DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.49270#0089
Pal. East. Desert
67
which has been retained, probably served as a convenient hand grasp. The retention
of such old surfaces for hand holds is quite common in this site. The same thing occurs
in the Eastern Desert (see fig. 47) although not so commonly, and is also found in many
other Egyptian sites.7
Fig. 61 and 62. Cat. no. H, P. M. Haynes collection (pl. 3, fig. 7). Luxor.
Flint — light —- opaque. Patina — light gray. Incrustations — calcareous in spots. 8.5 X 8 X
3.5 cm. Flaking — radial — portions of an old weathered surface A (probably the original cortex of
the nodule, but somewhat water worn before the implement was chipped) forming almost a half of the
face shown in fig. 63.
The maximum thickness is reached at B, and the minimum (1.5 cm.) at C. This
thinning, as in the previous specimen, is the result of a sharply curved reversed cone of
percussion. As in the case of the previous specimen, the retention of a portion of the old
nodular exterior has supplied a smooth surface convenient for a hand grasp. Here,
however, some of it was retained merely to avoid the unnecessary trouble of removing it.
This leaving of a portion of the original nodule unchipped is quite characteristic of the
Chellean period of western Europe.8 The edge is fairly straight except at D, where the
surface is rounded. At E and at F are notches which may be for convenience in holding.
The implement is a roughly ovoid coup-de-poing. End D shows much battering.
Fig. 63 and 64. Cat. no. , P. M. Haynes collection (pl. 1, fig. 1). Luxor.
Flint — light — opaque — much banded, as is seen in fig. 64. Patina — in general, yellow brown
and lusterless, somewhat dendritic on face shown in fig. 63 — the bands bearing varying shades of gray
and brown. 14.5 X 10X3.5 cm. Flaking — radial, flakes large —face shown in fig. 64 retaining
old weathered surface A (apparently an old fracture plane) — face shown in fig. 63 retaining portion of
the old cortex.
Except near the edges, the implement is fairly uniform in thickness. No fine
retouching of the edges by design occurs. The edges are fairly straight, and between
B and C, they have been much battered. At D is a stop-ridge on the edge. This may be
related to the holding of the tool, since here the retained nodular surface is merely not
in the way, and has no value as a hand grasp. The general form of the implement is that
of an ovoid coup-de-poing. The retention of the old nodular surfaces on these implements
and the coarseness of the chipping suggest the Chellean period of western Europe; but
the straightness of the edges suggests the Acheulean.9
7 C. T. Currelly, ‘Stone implements’ (Catalogue general des antiquites Egyptiennes du Mus6e du Caire, Cairo,
1913) pl. 2, figs. 63044, and 63049. W. M. F. Petrie, ‘The stone age in Egypt’ (Ancient Egypt, London, 1915, p.
59-76; 122-135) p. 60, fig. 9, p. 59.
8 G. and A. de Mortillet, Musee pr^historique, Paris, 1881, description of pl. 7.
9 J. Dechelette, Manuel d’archeologie pr6historique, Paris, 1908, vol. 1, p. 81.
67
which has been retained, probably served as a convenient hand grasp. The retention
of such old surfaces for hand holds is quite common in this site. The same thing occurs
in the Eastern Desert (see fig. 47) although not so commonly, and is also found in many
other Egyptian sites.7
Fig. 61 and 62. Cat. no. H, P. M. Haynes collection (pl. 3, fig. 7). Luxor.
Flint — light —- opaque. Patina — light gray. Incrustations — calcareous in spots. 8.5 X 8 X
3.5 cm. Flaking — radial — portions of an old weathered surface A (probably the original cortex of
the nodule, but somewhat water worn before the implement was chipped) forming almost a half of the
face shown in fig. 63.
The maximum thickness is reached at B, and the minimum (1.5 cm.) at C. This
thinning, as in the previous specimen, is the result of a sharply curved reversed cone of
percussion. As in the case of the previous specimen, the retention of a portion of the old
nodular exterior has supplied a smooth surface convenient for a hand grasp. Here,
however, some of it was retained merely to avoid the unnecessary trouble of removing it.
This leaving of a portion of the original nodule unchipped is quite characteristic of the
Chellean period of western Europe.8 The edge is fairly straight except at D, where the
surface is rounded. At E and at F are notches which may be for convenience in holding.
The implement is a roughly ovoid coup-de-poing. End D shows much battering.
Fig. 63 and 64. Cat. no. , P. M. Haynes collection (pl. 1, fig. 1). Luxor.
Flint — light — opaque — much banded, as is seen in fig. 64. Patina — in general, yellow brown
and lusterless, somewhat dendritic on face shown in fig. 63 — the bands bearing varying shades of gray
and brown. 14.5 X 10X3.5 cm. Flaking — radial, flakes large —face shown in fig. 64 retaining
old weathered surface A (apparently an old fracture plane) — face shown in fig. 63 retaining portion of
the old cortex.
Except near the edges, the implement is fairly uniform in thickness. No fine
retouching of the edges by design occurs. The edges are fairly straight, and between
B and C, they have been much battered. At D is a stop-ridge on the edge. This may be
related to the holding of the tool, since here the retained nodular surface is merely not
in the way, and has no value as a hand grasp. The general form of the implement is that
of an ovoid coup-de-poing. The retention of the old nodular surfaces on these implements
and the coarseness of the chipping suggest the Chellean period of western Europe; but
the straightness of the edges suggests the Acheulean.9
7 C. T. Currelly, ‘Stone implements’ (Catalogue general des antiquites Egyptiennes du Mus6e du Caire, Cairo,
1913) pl. 2, figs. 63044, and 63049. W. M. F. Petrie, ‘The stone age in Egypt’ (Ancient Egypt, London, 1915, p.
59-76; 122-135) p. 60, fig. 9, p. 59.
8 G. and A. de Mortillet, Musee pr^historique, Paris, 1881, description of pl. 7.
9 J. Dechelette, Manuel d’archeologie pr6historique, Paris, 1908, vol. 1, p. 81.