Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Size and form in the analysis of flake debris: Review and recent approaches

  • Published:
Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Flake debris — the by-product of lithic reduction — is abundant, not subject to uncontrolled collection, and sometimes culturally diagnostic. Its greatest virtue, however, is in registering the kinds and amounts of toolmaking and tool-using behavior that curated tools themselves may not. Most debris studies emphasize formal dimensions, yet even the best approaches assume rather than demonstrate a relationship between behavior and formal variation. Moreover, the diversity of formal typologies hinders interassemblage comparison. Progress in debris analysis has two prerequisites: (1) a minimum attribute set for individual flakes and (2) the combination of formal and continuous approaches to variation. Preliminary study suggests that Ahler's mass-analysis model and log skew Laplace functions hold particular promise for behavioral interpretation from debris assemblages.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References cited

  • Ahler, S. A. (1986).The Knife River Flint Quarries: Excavations at Site 32DU508, State Historical Society of North Dakota, Bismarck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahler, S. A. (1989a). Mass analysis of flaking debris: Studying the forest rather than the trees. In Henry, D., and Odell, G. (eds.),Alternative Approaches to Lithic Analysis, Archeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association No. 1, pp. 85–118.

  • Ahler, S. A. (1989b). Experimental knapping with KRF and midcontinent cherts: Overview and applications. In Amick, D., and Mauldin, R. (eds.),Experiments in Lithic Technology, British Archaeological Report International Series 528, pp.199–234.

  • Amick, D. S., and Mauldin, R. P. (1989). Comments on Sullivan and Rozen's “Debitage analysis and archaeological interpretation.”American Antiquity 54: 166–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amick, D. S., Mauldin, R. P., and Tomka, S. A. (1988). An evaluation of debitage produced by experimental bifacial core reduction of a Georgetown chert nodule.Lithic Technology 17: 26–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ammerman, A. J. (1979). A study of obsidian exchange networks in Calabria.World Archaeology 11: 95–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bagnold, R. A., and Barndorff-Nielsen, O. (1980). The pattern of natural size distributions.Sedimentology 27: 199–207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnes, A. S., and Cheynier, A. (1935). Etude sur les techniques de débitage du silex et en particulare des nuclei prismatiques.Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Francaise 32: 288–299.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumler, M. F., and Downum, C. E. (1989). Between micro and macro: A study in the interpretation of small-sized lithic debitage. In Amick, D., and Mauldin, R., (eds.),Experiments in Lithic Technology, British Archaeological Reports International Series 528, pp. 101–116.

  • Behm, J. A. (1983). Flake concentrations: Distinguishing between flintworking activity areas and secondary deposits.Lithic Technology 12: 9–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergman, C. A., and Roberts, M. B. (1988). Flaking techniques at the Acheulean site of Boxgrove, West Sussex (England). In Tuffreau, A. (ed.),Cultures et industries lithiques en milieu loessique, Revue Archéologique de Picardie, No. 1–2, Amiens, France, pp. 105–112.

  • Berry, M. S. (1984). Sampling and predictive modeling on federal lands in the West.American Antiquity 49: 842–853.

    Google Scholar 

  • Binford, L. R. (1973). Interassemblage variability: The Mousterian and the “functional” argument. In Renfrew, C. (ed.),The Explanation of Culture Change, Duckworth, London, pp. 227–254.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, J. (1982). Experimental data. In Ozker, D. (ed.),An Early Woodland Community at the Schultz Site 20SA2 in the Saginaw Valley and the Nature of the Early Woodland Adaptation in the Great Lakes Region, University of Michigan Museum of Anthropology, Anthropological Papers No. 70, Ann Arbor, pp. 117–118.

  • Bordes, F. (1947). Etude comparative des différentes techniques de taille du silex et des roches durés.L'Anthropologie 51: 1–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bordes, F. (1961).Typoloqie du Paléolithique Ancien et Moyen. Publications de Préhistoire de l'Université de Bordeaux, Memoire 1.

  • Bradley, B. (1975). Lithic reduction sequences: A glossary and discussion. In Swanson, E. (ed.),Lithic Technology: Making and Using Stone Tools, Mouton, The Hague, pp. 5–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradley, R., and Fulford, M. (1980). Sherd size in the analysis of occupation debris.Bulletin of the Institute of Archaeology 17: 85–94 (University of London).

    Google Scholar 

  • Brézillon, M. N. (1971).La Dénomination des Objets de Pierre Tailleée: Matériaux pour un Vocabulaire des Préhistoriens de Langue Francaise, Fourth Supplement to Gallia Préhistoire, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris.

  • Bruce, J. C., Dubuc, M., and Walsh, J. (1983). Repeating an experiment: Confirmation of quantitative variation in lithic debitage.Contract Abstracts and CRM Archaeology 3: 147–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burgess, R. J., and Kvamme, K. L. (1978). A new technique for the measurement of artifact angles.American Antiquity 43: 482–486.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burton, J. (1980). Making sense of waste flakes: New methods for investigating the technology and economics behind chipped stone assemblages.Journal of Archaeological Science 7: 131–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callahan, E. (1979). The basics of biface knapping in the eastern fluted point tradition: A manual for flintknappers and lithic analysts.Archaeology of Eastern North America 7: 1–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callahan, E. (1991). Out of theory and into reality: A comment on Nami's comment.Plains Anthropologist 36(137): 367–368.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chase, P. G. (1985). Whole vessels and sherds: An experimental investigation of their quantitative relationships.Journal of Field Archaeology 12: 213–218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, J. D., and Kurashina, H. (1981). A study of the work of a modern tanner in Ethiopia and its relevance for archaeological interpretation. In Gould, R., and Schiffer, M. (eds.),Modern Material Culture: The Archaeology of Us, Academic Press, New York, pp. 303–321.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, J. E. (1986). Another look at small debitage and microdebitage.Lithic Technology 15: 21–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, M. B. (1975). Lithic technology as a means of processual inference. In Swanson, E. (ed.),Lithic Technology: Making and Using Stone Tools, Mouton, The Hague, pp. 5–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cotterell, B., and Kamminga, J. (1987). The formation of flakes.American Antiquity 52: 675–708.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cotterell, B., and Kamminga, J. (1990). Mechanics of Pre-Industrial Technology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crabtree, D. (1966). A stoneworker's approach to analyzing and replicating the Lindenmeier Folsom.Tebiwa 9: 3–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crabtree, D. (1972).An Introduction to Flintworking. Occasional Papers of the Idaho State Museum No. 28, Pocatello.

  • Deckers, P. H. (1985). Coded culture; Studies in Neolithic flint. 1. Constructing the descriptive system.Palaeohistoria 27: 131–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dibble, H. L. (1985a). Technological aspects of flake variation: A comparison of experimental and prehistoric flake production.American Archaeology 5: 236–240.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dibble, H. L. (1985b). Raw-material variation in Levallois flake manufacture.Current Anthropology 26: 391–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dibble, H. L. (1987). The interpretation of Middle Paleolithic scraper morphology.American Antiquity 52: 109–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dibble, H. L., and Bernard, M. C. (1980). A comparative study of basic edge angle measurements.American Antiquity 45: 857–865.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dibble, H. L., and Whittaker, J. (1981). New experimental evidence on the relation between percussion flaking flake variation.Journal of Archaeological Science 6: 283–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunnell, R. C., and Stein, J. K. (1989). Theoretical issues in the interpretation of micro-artifacts.Geoarchaeology 4: 31–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ebert, J. I. (1986).Distributional Archaeology: Nonsite Discovery, Recording and Analytical Methods for Application to the Surface Archaeological Record, Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ensor, H. B., and Roemer, E. (1989). Comments on Sullivan and Rozen's Debitage Analysis and Archaeological Interpretation.American Antiquity 54: 175–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fieller, N. R., Flenley, E. C., and Olbricht, W. (1992a). Statistics of particle size data.Applied Statistics 41: 127–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fieller, N. R., Gilbertson, D. D., Griffin, C. M., Briggs, D. J., and Jenkinson, R. D. (1992b). The statistical modelling of the grain size distributions of cave sediments using log skew Laplace distributions: Creswell Crags, near Sheffield, England.Journal of Archaeological Science 19: 129–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, A., Bronnow, B., Jonsson, J. H., Nielsen, F. O., and Petersen, C. (1979). Stenalder-eksperimenter i Lejre: Bopladsernes Indretning (Stone Age Experiments in Lejre: Internal Organization of the Settlements). Working Papers of the National Museum of Denmark, Copenhagen.

  • Fish, P. R. (1978). Consistency in archaeological measurement and classification: A pilot study.American Antiquity 43: 86–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fish, P. R. (1979).The Interpretive Potential of Mousterian Debitage. Arizona State University Anthropological Research Papers No. 16, Tempe.

  • Fish, P. R. (1981). Beyond tools: Middle Paleolithic debitage analysis and cultural inference.Journal of Anthropological Research 37: 374–386.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fladmark, K. R. (1982). Microdebitage analysis: Initial considerations.Journal of Archaeological Science 9: 205–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flenley, E. C., Fieller, N. R., and Gilbertson, D. D. (1987). The statistical analysis of “mixed” grain size distributions from aeolian sands in the Libyan Pre-Desert using log skew Laplace models. In Frostick, L., and Reid, I. (eds.),Desert Sediments: Ancient and Modern, Geological Society Special Publication No. 35, pp. 271–280.

  • Flenniken, J. J. (1984). The past, present, and future of flintknapping: An anthropological perspective.Annual Review of Anthropology 13: 187–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flenniken, J. J. (1985). Stone tool reduction techniques as cultural markers. In Plew, M., Woods, J., and Pavesic, M. (eds.),Stone Tool Analysis: Essays in Honor of Don E. Crabtree, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, pp. 265–276.

    Google Scholar 

  • Folk, R. L. (1980).Petrology of Sedimentary Rocks, Hemphill, Austin, TX.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frison, G. C. (1968). A functional analysis of certain chipped stone tools.American Antiquity 33: 149–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frison, G. C., and Bradley, B. A. (1980).Folsom Tools and Technology at the Hanson Site, Wyoming. University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallagher, J. P. (1977). Contemporary stone tools in Ethiopia: Implications for archaeology.Journal of Field Archaeology 4: 407–414.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gero, J. M. (1991). Genderlithics: Women's role in stone tool production. In Gero, J., and Conkey, M. (eds.),Engendering Archaeology: Women and Prehistory, Basil Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 163–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gifford-Gonzalez, D., Damrosch, D., Pryor, J., and Thunen, R. (1985). The third dimension in site structure: An experiment in trampling and vertical dispersal.American Antiquity 50: 803–818.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilreath, A. J. (1983).Bifacial Debitage and Sampling at a Small Lithic Scatter: An Experimental Study, Unpublished M.A. thesis, Washington State University, Pullman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, M. E. (1944). The physical properties of stone tool materials.American Antiquity 9: 415–433.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, P. V., and Madsen, B. (1983). Flint axe manufacture in the Neolithic: An experimental investigation of a flint axe manufacture site at Hastrup Voengel, East Zealand.Journal of Danish Archaeology 2: 43–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayden, B. (1977). Stone tool functions in the Western Desert. In Wright, R. V. (ed.),Stone Tools as Cultural Markers: Change, Evolution and Complexity, Humanities, Atlantic Highlands, NJ, pp. 178–188.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henry, D. O., Haynes, C. V., and Bradley, B. (1976). Quantitative variations in flaked stone debitage.Plains Anthropologist 21: 57–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hester, T. R. (1991). The impact of debitage studies in Maya archaeology. Paper presented at the 56th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, New Orleans.

  • Holmes, W. H. (1894). Natural history of flaked stone implements. In Wake, C. (ed.),Memoirs of the International Congress of Anthropology, Schulte, Chicago, pp. 120–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hull, K. L. (1987). Identification of cultural site formation processes through microdebitage analysis.American Antiquity 52: 772–783.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ingbar, E. E., Larson, M. L., and Bradley, B. A. (1989). A nontypological approach to debitage analysis. In Amick, D., and Mauldin, R. (eds.),Experiments in Lithic Technology, British Archaeological Reports International Series 528, Oxford, pp. 117–135.

  • Janes, R. R. (1989). A comment on microdebitage analysis and cultural site-formation processes among tipi dwellers.American Antiquity 54: 851–855.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeter, M. D. (1977).Archaeology in Copper Basin, Yavapai County, Arizona: Model Building for the Prehistory of the Prescott Region, Arizona State University Anthropological Research Paper No. 11, Tempe.

  • Johnson, L. L. (1978). A history of flint-knapping experimentation, 1838–1976.Current Anthropology 19: 337–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, R., and White, N. (1988). Point blank: Stone tool manufacture at the Ngilipitji Quarry, Arnhem Land, 1981. In Meehan, B., and Jones, R. (eds.),Archaeology with Ethnography: An Australian Perspective, Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies, Canberra, pp. 51–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalin, J. (1981). Stem point manufacture and debitage recovery.Archaeology of Eastern North America 9: 134–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelterborn, P. (1984). Towards replicating Egyptian Predynastic flint knives.Journal of Archaeological Science 11: 433–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lachenbruch, P. A. (1975).Discriminant Analysis, Hafner Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larralde, S. (1984). Quality control in lithics analysis: A test of precision.Haliksa'i 3: 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latas, T. W. (1992). An analysis of fire-cracked rock: A sedimentological approach. In Stein, J. (ed.),Deciphering a Shell Midden, Academic Press, San Diego, pp. 211–237.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lothrop, J. C. (1988).The Organization of Paleoindian Lithic Technology at the Potts Site, Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, State University of New York—Binghamton.

  • Luedtke, B. E. (1992).An Archaeologist's Guide to Chert and Flint, Archaeological Research Tools No. 7, Institute of Archaeology, University of California at Los Angeles.

  • Madsen, M. E. (1992). Lithic manufacturing at British Camp: Evidence from size distributions and microartifacts. In Stein, J. (ed.),Deciphering a Shell Midden, Academic Press, San Diego, pp. 193–210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Magne, M. P. (1985).Lithics and Livelihood: Stone Tool Technologies of Central and Southern Interior British Columbia, Archaeological Survey of Canada Paper No. 133, Ottawa: National Museum of Man Mercury Series, Ottawa.

  • Magne, M., and Pokotylo, D. (1981). A pilot study in bifacial lithic reduction sequences.Lithic Technology 10: 34–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mauldin, R. P., and Amick, D. S. (1989). Investigating patterning from experimental bifacial core reduction. In Amick, D., and Mauldin, R. (eds.),Experiments in Lithic Technology, British Archaeological Reports International Series No. 528, Oxford, pp. 67–99.

  • McAnany, P. A. (1989). Stone-tool production and exchange in the eastern Maya lowlands: The consumer perspective from Pulltrouser Swamp.American Antiquity 54: 332–346.

    Google Scholar 

  • McHugh, W. P., and Mitchum, B. A. (1981). “Quantitative characteristics of debitage from heat treated chert,” by L. W. Patterson.Plains Anthropologist 26: 327–331.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrow, T. A. (1988). Thebes knives: Experimental applications to archaeological data.20th Century Lithics 1(1): 8–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moss, E. H. (1986). Aspects of site comparison: Debitage samples, technology and function.World Archaeology 18: 116–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muto, G. (1971).A Technological Analysis of the Early Stages in the Manufacture of Lithic Artifacts, Unpublished M.A. thesis, Idaho State University, Pocatello.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, M. (1987). Site contents and structure: Quarries and workshops in the Maya highlands. In Hayden, B. (ed.),Lithic Studies Among the Contemporary Highland Maya, University of Arizona, Tucson, pp. 120–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neumann, T. W., and Johnson, E. (1979). Patrow site lithic analysis.Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology 4: 79–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newcomer, M. H. (1971). Some quantitative experiments in handaxe manufacture.World Archaeology 3: 85–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicholson, B. A. (1983). A comparative evaluation of four sampling techniques and of the reliability of microdebitage as a cultural indicator in regional surveys.Plains Anthropologist 28: 273–281.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nielson, A. E. (1991). Trampling the archaeological record: An experimental study.American Antiquity 56: 483–503.

    Google Scholar 

  • Odell, G. H. (1989). Experiments in lithic reduction. In Amick, D., and Mauldin, R. (eds.),Experiments in Lithic Technology, British Archaeological Reports International Series 528, pp. 163–197.

  • Ohnuma, K., and Bergman, C. (1982). Experimental studies in the determination of flaking mode.Bulletin of the Institute of Archaeology 19: 161–170 (University of London).

    Google Scholar 

  • Parry, W. J. (1987). Technological change: Temporal and functional variability in chipped stone debitage. In Parry, W., and Christenson, A. (eds.),Prehistoric Stone Technology on Northern Black Mesa, Arizona, Center for Archaeological Investigations, Occasional Paper No. 12, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, pp. 199–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patterson, L. W. (1979). Quantitative characteristics of debitage from heat treated chert.Plains Anthropologist 24: 255–259.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patterson, L. W. (1981). The importance of flake size distribution.Contract Abstracts and CRM Archaeology 3: 70–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patterson, L. W. (1982). Replication and classification of large size lithic debitage.Lithic Technology 11: 50–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patterson, L. W. (1990). Characteristics of bifacial-reduction flake-size distribution.American Antiquity 55: 550–558.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patterson, L. W., and Sollberger, J. B. (1978). Replication and classification of small size lithic debitage.Plains Anthropologist 23: 103–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pitts, M. W. (1978). On the shape of waste flakes as an index of technological change in lithic industries.Journal of Archaeological Science 5: 17–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prentiss, W. C., and Romanski, E. J. (1989). Experimental evaluation of Sullivan and Rozen's debitage typology. In Amick, D., and Mauldin, R. (eds.),Experiments in Lithic Technology, British Archaeological Reports International Series 528, pp. 89–99.

  • Raab, L. M., Cande, R. F., and Stahle, D. W. (1979). Debitage graphs and Archaic settlement patterns in the Arkansas Ozarks.Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology 4: 167–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, J. D. (1982). The experimental determination of lithic tool manufacturing goals. In Archaeological Survey, Studies in Oklahoma's Past No. 9, Norman, pp. 93–115.

  • Root, M. J. (1992).The Knife River Flint Quarries: The Organization of Stone Tool Production, Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Washington State University, Pullman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rozen, K. C., and Sullivan, A. P. (1989a). Measurement, method, and meaning in lithic analysis: Problems with Amick and Mauldin's middle-range approach.American Antiquity 54: 169–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rozen, K. C., and Sullivan, A. P. (1989b). The nature of lithic reduction and lithic analysis: Stage typologies revisited.American Antiquity 54: 179–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schick, K. D. (1986).Stone Age Sites in the Making: Experiments in the Formation and Transformation of Archaeological Occurrences, British Archaeological Reports International Series 319, Oxford.

  • Schiffer, M. B. (1975). The effects of occupation span on site content. In Schiffer, M. B., and House, J. H. (eds.),The Cache River Archeological Project: An Experiment in Contract Archeology, Arkansas Archaeological Survey, Research Series No. 8, Fayetteville, pp. 265–270.

  • Schiffer, M. B. (1987).Formation Processes of the Archaeological Record, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shott, M. J. (1986). Technological organization and settlement mobility: An ethnographic examination.Journal of Anthropological Research 42: 15–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shott, M. J. (1989a). On tool class use-lives and the formation of archaeological assemblages.American Antiquity 54: 9–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shott, M. J. (1989b).Childers and Woods: Two Late Woodland Sites in the Upper Ohio Valley, Mason County, West Virginia, University of Kentucky Program for Cultural Resource Assessment, Archaeological Report 200, Lexington.

  • Shott, M. J. (1993).The Leavitt Site: A Parkhill Phase Paleo-Indian Occupation in Central Michigan, University of Michigan Museum of Anthropology, Memoirs No. 25, Ann Arbor.

  • Speth, J. D. (1972). Mechanical basis of percussion flaking.American Antiquity 37: 34–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stahle, D. W., and Dunn, J. E. (1982). An analysis and application of the size distribution of waste flakes from the manufacture of bifacial stone tools.World Archaeology 14: 84–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stahle, D. W., and Dunn, J. E. (1984).An Experimental Analysis of the Size Distribution of Waste Flakes from Biface Reduction, Arkansas Archeological Survey, Technical Paper No. 2, Fayetteville.

  • Statham, W. P. (1985). Research documentation and reference collection in experimental lithic technology. In Plew, M., Woods, J., and Pavesic, M. (eds.),Stone Tool Analysis: Essays in Honor of Don E. Crabtree, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, pp. 229–242.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stein, J. K., and Teltser, P. A. (1989). Size distributions of artifact classes: Combining macro-and micro-fractions.Geoarchaeology 4: 1–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, A. P., and Rozen, K. C. (1985). Debitage analysis and archaeological interpretation.American Antiquity 50: 755–779.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teltser, P. A. (1991). Generalized core technology and tool use: A Mississippian example.Journal of Field Archaeology 18: 363–375.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomka, S. A. (1989). Differentiating lithic reduction techniques: An experimental approach. In Amick, D., and Mauldin, R. (eds.),Experiments in Lithic Technology, British Archaeological Reports International Series 528, pp. 137–161.

  • Toth, N. (1987). Behavioral inferences from Early Stone artifact assemblages: An experimental model.Journal of Human Evolution 16: 763–787.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Towner, R. H., and Warburton, M. (1990). Projectile point rejuvenation: A technological analysis.Journal of Field Archaeology 17: 311–321.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tringham, R., Cooper, G., Odell, G., Voytek, B., and Whitman, A. (1974). Experimentation in the formation of edge damage: A new approach to lithic analysis.Journal of Field Archaeology 1: 171–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vance, E. D. (1986). Microdebitage analysis in activity analysis: An application.Northwest Anthropological Research Notes 20: 179–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Riet Lowe, C. (1945). The evolution of the Levallois technique in South Africa,Man 45: 49–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Villa, P. (1991). From debitage chips to social models of production: The refitting method in Old World archaeology.The Review of Archaeology 12(2): 24–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenban-Smith, F. F. (1989). The use of canonical variates for determination of biface manufacturing technology at Boxgrove Lower Palaeolithic site and the behavioral implications of this technology.Journal of Archaeological Science 16: 17–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whittaker, J. C. (1987). Making arrowpoints in a prehistoric Pueblo.Lithic Technology 16: 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilk, R. (1976). Superficial examination of Structure 100, Colha. In Hammond, N. (ed.),Archaeology in Northern Belize: British Museum-Cambridge University Corozal Project, 1974–1975, Cambridge University Centre of Latin American Studies, Cambridge, pp. 152–173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilmsen, E. N. (1970).Lithic Analysis and Cultural Inference: A Paleo-Indian Case, Anthropological Papers of the University of Arizona No. 16, Tucson.

  • Wilmsen, E. N., and Roberts, F. H. H. (1978).Lindenmeier: Concluding Report on Investigations, Smithsonian Contributions to Anthropology No. 24, Washington, DC.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Sociology and Anthropology, University of Northern Iowa, 272 Baker Hall, 50614-0513, Cedar Falls, Iowa

    Michael J. Shott

Authors
  1. Michael J. Shott
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shott, M.J. Size and form in the analysis of flake debris: Review and recent approaches. J Archaeol Method Theory 1, 69–110 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02229424

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02229424

Key words

Search

Navigation