To send content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about sending content to .
To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure email@example.com
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
We define diversity in core reduction systems as the degree of deviation from the most efficient means to proceed from the start to the end product exhibited in a given core reduction system. Because lithic core reduction systems are often characterized along a continuum of high or low degree of diversity, some archaeologists have suggested that assemblage diversity is linked to raw material availability and quality. In this paper we provide a model that predicts when humans would favor less systematic core reduction techniques as opposed to those that are more systematic. The model incorporates three factors influencing diversity in core reduction techniques: raw material availability, raw material quality, and the ratio of producers to consumers. We provide the model and then estimate where several case examples from different archaeological contexts fit within the expectations. This allows us to generate hypotheses about the relationship of producers and consumers who manufactured the assemblages.
The process of lithic core reduction is often described as systematic (nearly uniform) or unsystematic (highly variable) (Bleed 2001; Brantingham et al. 2000; Root 1997). For example, some core reduction systems represent human interaction with raw materials that are much more prone to knapping error and failure rates, whereas others appear to follow very specific chains (for an example of each, see Bleed 1996, 101–2).
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.