Advertisement

Introduction

  • George H. Odell
Part of the Interdisciplinary Contributions to Archaeology book series (IDCA)

Abstract

Stone tools dominate archaeological assemblages from all but the most recent periods in most areas of the world. It should come as no surprise, then, that trends in lithic analysis have followed trajectories common to archaeology in general. If American archaeology in the first half of this century, for example, can be called “Classificatory-Descriptive” or “Classificatory-Historical” (Willey and Sabloff 1974), then it is a sure bet that these terms also characterize the way that stone tools were analyzed during this period. That is, analytical efforts were expended in providing taxonomic systems and historical reconstructions for the lithic remains that were being unearthed.

Keywords

Stone Tool Anthropological Research American Archaeology American Antiquity Archaeological Assemblage 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aldenderfer, M. S. 1990. Defining Lithics-Using Craft Specialties in Lowland Maya Society through Microwear Analysis: Conceptual Problems and Issues. In The Interpretive Possibilities of Microwear Studies, edited by B. Graslund et al., pp. 53–70. Societas Archaeologica Upsaliensis, AUN 14, Uppsala.Google Scholar
  2. Bamforth, D. B. 1986. Technological Efficiency and Tool Curation. American Antiquity 51: 38–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bamforth, D. B. 1991. Technological Organization and Hunter-Gatherer Land Use: A California Example. American Antiquity 56: 216–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beyries, S. 1987. Variabilité de l’industrie lithique au mousterién: approche fonctionelle sur quelques gisements français. BAR International Series 328, Oxford.Google Scholar
  5. Binford, L. R. 1979. Organization and Formation Processes: Looking at Curated Technologies. Journal of Anthropological Research 35: 255–273.Google Scholar
  6. Binford, L. R. 1980. Willow Smoke and Dogs’ Tails: Hunter-Gatherer Settlement Systems and Archaeological Site Formation. American Antiquity 45: 4–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bleed, P. 1986. The Optimal Design of Hunting Weapons: Maintainability or Reliability. American Antiquity 51: 737–747.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cauvin, M.-C. (editor). 1983. Traces d’utilisation sur les outils néolithiques du Proche Onent. Maison de l’Orient Mediterranean, no. 5, Lyon.Google Scholar
  9. Kelly, R. L. 1983. Hunter-Gatherer Mobility Strategies. Journal of Anthropological Research 39: 277–306.Google Scholar
  10. Lewenstein, S. M. 1987. Stone Tool Use at Cerros: The Ethnoarchaeological and Use-Wear Evidence. University of Texas Press, Austin.Google Scholar
  11. Shackley, M. S. 1990. Early Hunter-Gatherer Procurement Ranges in the Southwest: Evidence from Obsidian Geochemistry and Lithic Technology. PhD dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Arizona State University.Google Scholar
  12. Shea, J. J. 1991. The Behavioral Significance of Levantine Mousterian Industrial Variability. PhD dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Harvard University.Google Scholar
  13. Sievert, A. K. 1990. Postclassic Maya Ritual Behavior: Microwear Analysis of Stone Tools from Ceremonial Contexts. In The Interpretive Possibilities of Microwear Studies, edited by B. Graslund et al., pp. 147–157. Societas Archaeologica Upsaliensis, AUN 14, Uppsala.Google Scholar
  14. Shott, M. J. 1986. Technological Organization and Settlement Mobility: An Ethnographic Examination. Journal of Anthropological Research 42: 15–51.Google Scholar
  15. Shott, M. J. 1989. Technological Organization in Great Lakes Paleoindian Assemblages. In Eastern Paleoindian Lithic Resource Use, edited by C. Ellis and J. Lothrop, pp. 221–237. Westview Press, Boulder.Google Scholar
  16. Thomas, D. H. 1983. The Archaeology of Monitor Valley. 1. Epistemology. Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History, vol. 58, part 1, New York.Google Scholar
  17. Torrence, R. 1989a. Preface. In Time, Energy and Stone Tools, edited by R. Torrence, pp. vii–viii. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  18. Torrence, R. 1989b. Tools as Optimal Solutions. In Time, Energy and Stone Tools, edited by R. Torrence, pp. 1–6. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  19. Unger-Hamilton, R. 1988. Method in Microwear Analysis: Prehistoric Sickles and Other Stone Tools from Arjoune, Syria. BAR International Series 435, Oxford.Google Scholar
  20. Willey, G. R., and J. A. Sabloff. 1974. A History of American Archaeology. W. H. Freeman and Co., San Francisco.Google Scholar
  21. Winterhalder, B., and E. A. Smith. 1981. Hunter-Gatherer Foraging Strategies. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1996

Authors and Affiliations

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

Personalised recommendations