Article contents
The Nature of Lithic Reduction and Lithic Analysis: Stage Typologies Revisited
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 20 January 2017
Abstract
Ensor and Roemer (1989) claim that our debitage categories inherently are linked to our interpretations (i.e., are not interpretation free), that we have dismissed unfairly the work of lithic analysts who use stage typologies, and that our view of lithic reduction as a continuum is questionable. In responding, we review the descriptive and interpretive limitations of stage approaches, and explore terminological issues that arise from Ensor and Roemer's zealous adherence to stage approaches. Finally, we reiterate our position that approaches like ours, which seek to describe and interpret distinctive assemblages of lithic artifacts, are more likely to yield productive results than those, such as stage approaches, which focus on identifying distinctive artifacts.
- Type
- Comments
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Society for American Archaeology 1989
References
References Cited
- 10
- Cited by