Working at home. Reconstructing activities within the LBK household through the
systemic use-wear analysis of flint industries, bone and antler tools and ground stone
implements.

Caroline Hamon*, Nicolas Cayol**, Yolaine Maigrot*, Alba Masclans*

5

*CNRS-UMR 8215 Trajectoires

7 9 rue Malher 75004 Paris France

8

**INRAP Hauts de France

10 UMR 8215 Trajectoires
11 9 rue Malher 75004 Paris France

12

13

## Abstract

15

The systemic analysis of use-wear traces on flint, ground stone and bone tools, has rarely been carried out at Early Neolithic sites in continental Europe. Hence, it is a powerful means of identifying possible economic differences. As part of the ongoing HOMES project, we are investigating the importance and nature of acquisition strategies (hunting, harvesting), food preparation techniques (butchery, grain milling) and the processing of other resources (plant fibres) in a large set of LBK households in the Aisne Valley (France). After re-examining and integrating new results on the flint industry (366 tools), bone and antler tools (414 tools) and ground stone tools (114 tools), the aim here is to examine whether the processing of soft flint plants, hides and wood remains the dominant activity and how it coexists with more marginal activities such as the processing of soft minerals and textile fibres. The absence of certain activities is scrutinised in relation to their location within and outside the domestic and village space. Discrete functional characteristics are tracked to improve our understanding of the observed differences between the domestic units: segmentation of production processes, differences in the use of each type of raw material, intensity of use. In this way, we can test the hypothesis of autonomous or interdependent households in terms of production and consumption and investigate the economic structure of LBK villagers.

32

## Keywords

LBK, households, use-wear analysis, food, crafts, stone and bone tools

35

36

## Introduction

38

The Linear Pottery (LBK) is one of the very rare contexts in European prehistory in which it is possible to discuss in detail the nature of activities within the domestic space. In contrast to Central Europe, the waste from various activities is found in lateral pits directly associated with each of the domestic units forming the small hamlets that occur in the westernmost expansion of the culture through Europe, reached around 5100 BC. This waste is made up of the remains of food and craft activities that took place in the longhouses and their immediate surroundings (Allard et al. 2013).

46

Such a specific configuration seems particularly relevant for research into the organisation of households, which are the focus of various social and economic models within the LBK (Hamon et Gomart 2021). The HOMES project aims to develop a high-resolution anthropological approach to the relationships and integration rules between the different groups

48

50
that formed the first village communities in Western Europe. Based on previous work (Hachem and Hamon 2014; Gomart et al. 2015), several research questions were explored: (1) Evolution of the economic maturity and of the production capacity of households for food supply and craft activities; (2) links between households (interdependence, reciprocity, redistribution network, etc.); (3) integration of external individuals in the village community to ensure cultural cohesion at a supra regional scale. These questions were investigated at a series of 15 sites with 90 houses, covering the entire sequence of LBK settlement in the Aisne valley (Picardy; fig. 1), where a high density of sites has been revealed through excavations since the 1960's (Ilett 2012). Among other technological and bioarchaeological analyses carried out as part of the HOMES project, the wear analysis was applied to 4 types of industries: flint flaked stone tools, polished stone tools, ground stone tools and bone tools.

For decades, use-wear analysis on lithic and bone tools has proven to be a powerful means of reconstructing activities that form the basis of the economy of past societies. Based on experimental and actualistic references, this method has evolved in the field of archaeometry to provide a comprehensive overview of technical decisions and group behaviour. In LBK contexts, the analysis of utilitarian clothing has investigated domestic and village activities. In Central Europe, following a pioneering study of the settlement of the Aldenhoven Plateau (Vaughan 1994), recent work has been carried out on Central European cemeteries to shed light on the structure of the gender division of labour (Masclans et al. 2020, 2021). However, most of the functional studies on the domestic sphere of the LBK were carried out in its north-western area of expansion, from the Graetheide Plateau (Van Gijn 2010; Van Gijn and Verbaas 2007; van Gijn and Mazzucco 2013) to Hesbaye (Beugnier 2012; Caspar 1985, 1988), Picardy (Allard and Cayol 2022; Hamon 2006; Sidéra 1993, Maigrot 1997) and Normandy (Caspar in Billard et al. 2014).

The main objectives of this use-wear analysis were to propose at the end a systemic view of the organisation of the technical system and the scope of the activities carried out in the domestic sphere. It was important to obtain a general overview of the activities carried out in the villages of the Aisne Valley and to compare them with the spectrum revealed by similar analyses in neighbouring regions in order to highlight similarities/dissimilarities between the village organisation in different parts of the LBK. Considering that all the archaeological material comes from waste pits, the frequency of waste was also investigated. We also tried to find out which activities caused the greatest consumption of tools. The absence of certain tools was also tracked as an important source of information for the spatialisation and organisation of activities. Determining the indoor/outdoor nature of the identified tasks also contributed to a more detailed picture of how LBK people's lives are organised.

## Materials and methods

In order to utilise a manageable amount of data, we carried out our technology and use-wear analysis on 9 of the 15 available sites in a coherent geographical unit limited to 80 km along the Aisne in the Seine basin and covering the entire LBK sequence between 5100 and 4900 BC (Fig. 1). The research potential here is based on the high quality of the archaeological data from excavated houses. A large number of different categories of finds (stone and bone artefacts, pottery, ornaments) as well as particularly well-preserved animal remains provide important information on the economy, diet and immaterial practises

A systemic approach was applied to flaked, polished and ground stone tools as well as bone tools in order to reconstruct household activities. On the one hand, extensive technological analyses were carried out to investigate raw material supply strategies, techniques and
101

production processes for all sites and household units. On the other hand, ue-wear analysis was
only carried out on a sample of tools according to various parameters.

102

103

Differences in the distribution of tool types within villages and individual households were
taken into account for sampling strategies. While the composition of the toolkits appears to be
standardised, the frequency of tool types in the pits varies from house to house. Furthermore,
certain types of tools, such as grinding or flint tools, were discarded fairly regularly in the side
pits of the houses, while others, such as polished tools or bone tools, were discarded more
randomly or, to be more precise, clustered in some houses.

104

105

106

107

108

109

The state of preservation of the tool surfaces was also an important factor influencing the selection of tool samples in order to avoid as far as possible misinterpretations related to taphonomic processes: flint tool surfaces exhibit varying degrees of patination depending on the site, while grinding tools show signs of reuse and heating depending on the dwelling unit.

110

111

112

113

114

For all these reasons, and in order to obtain a meaningful overview of the activities carried out
in the domestic sphere, the most complete and best-preserved domestic tool sets for each type
of tool were selected for analysis. The data available for each category of tools summarises the
research carried out over several years as part of various projects. New analyses have been
carried out to complete the full data set and make the information available for all selected sites.

115

116

117

118

119

The details of the samples for each category of tools can be found in Suppl. Data 1 to 3.

120

121

Flint tools

122

The tool sets of 7 domestic units were considered for use-wear analysis: Bucy-le-Long "la
Héronnière" (1 house), Pontavert "le Port-aux-Marbres" (1 house) Cuiry-lès-Chaudardes "les
Fontinettes" (3 houses), Berry-au-Bac "la Croix Maigret" (1 house), Menneville "Derrière le
Village" (1 house).

123

124

125

126

Considering that for most domestic units only a small number of tools were found in the waste
pits, only the richest and most complete toolsets were selected for analysis, in order to enable a
general reconstruction of the activities. Use-wear analysis was conducted on 366 flint tools, out
of a total of 3325 tools identified on the sites of the Aisne valley. These include scrapers,
arrowheads, blades and retouched flakes, burins, borers, splintered pieces (Suppl. Data 1).

127

128

129

130

131

The tools were first analysed at low magnification with a binocular microscope (Leica EZ4D), and then at high magnification with a metallographic microscope (Leica DM1750M), following classic methods (Semenov 1964, Plisson 1985, Van Gijn 1990, Caspar 1988) and a referential developed over nearly 20 years (Cayol 2002).

132

133

134

135

136

Ground stone tools

137

A total of 717 polished stone tools were found at the sites in the Aisne valley (Suppl. data 2).

138

The sample analysed by use-wear analysis comprises 206 tools from 32 domestic units and 7 sites, representing all chronological phases of the LBK and only partially published (Hamon 2006, 2008; Hamon et al. 2021): Bucy-le-Long “la Fosselle” (7 houses), Bucy-le-Long "la Héronnière" (3 houses), Missy-sur-Aisne “le Culot” (2 houses), Chassemy “le Grand Horle” (5 houses), Cuiry-lès-Chaudardes "les Fontinettes" (6 houses), Berry-au-Bac "le Vieux Tordoir" (3 houses), Menneville "Derrière le Village" (5 houses). They form a large set of tools that includes back and forth grinding tools, flat and grooved abraders, hammerstones and friction tools. All are made from different types of sandstone, collected from local outcrops.

139

140

141

142

143

144

145

146

Given the high degree of fragmentation of ground stone tools at the Lbk sites in the Aisne
valley, only unbroken tools with well-preserved surfaces have been taken into account for use-
wear analysis. Tools showing heating phases or calcareous concretions at a macroscale were
excluded from our analysis.

147

148

149
150

Use-wear analysis was conducted at low and high magnification with a stereomicroscope Nikon SMZ 1000 and Olympus BX51M, following the methodology and referential presented in Hamon 2006, and completed by Adams et al. 2009 and Hayes et al. 2018.

151

152

153

154

## Polished tools

155

23 stone adzes were found on six different sites. All the tools with preserved edges (14 tools) were analysed for use-wear. With only two exceptions from Menneville "Derrière le Village" (corresponding to intentional deposits), all of them come from the waste pits associated with houses.

156

157

158

159

Use-wear analysis has been conducted at low and high magnification using a Nikon SMZ 1000 stereomicroscope and Olympus BX51M, following the methodology and referential presented in Masclans 2020.

160

161

162

The artefacts have been made on very varied raw materials. They were characterized by their very small dimensions (maximum lengths of between 29 and 75mm) compared to classical polished tools from other Lbk regions. The high number of broken tools, accounting for 66% of the total number of items, reflects the end of the cycle of use.

163

164

165

166

All the artefacts subjected to use-wear analysis presented evidence of use. However, the state of preservation was often very poor which led to a high rate of undetermined functional attributions. Accordingly, five items were found to be related to animal processing and in six more cases there was evidence of percussion against a hard indeterminate material.

167

168

169

170

171

## Bone tools

172

The worked bone, antler and teeth assemblage comes from four villages: Cuiry-lès-Chaudardes "les Fontinettes" (33 houses), Bucy-le-Long "la Fosselle" (11 houses), Bucy-le-Long "la Heronnière" & "la Fosse Tounise" (11 houses), and Menneville "Derrière le village" (9 houses) (Suppl. data 3). Of the 64 houses, 22 did not yield any tools. This is not due to taphonomic factors as large quantities of animal remains were often found in these houses. The results presented here are unpublished, with the exception of those relating to Cuiry-lès-Chaudardes.

173

174

175

176

177

178

179

180

181

In fact, several studies have already been carried out on part of this collection (Sidéra 1984, 1989, 1993, 2000, 2012; Maigrot 1997). In order to standardize the data, we examined all the pieces from this site and also included the 100 artefacts that had never been documented. In total, we carried out a technological study of 545 artefacts, including 414 tools (Suppl data3).

182

We performed use-wear analysis of a sample of 166 tools, from 3 sites and 22 domestic units. Macro- and microscopic observations were conducted with a binocular (Leica EZ4W up to x35) and a metallographic microscope (Olympus BHMJ x100 & x200). Functional interpretation of archaeological artefacts was based on our own experimental referential (Maigrot 1997, 2001, 2003, 2010; Giligny et. al 2016; Maigrot & Provenzano 2020, etc.) and published references (Olsen 1984; Chistidou 1999; Griffiths 2006; Van Gijn 2006; Semenov 1964; Struckmeyer 201; Alvarez et. al 2014; Скочина 2017; Xie 2014; Wotjczak & Kerdy 2018; etc.).

183

184

185

186

187

188

189

These are mainly points made from small metapodials of ruminants that have been split in half by grooving or abrading, bevels made from ribs or shaped from splintered diaphyses, rings made from sawn sheep/goat femurs, scrapers made from pig / boar tusks, hammers made from large transversally broken bones and some tools, especially punches, made from deer antlers.

190

191

192

193

194

195

## Results

196

197

Detailed results of use-wear analysis by tool type are presented in Suppl. data 4 to 6.

198
199

200

201

202

203

204

205

206

207

208

209

210

211

212

213

214

215

216

There is a strong complementarity between the four different types of tools, which take advantage of their mechanical and morphological properties. Above all, we must emphasise the strong complementarity of the different industries in the different phases of most *chaîne opératoire* of acquisition and transformation.

The contribution of each category of tools is emphasised for the different phases of the *chaînes opératoires* in which they are involved. However, in order to propose a systemic reconstruction, the results of the combined technology and wear analysis are presented below according to the main areas of activity of the Lbk household units and not according to the individual types of tools.

## Management of tools and blanks

211

212

213

214

215

216

A generally low intensity of use concerns the three main categories of tools, i.e. flint tools, ground sandstone tools and bone tools. For these three categories, evidence for the reuse of blanks and tools is rare, and in fact there was no systematic recycling system. Polished adzes are a different story, as most of the tools from the Aisne valley are small and have definitely reached the end of their life cycle.

This is related to the existence of a standard tool set common to the LBK sites in the Aisne valley and in the neighbouring LBK sites in Hesbaye and on the Graetheide plateau (Beugnier 2012, Caspar 1985, van Gijn and Mazzucco 2013). This standard tool set implies a strong typological association for some categories of tools. This is particularly true for:

217

218

219

220

221

- Scrapers and the working of skins

222

- Burins and plant craft

223

- Flint tools and the processing of hard organic materials

224

- Querns and cereal grain processing

225

- Scrapers and the shaping of bone tools

226

- Specialised bone points and the piercing of skin or bark

227

This strong typological and functional connection does not exclude the possibility that some of the blanks and tool types were used in a more varied way. This is particularly true for the flint blades, scrapers and drills, for which a greater variety of tasks related to their specific active surfaces (edge profiles, kinematics) have been identified. More occasional uses or reuses of the same surfaces were also identified through traces of use; this is the case for a number of grinding tools used mainly for cereals, but also for pulses and ochre.

228

229

230

231

232

233

234

## Acquisition and transformation of food

235

236

### *Animal food (hunting, butchery)*

237

238

239

240

241

242

243

244

245

246

Archaeozoological analysis of several LBK settlements in our research area has revealed that livestock species such as cattle, caprines and pigs largely dominate the assemblage. However, hunting of a diverse range of wild animals was represented and accounts for a significant proportion of the assemblage, particularly in 'smaller' houses. Hunting focussed on red deer, roe deer, wild boar and small mammals (Hachem 2011). Arrowheads, either of triangle or asymmetrical trapeze type, are occasionally found among the domestic waste (fig. 2a-b). Since these tools are unexpected in the context of domestic activity, two hypotheses are proposed. In the case of the specimens that show impacts on the points, we can surmise that they were brought back to the village in the bodies of wild animals. The intact specimens could reflect the processing of arrows, including the preparation or repair of arrows.

247

248

The next step in the processing of animal resources is butchery, either for consumption or for craft purposes, and is also represented in the collection (fig. 2c). However, its recognition is
249

made more difficult by post-depositional changes, which means that it is probably significantly underrepresented (van Gijn 2010; van Gijn and Mazzucco 2013). Together with the absence of bones associated with the phases of disarticulation and removal of the meat, the accumulation of stone tools could indicate that only the final stages of animal preparation took place within the domestic sphere. This also suggests that most of the butchering time took place in other areas of the village or outside its boundaries.

250

251

252

253

254

255

256

257

These results are consistent with the findings from analysing the use traces on the stone axes, as only two items show evidence of percussive kinematics against bone and flesh, which could indicate butchering activities.

258

259

## - Plant food (harvesting, grinding)

260

261

262

263

264

265

266

267

The acquisition and processing of plant foods is mainly represented by sickle blades and grinding tools, which can be found to some extent in every house. They emphasise the role of cereals as the dominant plant in the LBK diet. Use-wear analyses of sickle blades indicate mainly an oblique insertion of the blades, comparable to the longitudinal example identified in Elsloo (van Gijn and Mazucco 2013). Most examples were not retouched and were held in a perpendicular position when harvesting plants like sheaves of grain. As we have seen with the arrowheads, the presence of sickle blades in the domestic area suggests that sickles were episodically repaired or stored in the domestic area.

268

269

270

271

272

273

The analysis of grinding tools shows that they were used for dehusking operations, resulting in a higher proportion of abrasive particles during processing, and for grinding cleaned grains with two different grinding systems (fig. 3). A comparison of the morphological data indicates that there is a slight difference in the dimensions of the two sets of tools (Hamon 2006). In addition, microbotanical remains have revealed a secondary or occasional use of these tools for processing other plants, including legumes and tubers (Hamon et al. 2021).

274

275

276

## - Lithic productions

277

278

279

280

281

282

283

284

285

286

Blade debitage carried out by indirect percussion is one of the characteristic trends of LBK lithic production. However, not all the stages of their production seem to be represented in the domestic sphere, and we note in particular that there is a lack of evidence for the first stages of production. Nor are they equally represented in all houses. This also applies to the tools associated with this debitage technique. A large number of flint and sandstone hammerstones, with a wide range of weights and dimensions, were found at the sites. Only a few antler tines show damage to the distal parts which can be attributed to the fact that they were used as punches (fig. 4a). They come from two sites: Cuiry-lès-Chaudardes and Menneville. They remain underrepresented considering the total number of blades produced and used in households.

287

288

289

290

291

292

Quern shaping is also attested by a certain amount of waste material (flakes, debris) from blocks and by abandoned roughouts. The presence of spherical and faceted hammerstones seems to be more related to the rejuvenation of the active surfaces of the querns, while heavier and lighter hammerstones of various shapes were most probably used in the shaping of these tools (fig. 4b). As far as flint tools are concerned, there is a clear lack of the first stages of the manufacture of querns in domestic waste material.

293

294

295

296

The image provided by stone tool production, including flint and sandstone tools, is that of a spatial division of tasks, with the initial stages of block opening probably taking place outside the domestic sphere, possibly in a common meeting place or in another area of the village, and the last stages of rejuvenation and maintenance taking place in the house.

297

298

## Exploitation of animal sub-products
299

300 - *Bone tool production*

301 Waste from the manufacture of bone tools is visible in all the houses. They show many traces
302 of various activities, such as sawing or grooving with lithic tools (fig. 5a). However, the
303 processing of hard animal material is not very well represented in the lithic finds of the Aisne
304 valley. As already mentioned for butchery, the production of bone tools may be
305 underrepresented due to post-depositional changes in use, as they rarely account for more than
306 5 % of the assemblages (van Gijn and Mazzucco 2013). However, detailed analysis of the
307 production process highlights their role for abrading, sawing and cutting bone tools. This could
308 also be related to the occasional use of lithic tools for bone production, or the low consumption
309 of lithic tool for this activity. At Elsloo, the elements used for bone production were mainly
310 unretouched blades and flakes, which makes their identification in the lithic assemblage
311 difficult without use-wear analysis (van Gijn and Mazzucco 2013).

312 According to the analysis of technical traces on bone tools, debitage of metapodes by transverse
313 abrasion was carried out on large, well-cemented polishers, while bone points were shaped
314 using low-cemented, grooved abraders (fig. 5b). These two kinds of tools are represented in the
315 groundstone toolkit, and according to use-wear analysis were used for the production of bone
316 tools (Hamon 2006; 2016).

317 The use of bone supports obtained by fracturing is also well documented. For example, a large
318 number of bevels were shaped from diaphyseal splinters. Flake production involved the use of
319 hammerstones and anvils (Maigrot and Provenzano 2014, Christensen and Goutas 2018). While
320 anvils are rare on most LBK sites in the Aisne valley, the variety of hammer types found in the
321 domestic units suggests that some of them were used not only for making stones but also for
322 breaking bones.
323

324

325 - *Treatment of skins*

326 Following previous studies on LBK contexts (Caspar 1985; Van Gijn and Mazzucco 2013), the
327 working of skins is one of the most important activities identified by the use-wear analysis of
328 flaked lithic tools, and also the most common and regularly found in domestic refuse. A variety
329 of tools were involved in this task, including scrapers on blades and flakes used for removing
330 flesh, blades used for cutting and drills used to perforate (fig. 6a-b). Indeed, lithic tools
331 contribute to different stages of skin treatment and preparation, but show a low intensity of use
332 that would suggest a high consumption of blanks. There is no great variability in the observed
333 hide micropolishes: on the scraper fronts, we observe the most often use-wear traces related to
334 the working of dry to semi-dry hide. It is very likely that not all stages of skin treatment took
335 place in the 7 selected houses: thus, the first stages of preparation are not well represented in
336 the domestic units of the Aisne Valley. This contrasts with the case of Elsloo, where “*the entire
337 hide processing process was realized in all domestic spaces* » (Van Gijn and Mazzucco 2013,
338 p. 114).

338 Similar observations can be made with bone tools (fig. 6c). Bone tools involved in hide
339 processing seem numerous and are present in all the houses analyzed. This assemblage
340 consists of bevels used for scraping or rubbing skin, as well as various points for piercing
341 them. Like the lithic tools, the bone tools seem to have been used for the processing of thin
342 skins and/or towards the end of this *chaîne opératoire* (sewing). It should also be noted that
343 the bone toolkit includes a range of pieces that are quite disparate from both a typological and
344 a technological point of view, which could indicate a potential individual expression for this
345 activity.
346

347

348 In contrast to other LBK contexts in Normandy (Billard et al. 2014), ground stone tools do not
seem to have been involved in skin processing (e.g. to break fibers or soften skins) in the Aisne
349
350
351

valley. Only two polished adzes bear a use-wear pattern attesting to the treatment of skins, namely scraping/percussion against fresh hide.

352
353

- Wood and bark treatment

354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366

Wood and bark treatment must have been one of the most important activities of the LBK inhabitants in at least two areas: building activity and the production of wooden vessels, for which we have only indirect evidence. A wide range of lithic and bone tools were used for various wood-working tasks (fig. 7). But unlike Elsloo, where no specific blanks were selected for a variety of tasks (van Gijn and Mazzucco 2013), specific tools were apparently used wood working in the LBK of the Aisne valley. Although they are only present in small quantities, splintered pieces as well as small sized “scraper-adzes” were used for the precise splitting and scraping of wood, possibly to shape artefacts. Bone chisels and scrapers made from pig / wild boar tusks were also used in the production of wooden artefacts. There is no evidence for early stages of wood acquisition (i.e. felling, harvesting) within the toolkit, even among polished adzes commonly thought to be associated to such activity: these tasks were probably carried out outside of the main circulation areas within the village, as already suggested by Caspar 1985.

367
368
369
370
371
372
373

Bark working is more discreet, but several bone point tools were used for perforating bark. These points are made from caprine metapodials which have been divided into two parts by abrading. In contrast to hide working, there appears to be a close relationship between the typology and function of bone tools involved in bark working.

Most of the tasks represented in the domestic toolkit appear to be related to the manufacture of everyday objects from wood and bark.

374
375

- Plant processing

376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386

The processing of fibrous plants has been the subject of much debate among LBK specialists since the 1980s, particularly with regard to the interpretation of “polish 23”. This particular two-sided wear remains somewhat enigmatic, although the hypothesis that it refers to specific tasks involved in the processing of flax is now widely accepted (van Gijn 2010, van Gijn and Mazzucco 2013). On the sites from the Aisne valley, various blanks and tools appear to have been used for processing soft plant material; these include scrapers, burins, blades, etc. used for scraping or cutting (fig. 8a-b).

The scraping of semi-rigid plant material was carried out with a variety of tools, particularly scrapers and burins. Such tools were used in various activities, such as basketry. A couple of large bone points, made from deer metapodials, have also been linked to basket making (fig. 8c).

387
388

Soft mineral matter

389
390

-Ornaments

391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398

In this region of the LBK territory, different kinds of limestone bracelets and beads, as well as various shell ornaments, comprise the main forms of personal and clothing adornment (Bonnardin 2009). While such objects are quite well known from funerary contexts, they are less commonly found in domestic refuse, as are the tools involved in their manufacture; it therefore seems likely that such objects may have been produced in specific workshop areas.
Within the domestic toolkit, a few tools may have been used for working soft mineral materials.
Sandstone grooved abraders were used to shape some of these objects (fig. 9b). In the case of beads, they may have been used to calibrate their size, as suggested by the correspondence of the wear, especially striations, found on these tools and on the surfaces of the ornaments
399

(Hamon 2006, 2016). Blades were also used for the scraping of mineral surfaces and flint borers used to pierce objects (fig. 9a). In view of the small number of tools identified and the rather random use of different blanks, we suspect that the production of ornaments may have been an occasional activity or practised in certain areas and/or at certain times.

400

401

402

403

404

- *Ceramic Production*

405

Evidence for in situ ceramic production is very rare in the LBK refuse in the Aisne valley, despite the ubiquity of coarse and fine ware among domestic artefacts (Ilett, Constantin 2010).

407

While a number of hammerstones and anvils may have been used to process temper, there is no evidence that other lithic tools were involved in pottery production. Some of the bone tools analysed were used for pottery production. Two types of tool were identified: a number of large tools made from whole bovine ribs were used for the external regularization of coarse pottery and a very limited number of small tools, more elaborate from a technological point of view, were used for scraping the insides of fine pottery (fig. 9c). The apparent absence of tools used for pottery production could indicate that this activity was not organized in a domestic setting, but was carried out in common production areas outside the domestic sphere. However, given the presence of some bone tools involved in this activity, it is more likely that lithic tools in general played a very minor role in this activity and that tools of organic origin dominated most phases of the *chaîne opératoire* of pottery production.

408

409

410

411

412

413

414

415

416

417

418

419

- *Processing of pigments*

420

Among soft mineral matter, hematite and other pigments have to be mentioned. Evidence of their processing is quite common in western LBK contexts, especially in Normandy (Billard et al. 2016) and Hesbaye (Hamon et al. 2007, 2016). Use-wear analysis on the site of Geleen-Janskamperveld has shown that at least some of the pigment traces on grinding tools are not due to the processing of the material but to contact with coloured sediment (Verbaas and van Gijn 2007). In the Aisne valley only a handful of tools, mostly grinders and handstones, show hematite residues indicating the processing of ochre.

421

422

423

424

425

426

427

428

429

Discussion

430

431

A specific organization pattern can be proposed for the various activities represented, at the level of the house and the village (fig. 10). Some activities undoubtedly took place within all domestic units. This is particularly true of the acquisition and the processing of animal and plant food, a pattern already suggested following the combined study of archaeozoological remains and the distribution of grinding tools (Hachem and Hamon 2014). Two other tasks related to the exploitation of animal resources seem to have taken in most houses: firstly, the treatment of hides, especially the final stages of the transformation of fine skins and their regular treatment - the processing of thick skins seems to have taken place outside the domestic sphere; and, secondly, the manufacture of bone tools which is represented by waste and elements of the *chaîne opératoire* in every house. At least for these important activities, the self-sufficiency of households can be confirmed.

432

433

434

435

436

437

438

439

440

441

442

Other activities show a more uneven distribution, suggesting a different type of organisation. This may be related to the frequency of the tasks concerned, which may be more or less random, and to the possible specificity of some households in the organisation of production. Lithic production, woodworking and plant processing correspond to such a pattern. For these particular activities, one could assume an exchange between households or a possible specialisation in one or the other activity.

443

444

445

446

447
From another perspective, certain gaps in the production and *chaines operatoires* are clearly recognisable in the waste generated by domestic activities. The first relate to outdoor activities, which logically do not generate waste in the domestic sphere. These include hunting, tilling fields and harvesting or felling and debarking wood, for which there is very little evidence. A second group of activities producing large quantities of waste may have taken place outside the domestic sphere, possibly in the labour sector or elsewhere within the village. Two examples of this are the first stages of hide acquisition and processing, and butchering, which may have taken place in areas outside the main living areas of the village. A similar logic may have applied to the initial stages of stone and grinding tool production, which also generated large quantities of waste material. This organisation would have limited weight and transport logistics. Of course, these observations do not take into account the organic remains. In any case, this lack of evidence for different production and *chaines operatoires* indicates a strong spatial segmentation of activities and a complementarity between domestic units, village and outdoor areas.

Such patterns in the spatial organisation of activities raise questions about the various models of social organisation that have been proposed for the LBK. Our technological and use-wear analyses complete the panorama of self-sufficiency in the production and consumption of household units, especially in relation to food (Hachem and Hamon 2014; Gomart et al. 2015). These results also suggest that the organisation of some activities did not take place at the level of the domestic unit. At a second level, certain craft activities seem to have been organised at the level of the village rather than the household, even if they were carried out in the domestic sphere. This is consistent with some other suggestions, such as the concentration of skin treatment activities in certain zones of the villages or the concentration of lithic production in some domestic units 'possibly for the benefit of the entire settlement' in the centre of the village (van Gijn and Mazzucco 2013). Some specific functions seem to be associated with certain houses, which may have been the homes of specialised craftsmen. This could open up the possibility of an exchange system between the houses, or at least some form of economic connection, perhaps even dependence, between them.

## Conclusion

Based on our systematic use and wear analyses of flint, chipped stone and bone tools, it was possible to explore the range of activities that took place in the domestic sphere of the LBK. Our work, which focuses on the Aisne Valley (France), provides an accurate picture of the organisation of daily tasks within LBK villages as well as new insights into the spatial organisation of activities. From this new perspective, our research contributes to a better understanding of the social structure of the first peasant groups in Europe.

## Acknowledgements

This research has been funded by the ANR HOMES project 2019-2023 (n° ANR-18-CE27-0011, PI C. Hamon). N. Cayol has benefited from a research contribution from INRAP and A. Masclan has received a Fyssen Foundation grant (2018).

## Declaration of interest
499 Adams J. L., Delgado S., Dubreuil L., Hamon C., Plisson H., Risch R., 2009. Functional
501 analysis of macro-lithic artefacts: a focus on working surfaces. In: Sternke I. F., Eigeland L.,
502 Costa, L.-J. (eds.) Flint Raw Material Use in Prehistory. Archaeopress, Oxford.

503 Alavarez M., Mansur M.E., Pal N. 2014. Experiments in bone technology: a methodological
505 approach to functional analysis on bone tools, In : Mansur M.E., Lima M.A., Maigrot Y. (eds.)
506 *Traceology today: Methodological issues in the Old World and the Americas*, Proceedings of
507 the XVI world congress of the UISPP, BAR International Series, 2643, Oxford, pp. 19-26.

508 Allard P., Hamon C., Bonnardin S., Cayol N., Chartier M., Coudart A., Dubouloz J., Gomart
510 L., Hachem L., Ilett M., Meunier K., Monchablon C., Thevenet C. 2013. Linear pottery
511 domestic space: taphonomy, distribution of finds, and economy in the Aisne valley settlements
512 In Hamon C., Allard P., Ilett M. (eds.) 2013. The domestic Space in LBK Settlements,
513 Internationale Archäologie - Arbeitsgemeinschaft, Symposium, Tagung, Kongress band 17, Verlag
514 Marie Leidorf, Rahden/Westf., pp. 9-28.

515 Allard P., Cayol N. 2022. Industrie lithique et activités domestiques au Néolithique ancien : le
517 Rubané de la vallée de l'Aisne, Bulletin de la Société préhistorique française, 119, 2 : 223-257.

518 Beugnier V. 2012. L'industrie en silex taillé : étude technologique et fonctionnelle, In :
519 Livingstone Smith A. (dir.), Habitats du Néolithique ancien en Hainaut occidental (Ath et
520 Beloeil, Belgique) : Ormeignies « Le Pilori » et Aubechies « Coron Maton », Service public de
521 Wallonie (coll. Études et documents, Archéologie, 18), Namur, pp. 58-88

523 Billard C., Bostyn F., Hamon C., Meunier K., 2014. L'habitat du Néolithique ancien de
525 Colombelles « Le Lazzaro » (Calvados), Mémoire 58, Société Préhistorique Française, Paris,
526 408 p.

527 Billard C., Bosquet D., Dreesen R., Goemaere É., Hamon C., Jadin I., Salomon H., Savary X.
528 (eds.), 2016. Autour de l'hématite / About haematite. Actes de / Acts of Jambes, 7-8/02/2013,
529 Liège, ERAUL, 143 – Liège-Brussels-Leuven, Studia Praehistorica Belgica, 8 –
530 *Anthropologica et Præhistorica*, 125/2014.
531

532 Bonnardin S. 2009. La parure funéraire des premières sociétés agro-pastorales des Bassins
533 parisien et rhénan : Rubané, Hinkesltein et Villeneuve-Saint-Germain, Mémoire de la Société
534 Préhistorique française 49, Société préhistorique française, Paris.

535 Caspar JP. 1985. Le village rubané de Darion (province de Liège, Belgique). Etudes
536 préliminaires. IV: Etude tracéologique de l'industrie de silex du village rubané de Darion:
537 données préliminaires. Bulletin de la Société Royale Belge d'Anthropologie et de Préhistoire
538 Bruxelles 96: 49-74.

540 Caspar J.-P. 1988. Contribution à la tracéologie de l'industrie lithique du Néolithique ancien
dans l'Europe nordoccidentale, Thèse de doctorat de l'université de Louvain, Louvain, 3 vol.

543 Cayol N. 2002. *Fonction de l'outillage lithique du Rubané Récent du Bassin parisien : l'exemple
de quatre unités d'habitation de la vallée de l'Aisne*. Mémoire de DEA, Université de Paris 1-
545 Panthéon-Sorbonne.

547
548 Christensen M., Goutas N. (dir.) 2018. « À coup d'éclats ! » *La fracturation des matières osseuses en Préhistoire*, Séances de la SPF, 13, SPF, Paris, 368 p.

550

551 Christidou R. 1999. *Outils en os néolithiques du Nord de la Grèce : étude technologique*,
552 PhD, Université de Paris X Nanterre, 2 vol. multigraphiés, 418 p.

553

554 Giligny F., Lo Carmine A., Bostyn F., Cayol N., Maigrot Y. 2016. Les techniques
d'extraction : une expérimentation, In : F. Bostyn et F. Giligny (dir.), *La hache de silex dans
le Val de Seine – Production et diffusion des haches au Néolithique*, Sidestone Press, Leiden,
p.105-148.

558

559 Gomart L., Hachem L., Hamon C., Giligny F., Ilett M. 2015. Household integration in Neolithic
560 villages: a new model for the Linear Pottery Culture in west central, Journal of Anthropological
561 Archaeology, 40: 230-249.

562

563 Griffitts J.L. 2006. *Bone tools and technological choice: Change and stability on the Northern Plains*, PhD, University of Arizona, 629 p.

565

566 Hachem L. 2011. Le site néolithique de Cuiry-lès-Chaudardes -I- De l'analyse de la faune à la
567 structuration sociale, Rahden/Westf., Verlag M. Leidorf GmbH (coll. Internationale
568 Archäologie, 120), 522 p.

569

570 Hachem L., Hamon C. 2014. Linear Pottery Culture Household Organisation. An Economic
571 Model, In : Whittle A., Bickle P. (dir.), Early farmers, The view from Archaeology and Science,
572 Oxford University Press (coll. Proceedings of the British Academy, 198), Oxford, pp. 159-180.

573

574 Hamon C. 2006. Broyage et abrasion au Néolithique ancien. Caractérisation technique et
575 fonctionnelle des outillages en grès du Bassin parisien, Archaeopress, Oxford, (coll. BAR,
576 International Reports, S1551), 342 p.

577

578 Hamon, C., 2008. Functional analysis of stone grinding and polishing tools from the earliest Neolithic
579 of north-western Europe. J. Archaeol. Sci. 35, 1502-1520.

580

581 Hamon C. 2016. Technology and function of grooved abraders in the early Neolithic of
582 northwestern Europe, Journal of lithic studies 3 (3), doi:10.2218/jls.v3i3.1649.

583

584 Hamon C., Goemaere E. 2007. Outils de broyage et outils d'abrasion en contexte rubané de
585 Hesbaye : premiers résultats d'une analyse techno-fonctionnelle, Notae Praehistoricae 27 : 109-
586 119

587

588 Hamon C., Billard C., Bosquet D., Constantin C., Jadin I. 2016. Usages et transformation de
589 l'hématite dans le Néolithique ancien d'Europe du Nord-Ouest, In : Billard C., Bosquet D.,
590 Dreesen R., Goemaere É., Hamon C., Jadin I., Salomon H., Savary X. (eds.), *Autour de
l'hématite / About haematite. Actes de / Acts of Jambes, 7-8/02/2013*, Liège, ERAUL, 143 –
591 Liège-Brussels-Leuven, Studia Praehistorica Belgica, 8 – *Anthropologica et Præhistorica*,
592 125/2014.

594

595 Hamon C., Gomart L. 2021. Social Rules and Household Interactions Within the LBK: Long-Standing Debates,
596 New Perspectives *Open Archaeology* 7 (1): 690-704, https://doi.org/10.1515/opar-2020-0158

597
598 Hamon C., Cagnato C., Emery-Barbier A., Salavert A. 2020 - Food practices of the first farmers of Europe: Combined use-wear and microbotanical studies of Early Neolithic grinding tools from the Paris Basin Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 36 (2021) 102764.

601 Hayes, E., Pardoe, C., Fullagar, R., 2018. *Sandstone grinding/pounding tools: Use-trace reference libraries and Australian archaeological applications*, Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports, 20: 97-114.

605 Ilett M., Constantin C. 2010. La production céramique du Rubané de la vallée de l'Aisne : état des lieux. In : Manen C., Convertini F., Binder D., Sénépart I. (dir.) *Premières sociétés paysannes en Méditerranée occidentale. Structures des productions céramiques*, Mémoire 51, Société Préhistorique Française, Paris, p. 239-248.

610 Ilett M. 2012. Linear Pottery and Blicquy/Villeneuve-Saint-Germain settlement in the Aisne valley and its environs: an overview. In : Wolfram S., Stäuble H., (dir.) *Siedlungsstrukturen und Kulturwandel in der Bandkeramik. Beiträge der internationalen Tagung « Neue Fragen zur Bandkeramik oder alles beim Alten ?! Leipzig, 23. bis 24 September 2010. Arbeits- und Forschungsberichte zur sächsischen Bodendenkmalpflege*, Beiheft 25, Dresden, pp. 69-79.

616 Maigrot Y. 1997. Tracéologie des outils tranchants en os des Ve et IVe millénaires av. J.-C. en Bassin parisien, *Bulletin de la Société préhistorique française*, 94 (2) : 198-216.
https://www.persee.fr/doc/bspf_0249-7638_1997_num_94_2_10878

620 Maigrot Y. 2001. Technical and functional study of ethnographic (Irian Jaya, Indonesia) and archaeological (Chalain and Clairvaux, Jura, FRance, 30th century BC) tools made from boars’tusks, In : Beyries S., Pétrequin P. (dir.), Ethno-arcaheology and its transfers, Bournemouth, BAR International Series, Oxford, pp. 67-79.

625 Maigrot Y. 2003. Etude technologique et fonctionnelle de l'outillage en matières dures animales La station 4 de Chalain (Néolithique final, Jura, France), PhD, Université Paris I - Panthéon Sorbonne, Paris, 284 p.

629 Maigrot Y. 2010. Étude comparative de deux séries d'outils en os impliqués dans la production céramique néolithique du Jura : Clairvaux XIV (Néolithique moyen) et Chalain 4 (Néolithique final), *Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Française*, 107 (4) : 737-753.

633 Maigrot Y., Provenzano N. 2020. Quand l'expérimentation pointe les limites de l'interprétation tracéologique. Le cas des outils sur os tronqués, in S. Beyries (dir.), *Expérimentation en archéologie de la préhistoire*, Editions des archives contemporaines (Sciences archéologiques), Paris, pp. 31-37.

638 Masclans A., Hamon C., Jeunesse C., Bickle P. 2021. A sexual division of labour at the start of agriculture? A multi-proxy comparison through grave good stone tool technological and use-wear analysis. PLoS ONE 16(4): e0249130. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0249130

642 Masclans Latorre A., Bickle P., Hamon C. 2020. Gendered inequalities in the early Neolithic? Exploring gender relationships at the cemetery of Vedrovice using use-wear analysis, diet and mobility. Journal of archaeological method and theory 28 (1) : 232-273.

646 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10816-020-09453-y

647
648 Olsen S.L. 1984. Analytical approaches to the manufacture and use of bone artifacts in
649 Prehistory, PhD, Institute of Archaeology, University of London, 503 p.

650 Plisson H. 1985. Etude fonctionnelle d'outillages lithiques préhistoriques par l'analyse des
651 micro-usures : recherche méthodologique et archéologique. Thèse de doctorat, Université de
652 Paris I Panthéon Sorbonne.

653 Sidéra I. 1984. L'industrie osseuse de Cuiry-lès-Chaudardes (Aisne), Mémoire de maîtrise, Université Paris 1.

654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
Olivier de Perrot, Edmond de Perrot, and Jean-Pierre Le Guénot. 1993. *Les出of the French Prehistory and Archeology Society* 42:1-24.

660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
van Gijn A. 2012. Nouveau regard sur la néolithisation. Les industries osseuses de l'Anatolie au
690
Bassin parisien via la Méditerranée, Travaux de la Maison René Ginouvès, 15, De Boccard,
691
Paris, 106p.

663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
van Gijn A. 2006. Implements of bone and antler: a Mesolithic tradition continued, In: Louwe
690
Kooijmans L.P. and Jongste P.F.B. (eds.) *Schippluiden. A Neolithic settlement on the Dutch
691
North Sea Coast c. 3500 CAL BC*, Analecta Praehistorica Leidensia 37/38, University of
692
Leiden, Leiden, pp. 207-24.

665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
Une consécration aux matières animales, In : Anderson P. C., Beyries S., Otte M. et Plisson
690
H. (eds.) Traces et fonctions : les gestes retrouvés, Actes du colloque international de Liège,
691
vol. 2, ERAUL, Liège, 50, pp.147-157.

668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
Sidéra I. 2000. Animaux domestiques, bêtes sauvages et objets en matières animales
du Rubané au Michelsberg. De l'économie aux symboles, des techniques à la culture, Gallia
Préhistoire 42 : 108-194.

672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
Sidéra I. 2012. Nouveau regard sur la néolithisation. Les industries osseuses de l'Anatolie au
Bassin parisien via la Méditerranée, Travaux de la Maison René Ginouvès, 15, De Boccard,
Paris, 106p.

676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
Struckmeyer K. 2011. Die Knochen- und Geweihgeräte der Feddersen Wierde.
Gebrauchsspurenanalysen an Geräten von der Römischen Kaiserzeit bis zum Mittelalter und
ethnoarchäologische Vergleiche, Studien zur Landschafts- und Siedlungsgeschichte im
südlichen Nordseegebiet 2, Verlag Marie Leidorf Rahden, 259 p.

681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
van Gijn A. 1990. The wear and tear of flint. Principles of functional analysis applied to
Dutch Neolithic assemblages, Analecta Praehistorica Leidensia 22.

684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
van Gijn, A. 2006. Implements of bone and antler: a Mesolithic tradition continued, In: Louwe
Kooijmans L.P. and Jongste P.F.B. (eds.) *Schippluiden. A Neolithic settlement on the Dutch
North Sea Coast c. 3500 CAL BC*, Analecta Praehistorica Leidensia 37/38, University of
Leiden, Leiden, pp. 207-24.

689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
van Gijn A. 2010. Flint in focus. Lithic biographies in the Neolithic and Bronze Age,
Sidestone Press, Leiden.

692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
Van Gijn A., Mazzucco N. 2013. Domestic activities at the Linear Pottery site of Elsloo
(Netherlands): a look from under the microscoop, In : Hamon C., Allard P., Ilett M. (eds.), The
Domestic Space in LBK Settlements, Verlag Marie Leidorf GmbH (coll. Internationale
Archäologie, Arbeitsgemeinschaft, Symposium Tagung, Kongress, 17), Rahden/Westf., pp.
111-126.
698

699 Vaughan P. 1994. Microwear analysis of flints from the Bandkeramik sites of Langweiler 8

700 and Laurenzberg 7, In: Lüning J., Stheli P. (dir.), Die Bandkeramik im Merzbachtal auf der

701 Aldenhovener Platte, Rheinland-Verlag (coll. Rhein Ausgrabungen, 36), Köln, pp. 535-552.

702

703 Verbaas A., van Gijn 2007. Use wear analysis of the flint tools from GeleenJanskamperveld.

704 In: van De Velde, P. (ed.) GeleenJanskamperveld, Analecta Praehistorica Leidensia 39, pp.

705 173-184.

706

707 Wotjczak D., Kerdy M. 2018. They left traces. Preliminary analyses of micro-wear traces on

708 bone and antler tools from Sutz-Lattrigen Aussen, Lake Bienne Switzerland, Journal of

709 Archaeological Science : Report 17 : 798-808.

710

711 Xie L. 2014. Early to middle Holocene earth-working implements an Neolithic land-use

712 strategies on the Ningshao Plain, China, PhD, University of Arizona, 370 p.

713

714 Скочина С.Н. 2017. *Каменная и костяная индустрия в эпоху Неолита лесостепного*

715 пришшимья, Федеральное Государственное Бюджетное Учреждение Науки. Институт

716 Проблем освоения Севера Сибирского Отделения Российской Академии Наук, 321с.

717

718

719

720

721

722

723
## Captions

Fig. 1 Map of the Aisne Valley, with the locations of LBK sites. Black dots: main sites selected for our study. BLF = Bucy-le-Long La fosselle, BLH = Bucy-le-Long la Héronnière; MAC = Missy-sur-Aisne le Culot; CGH = Chassemy le Grand Horle; PBP = Presles et Boves les Bois Plantés; CCF= Cuiry-les-Chaudardes les Fontinettes; PPM = Pontavert le Port au Marbre; BVT = Berry-au-Bac le Vieux Tordoir; BCP = Berry-au-Bac le Chemin de la Pêcherie ; BCM = Berry-au-Bac la Croix Maigret ; MLB = Menneville la Bourguignotte ; MDV = Menneville Derrière le Village (Map : M. Ilett, L. Aubry, F. Couderc).

Fig. 2. Animal food acquisition. a-b) Arrows indicate deliberate abrasions (a et b) and use-wear related to impact (a); c) view of the edge of a blade from Cuiry-lès-Chaudardes "les Fontinettes" involved in cutting animal material, with contact with bone matter (x200). (illustration : N. Cayol).

Fig. 3. Vegetal food acquisition and transformation. a) Sickle blade from Cuiry-lès-Chaudardes "les Fontinettes" with view of the sickle gloss on the active edge used to harvest soft siliceous plants (x100) (illustration : N. Cayol); b) Quern and grinder from the Berry-au-Bac "le Vieux Tordoir" hoard, with detail of the use-wear traces on the grinding surfaces (after Hamon *et al.* 2021).

Fig. 4. Lithic production. a) Punch from Menneville "Derrière le village" (illustration: Y. Maigrot); b) Hammerstones used to produce grinding tools (left) and grinder roughouts (right) from domestic pit no. 16 at Chassemy "le Grand Horle" (illustration: C. Hamon).

Fig. 5. Bone tool production. a) Detail of traces related to bone tool production in Bucy-le-Long "la Heronnière" including transverse and longitudinal abrasion, and diaphysis sawing with an example of a bone ring (illustration: Y. Maigrot); b) Multiple grooved abrader in ferruginous sandstone from Bucy-le-Long "la Heronnière" with use-wear traces of hard animal matter abrasion (illustration: C. Hamon).

Fig. 6. Skin treatment. a) Scrapers on blade (n°1 and 2) used for scraping hides; b) view of the trace from hide working present on the front of the scraper (x100) (illustration: N. Cayol); c) Bone tools involved in skin treatment. 1) rib from Bucy-le-Long "la Heronnière"; 2) small point from Menneville "Derrière le village"; 3) large point from Bucy-le-Long "la Heronnière"; 4) fragment of a point from Menneville "Derrière le village" (illustration : Y. Maigrot).

Fig. 7. Wood and bark work. a) Pig / boar's tusk from Bucy-Le-long "la Héronnière" ; b) Bone chisels from Menneville "Derrière le village" (illustration : Y. Maigrot); c) "Scraper-adze" on blade from Bucy-Le-long "la Héronnière" used in throwing percussion on wood, with detail of wear left by hard plant material on the front of this kind of tool (x200) (illustration: N. Cayol); d. Abraded points from Bucy-le-Long "la Heronnière" used for bark work (illustration : Y. Maigrot).

Fig. 8. Plant-base craft. a) "Burin" (n°1) from Berry-au-Bac "la Croix-Maigret" used for scraping soft, rigid siliceous plants, with detail of the use-wear traces from soft siliceous plants scraping on the attack face ("pan" of the burin, x 200); b) Arrowhead from Cuiry-lès-Chaudardes "les Fontinettes" displaying use-wear traces of the famous "polish 23", left by plants scraping. The photographs show the marked difference between the two aspects of the two sides of the same active edge, with the shiny trace (top, x 200) on one side and dull abrasive
wear on the other (bottom, x100) (illustration: N. Cayol); c) Bone point used for basketry from
Menneville "Derrière le village" (illustration: Y. Maigrot).

Fig. 9. Soft mineral matter processing. a) Borer on blade from Berry-au-Bac "la Croix-Maigret" displaying traces of mineral material drilling, with a detailed view of the worn tip (x100) (illustration: N. Cayol); b) Grooved abrader from Menneville "Derrière le village" with traces of soft mineral abrasion (illustration: C. Hamon); c) Bone tools from Menneville "Derrière le village" used for ceramic production: large tool on rib and small scrapers with detail of use-wear traces (illustration: Y. Maigrot).

Fig 10. Schematic view of the distribution of activities in the domestic units, within all domestic units, with unequal distribution or absence.

**Supplementary data**

File 1 : Detail of flint elements analysed by use-wear analysis per houses selected

File 2 : Detail of ground stone tools elements analysed by use-wear analysis per houses selected

File 3 : Detail of bone elements analysed by use-wear analysis per houses selected

File 4 : Detail of identified transformed matter per house after flint tools use-wear analysis

File 5 : Detail of identified transformed matter per house after ground stone tools use-wear analysis

File 6 : Detail of identified transformed matter per house after bone tools use-wear analysis
<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>
5 cm

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

a

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

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /></figure>

b

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /></figure>

C

<figure><img src="image_6.png" /></figure>

x 200
## Harvesting

<figure><img src="image_7.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_8.png" /></figure>

## Grinding

<figure><img src="image_9.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_10.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_11.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_12.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_13.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_14.png" /></figure>
## Flint Debitage

<figure><img src="image_15.png" /></figure>

## Quern shaping

<figure><img src="image_16.png" /></figure>
<figure><img src="image_17.png" /><figcaption>Transverse
abrasion</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_18.png" /><figcaption>Longitudinal
abrasion</figcaption></figure>

a

<figure><img src="image_19.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_20.png" /><figcaption>Diaphysis
sawing</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_21.png" /></figure>

b
<figure><img src="image_22.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_23.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_24.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_25.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_26.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_27.png" /></figure>

2

<figure><img src="image_28.png" /></figure>

3

<figure><img src="image_29.png" /></figure>

c
Wood working

<figure><img src="image_30.png" /></figure>

a

<figure><img src="image_31.png" /></figure>

b

<figure><img src="image_32.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_33.png" /></figure>

c

Bark working

<figure><img src="image_34.png" /></figure>

d
Plant-base crafts

<figure><img src="image_35.png" /></figure>

a

b

Basketry

<figure><img src="image_36.png" /></figure>

c
## Soft mineral matters (ornaments?)

<figure><img src="image_37.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_38.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_39.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_40.png" /></figure>

## Ceramic production

<figure><img src="image_41.png" /></figure>

<figure><img src="image_42.png" /></figure>
Within all domestic units

* Animal and plant food acquisition and processing
* Skin treatment
* Bone tools production

Inequal distribution

* Lithic production
* Wood working
* Plant processing

Lack within each domestic units

* First stages of skin acquisition and treatment + butchery
* Wood felling, debarking
* First stages of lithic and grinding tools production
* No digging tools