A microlith is a small stone tool usually made of flint or chert and typically a centimetre or so in length and half a centimetre wide. They were made by humans from around 35,000 to 3,000 years ago, across Europe, Africa, Asia and Australia. The microliths were used in spear points and arrowheads.

Microliths are produced from either a small blade (microblade) or a larger blade-like piece of flint by abrupt or truncated retouching, which leaves a very typical piece of waste, called a microburin. The microliths themselves are sufficiently worked so as to be distinguishable from workshop waste or accidents.

Two families of microliths are usually defined: laminar and geometric. An assemblage of microliths can be used to date an archeological site. Laminar microliths are associated with the end of the Upper Paleolithic and the beginning of the Epipaleolithic era; geometric microliths are characteristic of the Mesolithic and the Neolithic. Geometric microliths may be triangular, trapezoid or lunate. Microlith production generally declined following the introduction of agriculture (8000 BCE) but continued later in cultures with a deeply rooted hunting tradition.

Regardless of type, microliths were used to form the points of hunting weapons, such as spears and (in later periods) arrows, and other artifacts and are found throughout Africa, Asia and Europe. They were utilised with wood, bone, resin and fiber to form a composite tool or weapon, and traces of wood to which microliths were attached have been found in Sweden, Denmark and England. An average of between six and eighteen microliths may often have been used in one spear or harpoon, but only one or two in an arrow.

Kebaran culture microliths 22000-18000 BP
Kebaran culture microliths from a flint prepared core, 22,000-18,000 BP.
Microlith productions, Kebaran culture, 22,000-18,000 BP, Israel (detail)
Microlith productions, Kebaran culture, 22,000-18,000 BP

Types of microlith

Microlith in hand
Backed edge bladelet

Laminar and non-geometric microliths

Laminar microliths date from at least the Gravettian culture or possibly the start of the Upper Paleolithic era, and they are found all through the Mesolithic and Neolithic eras. "Noailles" burins and micro-gravettes (see § Micro points, below) indicate that the production of microliths had already started in the Gravettian culture.[1] This style of flint working flourished during the Magdalenian period and persisted in numerous Epipaleolithic traditions all around the Mediterranean basin. These microliths are slightly larger than the geometric microliths that followed and were made from the flakes of flint obtained ad hoc from a small nucleus or from a depleted nucleus of flint. They were produced either by percussion or by the application of a variable pressure (although pressure is the best option, this method of producing microliths is complicated and was not the most commonly used technique).[2]

Truncated blade

There are three basic types of laminar microlith. The truncated blade type can be divided into a number of sub-types depending on the position of the truncation (for example, oblique, square or double) and according to its form, for example, concave or convex. "Raclette scrapers" are notable for their particular form, being blades or flakes whose edges have been sharply retouched until they are semicircular or even shapeless. Raclettes are indefinite cultural indicators, as they appear from the Upper Paleolithic through to the Neolithic.

Hojita de Fresno de la Ribera

Flint blade

Microlame 0.225.4

Truncated bladelet

Microlame 0.225.1

Backed edge bladelet

Flechette Gavaudun 231-3 (3)

Dufour bladelet

Backed edge blades

Backed edge blades have one of the edges, generally a side one, rounded or chamfered by abrupt retouching. There are fewer types of these blades, and may be divided into those where the entire edge is rounded and those where only a part is rounded, or even straight. They are fundamental in the blade-forming processes, and from them, innumerable other types were developed.[3] Dufour bladelets are up to three centimeters in length, finely shaped with a curved profile whose retouches are semi-abrupt and which characterize a particular phase of the Aurignacian period. Solutrean backed edge blades display pronounced and abrupt retouching, so that they are long and narrow and, although rare, characterize certain phases of the Solutrean period. Ouchtata bladelets are similar to the others, except that the retouched back is not uniform but irregular; this type of microlith characterizes certain periods of the Epipaleolithic Saharans. The Ibero-Maurusian and the Montbani bladelet, with a partial and irregular lateral retouching, is characteristic of the Italian Tardenoisian.[4]

Micro points

These are very sharp bladelets formed by abrupt retouching. There are a huge number of regional varieties of these microliths, nearly all of which are very hard to distinguish (especially those from the western area) without knowing the archaeological context in which they appear. The following is a small selection. Omitted are the foliaceous tips (also called leafed tips), which are characterized by a covering retouch and which constitute a group apart.[5]

  • The Châtelperrón point is not a true microlith, although it is close to the required dimensions. Its antiquity and its short, curved blade edge make it the antecedent of many laminar microliths.
  • The Micro-gravette or Gravette micro point is a microlith version of the Gravette point and is a narrow bladelet with an abrupt retouch, which gives it a characteristically sharp edge when compared to other types.
  • The Azilian point links the Magdalenian microlith points with those from the western Epipaleolithic. They can be identified by a rough and invasive retouching.
  • The Ahrensburgian point is also a peripheral paleolithic or western Epipaleolithic piece, but with a more specific morphology, as it is formed on a blade (not on a bladelet), is obliquely truncated and has a small tongue that possibly served as a haft on a spear point.

The next group contains a number of points from the Middle East characterized as cultural markers.

  • The Emireh point from the Upper Paleolithic is almost the same as one found in Châtelperrón, which is likely to be contemporary, although they are slightly shorter and also appear to be fashioned from a blade and not a bladelet.
  • The El-Wad point is from the end of the Upper Paleolithic from the same area, made from a very long, thin bladelet.
  • The El-Khiam point has been identified by the Spanish archeologist González Echegaray in Protoneolithic sites in Jordan. They are little known but easy to identify by two basal notches, doubtless used as a haft.[6]
Pointes de chatelperron

Châtelperrón points

Pointe de la Gravette MHNT PRE.2009.0.231.2.fond (2)


Pointe 228.2 La Tourasse (3)

Azilian point

Ahrensburg point

Ahrensburguien point

El-Wad point

El-Wad point

Three El-Khiam points from JQ-101

El-Khiam point

Adelaida point

Adelaide point

Helwan points (Abu Salem points sub-type)

Helwan points (Abu Salem points sub-type)

The Adelaide point is found in Australia. Its construction, based on truncations on a blade, has a nearly trapezoidal form. The Adelaide point emphasizes the range of variation in both time and culture of the laminar microliths; it also shows their technological differences, but sometimes morphological similarities, with geometric microliths. Laminar microliths can also sometimes be described as trapezoidal, triangular or lunate.[7] However, as we will see below, they are distinct from the geometric microliths because of the strokes used in the manufacture of geometric microliths, which mainly involved the microburin technique.

Geometric microliths

Geometric microliths are a clearly defined type of stone tool, at least in their basic forms. They can be divided into trapezoid, triangular and lunate (half-moon) forms, although there are many subdivisions of each of these types. A microburin is included among the illustrations below because, although it is not a geometrical microlith (or even a tool),[8] it is now seen as a characteristic waste product from the manufacture of these geometric microliths:



Microlito Trapecio


Microlito Triángulo


Microlito Segmento de-círculo


Geometric microliths, though rare, are present as trapezoids in Northwest Africa in the Iberomaurusian. They later appear in Europe in the Magdalenian[9] initially as elongated triangles and later as trapezoids (although the microburin technique is seen from the Perigordian), they are mostly seen during the Epipaleolithic and the Neolithic. They remained in existence even into the Copper Age and Bronze Age, competing with "leafed" and then metallic arrowheads.

Microburin technique

Arpón con microlitos
The most widely accepted hypothesis is that geometric microliths were used on projectiles such as this harpoon.
Tværmose arrow (Denmark)
Trapezoid microliths and arrow with a trapeze used to strengthen the tip, found in a peat bog at Tværmose (Denmark)

All the currently known geometric microliths share the same fundamental characteristics – only their shapes vary. They were all made from blades or from microblades (nearly always of flint), using the microburin technique (which implies that it is not possible to conserve the remains of the heel or the conchoidal flakes from the blank). The pieces were then finished by a percussive retouching of the edges (generally leaving one side with the natural edge of the blank), giving the piece its definitive polygonal form. For example, in order to make a triangle, two adjacent notches were retouched, leaving free the third edge or base[3] (using the terminology of Fortea). They generally have one long axis and concave or convex edges, and it is possible for them to have a gibbosity (hump) or indentations. Triangular microliths may be isosceles, scalene or equilateral. In the case of trapezoid geometric microliths, on the other hand, the notches are not retouched, leaving a portion of the natural edge between them. Trapezoids can be further subdivided into symmetrical, asymmetrical and those with concave edges. Lunate microliths have the least diversity of all and may be either semicircular or segmental.

Archeological findings and the analysis of wear marks, or use-wear analysis, has shown that, predictably, the tips of spears, harpoons and other light projectiles of varying size received the most wear. Microliths were also used from the Neolithic on arrows, although a decline in this use coincided with the appearance of bifacial or "leafed" arrowheads that became widespread in the Chalcolithic period, or Copper Age (that is, stone arrowheads were increasingly made by a different technique during this later period).

Weapons and tools

Not all the different types of laminar microliths had functions that are clearly understood. It is likely that they contributed to the points of spears or light projectiles, and their small size suggests that they were fixed in some way to a shaft or handle.[10][11]

Backed edge bladelets are particularly abundant at a site in France that preserves habitation from the late Magdalenian – the Pincevent. In the remains of some of the hearths at this location, bladelets are found in groups of three, perhaps indicating that they were mounted in threes on their handles. A javelin tip made of horn has been found at this site with grooves made for flint bladelets that could have been secured using a resinous substance. Signs of much wear and tear have been found on some of these finds.

Specialists have carried out lithic or microwear analysis on artefacts, but it has sometimes proved difficult to distinguish those fractures made during the process of fashioning the flint implement from those made during its use. Microliths found at Hengistbury Head in Dorset, England, show features that can be confused with chisel marks, but which might also have been produced when the tip hit a hard object and splintered.[12] Microliths from other locations have presented the same problems of interpretation.[13]

An exceptional piece of evidence for the use of microliths has been found in the excavations of the cave at Lascaux in the French Dordogne. Twenty backed edge bladelets were found with the remains of a resinous substance and the imprint of a circular handle (a horn). It appears that the bladelets might have been fixed in groups like the teeth of a harpoon or similar weapon.

In all these locations, the microliths found have been backed edge blades, tips and crude flakes. Despite the great number of geometric microliths that have been found in Western Europe, few examples show any clear evidence of their use, and all the examples are from the Mesolithic or Neolithic periods. Despite this, there is unanimity amongst researchers that these items were used to increase the penetrating potential of light projectiles such as harpoons, assegais, javelins and arrows.



Sépulture de Teviec Global
Two skeletons in the Tomb of Téviec

In France, one unusual find stands out: in the Mesolithic cemetery of Téviec, in Morbihan, one of the skeletons that has been found has a geometric microlith lodged in one of its vertebra. All indications suggest that the person died because of this projectile; whether by intention or by accident is unknown. It is widely agreed that geometric microliths were mainly used in hunting and fishing, but they may also have been used as weapons.[14]


Well-preserved examples of arrows with microliths in Scandinavia have been found at Loshult, at Osby in Sweden, and Tværmose, at Vinderup in Denmark. These finds, which have been preserved practically intact due to the special conditions of the peat bogs, have included wooden arrows with microliths attached to the tip by resinous substances and cords.


There are many examples of possible tools from Mesolithic deposits in England. Possibly the best known is a microlith from Star Carr in Yorkshire that retains residues of resin, probably used to fix it to the tip of a projectile. Recent excavations have found other examples. Archeologists at the Risby Warren V site in Lincolnshire have uncovered a row of eight triangular microliths that are equidistantly aligned along a dark stain indicating organic remains (possibly the wood from an arrow shaft). Another clear indication is from the Readycon Dene site in West Yorkshire, where 35 microliths appear to be associated with a single projectile. In Urra Moor, North Yorkshire, 25 microliths give the appearance of being related to one another, due to the extreme regularity and symmetry of their arrangement in the ground.[15]

The study of English and European artifacts in general has revealed that projectiles were made with a widely variable number of microliths: in Tværmose there was only one, in Loshult there were two (one for the tip and the other as a fin),[16] in White Hassocks, in West Yorkshire, more than 40 have been found together; the average is between 6 and 18 pieces for each projectile.[15]


Early research regard the microlithic industry in India as a Holocene phenomenon, however a new research provides solid data to put the South Asia microliths industry up to 35 ka across whole South Asia subcontinent. This new research also synthesizes the data from genetic, paleoenvironmental and archaeological research, and proposes that the emergence of microlith in India subcontinent could reflect the increase of population and adaptation of environmental deterioration.[17][18]


Crystal spear tips
Crystal spear tips, ca. 8000–7000 BCE, on display at Sion History museum

Laminar microliths are common artifacts from the Upper Paleolithic and the Epipaleolithic, to such a degree that numerous studies have used them as markers to date different phases of prehistoric cultures.

During the Epipaleolithic and the Mesolithic, the presence of laminar or geometric microliths serves to date the deposits of different cultural traditions. For instance, in the Atlas Mountains of northwest Africa, the end of the Upper Paleolithic period coincides with the end of the Aterian tradition of producing laminar microliths, and deposits can be dated by the presence or absence of these artifacts. In the Near East, the laminar microliths of the Kebarian culture were superseded by the geometric microliths of the Natufian tradition a little more than 11,000 years ago. This pattern is repeated throughout the Mediterranean basin and across Europe in general.[3][19]

A similar thing is found in England, where the preponderance of elongated microliths, as opposed to other frequently occurring forms, has permitted the Mesolithic to be separated into two phases: the Earlier Mesolithic of about 8300–6700 BCE, or the ancient and laminar Mesolithic, and the Later Mesolithic, or the recent and geometric Mesolithic. Deposits can be thus dated based upon the assemblage of artifacts found.[20]


  1. ^ Piel-Desruisseaux, Jean-Luc (1986). Outils préhistoriques. Forme. Fabrication. Utilisation. Masson, Paris. ISBN 2-225-80847-3. (pages 147–9)
  2. ^ Pelegrin, Jacques (1988). "Débitage expérimental par pression. Du plus petit au plus grand". Journée d'études technologiques en Préhistoire (Notes et monographies techniques, nº 25). Technologie préhistorique. ISBN 2-222-04235-6. (pages 37–53)
  3. ^ a b c Fortea Pérez; Francisco Javier (1973). Los complejos microlaminares y geométricos del Epipaleolítico mediterráneo español. Universidad de Salamanca. ISBN 84-600-5678-3.
  4. ^ Brézillon, Michel (1971). La dénomination des objets de pierre taillée. París: Editions du CNRS. pages 263–7.
  5. ^ Brézillon, Michel (1971). La dénomination des objets de pierre taillée. París: Editions du CNRS. pages 292–340.
  6. ^ González Echegaray, J. (1964). Excavaciones en la terraza de El Khiam (Jordania). Bibliotheca Praehistorica Hispana.
  7. ^ Geometric shapes, as we have seen, are present in many laminar microliths: for example the Dufour bladelet is an elongated lunate shape, the El-Emireh point is a triangle and the Adelaide point is a trapeze, the El-Wad point is spindle shaped; and there are many other examples.
  8. ^ Some of the earlier researchers, such as Octobon Octobon, E. (1920). "La question tardenoisienne. Montbani". Revue Anthropologique. page 107.), Peyrony and Noone (Peyrony, D. y Noone H. V. V. (1938). "Usage possible des microburins". 2 (numéro 3). Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Française., believed that these microburins had a useful function. Currently it has been demonstrated that these microburins did not have a function, at least not intentionally, although it cannot be ruled out that they were not reused at some point.
  9. ^ Bordes, F. y Fitte, P. (1964). "Microlithes du Magdalénien supérieur de la Gare de Gouze (Dordogne)". Miscelánea en homenaje al Abate Henri Breuil. Vol. I. Barcelona. page 264.CS1 maint: Multiple names: authors list (link)
  10. ^ Laming-Emperaire, Annette (1980). "Los cazadores depredadores del posglacial y del Mesolítico". La Prehistoria. Editorial Labor, Barcelona. ISBN 84-335-9309-9. (page 68)
  11. ^ Piel-Desruisseaux, Jean-Luc (1986). Outils préhistoriques. Forme. Fabrication. Utilisation. Masson, Paris. ISBN 2-225-80847-3. (pages 123-127)
  12. ^ Barton, R. N. E. y Bergman, C. A. (1982). "Hunters at Hengistbury: some evidence from experimental archaeology". 14 (Number 2). World Archaeology. ISSN 0043-8243.CS1 maint: Multiple names: authors list (link)
  13. ^ M. Lenoir has found knapping similar to that used in chiseled bladelets from Gironde, but considered this to be a coincidence and attributed the marks to the fact that the microliths were mounted on the tip of a projectile. A similar line of enquiry has also been followed by Lawrence H. Keeley, who has studied a wide range of bladelets from the French site at Buisson Campin, in Verberie, Oise.
  14. ^ Piel-Desruisseaux, Jean-Luc (1986). Outils préhistoriques. Forme. Fabrication. Utilisation. Masson, Paris. ISBN 2-225-80847-3. (pages 147-149)
  15. ^ a b Myers, Andrew (1989). "Reliable and mantainable technological strategies in the Mesolithic of mainland Britain". Time, energy and stone tools: New directions in Archaeology (edited by Robin Torrence). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 78–91. ISBN 0-521-25350-0.
  16. ^ Petersson, M. (1951). Microlithen als Pfeilspitzen. Ein Fund aus dem Lilla-Loshult Moor: Ksp. Loshult, Skane. Meddelanden fram Lunds Universitets. Historika Museum. (Pagies 123–37).
  17. ^ Petraglia; et al. (2009). "Population increase and environmental deterioration correspond with microlithic innovations in South Asia ca. 35,000 years ago" (PDF). Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 106 (30): 12261–12266. doi:10.1073/pnas.0810842106. PMC 2718386. PMID 19620737.
  18. ^ Malik, S. C. (1966). "The Late Stone Age Industries from Excavated Sites in Gujarat, India". Artibus Asiae. JSTOR. 28 (2/3): 162. doi:10.2307/3249352.
  19. ^ Professor Fortea has been able to distinguish two traditions in the Epipaleolithic period based in the Spanish Mediterranean , the "Microlaminar Complex" (with three separate phases: that of Sant Grégori de Falset, that based on the Cova de Les Mallaetes in Valencia and that of the Epigravettian) and the "Geometric Complex" (with two phases: the Filador and the Cocina, which receive their names from caves located on the eastern coast of Spain).
  20. ^ Myers, Andrew (1989). "Reliable and mantainable technological strategies in the Mesolithic of mainland Britain". Time, energy and stone tools: New directions in Archaeology (edited by Robin Torrence). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 78. ISBN 0-521-25350-0. The same author has suggested that the geometric microliths may replace one or two rows of teeth in the bone harpoons commonly found in the Upper Paleolithic at the end of the Upper Magdalanian (page 84).

External links

Bare Island projectile point

The Bare Island projectile point is a stone projectile point of prehistoric indigenous peoples of North America. It was named by Fred Kinsey in 1959 for examples recovered at the Kent-Halley site on Bare Island in Pennsylvania.

Celt (tool)

In archaeology, a celt is a long, thin, prehistoric, stone or bronze tool similar to an adze, a hoe or axe-like tool.

Cumberland point

A Cumberland point is a lithic projectile point, attached to a spear and used as a hunting tool. These sturdy points were intended for use as thrusting weapons and employed by various mid-Paleo-Indians (c. 11,000 BP) in the Southeastern US in the killing of large game mammals.

El Khiam

El Khiam is an archaeological site near Wadi Khureitun in the Judaean Desert in the West Bank, on the shores of the Dead Sea.

Archaeological finds at El Khiam show nearly continuous habitation by groups of hunters since the Mesolithic and early Neolithic periods. The Khiamian period (c. 10000-9500 BCE), named for this site, is characterized by flint arrowheads now known as "El-Khiam points".El Khiam was first excavated by René Neuville in 1934, by Jean Perrot in 1951 and González Echergaray in 1961.

Es Skhul

Es-Skhul (Arabic: السخول‎, meaning kid, young goat) is a prehistoric cave site situated 20 km (12.4 mi) south of the city of Haifa, Israel, and around 3 km (1.9 mi) from the Mediterranean Sea. The site was first excavated by Dorothy Garrod during summer of 1928. The excavation revealed the first evidence of the late Epipaleolithic Natufian culture, characterized by the presence of numerous microlith stone tools, human burials and ground stone tools. Skhul also represents an area where Neanderthals - possibly present in the region from 200,000 to 45,000 years ago - may have lived alongside these humans dating to 100,000 years ago. The cave also has Middle Palaeolithic layers.

The remains found at Es Skhul, together with those found at the Wadi el-Mughara Caves and Mugharet el-Zuttiyeh were classified in 1939 by Arthur Keith and Theodore D. McCown as Palaeoanthropus palestinensis, a descendant of Homo heidelbergensis.

Grinding slab

In archaeology, a grinding slab is a ground stone artifact generally used to grind plant materials into usable size, though some slabs were used to shape other ground stone artifacts. Some grinding stones are portable; others are not and, in fact, may be part of a stone outcropping.

Grinding slabs used for plant processing typically acted as a coarse surface against which plant materials were ground using a portable hand stone, or mano ("hand" in Spanish). Variant grinding slabs are referred to as metates or querns, and have a ground-out bowl. Like all ground stone artifacts, grinding slabs are made of large-grained materials such as granite, basalt, or similar tool stones.


The Kebaran or Kebarian culture, also known as the Early Near East Epipalaeolithic, was an archaeological culture in the eastern Mediterranean area (c. 18,000 to 12,500 BP), named after its type site, Kebara Cave south of Haifa. The Kebaran were a highly mobile nomadic population, composed of hunters and gatherers in the Levant and Sinai areas who used microlithic tools.


Lunate is a crescent or moon-shaped microlith. In the specialized terminology of lithic reduction, a lunate flake is a small, crescent-shaped flake removed from a stone tool during the process of pressure flaking.

In the Natufian period, a lunate was a small crescent-shaped stone tool that was sometimes used to harvest grasses.

In archaeology a lunate is a small stone artifact, that has a blunt straight edge and a sharpened crescent shaped back.

The word originates from the Latin word lunatus which means to bend like a crescent, and from luna meaning moon in Latin.

A lunate object can be typically used as a decorative piece or as a stone tool.

Microlith (catalytic reactor)

Microlith is a brand of catalytic reactor invented by the prize-winning engineer William C. Pfefferle and sold by Precision Combustion. Microlith's advantages include its weight, size, efficiency, and fast thermal response.

Microlith (disambiguation)

A microlith is a small stone tool from 35,000 to about 3,000 years ago.

Microlith may also refer to:

Microlith (catalytic reactor)

Mumba Cave

Mumba Cave, located near the highly alkaline Lake Eyasi in northern Tanzania, is a rich archaeological site noted for deposits spanning the transition between the Middle Stone Age and Late Stone Age in eastern Africa. The transitional nature of the site has been attributed to the large presence of its large assemblage of ostrich eggshell beads and more importantly, the abundance of microlith technology. Because these type artifacts were found within the site it has led archaeologists to believe that the site could provide insight into the origins of the modern human behavior. The cave was originally tested by Ludwig Kohl-Larsen and his wife Margit in their 1934 to 1936 expedition. They found abundant artifacts, rock art, and burials. However, only brief descriptions of these findings were ever published. That being said, work of the Kohl-Larsens has been seen as very accomplished due to their attention to detail, especially when one considers that neither was versed in proper archaeological techniques at the time of excavation. The site has since been reexamined in an effort to reanalyze and complement the work that has already been done, but the ramifications of improper excavations of the past are still being felt today, specifically in the unreliable collection of C-14 data and confusing stratigraphy.

Nahal Me'arot Nature Reserve

The Caves of Nahal Me’arot / Wadi el-Mughara ("Caves Creek"), named here by the Hebrew and Arabic name of the valley where they are located, are a UNESCO Site of Human Evolution in the Carmel mountain range near Haifa in northern Israel.The four UNESCO-listed caves are:

Tabun Cave or Tanur Cave (lit.: "Oven")

Gamal Cave or el-Jamal ("Camel")

el-Wad Cave or Nahal Cave ("Stream")

Es-Skhul Cave or Gedi Cave ("Kid")The four caves were proclaimed a site of "outstanding universal value" by UNESCO in 2012. They are protected within a nature reserve.The caves were used for habitation by hominins and prehistoric humans and contain unique evidence of very early burials, at the archaeological site of el-Wad Cave in the Nahal Me'arot Nature Reserve.

Pesse canoe

The Pesse canoe is believed to be the world's oldest known boat, and certainly the oldest known canoe. Carbon dating indicates that the boat was constructed during the early mesolithic period between 8040 BCE and 7510 BCE. It is now in the Drents Museum in Assen, Netherlands.

Plano point

In archeology, Plano point is flaked stone projectile points and tools created by the various Plano cultures of the North American Great Plains between 9000 BC and 6000 BC for hunting, and possibly to kill other humans.

They are bifacially worked and have been divided into numerous sub-groups based on variations in size, shape and function including Alberta points, Cody points, Frederick points, Eden points and Scottsbluff points. Plano points do not include the hollowing or 'fluting' found in Clovis and Folsom points.


In archeology, a racloir, also known as racloirs sur talon (French for scraper on the platform), is a certain type of flint tool made by prehistoric peoples.

It is a type of side scraper distinctive of Mousterian assemblages. It is created from a flint flake and looks like a large scraper. As well as being used for scraping hides and bark, it may also have been used as a knife. Racloirs are most associated with the Neanderthal Mousterian industry. These racloirs are retouched along the ridge between the striking platform and the dorsal face. They have shaped edges and are modified by abrupt flaking from the dorsal face.

Tool stone

In archaeology, a tool stone is a type of stone that is used to manufacture stone tools,

or stones used as the raw material for tools.Generally speaking, tools that require a sharp edge are made using cryptocrystalline materials that fracture in an easily controlled conchoidal manner.

Cryptocrystalline tool stones include flint and chert, which are fine-grained sedimentary materials; rhyolite and felsite, which are igneous flowstones; and obsidian, a form of natural glass created by igneous processes. These materials fracture in a predictable fashion, and are easily resharpened. For more information on this subject, see lithic reduction.

Large-grained materials, such as basalt, granite, and sandstone, may also be used as tool stones, but for a very different purpose: they are ideal for ground stone artifacts. Whereas cryptocrystalline materials are most useful for killing and processing animals, large-grained materials are usually used for processing plant matter. Their rough faces often make excellent surfaces for grinding plant seeds. With much effort, some large-grained stones may be ground down into awls, adzes, and axes.


In archeology, a uniface is a specific type of stone tool that has been flaked on one surface only. There are two general classes of uniface tools: modified flakes—and formalized tools, which display deliberate, systematic modification of the marginal edges, evidently formed for a specific purpose.

William C. Pfefferle

William C. Pfefferle (April 24, 1923 – December 28, 2010) was an American scientist and inventor.

This page is based on a Wikipedia article written by authors (here).
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.