Advertisement

Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory

, Volume 24, Issue 3, pp 813–851 | Cite as

Major Fallacies Surrounding Stone Artifacts and Assemblages

  • Harold L. Dibble
  • Simon J. Holdaway
  • Sam C. Lin
  • David R. Braun
  • Matthew J. Douglass
  • Radu Iovita
  • Shannon P. McPherron
  • Deborah I. Olszewski
  • Dennis Sandgathe
Article

Abstract

While lithic objects can potentially inform us about past adaptations and behaviors, it is important to develop a comprehensive understanding of all of the various processes that influence what we recover from the archaeological record. We argue here that many assumptions used by archaeologists to derive behavioral inferences through the definition, conceptualization, and interpretation of both individual stone artifact forms and groups of artifacts identified as assemblages do not fit squarely with what we have learned from both ethnographic sources and analyses of archaeological materials. We discuss this in terms of two fallacies. The first is the fallacy of the “desired end product” in stone artifact manufacture, which also includes our ability to recognize such end products. The second fallacy has to do with the notions that lithic assemblages represent simple accumulations of contemporary behaviors and the degree to which the composition of the depositional units we study reliably match the kinds of activities that took place. Although it is beyond the scope of this paper to offer a comprehensive set of new methodologies and theoretical perspectives to solve these problems, our goal here is to stress the importance of rethinking some of our most basic assumptions regarding the nature of lithic objects and how they become part of the archaeological record. Such a revision is needed if we want to be able to develop research questions that can be addressed with the data we have available to us.

Keywords

Lithic studies Lithic technology Typology Replicative experiments Ethnoarchaeology Site formation 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This article represents the results of a series of meetings held by the authors beginning in 2012. The initial meeting was held at the Max Planck Institute for Human Evolution, Leipzig, and we thank Jean-Jacques Hublin for his support. Additional meetings were held in Honolulu, Hawaii and Philadelphia in 2013. Participation at these meetings was supported by the Faculty of Arts, University of Auckland; the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, Columbian College of Arts and Science at George Washington University; the Kolb Foundation, University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology; and the Römisch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum, Leibniz-Forschungsinstitut für Archäologie. We thank Vera Aldeias, Paul Goldberg, Rebecca Phillipps, Marie Soressi, Alex Mackay, William Archer, Michael Chazan, George Leader, and Metin Eren for discussions related to the topics discussed here.

References

  1. Agam, A., Marder, O., & Barkai, R. (2015). Small flake production and lithic recycling at Late Acheulian Revadim, Israel. Quaternary International, 361, 46–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahler, S. A. (1971). Projectile point form and function at Rodgers shelter. Missouri: Missouri Archaeological Society Research Series No. 8.Google Scholar
  3. Akerman, K. (2007). To make a point: ethnographic reality and the ethnographic and experimental replication of Australian macroblades known as Leilira. Australian Archaeology, 64, 23–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aldeias, V., Goldberg, P., Sandgathe, D., Francesco, B., Dibble, H. L., McPherron, S. P., et al. (2012). Evidence for Neandertal use of fire at Roc de Marsal (France). Journal of Archaeological Science, 39(7), 2414–2423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Andrefsky, W., Jr. (1994). Raw material availability and the organization of technology. American Antiquity, 59(1), 21–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Andrefsky, W., Jr. (2009). The analysis of stone tool procurement, production, and maintenance. Journal of Archaeological Research, 17(1), 65–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ascher, R. (1961). Analogy in archaeological interpretation. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology, 17(4), 317–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Audouze, F., & Leroi-Gourhan, A. (1981). France: a continental insularity. World Archaeology, 13(2), 170–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bamforth, D. B. (1993). Stone tools, steel tools: contact period household technology at Heló. In J. D. Rogers & S. M. Wilson (Eds.), Ethnohistory and archaeology: approaches to postcontact change in the New World (pp. 49–72). New York: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bamforth, D. B., & Finlay, N. (2008). Introduction: archaeological approaches to lithic production skill and craft learning. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 15(1), 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Barkai, R., Lemorini, C., & Vaquero, M. (2015) The origins of recycling: a paleolithic perspective. Quaternary International 361, 1–3.Google Scholar
  12. Barrera, W. M., Jr., & Kirch, P. V. (1973). Basaltic-glass artefacts from Hawaii: their dating and prehistoric uses. Journal of the Polynesian Society, 82(2), 176–187.Google Scholar
  13. Barton, C. M., & Riel-Salvatore, J. (2014). The formation of lithic assemblages. Journal of Archaeological Science, 46, 334–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bar-Yosef, O., & Van Peer, P. (2009). The chaîne opératoire approach in Middle Paleolithic archaeology. Current Anthropology, 50(1), 103–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bar-Yosef, O., Goren-Inbar, N., & Gilead, I. (1993). The lithic assemblages of ‘Ubeidiya’: a Lower Paleolithic site in the Jordan Valley. Jerusalem: Institute of Archaeology, Hebrew University of Jerusalem.Google Scholar
  16. Baumler, M. F. (1988). Core reduction, flake production, and the Middle Paleolithic industry of Zobiste (Yugoslavia). In H. L. Dibble & A. Montet-White (Eds.), Upper Pleistocene prehistory of Western Eurasia (pp. 255–274). Philadelphia: University Museum, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
  17. Behrensmeyer, A. K. (1978). Taphonomic and ecologic information from bone weathering. Paleobiology, 4(2), 150–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Behrensmeyer, A. K., Gordon, K. D., & Yanagi, G. (1986). Trampling as a cause of bone surface damage and pseudo-cutmarks. Nature, 319, 768–771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Bergman, C. A., & Roberts, M. B. (1988). Flaking technology at the Acheulean site of Boxgrove, West Sussex (England). Revue Archéologique de Picardie, 1(1), 105–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Bertran, P., Lenoble, A., Todisco, D., Desrosiers, P. M., & Sørensen, M. (2012). Particle size distribution of lithic assemblages and taphonomy of Palaeolithic sites. Journal of Archaeological Science, 39(10), 3148–3166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Beyries, S. (1988). Functional variability of lithic sets in the Middle Paleolithic. In H. L. Dibble & A. Montet-White (Eds.), Upper Pleistocene prehistory of Western Eurasia (pp. 213–224). Philadelphia: University Museum, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
  22. Binford, L. R. (1977). Forty-seven trips: a case study in the character of archaeological formation processes. In R. V. S. Wright (Ed.), Stone tools as cultural markers: change, evolution and complexity (pp. 24–36). Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.Google Scholar
  23. Binford, L. R. (1978a). Dimensional analysis of behavior and site structure: learning from an Eskimo hunting stand. American Antiquity, 43(3), 330–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Binford, L. R. (1978b). Nunamiut ethnoarchaeology. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  25. Binford, L. R. (1981a). Bones: ancient men and modern myths. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  26. Binford, L. R. (1981b). Behavioral archaeology and the ‘Pompeii Premise’. Journal of Anthropological Research, 37(3), 195–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Binford, L. R. (1982). Objectivity―Explanation―Archaeology. In C. Renfrew, M. J. Rowlands, & B. A. Seagraves (Eds.), Theory and explanation in archaeology: the Southampton conference (pp. 125–138). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  28. Binford, L. R. (1986). An Alyawara day: making men’s knives and beyond. American Antiquity, 51(3), 547–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Binford, L. R., & O’Connell, J. F. (1984). An Alyawara day: the stone quarry. Journal of Anthropological Research, 40(3), 406–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Bleed, P. (2001). Trees or chains, links or branches: conceptual alternatives for consideration of stone tool production and other sequential activities. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 8(1), 101–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Bleed, P. (2002a). Obviously sequential, but continuous or staged? Refits and cognition in three late Paleolithic assemblages from Japan. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 21(3), 329–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Bleed, P. (2002b). Cheap, regular, and reliable: implications of degin variation in late Pleistocene Japanese microblade technology. Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association, 12(1), 95–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Blumenschine, R. J. (1991). Breakfast at Olorgesailie: the natural history approach to Early Stone Age archaeology. Journal of Human Evolution, 21(4), 307–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Bodu, P. (1994). Analyse typo-technologique du matériel lithique de quelques unités du site magdalénien de Pincevent (Seine-et-Marne). Applications spatiales, économiques et sociales. Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Française, 92(1), 15–17.Google Scholar
  35. Bodu, P. (1996). Magdalenian hunters of Pincevent: aspects of their behavior. Lithic Technology, 21, 66–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Boëda, E. (1986). Approche technologique du concept Levallois et évaluation de son champ d’application: étude de trois gisements saaliens et weichséliens de la France septentrionale. Thèse de doctorat, Université de Paris X, Paris.Google Scholar
  37. Boëda, E. (1988a). Le concept Levallois et évaluation de son champ d’application. In M. Otte (Ed.), L’Homme de Néandertal, vol. 4, La Technique (pp. 13–26). Liège: Études et Recherches Archéologiques de l’Université de Liège.Google Scholar
  38. Boëda, E. (1988b). Le concept laminaire: rupture et filiation avec le concept Levallois. In M. Otte (Ed.), L’Homme de Néandertal, vol. 8, La Mutation (pp. 41–59). Liège: Études et Recherches Archéologiques de l’Université de Liège.Google Scholar
  39. Boëda, E. (1993). Le débitage discoïde et le débitage Levallois récurrent centripède. Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Française, 90(6), 392–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Boëda, E. (1995). Levallois: a volumetric construction, methods, a technique. In H. L. Dibble & O. Bar-Yosef (Eds.), The definition and interpretation of Levallois technology (pp. 41–68). Madison: Prehistory Press.Google Scholar
  41. Boëda, E., Geneste, J.-M., & Meignen, L. (1990). Identification de chaînes opératoires lithiques du Paléolithique ancien et moyen. Paléo, 2(1), 43–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Boeuf, O. (1976). Découverte de deux cránes d’Archidiskodon (Elephas) meridionalis dans le gisement villafranchien de Chilhac 2 (Haute-Loire). Compts Rendos de la Academie de Science, 283(serie D), 659–660.Google Scholar
  43. Bordes, F. (1953). Notules de typologie paléolithique. I. Outils moustériens à fracture volontaire. Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Française, 50(4), 224–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Bordes, F. (1961). Typologie du paléolithique ancien et moyen. Bordeaux: Publications de l’Institut de Préhistoire de l’Université de Bordeaux.Google Scholar
  45. Bordes, F. (1971). Essai de préhistoire expérimentale: fabrication d’un épieu de bois. Mélanges de préhistoire, d’archéocivilisation et d’ethnologie offer à A. Varagnac, Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes, VI section, Paris.Google Scholar
  46. Bordes, F. (1980). Question de contemporanéité: l’illusion des remontages. Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Française, 77(5), 132–133.Google Scholar
  47. Bordes, F., Rigaud, J.-P., & de Sonneville-Bordes, D. (1972). Des buts, problèmes et limites de l’archéologie paléolithique. Quaternaria, 16, 15–34.Google Scholar
  48. Bosinski, G. (1979). Die Ausgrabungen in Gönnersdorf 1968–1976 und die Siedlungsbenfunde der Grabung 1968. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner GMBH.Google Scholar
  49. Brandt, S. A., Weedman, K. J., & Hundie, G. (1996). Gurage hide working stone tool use and social identity: an ethnoarchaeological perspective. In G. Hudson (Ed.), Essay on gurage language and culture (pp. 35–51). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
  50. Braun, D. R., Plummer, T., Ditchfield, P., Bishop, L., & Ferraro, J. (2009a). Oldowan technology and raw material variability at Kanjera South. In E. Hovers & D. R. Braun (Eds.), Interdisciplinary approaches to the Oldowan (pp. 99–110). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Braun, D. R., Plummer, T., Ferraro, J. V., Ditchfield, P., & Bishop, L. C. (2009b). Raw material quality and Oldowan hominin tool stone preferences: evidence from Kanjera South, Kenya. Journal of Archaeological Science, 36(7), 1605–1614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Bröndsted, J. (1957). Danmarks Oldtid (Vol. 1). Copenhagen: Gyldendal.Google Scholar
  53. Bunn, H., Harris, J. W. K., Isaac, G., Kaufulu, Z., Kroll, E., Schick, K., et al. (1980). FxJj50: an early Pleistocene site in Northern Kenya. World Archaeology, 12(2), 109–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Cahen, D., Keeley, L. H., & Van Noten, F. L. (1979). Stone tools, toolkits, and human behavior in prehistory. Current Anthropology, 20(4), 661–683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Chase, P. G., Debénath, A., Dibble, H. L., & McPherron, S. P. (2009). The cave of Fontéchevade: recent excavations and their Paleoanthropological implications. Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar
  56. Chiotti, L., Olszewski, D. I., Dibble, H. L., McPherron, S. P., Schurmans, U., & Smith, J. R. (2007). Paleolithic Abydos: reconstructing individual behaviors across the High Desert landscape. In Z. Hawass & J. Richards (Eds.), The archaeology and art of Egypt: essays in honor of David B. O’Connor (pp. 169–183). Cairo: Supreme Council of Antiquities Press.Google Scholar
  57. Clark, J. G. D. (1954). Excavations at Star Carr: an early Mesolithic site at Seamer near Scarborough, Yorkshire. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  58. Clark, J. D. (1967). The Middle Acheulian occupation site at Latamne, Northern Syria (first paper). Quaternaria, 9, 1–68.Google Scholar
  59. Clark, J. D. (1968). The Middle Acheulian occupation site at Latamne, Northern Syria (second paper). Further excavations (1995): general results, definitions and interpretations. Quaternaria, 10, 1–72.Google Scholar
  60. Clark, J. G. D. (1972). Star Carr: a case study in bioarchaeology. Reading: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.Google Scholar
  61. Clark, A. M. B. (1999). Late Pleistocene technology at Rose Cottage Cave: a search for modern behavior in an MSA context. African Archaeological Review, 16(2), 93–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Clarkson, C. (2006). Explaining point variability in the eastern Victoria River region, Northern Territory. Archaeology in Oceania, 41(3), 97–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Close, A. E. (2000). Reconstructing movement in prehistory. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 7(1), 49–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Cobb, C. R. (2003). Stone tool traditions after contact. Tuscaloosa: The University of Alabama Press.Google Scholar
  65. Coon, C. (1951). Cave explorations in Iran. Philadelphia: University Museum Press.Google Scholar
  66. Cooper, H. M. (1954). Material culture of Australian aborigines, part 1: progressive modification of a stone artefact. Records of the South Australian Museum, 11, 91–97.Google Scholar
  67. Crabtree, D. (1966). Stoneworker’s approach to analyzing and replicating the Lindenmeier Folsom. Tebiwa, 9(1), 3–39.Google Scholar
  68. Crabtree, D. (1967). Notes on experiments on flintknapping 3: the flintknapper’s raw materials. Tebiwa, 10(1), 8–24.Google Scholar
  69. Crabtree, D. (1970). Flaking stone with wooden implements. Science, 169(3941), 146–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Crabtree, D. (1972). An introduction to flintworking. Occasional papers of the Idaho State University Museum, 28.Google Scholar
  71. Curwen, E. C. (1935). Agriculture and the flint sickle in Palestine. Antiquity, 9(33), 62–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. d’Errico, F., Backwell, L., Villa, P., Degano, I., Lucejko, J. J., Bamford, M. K., et al. (2012). Early evidence of San material culture represented by organic artifacts from Border Cave, South Africa. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 109(33), 13214–13219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Davidson, I., & Noble, W. (1989). The archaeology of perception: traces of depiction and language. Current Anthropology, 30(2), 125–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Davidson, I., & Noble, W. (1993). Tools and language in human evolution. In K. Gibson & T. Ingold (Eds.), Tools, language and cognition in human evolution (pp. 363–388). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  75. Davies, B., Holdaway, S. J., & Fanning, P. C. (2015). Modelling the palimpsest: an exploratory agent-based model of surface archaeological deposit formation in a fluvial arid Australian landscape. The Holocene. doi: 10.1177/0959683615609754.Google Scholar
  76. de la Torre, I., & Benito-Calvo, A. (2013). Application of GIS methods to retrieve orientation patterns from imagery: a case study from Beds I and II, Olduvai Gorge (Tanzania). Journal of Archaeological Science, 40(5), 2446–2457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. de Lumley, H. (1966). Les fouilles de Terra Amata à Nice. Premiers résultats. Bulletin du Musée d’Anthropologie Préhistorique de Monaco, 13, 29–51.Google Scholar
  78. de Lumley, H. (1969). A Paleolithic camp at Nice. Scientific American, 220(5), 42–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. de Lumley, H., de Lumley, M.-A., Brandi, R., Guerrier, E., Pillard, F., & Pillard, B. (1972). La Grotte Moustérienne de l’Hortus. Marseille: Editions du Laboratoire de Paléontologie Humaine et de Préhistoire.Google Scholar
  80. Deacon, J. (1995). An unsolved mystery at the Howieson’s Poort name Site. The South African Archaeological Bulletin, 50(162), 110–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Debénath, A., & Dibble, H. L. (1994). Handbook of Paleolithic typology vol. 1: the Lower and Middle Paleolithic of Europe. Philadelphia: University Museum, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
  82. Dibble, H. L. (1984). Interpreting typological variation of Middle Paleolithic scrapers: function, style, or sequence of reduction? Journal of Field Archaeology, 11, 431–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Dibble, H. L. (1987). The interpretation of Middle Paleolithic scraper morphology. American Antiquity, 52(1), 109–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Dibble, H. L. (1988). Typological aspects of reduction and intensity of utilization of lithic resources in the French Mousterian. In H. L. Dibble & A. Montet-White (Eds.), Upper Pleistocene prehistory of Western Eurasia (pp. 181–197). Philadelphia: University Museum, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
  85. Dibble, H. L. (1995a). Biache Saint-Vaast, level IIa: a comparison of analytical approaches. In H. L. Dibble & O. Bar-Yosef (Eds.), The definition and interpretation of Levallois variability (pp. 96–113). Madison: Prehistory Press.Google Scholar
  86. Dibble, H. L. (1995b). Middle Paleolithic scraper reduction: background, clarification, and review of evidence to data. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 2(4), 299–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Dibble, H. (1995c). Introduction to site formation. In H. Dibble & M. Lenoir (Eds.), The Middle Paleolithic Site of Combe-Capelle Bas (France) (pp. 175–178). Philadelphia: University Museum Press.Google Scholar
  88. Dibble, H. L., & McPherron, S. P. (2006). The missing Mousterian. Current Anthropology, 47(5), 777–803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Dibble, H. L., & McPherron, S. P. (2007). Truncated-faceted pieces: hafting modification, retouch, or cores? In S. P. McPherron (Ed.), Tools versus cores: alternative approaches to stone tool analysis (pp. 75–90). Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
  90. Dibble, H. L., Chase, P. G., McPherron, S. P., & Tuffreau, A. (1997). Testing the reality of a “living floor” with archaeological data. American Antiquity, 62(4), 629–651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Dibble, H. L., Berna, F., Goldberg, P., McPherron, S. P., Mentzer, S., Niven, L., et al. (2009). A preliminary report on Pech de l’Azé IV, Layer 8 (Middle Paleolithic, France). PaleoAnthropology, 2009, 182–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Dibble, H. L., Aldeias, V., Alvarez-Fernandez, E., Blackwell, B. A. B., Hallett-Desguez, E., Jacobs, Z., et al. (2012). New excavations at the site of Contrebandiers Cave, Morocco. PaleoAnthropology, 2012, 145–201.Google Scholar
  93. Dibble, H. L., Aldeias, V., Jacobs, Z., Olszewski, D. I., Rezek, Z., Lin, S. C., et al. (2013). On the industrial affiliations of the aterian and Mousterian of the Maghreb. Journal of Human Evolution, 64(3), 194–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Dinnis, R., Pawlik, A., & Gaillard, C. (2009). Bladelet cores as weapon tips? Hafting residue identification and micro-wear analysis of three carinated burins from the late Aurignacian of Les Vachons, France. Journal of Archaeological Science, 36(9), 1922–1934.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Douglass, M.J. (2010). The archaeological potential of informal lithic technologies: a case study of assemblage variability in western New South Wales, Australia. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Anthropology, The University of Auckland.Google Scholar
  96. Douglass, M. J., & Wandsnider, L. (2012). Fragmentation resistant measures of chipped stone abundance and size: results of an experimental investigation of the impact of cattle trampling on surface chipped stone scatters. Plains Anthropologist, 57(224), 353–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Douglass, M. J., Holdaway, S. J., Shiner, J., & Fanning, P. C. (2015). Quartz and silcrete raw material use and selection in late Holocene assemblages from semi-arid Australia. Quaternary International. doi: 10.1016/j.quaint.2015.08.041.Google Scholar
  98. Dunnell, R. C. (1992). The notion site. In J. Rossignol & L. Wandsnider (Eds.), Space, time, and archaeological landscapes (pp. 21–41). New York: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Dunnell, R. C., & Dancey, W. S. (1983). The siteless survey: a regional scale data collection strategy. Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, 6, 267–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Ebert, J. I. (1979). An ethnoarchaeological approach to reassessing the meaning of variability in stone tool assemblages. In C. Kramer (Ed.), Ethnoarchaeology: implications of ethnography for archaeology (pp. 59–74). New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  101. Einstein, A. (1936). Lens-like action of a star by the deviation of light in the gravitational field. Science, 84(2), 506–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Eren, M. I., & Lycett, S. J. (2012). Why Levallois? A morphometric comparison of experimental ‘preferential’ Levallois flakes versus debitage flakes. PLoS ONE, 7(1), e29273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Eren, M. I., Greenspan, A., & Sampson, C. G. (2008). Are Upper Paleolithic blade cores more productive than Middle Paleolithic discoidal cores? A replication experiment. Journal of Human Evolution, 55(6), 952–961.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Eren, M. I., Bradley, B. A., & Sampson, C. G. (2011a). Middle Paleolithic skill level and the individual knapper: an experiment. American Antiquity, 76(2), 229–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Eren, M. I., Lycett, S. J., Roos, C. I., & Sampson, C. G. (2011b). Toolstone constraints on knapping skill: Levallois reduction with two different raw materials. Journal of Archaeological Science, 38(10), 2731–2739.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Evans, J. (1897). The ancient stone implements, weapons and ornaments of Great Britain (2nd ed.). London: Longmans.Google Scholar
  107. Féblot-Augustins, J. (1990). Exploitation des matières premières dans l’Acheuléen d’Afrique: perspectives comportmentales. Paléo, 2(1), 27–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Ferguson, J. R. (2003). An experimental test on the conservation of raw material in flintknapping skill acquisition. Lithic Technology, 28(2), 113–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Flenniken, J. J. (1984). The past, present, and future of flintknapping: an anthropological perspective. Annual Review of Anthropology, 13, 187–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Flenniken, J. J., & Raymond, A. W. (1986). Morphological projectile point typology: replication experimentation and technological analysis. American Antiquity, 51(3), 603–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Foley, R. A. (1981a). Off-site archaeology: an alternative approach for the short-sited. In I. Hodder, G. Isaac, & N. Hammond (Eds.), Patterns of the past: studies in honour of David Clarke (pp. 157–183). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  112. Foley, R. A. (1981b). A model of regional archaeological structure. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, 47, 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Foley, R. A., & Lahr, M. M. (2003). On stony ground: Lithic technology, human evolution, and the emergence of culture. Evolutionary Anthropology, 12(3), 109–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Freeman, L. G., & Butzer, K. (1966). The Acheulian station of Torralba (Spain): a progress report. Quaternaria, 8, 9–21.Google Scholar
  115. Frison, G. C. (1968). A functional analysis of certain chipped stone tools. American Antiquity, 33(2), 149–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Frison, G. C., & Stanford, D. J. (1982). The Agate basin site. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  117. Gamble, C., & Poor, M. (Eds.). (2005). The hominid individual in context: archaeological investigation of Lower and Middle Palaeolithic landscapes, locales and artefacts. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  118. Gao, X. (1999). A discussion on ‘Chinese Middle Paleolithic’. Acta Anthropologica Sinica, 18(1), 1–16.Google Scholar
  119. Gao, X. (2013). Paleolithic cultures in China: uniqueness and divergence. Current Anthropology, 54(S8), S358–S370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. Gao, X., & Norton, C. J. (2002). A critique of the Chinese ‘Middle Paleolithic’. Antiquity, 76, 397–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. Geneste, J-. M. (1985). Analyse lithique d’industries moustériennes du Périgord: une approche du comportement des groupes humains au paléolithique moyen. Thèse de doctorat, l’Université de Bordeaux I.Google Scholar
  122. Geribàs, N., Mosquera, M., & Vergès, J. M. (2010). What novice knappers have to learn to become expert stone toolmakers. Journal of Archaeological Science, 37(11), 2857–2870.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Goebel, T., Waters, M. R., & Dikova, M. (2003). The archaeology of Ushki Lake, Kamchatka, and the Pleistocene peopling of the Americas. Science, 301(5632), 501–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. Goldberg, P., Miller, C. E., Schiegl, S., Ligouis, B., Berna, F., Conard, N. J., et al. (2009). Bedding, hearths, and site maintenance in the Middle Stone Age of Sibudu Cave, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences, 1(2), 95–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. Goldberg, P., Dibble, H. L., Berna, F., Sandgathe, D., McPherron, S. P., & Turq, A. (2012). New evidence on Neanderthal use of fire: examples from Roc de Marsal and Pech de l’Azé IV. Quaternary International, 247, 325–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Goodyear, A. C. (1974). The Brand site: a techno-functional study of a Dalton site in Northeast Arkansas (p. 7). Fayetteville: Arkansas Archeological Survey No.Google Scholar
  127. Gould, R. A. (1980). Living archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  128. Gould, S. J., & Eldredge, N. (1993). Punctuated equilibrium comes of age. Nature, 366, 223–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. Gould, R. A., & Saggers, S. (1985). Lithic procurement in central Australia: a closer look at Binford’s idea of embeddedness in archaeology. American Antiquity, 50(1), 117–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. Gould, R. A., Koster, D. A., & Sontz, A. H. (1971). The lithic assemblage of the Western Desert Aborigines of Australia. American Antiquity, 36(2), 149–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  131. Haidel, M. N. (2007). Archaeology. In W. Henke & I. Tattersall (Eds.), Handbook of paleoanthropology (pp. 261–287). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. Harrison, H. S. (1947). A bolas-and-hoop game in East Africa. Man, 47, 153–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. Harrison, R. (2006). An artefact of colonial desire? Kimberley points and the technologies of enchantment. Current Anthropology, 47(1), 63–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. Hayden, B. (1979). Paleolithic reflections: lithic technology and ethnographic excavation among the Australian Aborigines. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.Google Scholar
  135. Hays, M. A., & Lucas, G. (2000). A technological and functional analysis of carinates from Le Flageolet I, Dordogne, France. Journal of Field Archaeology, 27(4), 455–465.Google Scholar
  136. Henry, D. (2012). The palimpsest problem, hearth pattern analysis, and Middle Paleolithic site structure. Quaternary International, 247, 246–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. Hiscock, P. (1988). A cache of tulas from the Boulia district, western Queensland. Archaeology of Oceania, 23(2), 60–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. Hiscock, P. (2004). Slippery and Billy: intention, selection and equifinality in lithic artefacts. Cambridge Archaeological Journal, 14(1), 71–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. Hiscock, P. (2006). Blunt and to the point: changing technological strategies in Holocene Australia. In I. Lilley (Ed.), Archaeology of Oceania: Australia and the Pacific Islands (pp. 69–95). Maiden: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
  140. Hiscock, P., & Clarkson, C. (2007). Retouched notches at Combe Grenel (France) and the reduction hypothesis. American Antiquity, 72(1), 176–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  141. Hoffman, C. M. (1985). Projectile point maintenance and typology: assessment with factor analysis and canonical correlation. In C. Carr (Ed.), For concordance in archaeological analysis: bridging data structure, quantitative technique, and theory (pp. 566–612). Kansas City: Westport Press.Google Scholar
  142. Holdaway, S. J. (1989). Were there hafted projectile points in the Mousterian? Journal of Field Archaeology, 16(1), 79–85.Google Scholar
  143. Holdaway, S. J., & Douglass, M. J. (2012). A twenty-first century archaeology of stone artifacts. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 19(19), 101–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. Holdaway, S. J., & Douglass, M. J. (2015). Use beyond manufacture: Non-flint stone artifacts from fowlers Gap, Australia. Lithic Technology, 40(2), 94–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  145. Holdaway, S. J., & Fanning, P. C. (2014). A geoarchaeology of Aboriginal landscapes in semiarid Australia. Collingwood: CSIRO.Google Scholar
  146. Holdaway, S. J., McPherron, S. P., & Roth, B. J. (1996). Notched tool reuse and raw material availability in French Middle Paleolithic sites. American Antiquity, 61(2), 377–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  147. Holdaway, S. J., Douglass, M. J., & Phillipps, R. S. (2014). Flake selection, assemblage variability and technological organization. In M. Shott (Ed.), Works in stone: contemporary perspectives on lithic analysis (pp. 46–62). Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.Google Scholar
  148. Horne, G. A., & Aiston, G. (1924). Savage life in central Australia. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  149. Howell, F. C. (1989). Lead review: the evolution of human hunting. Journal of Human Evolution, 18(6), 583–594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  150. Huffman, O. F., De Vos, J. O. H. N., Berkhout, A. W., & Aziz, F. (2010). Provenience reassessment of the 1931–1933 Ngandong Homo erectus (Java), confirmation of the Bone-Bed origin reported by the discoverers. PaleoAnthropology, 2010, 1–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  151. Inizan, M.-L., Reduron-Ballinger, M., Roche, H., & Tixier, J. (1999). Technology and terminology of knapped stone. Nanterre: CREP.Google Scholar
  152. Iovita, R. (2011). Shape variation in Aterian tanged tools and the origins of projectile technology: a morphometric perspective on stone tool function. PLoS ONE, 6(12), e29029.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  153. Iovita, R., & McPherron, S. P. (2011). The handaxe reloaded: a morphometric reassessment of Acheulian and Middle Paleolithic handaxes. Journal of Human Evolution, 61(1), 61–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  154. Iovita, R., & Sano, K. (2016). Summary and conclusions. In R. Iovita & K. Sano (Eds.), Multidisciplinary approaches to the study of Stone Age weaponry (pp. 289–297). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  155. Isaac, G. L. (1986). Foundation stones: early artefacts as indicators of activities and abilities. In G. Bailey & P. Callow (Eds.), Stone Age prehistory: studies in memory of Charles McBurney (pp. 221–241). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  156. Jelinek, A. J. (1976). Form, function and style in lithic analysis. In C. E. Cleland (Ed.), Cultural change and continuity: essays in honor of James Bennett Griffin (pp. 19–33). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  157. Jelinek, A. J. (1977). The lower Paleolithic: current evidence and interpretation. Annual Review of Anthropology, 6, 11–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  158. Jelinek, A. J. (1991). Observations on reduction patterns and raw materials in some Middle Paleolithic industries in the Perigord. In A. Montet-White & S. Holen (Eds.), Raw material economies among prehistoric hunter-gatherers (pp. 7–32). Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
  159. Johnson, L. (1978). A history of flint-knapping experimentation, 1838–1976. Current Anthropology, 19(2), 337–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  160. Kelterborn, P. (1984). Towards replicating Egyptian Predynastic flint knives. Journal of Archaeological Science, 11(6), 433–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  161. Kempe, M., Lycett, S. J., & Mesoudi, A. (2012). An experimental test of the accumulated copying error model of cultural mutation for Acheulean handaxe size. PLoS ONE, 7(11), e48333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  162. Klein, R. (1987). Reconstructing how early people exploited animals: problems and prospects. In M. Nitecki & D. Nitecki (Eds.), The evolution of human hunting (pp. 11–46). New York and London: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  163. Kluskens, S. (1995). Archaeological taphonomy of Combe-Capelle Bas from artifact orientation and density analysis. In H. L. Dibble & M. Lenoir (Eds.), The middle Paleolithic site of Combe-Capelle Bas (France) (pp. 199–243). Philadelphia: University Museum, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
  164. Kroll, E. M., & Isaac, G. (1984). Configurations of artifacts and bones at early Pleistocene sites in East Africa. In H. Hietala (Ed.), Intrasite spatial analysis in archaeology (pp. 4–31). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  165. LaRue, C., & Webster, L. (2015). Ancient woodworking, animal use, and hunting practices in southeastern Utah: new insights from the study of early perishable collections. The Monthly Newsletter of the Arizona Archaeological and Historical Society, 66, 4–5.Google Scholar
  166. Leakey, L. S. B. (1948). The bolas in Africa. Man, 48, 48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  167. Leakey, M. D. (1971). Olduvai Gorge, Vol. 3: Excavations in Beds I and II, 1960–1963. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  168. Lenoble, A., & Bertran, P. (2004). Fabric of Palaeolithic levels: methods and implications for site formation processes. Journal of Archaeological Science, 31(4), 457–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  169. Leroi-Gourhan, A., & Brezillon, M. (1966). L’habitation Magdalenienne no. 1 de Pincevent pres Montereau (Seine-et-Marne). Gallia Préhistoire, 9(2), 263–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  170. Leroi-Gourhan, A., & Brezillon, M. (1972). Fouilles de Picevent: Essai d’analyse ethnographique d’un habitat magdalénien. Paris: Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique.Google Scholar
  171. Lin, S. C., Rezek, Z., Braun, D. R., & Dibble, H. L. (2013). On the utility and economization of unretouched flakes: the effects of exterior platform angle and platform depth. American Antiquity, 78(4), 724–745.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  172. Lindly, J., Beck, R., & Clark, G. A. (2000). Core reconstruction and lithic reduction sequences at WHS 623X: an Upper Paleolithic site. In N. R. Coinman (Ed.), The archaeology of the Wadi al-Hasa, west-central Jordan, volume 2: Archaeological excavations in the Wadi Hasa (pp. 211–226). Tempe: Arizona State University.Google Scholar
  173. Lomborg, E. (1975). The flint daggers of Denmark: studies in chronology and cultural relations of the South Scandinavian Late Neolithic. Norwegian Archaeological Review, 8(2), 98–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  174. Lucas, G. (2012). Understanding the archaeological record. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  175. MacCalman, H. R., & Grobbelaar, B. J. (1965). Preliminary report of two stone-working OvaTjimba groups in the northern Kaokoveld of South West Africa. Cimbebasia, 134, 1–39.Google Scholar
  176. Madsen, A.P. (1848) Afbildninger fra Stenalderen. Copenhagen.Google Scholar
  177. Malinsky-Buller, A., Hovers, E., & Marder, O. (2011). Making time: ‘living floors’, ‘palimpsests’ and site formation processes—a perspective from the open-air Lower Paleolithic site of Revadim Quarry, Israel. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 30(2), 89–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  178. Mania, D., & Weber, T. (Eds.). (1986). Bilzingsleben III. Berlin: Deuscher Verlag der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar
  179. Marean, C. W., & Assefa, Z. (1999). Zooarchaeological evidence for the faunal exploitation behavior of Neanderthals and early modern humans. Evolutionary Anthropology, 8, 22–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  180. Marks, A. E., & Volkman, P. (1983). Changing core reduction strategies: a technological shift from the Middle to the Upper Palaeolithic in the Southern Levant. In E. Trinkaus (Ed.), The Mousterian legacy: human biocultural change in the Upper Pleistocene (pp. 13–34). Oxford: British Archaeological Reports.Google Scholar
  181. Massussi, M., & Lemorini, C. (2004). I siti ateriani del Jebel Gharbi: caratterizzazione delle catene di produzione e definizione tecno-funzionale dei peduncolati. Scienze dell’Antichità, 12, 19–28.Google Scholar
  182. McBrearty, S., & Brooks, A. S. (2000). The revolution that wasn’t: a new interpretation of the origin of modern human behavior. Journal of Human Evolution, 39, 453–563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  183. McBrearty, S., Bishop, L., Plummer, T., Dewar, R., & Conard, N. (1998). Tools underfoot: Human trampling as an agent of lithic artifact edge modification. American Antiquity, 63(1), 108–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  184. McCall, G. S. (2012). Ethnoarchaeology and the organization of lithic technology. Journal of Archaeological Research, 20(2), 157–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  185. McDonald, M. M. A. (1991). Systematic reworking of lithics from earlier cultures in the early Holocene of Dakhleh Oasis, Egypt. Journal of Field Archaeology, 18(2), 269–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  186. McPherron, S. P. (1999). Ovate and pointed handaxe assemblages: two points make a line. Préhistoire Européenne, 14, 9–32.Google Scholar
  187. McPherron, S. P. (2000). Handaxes as a measure of the mental capabilities of early hominids. Journal of Archaeological Science, 27(8), 655–664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  188. McPherron, S. P. (2005). Artifact orientations and site formation processes from total station proveniences. Journal of Archaeological Science, 32(7), 1003–1014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  189. McPherron, S. P. (Ed.). (2007). Tools versus cores: alternative approaches to stone tool analysis. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
  190. McPherron, S. P., Braun, D. R., Dogandžić, T., Archer, W., Desta, D., & Lin, S. C. (2014). An experimental assessment of the influences on edge damage to lithic artifacts: a consideration of edge angle, substrate grain size, raw material properties, and exposed face. Journal of Archaeological Science, 49, 70–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  191. Mesoudi, A., & O’Brien, M. J. (2008). The cultural transmission of Great Basin projectile-point technology I: an experimental simulation. American Antiquity, 73(1), 3–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  192. Mohapi, M. (2007). Rose Cottage Cave MSA lithic points: does technological change imply change in hunting techniques? South African Archaeological Bulletin, 62(185), 9–18.Google Scholar
  193. Morgan, T. J. H., Uomini, N. T., Rendell, L. E., Chouinard-Thuly, L., Street, S. E., Lewis, H. M., et al. (2015). Experimental evidence for the co-evolution of hominin tool-making teaching and language. Nature Communications, 6, 6029.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  194. Mourre, V., Villa, P., & Henshilwood, C. S. (2010). Early use of pressure flaking on lithic artifacts at Blombos Cave, South Africa. Science, 330(6004), 659–662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  195. Murray, T. (1999). A return to the “Pompeii Premise”. In T. Murray (Ed.), Time and archaeology (pp. 8–27). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  196. Nelson, N. (1916). Flint working by Ishi. In F. W. Hodge (Ed.), Holmes anniversary volume: anthropological essays presented to William Henry Holmes (pp. 397–402). Washington: J. W. Bryan Press.Google Scholar
  197. Newman, K., & Moore, M. W. (2013) Ballistically anomalous stone projectile points in Australia. Journal of Archaeological Science, 40(6), 2614–2620.Google Scholar
  198. Nonaka, T., Bril, B., & Rein, R. (2010). How do stone knappers predict and control the outcome of flaking? Implications for understanding early stone tool technology. Journal of Human Evolution, 59(2), 155–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  199. O’Brien, E. M. (1981). The projectile capabilities of an Acheulian handaxe from Olorgesailie. Current Anthropology, 22(1), 76–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  200. Oakley, K. (1972). Skill as a human possession. In S. L. Washburn & P. J. Dolhinow (Eds.), Perspectives on human evolution 2 (pp. 14–52). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
  201. Odell, G. H. (2000). Stone tool research at the end of the millennium: procurement and technology. Journal of Archaeological Research, 8(4), 269–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  202. Olive, M., & Pigeot, N. (2006). Réflexions sur le temps d’un séjour à Étiolles (Essonne). Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Française, 103(4), 673–682.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  203. Olszewski, D.I. (1993). Zarzian microliths from Warwasi Rockshelter, Iran: scalene triangles as arrow components. In G. Larsen-Peterkin, H. M. Bricker, P. A. Mellars (Eds.), Hunting and animal exploitation in the later Paleolithic and Mesolithic of Eurasia (pp. 199–205). Archeological papers of the American Anthropological Association, No. 4. Tempe: American Anthropological Association.Google Scholar
  204. Olszewski, D. I. (2004). Activity, space, and time: the lithic assemblages. In L. L. Hartzell, S. A. Lebo, H. A. Lennstrom, S. P. McPherron, & D. I. Olszewski (Eds.), Activities and settlement in an upper valley. Data recovery and monitoring archaeology in north hālawa valley, O’ahu, volume 1: overview and appendices (pp. 39–90). Honolulu: Department of Anthropology, Bishop Museum.Google Scholar
  205. Olszewski, D. I. (2007a). Carinated tools, cores, and mobility: the Zagros Aurignacian example. In S. P. McPherron (Ed.), Tools versus cores: alternative approaches to stone tool analysis (pp. 91–106). Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Press.Google Scholar
  206. Olszewski, D. I. (2007b). Interpreting activities in North Halawa Valley, O’ahu: Adze recycling and adze resharpening. Hawaiian Archaeology, 11, 18–32.Google Scholar
  207. Olszewski, D. I. (2016). Reductive technology and the early Epipaleolithic of the Middle East and North Africa. In A. Sullivan & D. I. Olszewski (Eds.), Assemblage formation and archaeological interpretation in global perspective. Boulder: University of Colorado Press.Google Scholar
  208. Olszewski, D. I., Dibble, H. L., McPherron, S. P., Schurmans, U., Chiotti, L., & Smith, J. R. (2010a). Nubian complex strategies in the Egyptian High Desert. Journal of Human Evolution, 59(2), 188–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  209. Olszewski, D., Dibble, H. L., Schurmans, U., McPherron, S., Chiotti, L., & Smith, J. R. (2010b). Middle Paleolithic settlement systems: theoretical and modeling frameworks using high desert survey data from Abydos, Egypt. In N. Conard & A. Delagnes (Eds.), Settlement dynamics of the Middle Paleolithic and Middle Stone Age, Vol. III (pp. 81–101). Tübingen: Kerns Verlag.Google Scholar
  210. Olszewski, D. I., Schurmans, U., & Schmidt, B. A. (2011). The Epipaleolithic (Iberomaurusian) from Grotte des Contrebandiers, Morocco. African Archaeological Review, 28(2), 97–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  211. Pargeter, J. (2011). Assessing the macrofracture method for identifying Stone Age hunting weaponry. Journal of Archaeological Science, 38(11), 2882–2888.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  212. Patrik, L. E. (1985). Is there an archaeological record? Advances in Archaeological Method and Theory, 8, 27–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  213. Paunescu, A. (1965). Sur la succession des habitats paleolithiques et postpaleolithiques de Ripiceni-Izvor. Dacia, 9, 1–32.Google Scholar
  214. Pelegrin, J. (1990). Prehistoric lithic technology: some aspects of research. Archaeological Review from Cambridge, 9(1), 116–125.Google Scholar
  215. Peresani, M., Romandini, M., Duches, R., Jéquier, C., Nannini, N., Pastoors, A., et al. (2014). New evidence for the Mousterian and Gravettian at Rio Secco Cave, Italy. Journal of Field Archaeology, 39(4), 401–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  216. Peresani, M., Boldrin, M., & Pasetti, P. (2015). Assessing the exploitation of double patinated artifacts from the Late Mousterian: Implications for lithic economy and human mobility in northern Italy. Quaternary International, 361, 238–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  217. Pigeot, N. (1987). Magdaléniens d’Étiolles: économie de débitage et organisation sociale (L’unité d’habitation U5). Paris: Editions du Centre national de la recherche scientifique.Google Scholar
  218. Pigeot, N. (1990). Technical and social actors. Flintknapping specialists and apprentices at Magdalenian Etiolles. Archaeological Review from Cambridge, 9(1), 126–141.Google Scholar
  219. Plisson, H., & Beyries, S. (1998). Pointes ou outils triangulaires? Données fonctionnelles dans le Moustérien levantin. Paléorient, 24(1), 5–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  220. Potts, R. (1986). Temporal span of bone accumulations at Olduvai Gorge and implications for early hominid foraging behavior. Paleobiology, 12(1), 25–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  221. Potts, R. (1991). Why the Oldowan? Plio-Pleistocene toolmaking and the transport of resources. Journal of Anthropological Research, 47(2), 153–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  222. Premo, L. S. (2014). Cultural transmission and diversity in time-averaged assemblages. Current Anthropology, 55(1), 105–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  223. Rios-Garaizar, J., Eixea, A., & Villaverde, V. (2015). Ramification of lithic production and the search of small tools in Iberian Peninsula Middle Paleolithic. Quaternary International, 361, 188–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  224. Robertson, G., Attenbrow, V., & Hiscock, P. (2009). Multiple uses for Australian backed artefacts. Antiquity, 83(320), 296–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  225. Roebroeks, W., Kolen, J., & Rensink, E. (1988). Planning depth, anticipation and the organization of Middle Paleolithic technology: the “Archaic Natives” meet Eve’s descendants. Helinium, 28(1), 17–34.Google Scholar
  226. Rots, V., & Plisson, H. (2014). Projectiles and the abuse of the use-wear method in a search for impact. Journal of Archaeological Science, 48, 154–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  227. Rots, V., Van Peer, P., & Vermeersch, P. M. (2011). Aspects of tool production, use, and hafting in Palaeolithic assemblages from Northeast Africa. Journal of Human Evolution, 60(5), 637–664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  228. Rust, A. (1943). Die alt- und mittelsteinzeitlichen Funde von Stellmoor. Neumünster.Google Scholar
  229. Sackett, J. R. (1982). Approaches to style in lithic archaeology. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 1(1), 59–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  230. Sandgathe, D. M. (2004). An alternative interpretation of the Levallois reduction strategy. Lithic Technology, 29(2), 147–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  231. Schick, K. D. (1986). Stone Age sites in the making: experiments in the formation and transformation of archaeological occurrences. Oxford: British Archaeological Record.Google Scholar
  232. Schick, K. D. (1987). Modeling the formation of Early Stone Age artifact concentrations. Journal of Human Evolution, 16(7), 789–807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  233. Schick, K. D. (1992). Geoarchaeological analysis of an Acheulean Site at Kalambo Falls, Zambia. Geoarchaeology, 7(1), 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  234. Schiffer, M. B. (1972). Archaeological context and systemic context. American Antiquity, 37(2), 156–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  235. Schiffer, M. B. (1983). Toward the identification of formation processes. American Antiquity, 48(4), 675–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  236. Schiffer, M. B. (1985). Is there a “Pompeii Premise” in archaeology? Journal of Anthropological Research, 41(1), 18–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  237. Schlanger, N. (1994). Mindful technology: unleashing the chaîne opératoire for an archaeology of mind. In C. Renfrew & E. Zubrow (Eds.), The ancient mind: elements of cognitive archaeology (pp. 231–254). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  238. Schlanger, N. (1996). Understanding Levallois: lithic technology and cognitive archaeology. Cambridge Archaeological Journal, 6(2), 231–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  239. Schousboe, R., Riford, M. F., & Kirch, P. V. (1983). Volcanic glass flaked stone artifacts. In J. T. Clark & P. V. Kirch (Eds.), Archaeological investigations of the Mudlane-Waimea-Kawaihae road corridor, Island of Hawai’i: An interdisciplinary study of an environmental transect (pp. 348–370). Honolulu: Bishop Museum.Google Scholar
  240. Schoville, B. J. (2010). Frequency and distribution of edge damage on Middle Stone Age lithic points, Pinnacle Point 13B, South Africa. Journal of Human Evolution, 59(3–4), 378–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  241. Semenov, S. A. (1964). Prehistoric technology: an experimental study of the oldest tools and artefacts from traces of manufacture and wear. London: Cory & Adams.Google Scholar
  242. Sharon, G., & Oron, M. (2014). The lithic tool arsenal of a Mousterian Hunter. Quaternary International, 331, 167–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  243. Shea, J. J. (1988). Spear points from the Middle Paleolithic of the Levant. Journal of Field Archaeology, 15(4), 441–450.Google Scholar
  244. Shea, J. J. (1990). A further note on Mousterian spear points. Journal of Field Archaeology, 17(1), 111–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  245. Shea, J. J. (2011). Homo sapiens is as Homo sapiens was. Current Anthropology, 52(1), 1–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  246. Shipman, P. (1986). Studies of hominid-faunal interactions at Olduvai Gorge. Journal of Human Evolution, 15(8), 691–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  247. Shott, M. J. (1996). Stage versus continuum in the debris assemblage from production of a fluted biface. Lithic Technology, 21(1), 6–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  248. Sievers, C., & Muasya, A. M. (2011). Identification of the sedge Cladium mariscus subsp. jamaicense and its possible use in the Middle Stone Age at Sibudu, KwaZulu-Natal. South African Humanities, 23(1), 77–86.Google Scholar
  249. Sillitoe, P., & Hardy, K. (2003). Living lithics: ethnography in Highland Papua New Guinea. Antiquity, 77(297), 555–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  250. Skertchly, S. B. J. (1879). On the manufacture of gun flints, the methods of excavating for flint, the age of Palaeolithic man, and the connection between Neolithic art and the gun-flint trade. London: HM Stationery Office.Google Scholar
  251. Smith, W. G. (1894). Man, the primeval savage. Stanford: London.Google Scholar
  252. Smith, P. (1966). Le Solutréen en France. Bordeaux: L’Institute de Préhistoire de L’Université de Bordeaux.Google Scholar
  253. Solecki, R. S. (1992). More on hafted projectile points in the Mousterian. Journal of Field Archaeology, 19(2), 207–212.Google Scholar
  254. Solecki, R. S., & Solecki, R. L. (1993). The pointed tools from the Mousterian occupations of Shanidar Cave, northern Iraq. In D. I. Olszewski & H. L. Dibble (Eds.), The Paleolithic prehistory of the Zagros-Taurus (pp. 119–146). Philadelphia: University Museum, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
  255. Sollberger, J. B. (1985). A technique for Folsom fluting. Lithic Technology, 14(1), 41–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  256. Spencer, W. B., & Gillen, F. J. (1912). Across Australia. London: Macmillan and Co.Google Scholar
  257. Spurrell, F. C. J. (1892). Notes on early sickles. Archaeological Journal, 49(1), 53–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  258. Stekelis, M. (1966). The Lower Pleistocene of the central Jordon Valley: archaeological excavations at ‘Ubeidiya, 1960–1963. Jerusalem: The Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities.Google Scholar
  259. Stern, N. (1994). The implications of time-averaging for reconstructing the land-use patterns of early tool-using hominids. Journal of Human Evolution, 27(1–3), 89–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  260. Stern, N. (2008). Time averaging and the structure of late Pleistocene archaeological deposits in south west Tasmania. In S. J. Holdaway & L. Wandsnider (Eds.), Time in archaeology: time perspectivism revisited (pp. 134–147). Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.Google Scholar
  261. Stout, D. (2002). Skill and cognition in stone tool production: an ethnographic case study from Irian Jaya. Current Anthropology, 43(5), 693–6972.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  262. Takase, K. (2010). Use angle and notion direction of end scrapers: a case study of the Palaeolithic in Hokkaido, Japan. Asian Perspectives, 49(2), 363–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  263. Thomas, D. H. (1981). How to classify the projectile points from Monitor Valley, Nevada. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology, 3(1), 7–43.Google Scholar
  264. Thompson, E., Williams, H. M., & Minichillo, T. (2010). Middle and late Pleistocene Middle Stone Age lithic technology from Pinnacle Point 13B (Mossel Bay, Western Cape Province, South Africa). Journal of Human Evolution, 59(3–4), 358–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  265. Todd, L. C. (1987). Analysis of kill-butchery bonebeds and interpretation of Paleoindian hunting. In M. H. Nitecki & D. V. Nitecki (Eds.), The evolution of human hunting (pp. 225–266). New York & London: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  266. Torrence, R. (2011). Finding the right question: learning from stone tools on the Willaumez Peninsula, Papua New Guinea. Archaeology in Oceania, 46(2), 29–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  267. Tostevin, G. B. (2011). Levels of theory and social practice in the reduction sequence and chaîne opératoire methods of lithic analysis. PaleoAnthropology, 2011, 351–375.Google Scholar
  268. Tostevin, G. B. (2012). Seeing lithics: a middle-range theory for testing for cultural transmission in the Pleistocene. Oxford: Oxbow Books.Google Scholar
  269. Toth, N. (1985). The Oldowan reassessed: a close look at early stone artifacts. Journal of Archaeological Science, 12(2), 101–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  270. Toth, N. (1987). Behavioral inferences from Early Stone Age artifact assemblages: an experimental model. Journal of Human Evolution, 16(7–8), 763–787.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  271. Troels-Smith, J. (1960). En elmetreæs bue fra Aamosen og andre træsager fra tidlig-neolithisk tid. Aarbørger For Nordisk Oldkyndighed Og Historie, 1960, 91–145.Google Scholar
  272. Tryon, C. A., McBrearty, S., & Texier, P.-J. (2005). Levallois lithic technology from the Kapthurin formation, Kenya: Acheulian origin and Middle Stone Age diversity. African Archaeological Review, 22(4), 199–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  273. Tuffreau, A., & Sommé, J. (1988). Le gisement paléolithique moyen de Biache-Saint-Vaast (Pas-de-Calais). Stratigraphie, environnement, études archéologiques. Paris: Mémoires de la Société Préhistorique de France.Google Scholar
  274. Tuffreau, A., Antoine, P., Chase, P., Dibble, H., Ellwood, B., van Kolfschoten, T., Lamotte, A., Laurent, M., McPherron, S., Moigne, A.-M., & Munaut, A. (1995). Le gisement acheule6en de Cagny-l’Epinette (Somme). Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Française, 92, 169–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  275. Turner, M., & Bonica, D. (1994). Following the flake trail: adze production on the Coromandel East Coast, New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Archaeology, 16, 5–32.Google Scholar
  276. Turq, A., Roebroeks, W., Bourguignon, L., & Faivre, J. P. (2013). The fragmented character of Middle Palaeolithic stone tool technology. Journal of Human Evolution, 65(5), 641–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  277. Vallverdú, J., Allué, E., Bischoff, J. L., Cáceres, I., Carbonell, E., Cebrià, A., et al. (2005). Short human occupations in the Middle Palaeolithic level i of the Abric Romaní rock-shelter (Capellades, Barcelona, Spain). Journal of Human Evolution, 48(2), 157–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  278. Vallverdú, J., Vaquero, M., Cáceres, I., Allué, E., Rosell, J., Saladié, P., et al. (2010). Sleeping activity area within the site structure of archaic human groups: evidence from Abric Romaní Level N combustion activity areas. Current Anthropology, 51(1), 137–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  279. Vallverdú, J., Alonso, S., Bargalló, A., Bartroli, R., Campeny, G., Carrancho, A., et al. (2012). Combustion structures of archaeological level O and mousterian activity areas with use of fire at Abric Romaní rockshelter (NE Iberian Peninsula). Quaternary International, 247, 313–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  280. van Gijn, A. (2014). Science and interpretation in microwear studies. Journal of Archaeological Science, 48(C), 166–169. doi: 10.1016/j.jas.2013.10.024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  281. Van Peer, P. (1992). The Levallois reduction strategy. Madison: Prehistory Press.Google Scholar
  282. Van Riper, A. B. (1993). Men among the mammoths. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  283. Vaquero, M., & Pasto, I. (2001). The definition of spatial units in Middle Palaeolithic sites: the hearth-related assemblages. Journal of Archaeological Science, 28(11), 1209–1220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  284. Vaquero, M., Alonso, S., García-Catalán, S., García-Hernández, A., Gómez de Soler, B., Rettig, D., et al. (2012). Temporal nature and recycling of Upper Paleolithic artifacts: the burned tools from the Molí del Salt site (Vimbodí i Poblet, northeastern Spain). Journal of Archaeological Science, 39(8), 2785–2796.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  285. Vaquero, M., Bargalló, A., Chacón, M. G., Romagnoli, F., & Sañudo, P. (2015). Lithic recycling in a Middle Paleolithic expedient context: evidence from the Abric Romaní (Capellades, Spain). Quaternary International, 361, 212–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  286. Villa, P. (1982). Conjoinable pieces and site formation processes. American Antiquity, 47(2), 276–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  287. Villa, P. (1983). Terra Amata and the Middle Pleistocene archaeological record of southern France. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  288. Villa, P., & Lenior, M. (2006). Hunting weapons of the Middle Stone Age and the Middle Palaeolithic: spear points from Sibudu, Rose Cottage and Bouheben. South African Humanities, 18(1), 89–122.Google Scholar
  289. Villa, P., Soressi, M., Henshilwood, C. S., & Mourre, V. (2009). The Still Bay points of Blombos Cave (South Africa). Journal of Archaeological Science, 36(2), 441–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  290. Volkman, P. (1983). Boker Tachtit: core reconstructions. In A. E. Marks (Ed.), Prehistory and paleoenvironments in the central Negev, Israel. Volume III: The Avdate/Aqev area, Part 3 (pp. 127–190). Dallas: Souther Methodist University Press.Google Scholar
  291. Volman, T.P. (1981). The middle stone age in the Southern Cape. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Chicago.Google Scholar
  292. Walsh, D., Carswell, R. F., & Weymann, R. J. (1979). 0957+ 561 A, B: Twin quasistellar objects or gravitational lens. Nature, 279(5712), 381–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  293. Waters, M. R. (1992). Principles of geoarchaeology. A North American perspective. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.Google Scholar
  294. Weedman, K. J. (2006). An ethnoarchaeological study of hafting and stone tool diversity among the Gamo of Ethiopia. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 13(3), 188–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  295. White, J. P. (1967). Ethno-archaeology in New Guinea: two examples. Mankind, 6(9), 409–414.Google Scholar
  296. White, J. P., & Dibble, H. L. (1986). Stone tools: small scale variability. In G. Bailey & P. Callow (Eds.), Stone age prehistory: studies in memory of Charles McBurney (pp. 47–53). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  297. White, J. P., & Thomas, D. H. (1972). What mean these stones? Ethno-taxonomic models and archaeological interpretation in the New Guinea Highlands. In D. L. Clarke (Ed.), Models in archaeology (pp. 275–308). London: Methuen.Google Scholar
  298. Whittaker, J., & McCall, G. (2001). Handaxe-hurling hominids: an unlikely story. Current Anthropology, 42(4), 566–572.Google Scholar
  299. Wilke, P. J., Flenniken, J. J., & Ozbun, T. L. (1991). Clovis technology at the Anzick site, Montana. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology, 13(2), 242–272.Google Scholar
  300. Wilkins, J., Schoville, B. J., Brown, K. S., & Chazan, M. (2012). Evidence for early hafted hunting technology. Science, 338(6109), 942–946.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  301. Witthoft, J. (1966). A history of gunflints. Pennsylvania Archaeologist, 36(1–2), 12–49.Google Scholar
  302. Yellen, J. E. (1977). Archaeological approaches to the present. New York: Academic.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Harold L. Dibble
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Simon J. Holdaway
    • 4
    • 5
  • Sam C. Lin
    • 6
  • David R. Braun
    • 2
    • 7
    • 8
  • Matthew J. Douglass
    • 9
  • Radu Iovita
    • 10
  • Shannon P. McPherron
    • 2
  • Deborah I. Olszewski
    • 1
  • Dennis Sandgathe
    • 11
  1. 1.Department of AnthropologyUniversity of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphiaUSA
  2. 2.Department of Human EvolutionMax Planck Institute for Evolutionary AnthropologyLeipzigGermany
  3. 3.Institute for Human Origins, School of Human Evolution and Social ChangeArizona State UniversityTempeUSA
  4. 4.School of Social SciencesUniversity of AucklandAucklandNew Zealand
  5. 5.School of Social ScienceUniversity of QueenslandSt LuciaAustralia
  6. 6.Centre for Archaeological Science, School of Earth and Environmental SciencesUniversity of WollongongWollongongAustralia
  7. 7.Center for the Advanced Study of Human PaleobiologyGeorge Washington UniversityWashingtonUSA
  8. 8.Department of AnthropologyGeorge Washington UniversityWashingtonUSA
  9. 9.Department of AnthropologyUniversity of Nebraska—LincolnLincolnUSA
  10. 10.MONREPOS Research Centre, Römisch-Germanisches ZentralmuseumLeibniz-Forschungsinstitut für ArchäologieNeuwiedGermany
  11. 11.Department of AnthropologySimon Fraser UniversityVancouverCanada

Personalised recommendations