TITLE: Differentiation between different soft hammers stigmats, quantitative and traceological approach
AUTHORS: Jean-Thomas Vie, zixuan shen

[DESCRIPTION]
Many studies in archaeology focus on the traces associated with stone knapping during prehistory, debating their correlation with the techniques used (Clément, 2021; Pelegrin, 2000). However, it is important to note that these traces are intimately linked to the physical qualities of the rock, as well as its response to the gesture, force, and experience of the knapper. These criteria can lead to a diversity of marks but can also introduce biases into the analysis, especially as the sensitivity of some rocks varies when struck. Thus, the complexity of interpreting knapping traces intensifies when adopting a qualitative approach, highlighting the multitude of factors to consider for precise analysis.

Furthermore, the historical approach to the analysis of soft percussion use has primarily focused on specific regions such as Europe (Roussel et al., 2009), North Africa (Sari, 2016), the Middle East (Pelegrin and Inizan, 2013), and the United States. These analyses have largely relied on locally available materials, such as limestone, deer antler, or boxwood. Consequently, they offer a limited perspective and may not necessarily generalize results to other geographical or ecological contexts. Additionally, while the use of different soft percussors and their identity have been established in areas where deer are found, many questions remain regarding the identity of the soft percussor in historically deer-free ecological zones. Acquiring soft percussors from animal wood is not possible, but the use of other materials such as hard vegetal wood may have played a similar role.

Through experimental flake production and the traceological study of marks on the platforms of these productions resulting from soft percussion, it would be possible to determine specific traces associated with vegetal soft percussion.

Therefore, we try to compare knapping by different percussors (three soft hammers and one hard hammer) on different raw materials, and observe their dimensional data and technical characteristics.

[BEFORE_START]
Be sure to conduct this experimentation in a controlled environment to avoid any contamination of archaeological sites.

[STEPS]
SECTION: Selection of a specific raw material
3. Select Raw material : Sandstone quartzite, Quartzite, Flint, Quartz
SECTION: Knapping with different hammers in order to produce flakes
6.  Use hammer from low to high hardness to produce flakes : 
Soft rock percussor, volcanic rock percussor.
We plan to knap in the order of Sandstone quartzite, Quartzite, Flint, Quartz. For each raw material, we use the hammer in order to get 10 flakes (i.e., for each raw material, we will get 40 flakes totally）

7. please use only tangential gesture

SECTION: Camera setting
1. Place the camera in front of the experimentator
SECTION: Camera setting
2. run the carmera and the experimentator explain what do he want to produce 
17.3. thickness of the flake
17.6. Hackel
17.5. thickness of the talus
17.4. widness of the talus
17.9. ripples
17.10. Bulb scar
17.11. angle de 
chasse (dorsal talus angle)
17.12. flaking angle (ventral talus angle)
17.13. presence of point of impact
18.1. smached residue and strations 
Take a picture if there is one and describe it 
18.2. craks
18.4. scar small removal retouchings 
18.3. hertzian cone 40x 50x zoom
angle of the cone 
size of the cone 
smached crack
14. 10 flakes with soft rock percussor
12. 10 flakes with  Deer antler percussor
8. first produce 10 flakes with Boxwood percussor
SECTION: Selection of a specific raw material
5. Preparation of a bifacial preform while opening somes striking platforms (optional)

18.5. stration
10. 10 flakes with bone percussor 
16. you can also store the core used to produce the flakes 
9. Store each flake with a paper explaining the type of hammer the raw material the gesture of production position in the dicritical schema with a number or on the excel document
11. Store each flake with a paper explaining the type of hammer the raw material the gesture of production position in the dicritical schema with a number or on the excel document
13. Store each flake with a paper explaining the type of hammer the raw material the gesture of production position in the dicritical schema with a number or on the excel document
15. Store each flake with a paper explaining the type of hammer the raw material the gesture of production position in the dicritical schema with a number or on the excel document
SECTION: Selection of a specific raw material
5.1. Choosing the suitable hammer：1 Boxwood percussor、2 Deer antler percussor、3 Soft rock percussor such as sandstone or limestone、 4 bone hammer
SECTION: Selection of a specific raw material
4. Preparation of the elongated flake core：
SECTION: Data record
17. Macro Mesurments 
SECTION: Data record
17.1. technological Leght of the piece 
SECTION: Data record
17.2. widness of the flake 
18. Micro trace (micro ware on talus)
SECTION: Data analysis
19. mean comparaison test 
SECTION: Data analysis
19.1. max and min size 
SECTION: Data analysis
19.2. 
SECTION: Data analysis
19.3. 
SECTION: Data analysis
20. boxplot
SECTION: Data analysis
20.2. 
SECTION: Data analysis
20.1. see the size of the flakes
SECTION: Data analysis
21. qualitative approcha
17.7. morphology of the bulb
17.8. lip