Journal of Archaeological Research

, Volume 9, Issue 1, pp 45–100 | Cite as

Stone Tool Research at the End of the Millennium: Classification, Function, and Behavior

  • George H. Odell
Article

Abstract

This is the second of the two papers that review the literature of archaeological lithic analysis over the last decade. This paper concentrates on aspects of stone tool research that are not directly related to the production or procurement of the tools themselves. It is divided into classification, functional analyses, behavioral processes, and approaches to the subject currently popular among analysts. As with the previous paper, an attempt has been made to be as comprehensive as is reasonable, though availability of sources has resulted in an emphasis on North American literature.

lithic analysis functional analysis use–wear analysis residue analysis technological organization lithic classification 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES CITED

  1. Abbott, A. L., Leonard, R. D., and Jones, G. T. (1996). Explaining the change from biface to flake technology. In Maschner, H. (ed.), Darwinian Archaeologies, Plenum, New York, pp. 33–42.Google Scholar
  2. Adams, W. Y., and Adams, E. W. (1991). Archaeological Typology and Practical Reality, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  3. Ahler, S. P. (1998). Early and Middle Archaic settlement systems in the Modoc locality, southwest Illinois. Illinois Archaeology 10: 1–109.Google Scholar
  4. Allen, J., Holdaway, S., and Fullagar, R. (1997). Identifying specialisation, production and exchange in the archaeological record: The case of shell bead manufacture on Motupore Island, Papua. Archaeology in Oceania 32: 13–38.Google Scholar
  5. Amick, D. S., and Carr, P. J. (1996). Changing strategies of lithic technological organization. In Sassaman, K., and Anderson, D. (eds.), Archaeology of the Mid-Holocene Southeast, University Press of Florida, Gainesville, pp. 41–56.Google Scholar
  6. Anderson-Gerfaud, P. (1980). A testimony of prehistoric tasks: Diagnostic residues on stone tool working edges. World Archaeology 12: 181–194.Google Scholar
  7. Anderson, P., Astruc, L., Vargiolu, R., and Zahouani, H. (1998). Contribution of quantitative analysis of surface states to a multi-method approach for characterising plant-processing traces on flint tools with gloss. In Functional Analysis of Lithic Artefacts: Current State of the Research, XIII International Congress of Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences, Workshops, Tome II, ABACO Edizioni, Forli, Italy, pp. 1151–1160.Google Scholar
  8. Andrefsky, W., Jr. (1994). Raw-material availability and the organization of technology. American Antiquity 59: 21–34.Google Scholar
  9. Andrefsky, W., Jr. (1995). Cascade phase lithic technology: An example from the Lower Snake River. North American Archaeologist 16: 95–115.Google Scholar
  10. Andrefsky,W., Jr. (1998). Lithics: Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  11. Aoyama, K. (1995). Microwear analysis in the southeast Maya lowlands: Two case studies at Copan, Honduras. Latin American Antiquity 6: 129–144.Google Scholar
  12. Arnold, J. E. (1992). Complex hunter–gatherer–fishers of prehistoric California: Chiefs, specialists, and maritime adaptations of the Channel Islands. American Antiquity 57: 60–84.Google Scholar
  13. Arnold, J. E., and Munns, A. (1994). Independent or attached specialization: The origin of shell bead production in California. Journal of Field Archaeology 21: 473–489.Google Scholar
  14. Atchison, J., and Fullagar, R. (1998). Starch residues on pounding implements from Jinmium rockshelter. In Fullagar, R. (ed.), A Closer Look, Archaeological Methods Series 6, Sydney University, Sydney, pp. 109–125.Google Scholar
  15. Ballenger, J. A. M. (1996). The Southern Plains craft lithic cache. Plains Anthropologist 41: 297–309.Google Scholar
  16. Bamforth, D. B. (1986). Technological efficiency and tool curation. American Antiquity 51: 38–50.Google Scholar
  17. Bamforth, D. B. (1988). Investigating microwear polishes with blind tests: The Institute results in context. Journal of Archaeological Science 15: 11–23.Google Scholar
  18. Bamforth, D. B., and Bleed, P. (1997). Technology, flaked stone technology, and risk. In Barton, C. M., and Clark, G. (eds.), Rediscovering Darwin: Evolutionary Theory and Archaeological Explanation, Archeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association, No. 7, Washington, DC, pp. 109–139.Google Scholar
  19. Barton, C. M. (1997). Stone tools, style, and social identity: An evolutionary perspective on the archaeological record. In Barton, C. M., and Clark, G. (eds.), Rediscovering Darwin: Evolutionary Theory and Archaeological Explanation, Archeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association, No. 7, Washington, DC, pp. 141–156.Google Scholar
  20. Barton, H., Torrence, R., and Fullagar, R. (1998). Clues to stone tool function reexamined: Comparing starch grain frequencies on used and unused obsidian artefacts. Journal of Archaeological Science 25: 1231–1238.Google Scholar
  21. Bayman, J. M. (1995). Rethinking “redistribution” in the archaeological record: Obsidian exchange at the Marana platform mound. Journal of Anthropological Research 51: 37–63.Google Scholar
  22. Becker, M., and Wendorf, F. (1993). A microwear study of a late Pleistocene Qadan assemblage from southern Egypt. Journal of Field Archaeology 20: 389–398.Google Scholar
  23. Bednarik, R. G. (1995). Concept-mediated marking in the Lower Paleolithic. Current Anthropology 36: 605–616.Google Scholar
  24. Bettinger, R. L., and Eerkens, J. (1997). Evolutionary implications of metrical variation in Great Basin projectile points. In Barton, C. M., and Clark, G. (eds.), Rediscovering Darwin: Evolutionary Theory and Archaeological Explanation, Archeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association, No. 7, Washington, DC, pp. 177–191.Google Scholar
  25. Bettinger, R. L., and Eerkens, J. (1999). Point typologies, cultural transmission, and the spread of bow-and-arrow technology in the prehistoric Great Basin. American Antiquity 64: 243–263.Google Scholar
  26. Bettinger, R. L., O'Connell, J. F., and Thomas, D. H. (1991). Projectile points as time markers in the Great Basin. American Anthropologist 93: 166–172.Google Scholar
  27. Bienenfeld, P. (1995). Duplicating archaeological microwear polishes with epoxy casts. Lithic Technology 20: 29–39.Google Scholar
  28. Binford, L. R. (1973). Interassemblage variability—the Mousterian and the “functional” argument. In Renfrew, C. (ed.), The Explanation of Culture Change: Models in Prehistory, Duckworth, London, pp. 227–254.Google Scholar
  29. Bleed, P. (1986). The optimal design of hunting weapons: Maintainability or reliability. American Antiquity 51: 737–747.Google Scholar
  30. Bourque, B. J. (1994). Evidence for prehistoric exchange on the Maritime Peninsula. In Baugh, T., and Ericson, J. (eds.), Prehistoric Exchange Systems in North America, Plenum, New York, pp. 23–46.Google Scholar
  31. Bousman, C. B. (1993). Hunter–gatherer adaptations, economic risk and tool design. Lithic Technology 18: 59–86.Google Scholar
  32. Bradbury, A. P. (1998). The examination of lithic artifacts from an Early Archaic assemblage: Strengthening inferences through multiple lines of evidence. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology 23: 263–288.Google Scholar
  33. Byers, A. M. (1994). Symboling and the Middle-Upper Paleolithic transition:Atheoretical and methodological critique. Current Anthropology 35: 369–381.Google Scholar
  34. Byers, A. M. (1999). Communication and material culture: Pleistocene tools as action cues. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 9: 23–41.Google Scholar
  35. Carlson, R. L. (1994). Trade and exchange in prehistoric British Columbia. In Baugh, T., and Ericson, J. (eds.), Prehistoric Exchange Systems in North America, Plenum, New York, pp. 307–361.Google Scholar
  36. Cattaneo, C., Gelsthorpe, K., Phillipos, P., and Sokol, R. J. (1993). Blood residues on stone tools: Indoor and outdoor experiments. World Archaeology 25: 29–43.Google Scholar
  37. Chatters, J. C. (1987). Hunter–gatherer adaptations and assemblage structure. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 6: 336–375.Google Scholar
  38. Christensen, M. (1998). Processus de formation et caractéerisation physico-chimique des polis d'utilisation des outils en silex. Applications à la technologie pr´ehistorique de l'ivoire. Bulletin de la Socété Préhistorique Française 95: 183–201.Google Scholar
  39. Christensen, M., Walter, P., and Menu, M. (1992). Usewear characterisation of prehistoric flints with IBA. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B 64: 488–493.Google Scholar
  40. Clark, J. E., and Bryant, D. D. (1991). The production of chert projectile points atYerba Buena, Chiapas, Mexico. In Hester, T., and Shafer, H. (eds.), Maya Stone Tools, Prehistory Press, Madison, WI, pp. 85–102.Google Scholar
  41. Close, A. E. (1996). Carry that weight: The use and transportation of stone tools. Current Anthropology 37: 545–553.Google Scholar
  42. Coffey, B. P. (1994). The chemical alteration of microwear polishes: An evaluation of the Plisson and Mauger findings through replicative experimentation. Lithic Technology 19: 88–92.Google Scholar
  43. Collin, F., and Jardon-Giner, P. (1993). Travail de la peau avec des grattoirs emmanchés. Réflexions sur des bases expérimentales et ethnographiques. In Anderson, P., Beyries, S., Otte, M., and Plisson, H. (eds.), Traces et fonction: Les gestes retrouvés, ERAUL, No. 50, Liège, pp. 105–117.Google Scholar
  44. Conard, N. J., and Adler, D. S. (1997). Lithic reduction and hominid behavior in the Middle Paleolithic of the Rhineland. Journal of Anthropological Research 53: 147–175.Google Scholar
  45. Cowan, F. L. (1999). Making sense of flake scatters: Lithic technological strategies and mobility. American Antiquity 64: 593–607.Google Scholar
  46. Custer, J. F., Ilgenfritz, J., and Doms, K. R. (1988). A cautionary note on the use of chemstrips for detection of blood residues on prehistoric stone tools. Journal of Archaeological Science 15: 343–345.Google Scholar
  47. Darras, V. (1994). Les mines-ateliers d'obsidienne de la region de Zinaparo-Prieto, Michoacan, Mexique. Bulletin de la Socété Préhistorique Française 91: 290–310.Google Scholar
  48. Davidson, I., and Noble, W. (1993). Tools and language in human evolution. In Gibson, K. R., and Ingold, T. (eds.), Tools, Language and Cognition in Human Evolution, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 363–388.Google Scholar
  49. Deacon, J. (1992). Arrows as agents of belief amongst the/Xam Bushmen. Margaret Shaw Lecture 3, South African Museum, Cape Town.Google Scholar
  50. De Bie, M. (1998). Late Paleolithic tool production strategies: Technological evidence from Rekem (Belgium). In Milliken, S., and Peresani, M. (eds.), Lithic Technology: From Raw Material Procurement to Tool Production, Workshop No. 12 of the XIII International Congress of Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences, Forli, Italy, 1996, pp. 91–95.Google Scholar
  51. Del Bene, T. A. (1979). Once upon a Striation: Current models of striation and polish formation. In Hayden, B. (ed.), Lithic Use–Wear Analysis, Academic Press, New York, pp. 167–177.Google Scholar
  52. Dibble, H. L. (1991). Mousterian assemblage variability on an interregional scale. Journal of Anthropological Research 47: 239–257.Google Scholar
  53. Dibble, H. L. (1995a). Middle Paleolithic scraper reduction: Background, clarification, and review of the evidence to date. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 2: 299–368.Google Scholar
  54. Dibble, H. L. (1995b). Raw material availability, intensity of utilization, and Middle Paleolithic assemblage variability. In Dibble, H., and Lenoir, M. (eds.), The Middle Paleolithic Site of Combe-Capelle Bas (France), University Museum Monograph 91, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, pp. 289–315.Google Scholar
  55. Dobres, M.-A., and Hoffman, C. R. (1994). Social agency and the dynamics of prehistoric technology. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 1: 211–258.Google Scholar
  56. Dockall, J. E. (1994). Oval biface celt variability during the Maya Late Preclassic. Lithic Technology 19: 52–68.Google Scholar
  57. Dockall, J. E., and Shafer, H. J. (1993). Testing the producer–consumer model for Santa Rita Corozal, Belize. Latin American Antiquity 4: 158–179.Google Scholar
  58. Downs, E. F., and Lowenstein, J. M. (1995). Identification of archaeological blood proteins: A cautionary note. Journal of Archaeological Science 22: 11–16.Google Scholar
  59. Edmonds, M. (1995). Stone Tools and Society: Working Stone in Neolithic and Bronze Age Britain, B. T. Batsford, London.Google Scholar
  60. Eerkens, J. (1998). Reliable and maintainable technologies: Artifact standardization and the Early to Later Mesolithic transition in northern England. Lithic Technology 23: 42–53.Google Scholar
  61. Eisele, J. A., Fowler, D. D., Haynes, G., and Lewis, R. A. (1995). Survival and detection of blood residues on stone tools. Antiquity 69: 36–46.Google Scholar
  62. Ellis, C. (1994). Miniature Early Paleo-Indian stone artifacts from the Parkhill, Ontario site. North American Archaeologist 15: 253–267.Google Scholar
  63. Feblot-Augustins, J. (1993). Mobility strategies in the late Middle Paleolithic of central Europe and western Europe: Elements of stability and variability. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 12: 211–265.Google Scholar
  64. Fedick, S. (1991). Chert tool production and consumption among Classic period Maya households. In Hester, T., and Shafer, H. (eds.), Maya Stone Tools, Prehistory Press, Madison, WI, pp. 103–118.Google Scholar
  65. Fellner, R. (1995). Technology or typology? A response to Neeley and Barton. Antiquity 69: 381–383.Google Scholar
  66. Fiedel, S. J. (1996). Blood from stones? Some methodological and interpretive problems in blood residue analysis. Journal of Archaeological Science 23: 139–147.Google Scholar
  67. Flenniken, J. J., and Raymond, A. W. (1986). Morphological projectile point typology: Replication, experimentation, and technological analysis. American Antiquity 51: 603–614.Google Scholar
  68. Flenniken, J. J., and Wilke, P. J. (1989). Typology, technology, and chronology of Great Basin dart points. American Anthropologist 91: 149–158.Google Scholar
  69. Fredericksen, C. F. K., and Sewell, B. (1991). The reliability of flaked tool function studies in New Zealand archaeology. Archaeology of Oceania 26: 123–126.Google Scholar
  70. Freeman, L. G. (1992). Mousterian facies in space: New data from Morin level 16. In Dibble, H., and Mellars, P. (eds.), The Middle Paleolithic: Adaptation, Behavior, and Variability, University Museum Symposium Series, Vol. 4, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, pp. 113–125.Google Scholar
  71. Fullagar, R. L. K. (1991). The role of silica in polish formation. Journal of Archaeological Science 18: 1–24.Google Scholar
  72. Fullagar, R., Loy, T., and Cox, S. (1998). Starch grains, sediments and stone tool function: Evidence from Bitokara, Papua New Guinea. In Fullagar, R. (ed.), A Closer Look, Archaeological Methods Series 6, Sydney University, Sydney, pp. 49–60.Google Scholar
  73. Galm, J. R. (1994). Prehistoric trade and exchange in the Interior Plateau of northwestern North America. In Baugh, T., and Ericson, J. (eds.), Prehistoric Exchange Systems in North America, Plenum, New York, pp. 275–305.Google Scholar
  74. Garling, S. J. (1998). Megafauna on the menu? Haemoglobin crystallisation of blood residues from stone artefacts at Cuddie Springs. In Fullagar, R. (ed.), A Closer Look, Archaeological Methods Series 6, Sydney University, Sydney, pp. 29–48.Google Scholar
  75. Gassin, B., with Garidel, Y. (1993). Des outils de silex pour la fabrication de la poterie. In Anderson, P., Beyries, S., Otte, M., and Plisson, H. (eds.), Traces et fonction: Les gestes retrouvés, ERAUL, No. 50, Liège, pp. 189–203.Google Scholar
  76. Geneste, J.-M., and Maury, S. (1997). Contributions of multidisciplinary experimentation to the study of Upper Paleolithic projectile points. In Knecht, H. (ed.), Projectile Technology, Plenum, New York, pp. 165–189.Google Scholar
  77. Gero, J. M. (1991). Genderlithics: Women's roles in stone tool production. In Gero, J., and Conkey, M. (eds.), Engendering Archaeology, Basil Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 163–193.Google Scholar
  78. Gibson, J. L. (1994). Empirical characterization of exchange systems in Lower Mississippi Valley prehistory. In Baugh, T., and Ericson, J. (eds.), Prehistoric Exchange Systems in North America, Plenum, New York, pp. 127–175.Google Scholar
  79. Gordon, D. (1993). Mousterian tool selection, reduction, and discard at Ghar, Israel. Journal of Field Archaeology 20: 205–218.Google Scholar
  80. Grace, R. (1993a). New methods in use–wear analysis. In Anderson, P., Beyries, S., Otte, M., and Plisson, H. (eds.), Traces et foncion: Les gestes retrouvés, ERAUL, No. 50, Liège, pp. 385–387.Google Scholar
  81. Grace, R. (1993b). The use of expert systems in lithic analysis. In Anderson, P., Beyries, S., Otte, M., and Plisson, H. (eds.), Traces et foncion: Les gestes retrouv´es, ERAUL, No. 50, Liège, pp. 389–400.Google Scholar
  82. Grace, R. (1996). Use–wear analysis: The state of the art. Archaeometry 38: 209–229.Google Scholar
  83. Graves, P. (1994). My strange quest for Leroi-Gourhan: Structuralism's unwitting hero. Antiquity 68: 457–460.Google Scholar
  84. Grimaldi, S. (1998). Methodological problems in the reconstruction of chaines opératoiresin Lower–Middle Palaeolithic industries. In Milliken, S., and Peresani, M. (eds.), Lithic Technology: From Raw Material Procurement to Tool Production, Workshop No. 12 of the XIII International Congress of Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences, Forli, Italy, 1996, pp. 19–22.Google Scholar
  85. Grimaldi, S., and Lemorini, C. (1993). Retouche specialisée et/ou chaine de ravivage? Les “racloirs” moustériens de la Grotta Breuil (Monte Circeo, Italie). In Anderson, P., Beyries, S., Otte, M., and Plisson, H. (eds.), Traces et fonction: Les gestes retrouvés, ERAUL, No. 50, Liége, pp. 67–78.Google Scholar
  86. Grimaldi, S., and Lemorini, C. (1995). Technology and microwear: Predetermined flakes from the Mousterian site of Grotta Brueil (Monte Circeo, Italy). In Dibble, H., and Bar-Yosef, O. (eds.), The Definition and Interpretation of Levallois Technology, Prehistory Press, Madison, WI, pp. 143–155.Google Scholar
  87. Gurfinkel, D. M., and Franklin, U. M. (1988). A study of the feasibility of detecting blood residue on artifacts. Journal of Archaeological Science 15: 83–97.Google Scholar
  88. Hardy, B. L., Raff, R. A., and Raman,V. (1997). Recovery of mammalian DNA from Middle Paleolithic stone tools. Journal of Archaeological Science 24: 601–611.Google Scholar
  89. Hayden, B. (1975). Curation: Old and new. In Raymond, J., Loveseth, B., Arnold, C., and Reardon, G. (eds.), Primitive Art and Technology, University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada, pp. 47–59.Google Scholar
  90. Hayden, B., Franco, N., and Spafford, J. (1996). Evaluating lithic strategies and design criteria. In Odell, G. (ed.), Stone Tools: Theoretical Insights into Human Prehistory, Plenum, New York, pp. 9–49.Google Scholar
  91. Head, L., and Fullagar, R. (1997). Hunter–gatherer archaeology and pastoral contact: Perspectives from the northwest Northern Territory, Australia. World Archaeology 28: 418–428.Google Scholar
  92. Hirth, K. G. (1995). The investigation of obsidian craft production at Xochicalco, Morelos. Ancient Mesoamerica 6: 251–258.Google Scholar
  93. Holdaway, S., McPherron, S., and Roth, B. (1996). Notched tool reuse and raw material availability in French Middle Paleolithic sites. American Antiquity 61: 377–387.Google Scholar
  94. Horsfall, G. A. (1987). Design theory and grinding stones. In Hayden, B. (ed.), Lithic Studies Among the Contemporary Highland Maya, University of Arizona Press, Tucson, pp. 332–377.Google Scholar
  95. Hudler, D. (1997). Determining Clear Fork Tool Function through Use–Wear Analysis: A Discussion of Use–Wear Methods and Clear Fork Tools, Texas Archeological Research Laboratory, Studies in Archeology 25, University of Texas, Austin.Google Scholar
  96. Hudson, L. (1993). Protohistoric Pawnee lithic economy. Plains Anthropologist 38: 265–277.Google Scholar
  97. Hughes, R. E. (1994). Mosaic patterning in prehistoric California—Great Basin exchange. In Baugh, T., and Ericson, J. (eds.), Prehistoric Exchange Systems in North America, Plenum, New York, pp. 363–383.Google Scholar
  98. Hurcombe, L. (1992). Use–Wear Analysis and Obsidian: Theory, Experiments and Results, Department of Archaeology and Prehistory, Archaeological Monograph 4, University of Sheffield, Sheffield.Google Scholar
  99. Hurcombe, L. (1997). The contribution of obsidian use–wear analysis to understanding the formation and alteration of wear. In Ramos-Millan, A., and Bustillo, M. A. (eds.), Siliceous Rocks and Culture, Editorial Universidad de Granada, Spain, pp. 487–497.Google Scholar
  100. Hyland, D. C., Tersak, J. M., Adovasio, J. M., and Siegel, M. I. (1990). Identification of the species of origin of residual blood on lithic material. American Antiquity 55: 104–112.Google Scholar
  101. Ingbar, E. E. (1994). Lithic material selection and technological organization. In Carr, P. (ed.), The Organization of North American Prehistoric Chipped Stone Technologies, International Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor, MI, pp. 45–56.Google Scholar
  102. Johnson, J. K. (1996). Lithic analysis and questions of cultural complexity: The Maya. In Odell, G. (ed.), Stone Tools: Theoretical Insights into Human Prehistory, Plenum, New York, pp. 159–179.Google Scholar
  103. Johnson, J. K., and Hayes, F. L. (1995). Shifting patterns of long-distance contact during the Middle Woodland period in the northern Yazoo Basin, Mississippi. In Nassaney, M., and Sassaman, K. (eds.), Native American Interactions, University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, pp. 100–121.Google Scholar
  104. Jones, J. C. (1970). Design Methods: Seeds of Human Futures, John Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
  105. Kaufman, D. (1995). Microburins and microliths of the Levantine Epipaleolithic: A comment on the paper by Neeley and Barton. Antiquity 69: 375–381.Google Scholar
  106. Kay, M. (1996). Microwear analysis of some Clovis and experimental chipped stone tools. In Odell, G. (ed.), Stone Tools: Theoretical Insights into Human Prehistory, Plenum Press, New York, pp. 315–344.Google Scholar
  107. Kazaryan, H. (1993). Butchery knives in the Mousterian sites of Armenia. In Anderson, P., Beyries, S., Otte, M., and Plisson, H. (eds.), Traces et fonction: Les gestes retrouvés, ERAUL, No. 50, Liège, pp. 79–85.Google Scholar
  108. Kealhofer, L., Torrence, R., and Fullagar, R. (1999). Integrating phytoliths within use–wear/residue studies of stone tools. Journal of Archaeological Science 26: 527–546.Google Scholar
  109. Kelly, R. L. (1983). Hunter–gatherer mobility strategies. Journal of Anthropological Research 39: 277–306.Google Scholar
  110. Kelly, R. L. (1988). The three sides of a biface. American Antiquity 53: 717–734.Google Scholar
  111. Kimball, L. R., Kimball, J. F., and Allen, P. E. (1995). Microwear polishes as viewed through the atomic force microscope. Lithic Technology 20: 6–28.Google Scholar
  112. Kooyman, B., Newman, M. E., and Ceri, H. (1992). Verifying the reliability of blood residue analysis on archaeological tools. Journal of Archaeological Science 19: 265–269.Google Scholar
  113. Krakker, J. J. (1997). Biface caches, exchange, and regulatory systems in the prehistoric Great Lakes region. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology 22: 1–41.Google Scholar
  114. Kuhn, S. L. (1992a). Blank form and reduction as determinants of Mousterian scraper morphology. American Antiquity 57: 115–128.Google Scholar
  115. Kuhn, S. L. (1992b). On planning and curated technologies in the Middle Paleolithic. Journal of Anthropological Research 48: 185–214.Google Scholar
  116. Kuhn, S. L. (1993). Mousterian technology as adaptive response: A case study. In Peterkin, G., Bricker, H., and Mellars, P. (eds.), Hunting and Animal Exploitation in the Later Paleolithic and Mesolithic of Eurasia, Archeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association, No. 4,Washington, DC, pp. 25–31.Google Scholar
  117. Kuhn, S. L. (1994). A formal approach to the design and assembly of mobile toolkits. American Antiquity 59: 426–442.Google Scholar
  118. Kuhn, S. L. (1995). Mousterian Lithic Technology: An Ecological Perspective, Princeton University Press, Princeton.Google Scholar
  119. Leach, J. D. (1998). A brief comment on the immunological identification of plant residues on prehistoric stone tools and ceramics: Results of a blind test. Journal of Archaeological Science 25: 171–175.Google Scholar
  120. Leach, J. D., and Mauldin, R. P. (1995). Additional comments on blood residue analysis in archaeology. Antiquity 69: 1020–1022.Google Scholar
  121. LeMoine, G. M. (1997). Use–Wear Analysis on Bone and Antler Tools of the Mackenzie Inuit, BAR International Series 679, Oxford.Google Scholar
  122. Levi Sala, I. (1993). Use–wear traces: Processes of development and post-depositional alterations. In Anderson, P., Beyries, S., Otte, M., and Plisson, H. (eds.), Traces et fonction: Les gestes retrouvés, ERAUL, No. 0, Liège, pp. 401–416.Google Scholar
  123. Levi Sala, I. (1996). A Study of Microscopic Polish on Flint Implements, BAR International Series 629, Oxford.Google Scholar
  124. Lewenstein, S. M. (1991). Edge angles and tool function among the Maya: A meaningful relationship? In Hester T., and Shafer, H. (eds.), Maya Stone Tools, Prehistory Press, Madison, WI, pp. 207–217.Google Scholar
  125. Lewenstein, S. M. (1993). Experimentation in the formation and variability of lithic use–wear traces on obsidian and chert implements. In Anderson, P., Beyries, S., Otte, M., and Plisson, H. (eds.), Traces et fonction: Les gestes retrouvés, ERAUL, No. 50, Liège, pp. 287–294.Google Scholar
  126. Lohse, E. S. (1996). A computerized descriptive system for functional analysis of stone tools. Tebiwa 26: 3–66.Google Scholar
  127. Loy, T. H. (1993). The artifact as site: An example of the biomolecular analysis of organic residues on prehistoric tools. World Archaeology 25: 44–63.Google Scholar
  128. Loy, T. H., and Dixon, E. J. (1998). Blood residues on fluted points from eastern Beringia. American Antiquity 63: 21–46.Google Scholar
  129. Loy, T. R., and Wood, A. R. (1989). Blood residue analysis at Cayonu Tepesi, Turkey. Journal of Field Archaeology 16: 451–460.Google Scholar
  130. MacDonald, D. H. (1999). Modeling Folsom mobility, technological organization, and mating strategies in the Northern Plains. Plains Anthropologist 44: 141–161.Google Scholar
  131. MacDonald, D. H., and Hewlett, B. S. (1999). Reproductive interests and forager mobility. Current Anthropology 40: 501–514.Google Scholar
  132. Mahmoud, A.-M. A., and Bard, K. A. (1993). Sources of the Predynastic grinding stones in the Hu-Semaineh region, Upper Egypt, and their cultural context. Geoarchaeology 8: 241–245.Google Scholar
  133. Manolakakis, L. (1996). Production lithique et émergence de la hierarchie sociale: l'industrie lithique de l'Enéolithique en Bulgarie (première moitié du IVe millenaire). Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Française 93: 119–123.Google Scholar
  134. Mansur, M. E. (1997). Functional analysis of polished stone-tools: Some considerations about the nature of polishing. In Ramos-Millan, A., and Bustillo, M. A., (eds.), Siliceous Rocks and Culture, Editorial Universidad de Granada, Spain, pp. 465–486.Google Scholar
  135. Mauldin, R. P., Leach, J. D., and Amick, D. S. (1995). On the identification of blood residues on Paleoindian artifacts. Current Research in the Pleistocene 12: 85–87.Google Scholar
  136. McBrearty, S., Bishop, L., Plummer, T., Dewar, R., and Conard, N. (1998). Tools underfoot: Human trampling as an agent of lithic artifact edge modification. American Antiquity 63: 108–129.Google Scholar
  137. McBryde, I. (1997). “The landscape is a series of stories.” Grindstones, quarries and exchange in Aboriginal Australia: A Lake Eyre case study. In Ramos-Millan, A., and Bustillo, M. A. (eds.), Siliceous Rocks and Culture, Editorial Universidad de Granada, Spain, pp. 587–607.Google Scholar
  138. McDonald, M. M. A. (1991).Technological organization and sedentism in the Epipaleolithic of Dakhleh Oasis, Egypt. African Archaeological Review 9: 81–109.Google Scholar
  139. McSwain, R. (1991). A comparative evaluation of the producer-consumer model for lithic exchange in northern Belize, Central America. Latin American Antiquity 2: 337–351.Google Scholar
  140. Milliken, S. (1998). The ghost of Childe and the question of craft specialization in the Paleolithic. In Milliken, S., and Vidale, M. (eds.), Craft Specialization: Operational Sequences and Beyond, BAR Series 720, Oxford, pp. 1–7.Google Scholar
  141. Mitchell, D. R., and Shackley, M. S. (1995). Classic period Hohokam obsidian studies in southern Arizona. Journal of Field Archaeology 22: 291–304.Google Scholar
  142. Morrow, J. E. (1997). End scraper morphology and use-life: An approach for studying Paleoindian lithic technology and mobility. Lithic Technology 22: 70–85.Google Scholar
  143. Morrow, T. A. (1996). Bigger is better: Comments on Kuhn's formal approach to mobile tool kits. American Antiquity 61: 581–590.Google Scholar
  144. Moss, E. H. (1987). A review of “Investigating microwear polishes with blind tests.” Journal of Archaeological Science 14: 473–481.Google Scholar
  145. Moulton, A. L., and Abler, T. S. (1991). Lithic beings and lithic technology: References from northern Iroquoian mythology. Man in the Northeast 42: 1–7.Google Scholar
  146. Nash, S. E. (1996). Is curation a useful heuristic? In Odell, G. (ed.), Stone Tools: Theoretical Insights into Human Prehistory, Plenum, New York, pp. 81–99.Google Scholar
  147. Nassaney, M. S. (1996). The role of chipped stone in the political economy of social ranking. In Odell, G. (ed.), Stone Tools: Theoretical Insights into Human Prehistory, Plenum, New York, pp. 181–224.Google Scholar
  148. Neeley, M. P., and Barton, C. M. (1994). A new approach to interpreting late Pleistocene microlith industries in Southwest Asia. Antiquity 68: 275–288.Google Scholar
  149. Nelson, M. C. (1991). The study of technological organization. In Schiffer, M. (ed.), Archaeological Method and Theory, University of Arizona Press, Tucson, pp. 57–100.Google Scholar
  150. Newman, M. E., Ceri, H., and Kooyman, B. (1996). The use of immunological techniques in the analysis of archaeological materials—a response to Eisele; with report of studies at Head-Smashed-In buffalo jump. Antiquity 70: 677–682.Google Scholar
  151. Newman, M. E., Yohe, R. M., II, Ceri, H., and Sutton, M. Q. (1993). Immunological protein residue analysis of non-lithic archaeological materials. Journal of Archaeological Science 20: 93–100.Google Scholar
  152. O'Connell, J. F., and Inoway, C. M. (1994). Surprise Valley projectile points and their chronological implications. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 16: 162–198.Google Scholar
  153. Odell, G. H. (1994a). Assessing hunter–gatherer mobility in the Illinois Valley: Exploring ambiguous results. In Carr, P. (ed.), The Organization of North American Prehistoric Chipped Stone Technologies, International Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor, MI, pp. 70–86.Google Scholar
  154. Odell, G. H. (1994b). Prehistoric hafting and mobility in the North American Midcontinent: Examples from Illinois. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 13: 51–73.Google Scholar
  155. Odell, G. H. (1996a). Economizing behavior and the concept of “curation.” In Odell, G. (ed.), Stone Tools: Theoretical Insights into Human Prehistory, Plenum, New York, pp. 51–80.Google Scholar
  156. Odell, G. H. (1996b). Stone Tools and Mobility in the Illinois Valley: From Hunting–Gathering Camps to Agricultural Villages, International Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor, MI.Google Scholar
  157. Odell, G. H. (1998). Investigating correlates of sedentism and domestication in prehistoric North America. American Antiquity 63: 553–571.Google Scholar
  158. Odell, G. H., and Odell-Vereecken, F. (1980). Verifying the reliability of lithic use–wear assessments by “blind tests:” The low-power approach. Journal of Field Archaeology 7: 87–120.Google Scholar
  159. Olausson, D. (1990). Edge-wear analysis in archaeology: The current state of research. Laborativ Arkeologi 4, Humanistisk-Samhallsvetenskapliga Forskningsradet, Stockholm.Google Scholar
  160. Oswalt, W. (1976). An Anthropological Analysis of Food-Getting Technology, Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
  161. Otis Charlton, C. L. (1993). Obsidian as jewelry: Lapidary production in Aztec Otumba, Mexico. Ancient Mesoamerica 4: 231–243.Google Scholar
  162. Owen, L., and Unrath, G. (1989). Microtraces d'usure dues à la préhension. l'Anthropologie 93: 673–688.Google Scholar
  163. Parry, W. J., and Kelly, R. L. (1987). Expedient core technology and sedentism. In Johnson, J. K., and Morrow, C. A. (eds.), The Organization of Core Technology, Westview Press, Boulder, CO, pp. 285–304.Google Scholar
  164. Paton, R. (1994). Speaking through stones: A study from northern Australia. World Archaeology 26: 172–184.Google Scholar
  165. Pawlik, A. (1995). Die microskopische Analyse von Steingeraten: Experimente-Auswertungsmethoden-Artefaktanalyse, Urgeschichtliche Materialhefte 10, Verlag Archaeologica Venatoria, Tubingen.Google Scholar
  166. Petraglia, M., Knepper, D., Glumac, P., Newman, M., and Sussman, C. (1996). Immunological and microwear analysis of chipped-stone artifacts from piedmont contexts. American Antiquity 61: 127–135.Google Scholar
  167. Piperno, D. R., and Holst, I. (1998). The presence of starch grains on prehistoric stone tools from the humid Neotropics: Indications of early tuber use and agriculture in Panama. Journal of Archaeological Science 25: 765–776.Google Scholar
  168. Plisson, H., and Mauger, M. (1988). Chemical and mechanical alteration of micro-wear polishes: An experimental approach. Helinium 28: 3–16.Google Scholar
  169. Pope, M. K. (1994). Mississippian microtools and Uruk blades: A comparative study of chipped stone production, use, and economic organization. Lithic Technology 19: 128–145.Google Scholar
  170. Pope, M., and Pollock, S. (1995). Trade, tools, and tasks: A study of Uruk chipped stone industries. Research in Economic Anthropology 16: 227–265.Google Scholar
  171. Prost, D.-C. (1993). Nouveaux termes pour une description microscopique des retouches et autres enlèvements. Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Française 90: 190–195.Google Scholar
  172. Pye, D. (1964). The Nature of Design, Studio Vista, London.Google Scholar
  173. Ramos-Millan, A. (1997). Flint political economy in a tribal society. A material-culture study in the El Malagon settlement (Iberian southeast). In Ramos-Millan, A., and Bustillo, M. A. (eds.), Siliceous Rocks and Culture, Editorial Universidad de Granada, Spain, pp. 671–711.Google Scholar
  174. Read, D. W., and Russell, G. (1996). A method for taxonomic typology construction and an example: Utilized flakes. American Antiquity 61: 663–684.Google Scholar
  175. Rees, D., Wilkinson, G. G., Grace, R., and Orton, C. R. (1991). An investigation of the fractal properties of flint microwear images. Journal of Archaeological Science 18: 629–640.Google Scholar
  176. Rick, J. W. (1996). Projectile points, style, and social process in the Preceramic of central Peru. In Odell, G. (ed.), Stone Tools: Theoretical Insights into Human Prehistory, Plenum, New York, pp. 245–278.Google Scholar
  177. Ricq-de Bouard, M., and Fedele, F. G. (1993). Neolithic rock resources across the western Alps: Circulation data and models. Geoarchaeology 8: 1–22.Google Scholar
  178. Rondeau, M. F. (1996). When is an Elko? In Odell, G. (ed.), Stone Tools: Theoretical Insights into Human Prehistory, Plenum, New York, pp. 229–243.Google Scholar
  179. Rosen, S. A. (1996). The decline and fall of flint. In Odell, G. (ed.), Stone Tools: Theoretical Insights into Human Prehistory, Plenum, New York, pp. 129–158.Google Scholar
  180. Rosen, S. A. (1997a). Beyond meat and milk: Lithic evidence for economic specialization in the Early Bronze Age pastoral periphery in the Levant. Lithic Technology 22: 99–109.Google Scholar
  181. Rosen, S. A. (1997b). Lithics after the Stone Age: A Handbook of Stone Tools from the Levant, AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek, CA.Google Scholar
  182. Rousseau, M. K. (1992). Integrated Lithic Analysis: The Significance and Function of Key-Shaped Formed Unifaces on the Interior Plateau of Northwestern North America, Department of Archaeology, Publication No. 20, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC.Google Scholar
  183. Rowlett, R. M., and Robbins, M. C. (1982). Estimating original assemblage content to adjust for post-depositional vertical artifact movement. World Archaeology 14: 73–83.Google Scholar
  184. Rozoy, J.-G. (1991). Typologie et chronologie. Paléo 3: 207–211.Google Scholar
  185. Santone, L. (1997). Transport costs, consumer demand, and patterns of intraregional exchange: A perspective on commodity production and distribution from northern Belize. Latin American Antiquity 8: 71–88.Google Scholar
  186. Sassaman, K. E. (1992). Lithic technology and the hunter–gatherer sexual division of labor. North American Archaeologist 13: 249–262.Google Scholar
  187. Sassaman, K. E. (1994a). Changing strategies of biface production in the South Carolina coastal plain. In Carr, P. (ed.), The Organization of North American Prehistoric Chipped Stone Tool Technologies, International Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor, MI, pp. 99–117.Google Scholar
  188. Sassaman, K. E. (1994b). Production for exchange in the Mid-Holocene Southeast: A Savannah River Valley example. Lithic Technology 19: 42–51.Google Scholar
  189. Sassaman, K. E. (1998). Crafting cultural identity in hunter–gatherer economies. In Costin, C., and Wright, R. (eds.), Craft and Social Identity, Archeological papers of the American Anthropological Association, No. 8. Washington, DC, pp. 93–107.Google Scholar
  190. Schick, K. D., and Toth, N. (1993). Making Silent Stones Speak: Human Evolution and the Dawn of Technology, Simon and Schuster, New York.Google Scholar
  191. Schreurs, J. (1992). The Michelsberg site Maastricht-Klinkers: A functional interpretation. Analecta Praehistorica Leidensia 25: 129–171.Google Scholar
  192. Seeman, M. F. (1994). Intercluster lithic patterning at Nobles Pond: A case for “disembedded” procurement among Early Paleoindian societies. American Antiquity 59: 273–288.Google Scholar
  193. Sellet, F. (1993). Chaine opératoire: The concept and its applications. Lithic Technology 18: 106–112.Google Scholar
  194. Shackley, M. S. (1990). Early Hunter–Gatherer Procurement Ranges in the Southwest: Evidence from Obsidian Geochemistry and Lithic Technology, Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Arizona State University, Tempe.Google Scholar
  195. Shafer, H. J., and Hester, T. R. (1991). Lithic craft specialization and product distribution at the Maya site of Colha, Belize. World Archaeology 23: 79–97.Google Scholar
  196. Shea, J. J. (1992). Lithic microwear analysis in archaeology. Evolutionary Anthropology 1: 143–150.Google Scholar
  197. Shea, J. J. (1999). Artifact abrasion, fluvial processes, and “living floors” from the Early Paleolithic site of ‘Ubeidiya (Jordan Valley, Israel). Geoarchaeology 14: 191–207.Google Scholar
  198. Shea, J. J., and Klenck, J. D. (1993). An experimental investigation of the effects of trampling on the results of lithic microwear analysis. Journal of Archaeological Science 20: 175–194.Google Scholar
  199. Sheppard, P. J. (1993). Lapita lithics: Trade/exchange and technology. A view from the Reefs/Santa Cruz. Archaeology in Oceania 28: 121–137.Google Scholar
  200. Sheppard, P. J. (1996). Hard rock: Archaeological implications of chert sourcing in near and remote Oceania. In Davidson, J., Irwin, G., Leach, B. F., Pawley, A., and Brown, D. (eds.), Oceanic Culture History, New Zealand Journal of Archaeology Special Publication, pp. 99–115.Google Scholar
  201. Shott, M. J. (1986). Technological organization and settlement mobility: An ethnographic examination. Journal of Anthropological Research 42: 15–51.Google Scholar
  202. Shott, M. J. (1996). An exegesis of the curation concept. Journal of Anthropological Research 52: 259–280.Google Scholar
  203. Shott, M. J. (1997). Stones and shafts redux: The metric discrimination of chipped-stone dart and arrow points. American Antiquity 62: 86–101.Google Scholar
  204. Sievert, A. K. (1992). Maya Ceremonial Specialization: Lithic Tools from the Sacred Cenote at Chichén Itzá, Yucatán, Prehistory Press, Madison, WI.Google Scholar
  205. Sievert, A. K. (1994). The detection of ritual tool use through functional analysis: Comparative examples from the Spiro and Angel sites. Lithic Technology 19: 146–156.Google Scholar
  206. Smith, M. E. (1990). Long-distance trade under the Aztec empire: The archaeological evidence. Ancient Mesoamerica 1: 153–169.Google Scholar
  207. Smith, P. R., and Wilson, M. T. (1992). Blood residues on ancient tool surfaces: A cautionary note. Journal of Archaeological Science 19: 237–241.Google Scholar
  208. Sobolik, K. D. (1996). Lithic organic residue analysis: An example from the Southwestern Archaic. Journal of Field Archaeology 23: 461–469.Google Scholar
  209. Spence, M. W. (1996). Commodity or gift: Teotihuacan obsidian in the Maya region. Latin American Antiquity 7: 21–39.Google Scholar
  210. Stafford, M. (1999). From Forager to Farmer in Flint: A Lithic Analysis of the Prehistoric Transition to Agriculture in Southern Scandinavia, Aarhus University Press, Aarhus, Denmark.Google Scholar
  211. Stiner, M. C., and Kuhn, S. L. (1992). Subsistence, technology, and adaptive variation in Middle Paleolithic Italy. American Anthropologist 94: 306–339.Google Scholar
  212. Storck, P. L. (1997). The Fisher Site: Archaeological, Geological and Paleobotanical Studies at an Early Paleo-Indian Site in Southern Ontario, Museum of Anthropology, Memoirs No. 30, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
  213. Strauss, A. E. (1992). Jack's Reef corner notched points in New England: Site distribution, raw material preference, and implications for trade. North American Archaeologist 13: 333–350.Google Scholar
  214. Sullivan, A. P., III (1994). Adaptive diversity and limited-activity sites versus logistical mobility and expedient technology: Adrift in normative thought. Journal of Anthropological Research 50: 159–167.Google Scholar
  215. Takacs-Biro, K. (1997). Raw material economy of the Late Neolithic in Hungary. In Ramos-Millan, A., and Bustillo, M. A. (eds.), Siliceous Rocks and Culture, Editorial Universidad de Granada, Spain, pp. 639–660.Google Scholar
  216. Therin, M. (1998). The movement of starch grains in sediments. In Fullagar, R. (ed.), A Closer Look, Archaeological Methods Series 6, Sydney University, Sydney, pp. 61–72.Google Scholar
  217. Thomas, D. H. (1981). How to classify the projectiles from Monitor Valley, Nevada. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 3: 7–43.Google Scholar
  218. Thomas, D. H. (1986). Points on points: A reply to Flenniken and Raymond. American Antiquity 51: 619–627.Google Scholar
  219. Thompson, M. (1996). Correlation of Maya lithic and glyphic data. Lithic Technology 21: 120–133.Google Scholar
  220. Tomenchuk, J. (1997). A parametric use–wear study of artifacts from Areas C and C-east. In Storck, P. (ed.), The Fisher Site, Museum of Anthropology, Memoirs No. 30, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, pp. 95–161.Google Scholar
  221. Tuross, N., Barnes, I., and Potts, R. (1996). Protein identification of blood residues on experimental stone tools. Journal of Archaeological Science 23: 289–296.Google Scholar
  222. Unger-Hamilton, R. (1989). Analyse expérimentale des microtraces d'usure: Quelques controverses actuelles. l'Anthropologie 93: 659–672.Google Scholar
  223. van den Dries, M., and van Gijn, A. (1997). The representativity of experimental usewear traces. In Ramos-Millan, A., and Bustillo, M. A. (eds.), Siliceous Rocks and Culture, Editorial Universidad de Granada, Spain, pp. 499–513.Google Scholar
  224. Vierra, B. J. (1995). Subsistence and Stone Tool Technology: An Old World Perspective, Anthropological Research Papers No. 47, Arizona State University, Tempe.Google Scholar
  225. Villa, P. (1982). Conjoinable pieces and site formation processes. American Antiquity 47: 276–290.Google Scholar
  226. Wallis, L., and O'Connor, S. (1998). Residues on a sample of stone points from theWest Kimberley. In Fullagar, R. (ed.), A Closer Look, Archaeological Methods Series 6, Sydney University, Sydney, pp. 149–178.Google Scholar
  227. Walthall, J. A., and Holley, G. R. (1997). Mobility and hunter–gatherer toolkit design: Analysis of a Dalton lithic cache. Southeastern Archaeology 16: 152–162.Google Scholar
  228. Walthall, J. A., and Koldehoff, B. (1998). Hunter–gatherer interaction and alliance formation: Dalton and the Cult of the Long Blade. Plains Anthropologist 43: 257–273.Google Scholar
  229. White, J. P. (1996). Rocks in the head: Thinking about the distribution of obsidian in Near Oceania. In Davidson, J., Irwin, G., Leach, B. F., Pawley, A., and Brown, D. (eds.), Oceanic Culture History, New Zealand Journal of Archaeology Special Publication, pp. 199–209.Google Scholar
  230. Whittaker, J. C., Caulkins, D., and Kamp, K. A. (1998). Evaluating consistency in typology and classification. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 5: 129–164.Google Scholar
  231. Wilke, P. J., and Flenniken, J. J. (1991). Missing the point: Rebuttal to Bettinger, O'Connell, and Thomas. American Anthropologist 93: 172–173.Google Scholar
  232. Williams-Thorpe, O., Thorpe, R. S., Elliott, C., and Xenophontos, C. (1991). Archaeology, geochemistry, and trade of igneous rock millstones in Cyprus during the Late Bronze Age to Roman periods. Geoarchaeology 6: 27–60.Google Scholar
  233. Wright, J. V. (1994). The prehistoric transportation of goods in the St. Lawrence River Basin. In Baugh, T., and Ericson, J. (eds.), Prehistoric Exchange Systems in North America, Plenum, New York, pp. 47–71.Google Scholar
  234. Wynn, T. (1991). Tools, grammar and the archaeology of cognition. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 1: 191–206.Google Scholar
  235. Wynn, T. (1993). Layers of thinking in tool behavior. In Gibson, K. R., and Ingold, T. (eds.), Tools, Language and Cognition in Human Evolution, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 389–406.Google Scholar
  236. Yamada, S. (1993). The formation process of “use–wear polishes.” In Anderson, P., Beyries, S., Otte, M., and Plisson, H. (eds.), Traces et fonction: Les gestes retrouvés, ERAUL, No. 50, Liège, pp. 433–445.Google Scholar
  237. Yamada, S., and Sawada, A. (1993). The method of description for polished surfaces. In Anderson, P., Beyries, S., Otte, M., and Plisson, H. (eds.), Traces et fonction: Les gestes retrouvés, ERAUL, No. 50, Liège, pp. 447–457.Google Scholar
  238. Yerkes, R. W., and Kardulias, P. N. (1993). Recent developments in the analysis of lithic artifacts. Journal of Archaeological Research 1: 89–119.Google Scholar
  239. Yohe, R. M., II, Newman, M. E., and Schneider, J. S. (1991). Immunological identification of small-mammal proteins on Aboriginal milling equipment. American Antiquity 56: 659–666.Google Scholar
  240. Young, L. C. (1994). Lithics and adaptive diversity: An examination of limited-activity sites in northeast Arizona. Journal of Anthropological Research 50: 141–154.Google Scholar

BIBLIOGRAPHY OF RECENT LITERATURE

  1. Akerman, K. (1998). A suggested function forWestern Arnhem Land use-polished flakes and elouras. In Fullagar, R. (ed.), A Closer Look, Archaeological Methods Series 6, Sydney University, Sydney, pp. 179–188.Google Scholar
  2. Amick, D. S. (1994). Technological organization and the structure of inference in lithic analysis: An examination of Folsom hunting behavior in the American Southwest. In Carr, P. (ed.), The Organization of North American Prehistoric Chipped Stone Tool Technologies, International Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor, MI, pp. 9–34.Google Scholar
  3. Amick, D. S. (1999). Raw material variation in Folsom stone tool assemblages and the division of labor in hunter–gatherer societies. In Amick, D. (ed.), Folsom Lithic Technology, International Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor, MI, pp. 169–187.Google Scholar
  4. Andrefsky, W., Jr. (1991). Inferring trends in prehistoric settlement behavior from lithic production technology in the Southern Plains. North American Archaeologist 12: 129–144.Google Scholar
  5. Andrefsky, W., Jr. (1997). Thoughts on stone tool shape and inferred function. Journal of Middle Atlantic Archaeology 13: 125–143.Google Scholar
  6. Bierwirth, S. L. (1996). Lithic Analysis in Southwestern France: Middle Paleolithic Assemblages from the Site of La Quina, BAR International Series 633, Oxford.Google Scholar
  7. Bosquet, D., and Jardon Giner, P. (1999). Etude tracéologique du site paléolithique moyen de Remicourt-En Bia FloI. Notae Praehistoricae(Namur) 19: 21–28.Google Scholar
  8. Boszhardt, R. F., and McCarthy, J. (1999). Oneota end scrapers and experiments in hide dressing: An analysis from the La Crosse locality. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology 24: 177–199.Google Scholar
  9. Brooks, L., and Phillips, P. (eds.) (1989). Breaking the Stony Silence: Papers from the Sheffield Lithics Conference 1988, BAR British Series, No. 213, Oxford.Google Scholar
  10. Brown, J. A. (1996). The Spiro Ceremonial Center, Vol. II: The Collections, Museum of Anthropology, Memoirs No. 29, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
  11. Calogero, B. L. A. (1992). Lithic misidentification. Man in the Northeast 43: 87–90.Google Scholar
  12. Carr, P. J. (ed.) (1994). The Organization of North American Prehistoric Chipped Stone Tool Technologies, International Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor, MI.Google Scholar
  13. Clark, J., and Parry, W. J. (1990). Craft specialization and cultural complexity. Research in Economic Anthropology 12: 289–346.Google Scholar
  14. Clemente-Conte, I. (1997). Thermal alterations of flint implements and the conservation of microwear polish: Preliminary experimental observations. In Ramos-Millan, A., and Bustillo, M. A. (eds.), Siliceous Rocks and Culture, Editorial Universidad de Granada, Spain, pp. 525–535.Google Scholar
  15. Cowan, F. L. (1994). Prehistoric Mobility Strategies in Western New York: A Small Sites Perspective, Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, State University of New York, Buffalo.Google Scholar
  16. Dawe, B. (1997). Tiny arrowheads: Toys in the toolkit. Plains Anthropologist 42: 303-318.Google Scholar
  17. Duff, A. I., Clark, G. A., and Chadderdon, T. J. (1992). Symbolism in the Early Paleolithic:Aconceptual odyssey. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 2: 211–229.Google Scholar
  18. Edmonds, M. (1990). Description, understanding and the chaine opératoire. Archaeological Review from Cambridge 9: 55–70.Google Scholar
  19. Franco, N. V. (1994). Maximización en el aprovechamiento de los recursos líticos: un caso analizado en el área interserrana Bonaerense. In Lanata, J., and Borrero, L. (eds.), Arqueología de Cazadores-Recolectores; Límites, Casos y Apertures, Arqueología Contemporánea 5, Edición Especial, Buenos Aires, pp. 75–88.Google Scholar
  20. Fullagar, R. L. K. (1993). Flaked stone tools and plant food production: A preliminary report on obsidian tools from Talasea, West New Britain, PNG. In Anderson, P., Beyries, S., Otte, M., and Plisson, H. (eds.), Traces et fonction: Les gestes retrouvés, ERAUL, No. 50, Liège, pp. 331–337.Google Scholar
  21. Fullagar, R. L. K. (1994a). Objectives for use–wear and residue studies: Views from an Australian microscope. Helinium 34: 210–224.Google Scholar
  22. Fullagar, R. L. K. (1994b). Traces of times past: Stone artefacts into prehistory. Australian Archaeology 39: 63–73.Google Scholar
  23. Fullagar, R., Furby, J., and Hardy, B. (1996). Residues on stone artefacts: State of a scientific art. Antiquity 70: 740–745.Google Scholar
  24. Geneste, J.-M. (1991). Systèmes techniques de production lithique: Variations techno-économiques dans les processus de réalisation des outillages paléolithiques. Techniques et Culture 17/18: 1–35.Google Scholar
  25. Gibaja, J. F., and Clemente, I. (1997). El tratamiento térmico del sílex y sus repercusiones en la determinaci ón de los rastros de uso. Algunos ejemplos del neolítico en Cataluña. Revista d'Arqueología de Ponent 7: 153–160.Google Scholar
  26. Grace, R. (1989). Interpreting the Function of Stone Tools: The Quantification and Computerisation of Microwear Analysis, BAR International Series 474, Oxford.Google Scholar
  27. Graves, P. (1994). Flakes and ladders: What the archaeological record cannot tell us about the origins of language. World Archaeology 26: 158–171.Google Scholar
  28. Hardy, B., and Garufi, G. T. (1998). Identification of woodworking on stone tools through residue and use–wear analyses: Experimental Results. Journal of Archaeological Science 25: 177–184.Google Scholar
  29. Hofman, J. L. (1991). Folsom land use: Projectile point variability as a key to mobility. In Montet-White, A., and Holen, S. (eds.), Raw Material Economies among Prehistoric Hunter–Gatherers, Publications in Anthropology, No. 19, University of Kansas, Lawrence, pp. 335–355.Google Scholar
  30. Hurcombe, L. (1992). L'analyse des traces d'usure sur l'obsidienne. l'Anthropologie 96: 179–186.Google Scholar
  31. Ingold, T. (1993). Tool-use, sociality and intelligence. In Gibson, K. R., and Ingold, T. (eds.), Tools, Language and Cognition in Human Evolution, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 429–445.Google Scholar
  32. Jardon Giner, P., and Sacchi, D. (1994). Traces d'usage et indices de réaffutages et d'emmanchements sur des grattoirs magdaléniens de la Grotte Gazel à Sallèles-Cabardes (Aude-France). l'Anthropologie 98: 427–446.Google Scholar
  33. Kimball, L. R. (1994). Microwear analysis of Late and Terminal Archaic projectile points from the Padula site (36NM15), Pennsylvania. Journal of Middle Atlantic Archaeology 10: 169–179.Google Scholar
  34. Korobkova, G. F. (1994). Stone tools and the beginning of agriculture in the Near East (in Russian). Archaeological News(St. Petersburg) 3: 166–180.Google Scholar
  35. Korobkova, G. F. (1999). Narzedzia w pradziejach: Podstawy badania funkcji metoda traseologiczna, Uniwersytet Mikolaja Kopernika, Torun.Google Scholar
  36. Lewenstein, S. M. (1991). Woodworking tools at Cerros. In Hester, T., and Shafer, H. (eds.), Maya Stone Tools, Prehistory Press, Madison, WI, pp. 239–249.Google Scholar
  37. Lurie, R. (1989). Lithic technology and mobility strategies: TheKoster site Middle Archaic. In Torrence, R. (ed.), Time, Energy and Stone Tools, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 46–56.Google Scholar
  38. Moloney, N., Raposo, L., and Santonja, M. (eds.) (1996). Non-Flint Stone Tools and the Paleolithic Occupation of the Iberian Peninsula, BAR International Series 649, Oxford.Google Scholar
  39. Nelson, M. C. (1993). Grinding-tool design as conditioned by land-use pattern. American Antiquity 58: 286–305.Google Scholar
  40. Nielsen, A. E. (1991). Trampling the archaeological record: An experimental study. American Antiquity 56: 483–503.Google Scholar
  41. Odell, G. H. (1993). A North American perspective on recent archeological stone tool research. Palimpsesto(Buenos Aires) 3: 109–122.Google Scholar
  42. Odell, G. H. (1995). Is anybody listening to the Russians? Lithic Technology 20: 40–52.Google Scholar
  43. Patterson, L. W. (1994). Incidental impact breakage of arrow points. La Tierra 21: 30–38.Google Scholar
  44. Patterson, L. W. (1996). Drilling holes in shell. La Tierra 23: 10–13.Google Scholar
  45. Patterson, L.W. (1997). Hunter–gatherer mobility: Limitations of interpretation. Houston Archeological Society Journal 117: 1–8.Google Scholar
  46. Pauketat, T. R. (1994). The Ascent of Chiefs: Cahokia and Mississippian Politics in Native North America, University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.Google Scholar
  47. Pawlik, A. F. (1996). Licht-und rasterelektronenmikroskopische Untersuchungen an geschafteten Steingeraten aus Burgaschisee-Sud. Tubinger Monographien zur Urgeschichte 11: 331–340.Google Scholar
  48. Pawlik, A. F. (1996). Die lichtmikroscopische Gebrauchsspurenanalyse an ausgewahlten Steinartefakten von Henauhof Nord II. In Kind, C.-J. (ed.), Die letzten Wildbeuter: Henauhof Nord II und das Endmesolithikum in Baden-Wurttemberg, Materialhefte zur Archaologie in Baden-Wurttemberg, No. 39, pp. 150–178.Google Scholar
  49. Pawlik, A. F. (1998). Die mikroskopische Gebrauchsspurenanalyse der Silexwerkzeuge aus Reute-Schorrenried. In Mainberger, M. (ed.), Das Moordorf von Reute, Teraqua CAP, pp. 185–198.Google Scholar
  50. Pelegrin, J. (1990). Prehistoric lithic technology: Some aspects of research. Archaeological Review from Cambridge 9: 117–125.Google Scholar
  51. Philibert, S. (1994). L'ochre et le traitement des peaux: Révision d'une conception traditionnelle par l'analyse fonctionnelle des grattoirs ocrés de la Balma Margineda (Andorre). l'Anthropologie 98: 447–453.Google Scholar
  52. Prewitt, E. R., and Tomka, S. (1993). What do I call thee? Projectile point types and archaeological interpretations: Perspectives from Texas. Lithic Technology 18: 49–58.Google Scholar
  53. Rovner, I., and Lewenstein, S. (1997). Maya Stone Tools of Dzibilchaltun, Yucatán, Becan and Chicanna, Campeche, Middle American Research Institute, Publication No. 65, Tulane University, New Orleans.Google Scholar
  54. Schultz, J. M. (1992). The use–wear generated by processing bison hides. Plains Anthropologist 37: 333–351.Google Scholar
  55. Shanks, O. C., Kornfeld, M., and Hawk, D. (1999). Protein analysis of Bugas-holding tools: Newtrends in immunological studies. Journal of Archaeological Science 26: 1183–1191.Google Scholar
  56. Shchelinskii, V. E. (1994). On the function of bifaces from the Mousterian site Zaskalnaja V, Crimea (in Russian). Archaeological News(St. Petersburg) 3: 16–24.Google Scholar
  57. Shchelinskii, V. E. (1999). Technologiya kamneobrabativayushchevo proizvodstva sredne paleoliticheskoi ctoyanki norovo I b priazovie. Archeologicheski Almanach(Donetsk) 8: 109–128.Google Scholar
  58. Shea, J. J. (1993). Lithic use–wear evidence for hunting in the Levantine Middle Paleolithic. In Anderson, P., Beyries, S., Otte, M., and Plisson, H. (eds.), Traces et fonction: Les gestes retrouvés, ERAUL, No. 50, Liège, pp. 21–30.Google Scholar
  59. Shott, M. J. (1995). How much is a scraper? Curation, use rates, and the formation of scraper assemblages. Lithic Technology 20: 52–72.Google Scholar
  60. Sievert, A. K. (1992). Root and tuber resources: Experimental plant processing and resulting microwear on chipped stone tools. In Anderson, P. (ed.), Pr´ehistoire de l'agriculture, Monographie du CRA, No. 6, Editions du CNRS, Paris, pp. 55–66.Google Scholar
  61. Skakun, N. N. (1994). Agricultural implements and the problem of spreading of agriculture in southeastern Europe. Helinium 24: 294–305.Google Scholar
  62. Stapert, D., and Johansen, L. (1999). Flint and pyrite: Making fire in the Stone Age. Antiquity 73: 765–777.Google Scholar
  63. Tacon, P. S. C. (1991). The power of stone: Symbolic aspects of stone use and tool development in western Arnhem Land, Australia. Antiquity 65: 192–207.Google Scholar
  64. Tankersley, K. B. (1995). Seasonality of stone procurement: An Early Paleoindian example in northwestern New York State. North American Archaeologist 6: 1–16.Google Scholar
  65. van Gijn, A. L. (1990). TheWear and Tear of Flint: Principles of Functional Analysis Applied to Dutch Neolithic Assemblages, Analecta Praehistorica Leidensia 22, Leiden.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • George H. Odell
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of AnthropologyUniversity of TulsaTulsa

Personalised recommendations