Advertisement

Stone Tools pp 51-80 | Cite as

Economizing Behavior and the Concept of “Curation”

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

Abstract

Stone tool curation is a concept employed to explain certain aspects of prehistoric hunter-gatherer behavior, and its effect on lithic assemblages can be similar to that of responses to lithic raw material scarcity. These two concepts are examined here with respect to their validity and viability, and are applied to lithic data from the Lower Illinois Valley. Because of operational difficulties, only two of the five most commonly employed components of curation could be applied to the Illinois data, and the results of these two have led to different conclusions. Definitional ambiguities suggest that the term “curation” should not be employed without specifying its precise meaning, and should probably be restricted to those definitions emphasizing settlement and mobility organization. In comparing the effects on lithic collections of curation and scarcity-induced economizing behavior, certain variables in the Illinois Valley data were found to be useful in distinguishing either of these from the other.

Keywords

Stone Tool Base Camp Mobility Strategy American Antiquity Lithic 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. Ahler, S. A. 1971. Projectile Point Form and Function at Rodgers Shelter, Missouri. Missouri Archaeological Society, Research Series 8.Google Scholar
  2. Ahler, S. A., and R. B. McMillan. 1976. Material Culture at Rodgers Shelter: A Reflection of Past Human Activities. In Prehistoric Man and His Environments: A Case Study in the Ozark Highland, edited by W. R. Wood and R. B. McMillan, pp. 163–199. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  3. Ammerman, A., and M. Feldman. 1974. On the “Making” of an Assemblage of Stone Tools. American Antiquity 39: 610–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bamforth, D. B. 1986. Technological Efficiency and Tool Curation. American Antiquity 51: 38–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Binford, L. R. 1973. Interassemblage Variability—the Mousterian and the “Functional” Argument. In The Explanation of Culture Change: Models in Prehistory, edited by C. Renfrew, pp. 227–254. Duckworth, London.Google Scholar
  6. Binford, L. R. 1977. Forty-seven Trips: A Case Study in the Character of Archaeological Formation Processes. In Stone Tools as Cultural Markers: Change, Evolution and Complexity, edited by R. V. Wright, pp. 24–36. Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies, Canberra.Google Scholar
  7. Binford, L. R. 1979. Organization and Formation Processes: Looking at Curated Technologies. Journal of Anthropological Research 35: 255–273.Google Scholar
  8. Binford, L. R. 1980. Willow Smoke and Dogs’ Tails: Hunter-Gatherer Settlement Systems and Archaeological Site Formation. American Antiquity 45: 4–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bleed, P. 1986. The Optimal Design of Hunting Weapons: Maintainability or Reliability. American Antiquity 51: 737–747.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Callahan, E. 1987. An Evaluation of the Lithic Technology in Middle Sweden during the Mesolithic and Neolithic. Societas Archaeologica Upsaliensis, AUN 8, Uppsala, Sweden.Google Scholar
  11. Chatters, J. C. 1987. Hunter-Gatherer Adaptations and Assemblage Structure. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 6: 336–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cole, F.-C., and T. Deuel. 1937. Rediscovering Illinois. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  13. Cook, T. G. 1986. A Dispersed Harvesting Economy: The Titterington Phase. In Foraging, Collecting, and Harvesting, edited by S. Neusius, pp. 175-200. Center for Archaeological Investigations, SIU Carbondale, Occasional Paper no. 6.Google Scholar
  14. Crabtree, D. E. 1972. An Introduction to Flintworking. Occasional Papers of the Idaho State University Museum, Pocatello, no. 28.Google Scholar
  15. Farnsworth, K. B., and J. B. Walthall. 1983. In the Path of Progress: Development of Illinois Highway Archeology, and the FAP 408 Project. American Archaeology 3: 169–181.Google Scholar
  16. Francis, J. 1991. Lithic Resources on the Northwestern High Plains: Problems and Perspectives in Analysis and Interpretation. In Raw Material Economies among Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherers, edited by A. Montet-White and S. Holen, pp. 305-319. University of Kansas, Publications in Anthropology, no. 19.Google Scholar
  17. Gramly, R. Michael. 1980. Raw Materials Source Areas and “Curated” Tool Assemblages. American Antiquity 45: 823–833.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hayden, B. 1987. From Chopper to Celt: The Evolution of Resharpening Techniques. Lithic Technology 16: 33–43.Google Scholar
  19. Henry, D. O. 1989. Correlations between Reduction Strategies and Settlement Patterns. In Alternative Approaches to Lithic Analysis, edited by D. Henry and G. Odell, pp. 139-155. Archeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association, no. 1.Google Scholar
  20. Holen, S. R. 1991. Bison Hunting Territories and Lithic Acquisition among the Pawnee: An Ethnohistoric and Archaeological Study. In Raw Material Economies among Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherers, edited by A. Montet-White and S. Holen, pp. 399-411. University of Kansas, Publications in Anthropology, no. 19.Google Scholar
  21. Jeske, R., and R. Lurie. 1993. The Archaeological Visibility of Bipolar Technology: An Example from the Koster Site. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology 18: 131–160.Google Scholar
  22. Johnson, J. K. 1989. The Utility of Reduction Trajectory Modeling as a Framework for Regional Analysis. In Alternative Approaches to Lithic Analysis, edited by D. Henry and G. Odell, pp. 119-138. Archeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association, no. 1.Google Scholar
  23. Keeley L. H. 1982. Hafting and Retooling: Effects on the Archeological Record. American Antiquity 47: 798–809.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kelly, R. L. 1983. Hunter-Gatherer Mobility Strategies. Journal of Anthropological Research 39: 277–306.Google Scholar
  25. Kelly, R. L. 1988. The Three Sides of a Biface. American Antiquity 53: 717–734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Koldehoff, B. 1987. The Cahokia Flake Tool Industry: Socioeconomic Implications for Late Prehistory in the Central Mississippi Valley. In The Organization of Core Technology, edited by J. Johnson and C. Morrow, pp. 151–185. Westview Press, Boulder.Google Scholar
  27. Kornfeld, M., K. Akoshima, and G. C. Frison. 1990. Stone Tool Caching on the North American Plains: Implications of the McKean Site Tool Kit. Journal of Field Archaeology 17: 301–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kuhn, S. L. 1991. “Unpacking” Reduction: Lithic Raw Material Economy in the Mousterian of West-Central Italy Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 10: 76–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kuhn, S. L. 1992. On Planning and Curated Technologies in the Middle Paleolithic. Journal of Anthropological Research 48: 185–214.Google Scholar
  30. Luedtke, B. E., and J. T. Meyers. 1984. Trace Element Variation in Burlington Chert: A Case Study. In Prehistoric Chert Exploitation: Studies from the Midcontinent, edited by B. Butler and E. May, pp. 287-298. Center for Archaeological Investigations, SIU Carbondale, Occasional Paper no. 2.Google Scholar
  31. Lurie, R. 1989. Lithic Technology and Mobility Strategies: The Koster Site Middle Archaic. In Time, Energy and Stone Tools, edited by R. Torrence, pp. 46–56. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  32. Mallouf, R. J. 1981. A Case Study of Plow Damage to Chert Artifacts: The Brookeen Creek Cache, Hill County, Texas. Texas Historical Commission, Office of the State Archaeologist, Report no. 33.Google Scholar
  33. Marks, A. E., J. Shockler, and J. Zilhao. 1991. Raw Material Usage in the Paleolithic. The Effects of Local Availability on Selection and Economy. In Raw Material Economies among Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherers, edited by A. Montet-White and S. Holen, pp. 127-139. University of Kansas, Publications in Anthropology, no. 19.Google Scholar
  34. Moss, E. H., and M. H. Newcomer. 1982. Reconstruction of Tool Use at Pincevent: Microwear and Experiments. Studia Praehistorica Belgica 2: 289–312.Google Scholar
  35. Myers, A. 1989. Reliable and Maintainable Technological Strategies in the Mesolithic of Mainland Britain. In Time, Energy and Stone Tools, edited by R. Torrence, pp. 78–91. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  36. Nelson, M. C. 1991. The Study of Technological Organization. In Archaeological Method and Theory, vol. 3, edited by M. Schiffer, pp. 57–100. University of Arizona Press, Tucson.Google Scholar
  37. Odell, G. H. 1981a. The Mechanics of Use-Breakage of Stone Tools: Some Testable Hypotheses. Journal of Field Archaeology 8: 197–209.Google Scholar
  38. Odell, G. H. 1981b. The Morphological Express at Function Junction: Searching for Meaning in Lithic Tool Types. Journal of Anthropological Research 37: 319–342.Google Scholar
  39. Odell, G. H. 1984. Chert Resource Availability in the Lower Illinois Valley: A Transect Sample. In Prehistoric Chert Exploitation: Studies from the Midcontinent, edited by B. Butler and E. May, pp. 45-67. Center for Archaeological Investigations, SIU Carbondale, Occasional Paper 2.Google Scholar
  40. Odell, G. H. 1989. Fitting Analytical Techniques to Prehistoric Problems with Lithic Data. In Alternative Approaches to Lithic Analysis, edited by D. Henry and G. Odell, pp. 159-182. Archeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association, no. 1.Google Scholar
  41. Odell, G. H. 1994a. Prehistoric Hafting and Mobility in the North American Midcontinent: Examples from Illinois. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 13: 51–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Odell, G. H. 1994b. The Role of Stone Bladelets in Middle Woodland Society. American Antiquity 59: 102–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Odell, G. H. 1995. Stone Tools and Mobility in the Illinois Valley: From Hunting-Gathering Camps to Agricultural Villages. International Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor, Michigan.Google Scholar
  44. Odell, G. H., and F Odell-Vereecken. 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
  45. Oswalt, W. 1976. An Anthropological Analysis of Food-Getting Technology. John Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
  46. Owen, L. R., and G. Unrath. 1989. Microtraces d’usure dues à la préhension. l’Anthropologie 93: 673–688.Google Scholar
  47. Reher, C. A. 1991. Large Scale Lithic Quarries and Regional Transport Systems on the High Plains of Eastern Wyoming: Spanish Diggings Revisited. In Raw Material Economies among Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherers, edited by A. Montet-White and S. Holen, pp. 251-284. University of Kansas, Publications in Anthropology, no. 19.Google Scholar
  48. Roper, D. C. 1979. Breakage Patterns of Central Illinois Woodland Projectile Points. Plains Anthropologist 24: 113–121.Google Scholar
  49. Rubey, W. W 1952. Geology and Mineral Resources of the Hardin and Brussels Quadrangles (in Illinois). U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, D.C., Professional Paper no. 218.Google Scholar
  50. Schiffer, M. B. 1976. Behavioral Archaeology. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  51. Shea, J. J. 1988. Spear Points from the Middle Paleolithic of the Levant. Journal of Field Archaeology 15: 441–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Shott, M. 1986. Technological Organization and Settlement Mobility: An Ethnographic Examination. Journal of Anthropological Research 42: 15–51.Google Scholar
  53. Shott, M. 1989a. Diversity, Organization, and Behavior in the Material Record: Ethnographic and Archaeological Examples. Current Anthropology 30: 283–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Shott, M. 1989b. On Tool-Class Use Lives and the Formation of Archaeological Assemblages. American Antiquity 54: 9–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Stordeur, D. (editor). 1987. La main et l’outil: manches et emmanchements préhistoriques. Maison de l’Orient Mediterranéen, Lyon.Google Scholar
  56. Sullivan, A. P., III, and K. C. Rozen. 1985. Debitage Analysis and Archaeological Interpretation. American Antiquity 50: 755–779.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 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
  58. Torrence, R. 1983. Time Budgeting and Hunter-Gatherer Technology. In Hunter-Gatherer Economy in Prehistory: A European Perspective, edited by G. Bailey, pp. 11–22. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  59. Torrence, R. 1989. Retooling: Towards a Behavioral Theory of Stone Tools. In Time, Energy and Stone Tools, edited by R. Torrence, pp. 57–66. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  60. Webb, W. S. 1974. Indian Knoll. University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville.Google Scholar
  61. Wiant, M. D., and H. Hassen. 1985. The Role of Lithic Resource Availability and Accessibility in the Organization of Technology. In Lithic Resource Procurement: Proceedings from the Second Conference on Prehistoric Chert Exploitation, edited by S. Vehik, pp. 101-114. Center for Archaeological Investigations, SIU Carbondale, Occasional Paper 4.Google Scholar
  62. Wiant, M. D., and C. R. McGimsey (editors). 1986. Woodland Period Occupations of the Napoelon Hollow Site in the Lower Illinois Valley. Center for American Archeology, Research Series, vol. 6.Google Scholar
  63. Winters, H. D. 1969. The Riverton Culture, a Second Millenium Occupation in the Central Wabash Valley. Illinois State Museum, Reports of Investigations, no. 13.Google Scholar
  64. Wylie, H. G. 1975. Tool Microwear and Functional Types from Hogup Cave, Utah. Tebiwa 17: 1–31.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