Cardin<fnref n="1" />*, Vangelis Tourloukis<fnref n="1" />,<fnref n="2" />, Eleni Panagopoulou<fnref n="3" />, Katerina Harvati<fnref n="1" />,<fnref n="4" />, Elisa Nicoud<fnref n="5" />, Sylvie Beyries<fnref n="5" />

http://dx.doi.org/10.15496/publikation-97669

Keywords: Lower Palaeolithic; small tools; Taphonomy; Use-wear analysis; Techno-morpho-functional analysis

## 11.1 INTRODUCTION

The European Lower Palaeolithic demonstrates a wide range of human settlements and various lithic production techniques. This variability is still poorly understood, hindering the assessment of hominin techno-economical choices. Recent studies on lithic variability of the Middle Pleistocene investigated whether differences in assemblage composition is related to cultural or temporal trends, site function, or availability of raw materials.

Here we focus on small flakes which constitute important blanks in many lithic assemblages of the Lower Palaeolithic (Rocca et al., 2016). They are present both in Africa and Eurasia from ≥1 Ma to 300 ka (Burdukiewicz and Ronen, 2003; Derevi-

anko, 2006; Lemorini, 2018). Although the origin of such assemblage diversity is still debated, it is proposed to be related to the age of assemblages, to the unique preservation of sites, or to specialized activities or durations. In order to better understand how small lithics were utilized, we conduct techno-morpho-functional and traceological analyses. The combined approach provides the opportunity to further assess the *chaîne opératoire* from the production of tools to their use and curation through the analysis of their final morphology before discard.

We report the preliminary results from a traceological study of lithics from Marathousa 1 (Megalopolis, Greece). The site is located in the Megalopolis Basin which periodically hosted an

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

http://dx.doi.org/10.15496/publikation-97669

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

J. Guilbert-Cardin: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1767-6328

V. Tourloukis: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9527-2708

E. Panagopoulou: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4268-6157

K. Harvati: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5998-4794

S. Beyries: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4798-701X

<footnote n="1">¹Paleoanthropology, Institute for Archaeological Sciences and Senckenberg Centre for Human Evolution and Palaeoenvironment, Department of Geosciences, Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany</footnote>

<footnote n="2">²Department of History and Archaeology, School of Philosophy, University of Ioannina, Ioannina, Greece</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³Hellenic Ministry of Culture, Ephorate of Palaeoanthropology-Speleology, Athens, Greece</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴DFG Centre for Advanced Studies 'Words, Bones, Genes, Tools', Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany</footnote>

<footnote n="5">⁵Université Côte d'Azur, CNRS, CEPAM, Nice, France</footnote>

<footnote>* juliette.guibert-cardin@cepam.cnrs.fr</footnote>
ancient lake (Panagopoulou et al., 2018; Bludau et al., 2021). The archaeological layer is attributed to Marine Isotope Stage 12 (Tourloukis et al., 2018a). The archaeological remains are at the contact of sedimentary units UA3-UA4 and UB4-UB5 (Karkanas et al., 2018). The excavation took place in two sections, approximately 60 m apart, areas A and B. Area A exhibits numerous elephant bones from a largely complete single individual with anthropogenic cut-marks and a low density of lithic finds (Konidaris et al., 2018). Area B has yielded a higher density of lithics, but also additional elephant remains and other bones with cut-marks and anthropogenic modifications. The lithic assemblage is composed of 2058 artifacts. The raw materials of local origin are radiolarite, flint, limestone and quartz, collected in close proximity to the site (Tourloukis et al., 2018b). The lithic assemblage is composed of exhausted cores, flakes, and tools and belongs to a flake-based industry. Blank types are varied. The aim of the debitage is to produce blanks with sharp and durable edges. Technological studies provide numerous data

on technological behaviors but questions remain about tool use and site function.

## 11.2 METHODS

The objective of this pilot study is to assess the potential for use-wear analysis on a sample of 250 lithic artifacts from Areas A and B. The sample is representative of the whole assemblage (Table 1). The analysis was carried out in two stages: a taphonomic analysis of the flint and radiolarite artifacts to determine the nature of post-depositional processes; and then a functional analysis of the 250 artefacts in the sample. This last part of the work is in progress: 13 pieces have been analyzed so far and are presented here.

The taphonomical study was founded on the methodological approach developed by petroarchaeologists (Fernandes, 2012; Fernandes and Raynal, 2005). The aim of this methodology is to identify the post-depositional processes within the archaeological site.

<table><caption>**Table 1:** Sample details.</caption><thead><tr><th>LITHIC TYPE</th><th>RADIOLARITE</th><th>FLINT</th><th>LIMESTONE</th><th>QUARTZ</th><th>SANDSTONE</th><th>TOTAL</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>UNRETOUCHED BLANKS</td><td>148</td><td>21</td><td>15</td><td>10</td><td>1</td><td>195</td></tr><tr><td>Cores/Core fragments</td><td>7</td><td>0</td><td>5</td><td>2</td><td>0</td><td>14</td></tr><tr><td>Flakes >15 mm</td><td>96</td><td>12</td><td>8</td><td>4</td><td>1</td><td>121</td></tr><tr><td>Chips <15 mm</td><td>38</td><td>7</td><td>0</td><td>3</td><td>0</td><td>48</td></tr><tr><td>Debris</td><td>7</td><td>2</td><td>2</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>12</td></tr><tr><td>RETOUCHED BLANKS</td><td>47</td><td>7</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>55</td></tr><tr><td>Backed pieces</td><td>9</td><td>2</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>12</td></tr><tr><td>Notched pieces</td><td>10</td><td>2</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>12</td></tr><tr><td>Denticulates</td><td>7</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>7</td></tr><tr><td>Scrapers</td><td>6</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>7</td></tr><tr><td>Core tools</td><td>7</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>7</td></tr><tr><td>Retouched pieces</td><td>4</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>Composite tools</td><td>3</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>Pointed pieces</td><td>1</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>0</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>TOTAL</td><td>195</td><td>28</td><td>16</td><td>10</td><td>1</td><td>250</td></tr></tbody></table>
<figure><img src="image_4.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 1:** Diacritical sketches of lithics with use-wear traces and photos of traces. a. functional spot polish from flake 620 (used in a longitudinal motion possibly for butchering activities); b. and c. crushing and smooth spot polish visible on the cutting edge of flake 1.2 (used to process hard material in a longitudinal motion); d. and e. angular scars oblique to the edge, smooth spot polish and striations oblique to the edge of flake 625 (used in a longitudinal motion for butchering activities).</figcaption></figure>
The techno-morpho-functional approach, conceived by M. Lepot (1993) and E. Boëda (1997) is occasionally combined with use-wear analysis to better characterize lithic assemblages from the Lower and Middle Paleolithic (Bonilauri, 2010; Claud, 2008; Guibert-Cardin et al., 2021). First, the functional analysis of lithics was conducted at both low and high magnifications to identify active parts and modes of tool use. Lastly, an analysis of the dorsal-scar pattern and the succession of each removal in the manufacturing of tools with use-wear traces was conducted. We seek to understand the existing relationships between the production of blanks for tools, morphology, retouch and use.

## 11.3 RESULTS

The pieces analyzed for the taphonomical study are exceptionally well preserved: the overwhelming majority of the pieces examined exhibit slight alterations, providing the opportunity to conduct use-wear analysis at both low and high magnifications. Post-depositional surface modifications are mainly of chemical origin; however, some mechanical alterations attest to slight movement of the lithics after deposition. This observation reinforces the interpretation of minor reworking of the find layers according to Giusti et al. (2018).

Currently, 13 lithics were analyzed for use-wear with a stereomicroscope and a metallographic microscope. Five in total show use wear traces and one exhibits technological traces (for the detailed results and comparisons with the experimental use-wear traces see Guibert-Cardin et al., 2022). The remaining seven lithics do not exhibit use-wear traces. However, this does not necessarily imply that the latter were not utilized.

MAR1 1.2 (Fig. 1) is a flint flake with a backing. The opposite edge is unretouched and bears bifacial and oblique scars and striations parallel to the working edge indicating a longitudinal motion.

The processed material is hard because crushing and smooth polish are present and scars are large and overlap. The active edge is unretouched and is opposite to a back.

MAR1 620 (Fig. 1) is a radiolarite backed knife. The back is created by abrupt retouch and is opposite an unretouched edge bearing spots of smooth polish and short and isolated striations. These use-wear traces are similar to those produced during butchering activities. Striations are oblique to the edge indicating a longitudinal motion.

MAR1 625 (Fig. 1) is an unretouched radiolarite tool. One edge exhibits bifacial scars, striations oblique to the edge and a symmetrical rounding resulting from a longitudinal motion. The scar characteristics are the same as those one would expect from butchering activities, namely with a triangular shape and bending and cone initiations. MAR1 605 (Fig. 2) is an unretouched radiolarite flake with a short back. The secant cutting edge exhibits dissymmetric use-wear traces indicating a transversal motion. The scars have circular and elongated forms, and the polish is domed and smooth. These characteristics are indicative of plant processing.

MAR1 637 (Fig. 2) is a thick radiolarite chunk with a convergent spine created by retouching. Use-wear traces are located on this spine. The scars are bifacial and the striations are perpendicular to the edge, implying a transversal bidirectional motion. The material processed is semi-hard because polish and striations are on high areas and the scars are infrequent. Rounding and numerous striations are indicative of an abrasive material. These traces are possibly related to the hammerstone, although they could also indicate the processing of a semi-hard and abrasive material.

MAR1 1132 (Fig. 2) is a thick flake with a cortical back opposite a retouched edge. On the face opposite to the retouch, the edge exhibits a band of polish and associated striations strictly parallel to each other indicating that they come from the
<figure><img src="image_5.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 2:** Diacritical sketches of lithics with functional and technological traces and photos of traces. a. and b. circular and elongated small scars opposite to a smooth domed polish on the cutting edge of flake 605 (used to process plant in a transversal unidirectional motion); c. and d. small irregular scars opposite to a rough to smooth polish on a slightly rounded arris with long striations perpendicular to the edge of flake 637 (related to technological traces or utilized on a semi hard material in a transversal bidirectional motion); e. and f. large band of polish in the center of a crescent-shaped crack and numerous organized striations on the ventral surface opposite the retouch scars of flake 1132 (technological traces).</figcaption></figure>
same event. These traces are associated with an impact mark and this combination of traces probably has a technological origin.

In summary, motions and material processed

are varied. Tools exhibiting use-wear traces include unretouched and retouched flakes that frequently display a back opposite to the active edge, maybe to facilitate gripping.

<table><caption>**Table 2:** Use-wear data on small flakes from Lower Palaeolithic sites in Europe and the Levant.</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2"></th><th rowspan="2">ISOTOPIC STAGE</th><th rowspan="2">NR. SUBJECTED TO<br/>FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS</th><th rowspan="2">NR. WITH USE WEAR<br/>TRACES</th><th colspan="4">MOTION</th><th colspan="6">MATERIAL PROCESSED</th><th rowspan="2">RESIDUES</th><th rowspan="2">PREHENSION/<br/>HAFTING</th><th rowspan="2">OTHER</th></tr><tr><th>LONG.</th><th>TRANSV.</th><th>BOTH</th><th>UND.</th><th>ANIMAL</th><th>VEGETAL</th><th>HARD</th><th>SEMI HARD</th><th>SOFT</th><th>UND.</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>EVRON QUARRY,<br/>ISRAEL</td><td>19</td><td>?</td><td>?</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>Impact<br/>traces</td><td>Chazan,<br/>2013</td></tr><tr><td>ISERNIA LA<br/>PINETA, ITALY</td><td>15</td><td>C<br/>1230</td><td>&gt;261</td><td>x</td><td>x</td><td>x</td><td>x</td><td>1?</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>x</td><td></td><td></td><td>Short<br/>activity</td><td>Longo et<br/>al., 1997<br/>Minelli et<br/>al., 2004</td></tr><tr><td>FICONCELLA,<br/>ITALY</td><td>13</td><td>129</td><td>13</td><td>x</td><td>x</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>x</td><td>x</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>Short<br/>activity</td><td>Lemorini,<br/>2018</td></tr><tr><td>REVADIM,<br/>ISRAEL</td><td>13-12</td><td>283</td><td>109</td><td>80</td><td>16</td><td>8</td><td>5</td><td>5</td><td></td><td>21<br/>53<br/>....22....<br/>.....3......</td><td>5</td><td>Animal</td><td>Prehension</td><td>Short<br/>activity.<br/>One<br/>flake<br/>= one<br/>activity</td><td>Venditti<br/>et al.,<br/>2019a<br/>Venditti<br/>et al.,<br/>2019b</td></tr><tr><td>MARATHOUSA<br/>1, GREECE</td><td>12-11</td><td>14</td><td>5</td><td>3</td><td>2</td><td></td><td></td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>2</td><td>1</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>Guibert-<br/>-Cardin<br/>et al., in<br/>press,<br/>2022</td></tr><tr><td>FONTANA<br/>RANUCCIO,<br/>ITALY</td><td>11</td><td>?</td><td>?</td><td>x</td><td>x</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>x</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>Marinelli<br/>et al.,<br/>2019</td></tr><tr><td>ARIDOS 1 AND<br/>2, SPAIN</td><td>11<br/>or 9</td><td>77</td><td>33</td><td>31</td><td>2</td><td>5</td><td>2</td><td>38</td><td>2</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>Ollé,<br/>2003</td></tr><tr><td>QESEM CAVE,<br/>ISRAEL</td><td>11-8</td><td>743</td><td>231</td><td>155</td><td>31</td><td>42</td><td>3</td><td>83</td><td>19</td><td>1</td><td>12 25<br/>.....91....</td><td>Various</td><td>Wrapping?</td><td>Short<br/>activity</td><td>Venditti,<br/>2019<br/>Lemorini,<br/>2015</td></tr><tr><td>SCHÖNINGEN,<br/>GERMANY</td><td>9</td><td>13</td><td>3</td><td>2</td><td></td><td></td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>2</td><td></td><td>1</td><td>Animal,<br/>vegetal</td><td>Prehension</td><td></td><td>Rots et<br/>al., 2015</td></tr><tr><td>LA POLLEDRARA<br/>DI CECANIBBIO,<br/>ITALY</td><td>9</td><td>155</td><td>20</td><td>x</td><td>x</td><td></td><td></td><td>x</td><td>x</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>Prehension</td><td>Lemorini,<br/>2018</td></tr></tbody></table>
11.4 DISCUSSION

This study confirms the exceptional state of pres-
ervation of the site. Moreover, it confirms that
butchering activities took place at both excavation
areas and demonstrates that plants were exploited.
The activities carried out at Marathousa 1 involved
a broader range of activities than originally hy-
pothesized. Tools with use-wear traces do not show
any significant standardization in terms of blank
shape or form, except for the recurrent presence of
an active edge opposite a natural or retouched back
(Guibert-Cardin et al., 2022). These first function-
al results from Marathousa 1 are part of the current
discussions on the function of small flakes in the
Lower Palaeolithic.

Use-wear analyses on small blanks and tools
have been performed on assemblages from fewer
than ten sites in total (Table 2). Small tools are
mainly used to process soft and semi-hard mate-
rials and when worked materials can be identified,
they primarily involve butchering activities and to
a lesser extent, vegetal materials (Lemorini, 2018;
Venditti, 2019; Guibert-Cardin et al., 2022). It is
frequently suggested that small tools are used in
the final stages of the butchering process (Longo et
al., 1997; Venditti et al., 2019b). Our preliminary
results suggest that small tools were used for differ-
ent tasks as also seen in the Italian sites of La Fi-
concella and La Polledrara di Cecanibbio (Aureli et
al., 2016; Lemorini, 2018). One of the most recur-
ring questions about small tools is the mode of pre-
hension. Small flakes from Revadim, La Polledrara
di Cecanibbio and Schöningen exhibit prehension
traces, whereas at Qesem Cave, they were possi-
bly wrapped (Lemorini, 2018; Rots et al., 2015;
Venditti, 2019; Venditti et al., 2019a). With the
current functional data on tools from Marathousa
1, there is no evidence to determine the mode of
prehension. However, the presence of a back or an
unsharpened edge opposite or adjacent to the ac-

tive part, as well as the lack of standardization of
the tools, suggests hand use rather than hafting.
Experimental reproductions of small tools demon-
strate that backing opposite to a sharp edge pro-
vides a superior grip and promotes the application
of force and precision (Chazan, 2013; Jones, 1980;
Starkovich et al., 2021).

This preliminary study enriches the sparse
functional data available on small tools and more
generally on Lower Palaeolithic tools. Use-wear
analyses are rare on Lower Palaeolithic assemblag-
es because of taphonomic problems. However, by
coupling techno-morpho-functional and use-wear
analysis, it is possible to access the techno-eco-
nomic choices of human groups. The pursuit of
the functional analysis of lithics from Marathou-
sa 1 will contribute to better qualify, quantify and
understand tool structure, function and activities
carried out.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Excavation at Marathousa 1 was conducted under
a permit granted to the Ephorate of Palaeoanthro-
pology-Speleology, Hellenic Ministry of Culture.
It was supported by the ERC Consolidator Grant
ERC-CoG-724703 ("CROSSROADS") and the
ERC Starting Grant ERC-StG-283503 ("PaGE"),
both awarded to K.H. J.G.C., V.T. and K.H.
are also supported by the Deutsche Forschungs-
gemeinschaft (DFG Project no. 463225251,
"MEGALOPOLIS"). K.H. is also supported by
the ERC Advanced Grant ERC-AdG-101019659
("FIRSTSTEPS"). J.G.C. was also supported by
the CEPAM, UMR 7264, and the French govern-
ment through the "Université Côte d'Azur UCA-
JEDI Investments in the Future" project managed
by the National Research Agency (ANR) with the
reference number ANR-15-IDEX-01. We thank
the two reviewers for their constructive comments,
which helped improve the manuscript.

REFERENCES

AURELI, D., Rocca, R., Lemorini, C., Modesti, V., Scaramucci, S., Milli, S., Giaccio, B., Marani, F., Palombo, M.R. and Contardi, A., 2016. Mode 1 or mode 2? “Small tools” in the technical variability of the European Lower Palaeolithic: The site of Ficoncella (Tarquinia, Lazio, central Italy). Quaternary International, 393, pp. 169–184.

BLUDAU, I.J.E., Papadopoulou, P., Iliopoulos, G., Weiss, M., Schnabel, E., Thompson, N., Tourloukis, V., Zachow, C., Kyrikou, S., Konidaris, G.E., Karkanas, P., Panagopoulou, E., Harvati, K. and Junginger, A., 2021. Lake-Level Changes and Their Paleo-Climatic Implications at the MIS12 Lower Paleolithic (Middle Pleistocene) Site Marathousa 1, Greece. Frontiers in Earth Science, 9, 668445.

BOËDA, E., 1997. Technogénèse de systèmes de production lithique au Paléolithique inférieur et moyen en Europe occidentale et au Proche-Orient. HDR, University of Paris X - Nanterre, Paris.

BONILAURI, S., 2010. Les outils du Paléolithique moyen, une mémoire technique oubliée ? Ap-proche techno-fonctionnelle appliquée à un assemblage lithique de conception Levallois provenant du site d'Umm el Tlel (Syrie cen-trale). Doctoral dissertation, University of Par-is X - Nanterre, Paris.

BURDUKIEWICZ, J.M., Ronen, A., 2003. Lower Palaeolithic small tools in Europe and the Levant. BAR International Series. Archeopress, Oxford.

CHAZAN, M., 2013. Butchering with small tools: the implications of the Evron Quarry assemblage for the behaviour of *Homo erectus*. An-

tiquity, 87, pp. 350–367.

CLAUD, E., 2008. Le statut fonctionnel des bifaces au Paléolithique moyen récent dans le Sud-Ouest de la France. Etude tracéologique intégrée des outillages des sites de La Graulet, La Conne de Bergerac, Combe de Brune 2, Fonseigner et Chez-Pinaud/Jonzac. Doctoral dissertation, University of Bordeaux I, Bordeaux.

DEREVIANKO, A.P., 2006. The Lower Paleolithic small tool industry in Eurasia: migration or convergent evolution? Archaeology, Ethnology & Anthropology of Eurasia, 1, pp. 2–32.

FERNANDES, P., 2012. Itinéraires et transformations du silex: une pétroarchéologie refondée, application au Paléolithique moyen. Doctoral dissertation, University of Bordeaux I, Bordeaux.

FERNANDES, P., Raynal, J. P., 2005. Pétroarchéologie du silex: un retour aux sources. Comptes Rendus Palevol, 5, pp. 829–837.

GIUSTI, D., Tourloukis, V., Konidaris, G., Thompson, N., Karkanas, P., Panagopoulou, E. and Harvati, K., 2018. Beyond maps: Patterns of formation processes at the Middle Pleistocene open-air site of Marathousa 1, Megalopolis Basin, Greece. Quaternary International, 497, pp. 137–153.

GUIBERT-CARDIN, J., Capellari, F., Lhomme, V., Connet, N., Nicoud, E. and Beyries, S., 2021. Lower Palaeolithic stone tools: a techno-func-tional study of the Soucy 3P assemblage (France), in: Beyries, S., Hamon, C., Maigrot, Y. (Eds.), Beyond use-wear traces: going from tools to people by means of archaeological wear and residue analyses. Sidestone Press, Nice, pp. 101–115.

GUIBERT-CARDIN, J., Tourloukis, V., Thompson, N., Panagopoulou, E., Harvati, K., Nicoud, E. and Beyries, S., 2022. The function of small tools in Europe during the Middle Pleistocene: the case of Marathousa 1 (Megalopolis, Greece). Journal of Lithic Studies 9(1).

JONES, P., 1980. Experimental butchery with
modern stone tools and its relevance for Palaeolithic archaeology. World Archaeology, 12, pp. 153–165.

KARKANAS, P., Tourloukis, V., Thompson, N., Giusti, D., Panagopoulou, E. and Harvati, K. 2018. Sedimentology and micromorphology of the Lower Palaeolithic lakeshore site Marathousa 1, Megalopolis Basin, Greece. Quaternary International, 497, pp. 123–136.

KONIDARIS, G., Athanassiou, A., Tourloukis, V., Thompson, N., Giusti, D., Panagopoulou, E. and Harvati, K., 2018. The skeleton of a straight-tusked elephant (Palaeoloxodon antiquus) and other large mammals from the Middle Pleistocene butchering locality Marathousa 1 (Megalopolis Basin, Greece): preliminary results. Quaternary International, 497, pp. 65–84.

LEMORINI, C., 2018. Small tools and the Palaeoloxodon - *Homo* interaction in the Lower Palaeolithic. The contribution of use-wear analysis, in: Borgia, V., Cristiani, E. (Eds.), Palaeolithic Italy. Advanced studies on early human adaptations in the Apennine peninsula. Sidestone Press, pp. 27–35.

LEPOT, M., 1993. Approche techno-fonctionnelle de l'outillage lithique moustérien: essai de classification des parties actives en termes d'efficacité technique : application à la couche M2e sagittale du Grand abri de la Ferrassie (fouille Henri Delporte). Master dissertation, University of Paris X - Nanterre, Paris.

LONGO, L., Peretto, C., Sozzi, M., Vannucci, S., 1997. Artefacts, outils ou supports épuisés ? Une nouvelle approche pour l'étude des industries du Paléolithique ancien : le cas d'Isernia la Pineta (Molise, Italie centrale). L'Anthropologie, 101, pp. 579–596.

MARINELLI, F., Lemorini, C. and Zampetti, D., 2019. La funzione degli “small tools” nell'ambito delle industrie litiche scheggiate acheuleane della Penisola Italiana: il caso studio del

sito laziale di Fontana Ranuccio. IpoTESI di Preistoria, 11, pp. 57–72.

MINELLI, A., Arzarello, M., Longo, L., Ollé, A., Vergès, J.M. and Peretto, C., 2004. New data on the lithic industry of Isernia La Pineta: typology, technology and functional analysis, in: Le Secrétariat du Congrès (Eds.), Human Origins and the Lower Palaeolithic - XIVth UISPP Congress. BAR International Series, Liège, pp. 59–68.

OLLÉ, A., 2003. Variabilitat i patrons functionals en els sistemes tècnics de Mode 2. Anàlisi de les deformacions d'ùs en els conjunts litics del Riparo Esterno de Grotta Paglicci (Rignano Garcanico, Foggia), Aridos (Arganda, Madrid) i Galeria-TN (Sierra de Atapuerca, Burgos). Doctoral dissertation, University of Tarragona - Rovira i Virgila, Tarragona.

PANAGOPOULOU, E., Tourloukis, V., Thompson, N., Konidaris, G., Athanassiou, A., Giusti, D., Tsartsidou, G., Karkanas, P. and Harvati, K., 2018. The Lower Palaeolithic site of Marathousa 1, Megalopolis, Greece: Overview of the evidence. Quaternary International, 497, pp. 33–46.

ROCCA, R., Abruzzese, C. and Aureli, D., 2016. Europeans Acheuleans: Critical perspectives from the East. Quaternary International, 411, pp. 402–411.

ROTS, V., Hardy, B., Serangeli, J. and Conard, N., 2015. Residue and microwear analyses of the stone artifacts from Schöningen. Journal of Human Evolution, 89, pp. 298–308.

STARKOVICH, B., Cuthbertson, P., Kitagawa, K., Thompson, N., Konidaris, G., Rots, V., Münzel, S.C., Giusti, D., Schmid, V.C., Blanco-Lapaz, A., Lepers, C. and Tourloukis, V., 2021. Minimal tools, maximum meat: A pilot experiment to butcher an elephant foot and make elephant bone tools using Lower Palaeolithic stone tool technology. Ethnoarchaeology, 12, pp. 118–147.
TOURLOUKIS, V., Muttoni, G., Karkanas, P., Monesi, E., Scardia, G., Panagopoulou, E. and Harvati, K., 2018a. Magnetostratigraphic and chronostratigraphic constraints on the Marathousa 1 Lower Palaeolithic site and the Middle Pleistocene deposits of the Megalopolis Basin, Greece. Quaternary International, 497, pp. 154–169.

TOURLOUKIS, V., Thompson, N., Panagopoulou, E., Giusti, D., Konidaris, G., Karkanas, P. and Harvati, K., 2018b. Lithic artifacts and bone tools from the Lower Palaeolithic site Marathousa 1, Megalopolis, Greece: Preliminary results. Quaternary International, 497, pp. 47–64.

VENDITTI, F., 2019. Understanding lithic recycling at the Late Lower Palaeolithic Qesem Cave, Is-

raël. A functional and chemical investigation of small flakes. Archaeopress Archaeology, Oxford.

VENDITTI, F., Agam, A. and Barkai, R., 2019a. Techno-functional analysis of small recycled flakes from Late Acheulian Revadim (Israel) demonstrates a link between morphology and function. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports, 28.

VENDITTI, F., Cristiani, E., Nunziante-Cesaro, S., Agam, A., Lemorini, C. and Barkai, R., 2019b. Animal residues found on tiny Lower Paleolithic tools reveal their use in butchery. Scientific reports, 9, 13031.