Tree Felling with Stone Axes: Pre-Bending Matters but Feller Sex Does Not

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Francis E. Putz and colleagues submitted a paper presenting experimental archaeology activities dealing with tree felling with stone axes. Besides experimentation with stone-made implements, they also used steel axes to fell small young trees (3.5-5.6 cm diameter). According to the authors, a novel finding is the usefulness of tension of saplings by a co-worker while felling, and that sex had no effect on felling efficiency with stone axes. They state that “These results suggest that stone-tool wielding farmers of both sexes worked together to clear trees from their fallowed fields” (line 25).

The Introduction gives some information on published works on felling trees, focusing on the characteristics of felling smaller trees and the “pre-bending treatment” that consists of the help of a second person who bents the tree while another one cuts it. In Materials and Methods, Putz et al. present the experimental protocol and the statistical analysis made with the obtained data. The Results section succinctly shows the main results with the raw data being given as supplementary material, while the Discussion focuses on the “novelties” of this study: i) felling small trees is facilitated by having someone help by applying tension to the tree; ii) feller sex does not affect the efficiency of felling.

            The statistical analysis is sound, in-depth and interesting, but my main issues are with the experimental protocol and the interpretation of the results. The figures and tables presented are informative, and the Supplementary material further complements them. The bibliography can be improved by adding some recent publications that also included experimental felling of trees among their activities; this could further enrich both the discussion of results but also the experimental protocol and methodologies.

 

This article has several problems:

 

·      The point scale for experience is not completely presented in the methodology section;

·      The authors acknowledge the importance of hafting techniques and materials (lines 93-94) but indicate that they hafted the axes with a combination of leather and strips of bicycle inner tube without adhesives (lines 95-96). I would state that this is not proper material for usage in an experimental setting since hafting would have been of importance for the analysis of the efficiency of usage;

·      I advise taking a look at some other recently published experimental archaeology studies. Some of them are not only related to tree felling but could help enrich your work (see some references below);

·      The authors state that the substantial variation in efficiency is related to experience but not to sex. This is something that is widely accepted among colleagues working in experimental archaeology. Experience is always one of the most important variables;

·      Regarding the application of tension, I would not consider this a novelty as it is something that has been done by several colleagues that work in experimentation. It actually is a sort of “common knowledge” among colleagues;

·      Regarding sex not affecting efficiency, you do state that this is in agreement with existing descriptions [10, 11], and the fact that sex does not affect efficiency in several experimental archaeology works is widespread. Is this really a novelty?

·      Line 39, correct is terra preta de índio

 

            Forests is a Q1 journal in Forestry and this paper was submitted to the section on Forest Ecology and Management. I would argue that this paper is better suited in a different journal, probably in more archaeology or even experimental archaeology-driven journal. As an archaeologist with several years doing experimental archaeology I would even advise the authors to participate in some experimental archaeology congress where they could see other colleagues' work and vice-versa. Considering what I mentioned regarding the main conclusions of this work and the criticism of some steps of the experimental work I cannot advise the publication of this paper in Forests. I suggest that this paper be sent to a more specialized journal or magazine, but consider that referees can be even more concerned than I was if some of these changes are not implemented.

        Overall, I believe that the topic under discussion is worthy of further experimental work. The refinement of the protocols and the enlargement of the sample with different activities and/or analyses could result in an interesting paper, but I do advise the authors to further familiarize themselves with archaeology and experimental archaeology research.

 

 

Cura S, Cura P, Grimaldi S, Cristiani E 2014. Experimentation and morphotecnological analyses of the Middle Pleistocene lithic assemblage of Ribeira da Ponte da Pedra site (Central Portugal). In Technology and Experimentation in Archaeology. Proceedings of the XVI World Congress (Florianópolis, 4-10 September 2011). BAR International Series 2657. Archaeopress, Oxford, Vol 10: 5-16.

Elburg R, Hein W, Probst A, Walter P 2015. Field trials in Neolithic woodworking – (Re)Learning to use early Neolithic stone adzes. EXARC Journal Issue 2015/2. https://exarc.net/ark:/88735/10196

Masclans A, Palomo A, Gibaja J 2017. Functional studies of neolithic stone axes and adzes. Experimental programme and archaeological applications. CPAG 27: 177-210.

Author Response

please see attachment

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Authors; according to me, this paper performed pre-tensioning stem fibers by bending facilitates tree felling with both stone and steel axes, and the sex of feller does not significantly influence the felling time. Generalized linear mixed models were used to evaluate the effect of those factors on felling trees. This study contains some interesting findings which are valuable for the understanding of the tree-felling history.

• The introduction clearly explains the problems that need to be studied. Figure 1 illustrates the effect of the typical cut cross. However, the two tree-felling methods evaluated in this study need to be further defined by schematic diagrams and text descriptions, and it is necessary to further indicate which method is used in the following experiments.

• The methodology and applications are sufficient but the size and specification details of the axe made of steel need to be supplemented.

• Line 93-96, authors should further explain why the stone axe is made in this way, and the bicycle inner tube is obviously not a material available in the Neolithic Age.
• The results are discussed according to the purpose.

• The article format should be double-checked.

Author Response

please see attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors agreed with my previous criticism and suggestions. Only a couple of changes were made to the article, improving it. I still am not sure that the two major contributions of this paper (application of tension and sex not affecting efficiency) should be considered a novelty. I maintain my criticism regarding the experimental protocol. At the same time, the topic under discussion is worthy of further experimental work, with a refinement of the protocols and the enlargement of the sample with different activities and/or analyses. The paper has some value but it falls behind the possible contribution it could have to the field, so I believe that the editors themselves should assess the relevance of the work for Forests. Innocens ego sum.

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear authors

The paper has been improved. Please also pay attention to the spelling and editting.