Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface and Acknowledgments
- List of Contributors
- PART I INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND, AND REVIEW
- PART II PRODUCTION, REDUCTION, AND RETOUCH
- PART III NEW PERSPECTIVES ON LITHIC RAW MATERIAL AND TECHNOLOGY
- 9 Projectile Point Provisioning Strategies and Human Land Use
- 10 The Role of Lithic Raw Material Availability and Quality in Determining Tool Kit Size, Tool Function, and Degree of Retouch: A Case Study from Skink Rockshelter (46NI445), West Virginia
- 11 Raw Material and Retouched Flakes
- PART IV EVOLUTIONARY APPROACHES TO LITHIC TECHNOLOGIES
- Index
- References
11 - Raw Material and Retouched Flakes
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 August 2009
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface and Acknowledgments
- List of Contributors
- PART I INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND, AND REVIEW
- PART II PRODUCTION, REDUCTION, AND RETOUCH
- PART III NEW PERSPECTIVES ON LITHIC RAW MATERIAL AND TECHNOLOGY
- 9 Projectile Point Provisioning Strategies and Human Land Use
- 10 The Role of Lithic Raw Material Availability and Quality in Determining Tool Kit Size, Tool Function, and Degree of Retouch: A Case Study from Skink Rockshelter (46NI445), West Virginia
- 11 Raw Material and Retouched Flakes
- PART IV EVOLUTIONARY APPROACHES TO LITHIC TECHNOLOGIES
- Index
- References
Summary
Abstract
Lithic analysts are often criticized for not engaging in theory building and for conducting particularistic studies. Such particularistic studies can be linked to theory through an organization-of-technology approach, which has great promise. However, concepts often employed in the approach, such as curation, need further refinement to become operationalized. One way to accomplish this for flake tools is to develop a method for measuring the amount of tool resharpening. One method is to determine the original flake mass and compare this to the mass of the recovered tool to determine the amount of realized use life. Here, a series of experiments in producing retouched flakes using various raw materials and two reduction modes were conducted by two flintknappers to determine how these variables influence the prediction of flake mass. Analysis indicates that raw material type is important for estimating original flake mass, but a tripartite division of quality may be sufficient to account for the variation. No significant differences are evident between the two knappers. Equations used to calculate original flake mass from retouched flakes must be derived with a consideration of raw material.
INTRODUCTION
A decade ago, George Odell discussed the “particularism” that was apparent in lithic studies and the need to link these studies to theory and to prehistoric behavior (Odell 1996a: 2–3). This is something of an echo of the characterization of lithic analysis made by David Hurst Thomas a decade prior as “in danger of chasing rainbows rather than providing archaeology with the theory so obviously lacking” (Thomas 1986: 247).
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Lithic TechnologyMeasures of Production, Use and Curation, pp. 233 - 254Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2008
References
1994. Raw Material Availability and the Organization of Technology. American Antiquity 59:21–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1986. Technological Efficiency and Tool Curation. American Antiquity 51(1):38–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1973. Interassemblage Variability: The Mousterian and the “Functional” Argument. In The Explanation of Culture Change: Models in Prehistory, edited by , 227–54. Duckworth, London.Google Scholar
1998. The Examination of Lithic Artifacts from an Early Archaic Assemblage: Strengthening Inferences through Multiple Lines of Evidence. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology 23(2):263–88.Google Scholar
2005. The Organization of Late Paleoindian Lithic Procurement Strategies in Western Wisconsin. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology 30(1):3–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1994a. The Organization of Technology: Impact and Potential. In The Organization of North American Chipped Stone Tool Technologies, edited by , pp. 1–8. International Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
1994b. Technological Organization and Prehistoric Hunter–Gatherer Mobility: Examination of the Hayes Site. In The Organization of North American Chipped Stone Tool Technologies, edited by , pp. 35–44. International Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
, and . 2005. Raw Material and Retouched Flakes: More Complicated Than We Thought. Paper presented at the 70th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Salt Lake City.
, and . 2006. Learning from Lithics. Paper presented at the 71st Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, San Juan, Puerto Rico.
1999. On Stone Tools: Theoretical Insights into Human Prehistory by G. H. Odell. Lithic Technology 24(2):126–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2000. From Quarry to Cornfield: The Political Economy of Mississippian Hoe Production. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.Google Scholar
, and . 1998. Quantifying Lithic Curation: An Experimental Test of Dibble and Pelcin's Original Flake-Tool Mass Predictor. Journal of Archaeological Science 25: 603–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1984. Interpreting Typological Variation of Middle Paleolithic Scrapers: Function, Style, or Sequence of Reduction? Journal of Field Archaeology 11(4):431–6.CrossRef
1995. Middle Paleolithic Scraper Reduction: Background, Clarification, and Review of the Evidence to Date. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 2(4):299–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1998. Comment on Quantifying Lithic Curation: An Experimental Test of Dibble and Pelcin's Original Flake-Tool Mass Predictor. Journal of Archaeological Science 25:611–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and . 1995. The Effect of Hammer Mass and Velocity on Flake Mass. Journal of Archaeological Science 22:429–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and . 1996. Evaluating Lithic Strategies and Design Criteria. In Stone Tools: Theoretical Insights into Human Prehistory, edited by , pp. 9–45. Plenum Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and . 2005. Measuring Artifact Reduction – An Examination of Kuhn's Geometric Index of Reduction. In Lithics “Down Under”: Australian Perspectives on Lithic Reduction, Use and Classification, edited by and , pp. 7–20. British Archaeological Reports, Oxford, England.Google Scholar
1990. A Geometric Index of Reduction for Unifacial Stone Tools. Journal of Archaeological Science 17:583–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1962. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
. 1997. End Scraper Morphology and Use-Life: An Approach for Studying Paleoindian Lithic Technology and Mobility. Lithic Technology 22:70–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1996. Is Curation a Useful Heuristic?. In Stone Tools: Theoretical Insights into Human Prehistory, edited by , pp. 81–99. Plenum Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1991. The Study of Technological Organization. In Archaeological Method and Theory, Vol. 3, edited by , pp. 57–100. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
1994. Assessing Hunter–Gatherer Mobility in the Illinois Valley: Exploring Ambiguous Results. In The Organization of North American Chipped Stone Tool Technologies, edited by , pp. 70–86. International Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
1996a. Economizing Behavior and the Concept of “Curation.” In Stone Tools: Theoretical Insights into Human Prehistory, edited by , pp. 51–80. Plenum Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1996b. Introduction. In Stone Tools: Theoretical Insights into Human Prehistory, edited by , pp. 1–5. Plenum Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1998. The Threshold Effect of Platform Width: A Reply to Davis and Shea. Journal of Archaeological Science 25:615–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1998. An Experiment-Based Evaluation of the Debitage Attributes Associated with “Hard” and “Soft” Hammer Percussion. M.A. thesis, Washington State University, Pullman, WA.
1989a. On Tool Class Use-Lives and the Formation of Archaeological Assemblages. American Antiquity 54:9–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1989b. Technological Organization in Great Lakes Paleoindian Assemblages. In Eastern Paleoindian Lithic Resource Use, edited by and , pp. 221–38. Westview Press, Boulder.Google Scholar
1995. How Much Is a Scraper? Uniface Reduction, Assemblage Formation, and the Concept of “Curation.”Lithic Technology 20:53–72.Google Scholar
, , , and . 2000. Flake Size from Platform Attributes: Predictive and Empirical Approaches. Journal of Archaeological Science 27(10):877–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1994. Some Thoughts on Future Directions in the Study of Stone Tool Technological Organization. In The Organization of North American Chipped Stone Tool Technologies, edited by , pp. 118–22. International Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
1986. Contemporary Hunter–Gatherer Archaeology in America. In American Archaeology Past and Present, edited by , , and , pp. 237–56. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
. 1994. Strategies for Moving On in Lithic Studies. In The Organization of North American Chipped Stone Tool Technologies, edited by , pp. 123–31. International Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
- 6
- Cited by