to formally recognized Paleolithic bone flutes,so it seems appropriate
to reconstruct the damaged object and experimentally verify its acoustic
properties.We rely for this on our own knowledge of music in general
and of instrumental music in particular.Our knowledge undoubtedly
exceeds that of the people who made the object and perhaps used it as
a flute,so any kind of reconstruction must be made very carefully.Reconstruction and Musical Testing of the Suspected Bone Flute
The following hypothetical reconstruction of the object as a flute is
possible:the hollow bone was cut straight and broken at the proximal
end to create a fairly sharp cut edge.The distal end could have been
untouched and closed.This end was later gnawed by some carnivore,or
could have already been chewed when the presumed flute was made.
Before cementing the flute in the breccia,both ends were additionally
broken,each to the remains of a hole.In the flat,posterior side,two holes
had been chipped.Perhaps a third hole was here;however,it was not
made in the same way as the first two or contemporaneously with them.
On the same side is a further irregular semicircular notch that may rep-
resent a mouthpiece or possibly the remains of a fourth hole.The mor-
phology of the edges of the notch corresponds to the morphology of the
rims of both complete holes.However,it is highly probable that a carni-
vore actually made the notch (Chase and Nowell 1998;d’Errico et al.
1998),and that it is not the remains of a hole or an artificial mouthpiece.
The anterior side of the bone may have had a fifth hole.This “thumb
hole”was made in the same way and at approximately the same time as
the suspected third hole.
If we make a very free reconstruction,we get a flute with three finger
holes and one thumb hole,a straight mouthpiece,and a closed or open
end (figure 15.4a).The open end could serve as a second naturally
formed mouthpiece.If we make a more conservative reconstruction,we
get a flute with two finger holes,a straight mouthpiece,and a closed or
open end (figure 15.4b).In this case,too,the open end could serve as a
second naturally formed mouthpiece.
With the help of physical reconstructions based on these considera-
tions,we analyzed the acoustic properties of the flute.We used a number
of reconstructions since the original,despite its good condition and only
partial damage,is inappropriate for such experiments,which might leave
traces on it.The reconstructions were made from various materials and,
as far as possible,corresponded to the original (figure 15.5).Several were
made from the femurs of young bears,but only two are described here.
The first was made from a fossilized bone of a cave bear of approximately
the same age as the original find (figure 15.5a).Fossilized bone is not the
most suitable material for acoustic experiments because,due to moisture249 New Perspectives on the Beginnings of Music