Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface and Acknowledgments
- List of Contributors
- PART I INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND, AND REVIEW
- PART II PRODUCTION, REDUCTION, AND RETOUCH
- PART III NEW PERSPECTIVES ON LITHIC RAW MATERIAL AND TECHNOLOGY
- 9 Projectile Point Provisioning Strategies and Human Land Use
- 10 The Role of Lithic Raw Material Availability and Quality in Determining Tool Kit Size, Tool Function, and Degree of Retouch: A Case Study from Skink Rockshelter (46NI445), West Virginia
- 11 Raw Material and Retouched Flakes
- PART IV EVOLUTIONARY APPROACHES TO LITHIC TECHNOLOGIES
- Index
- References
9 - Projectile Point Provisioning Strategies and Human Land Use
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 August 2009
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- Preface and Acknowledgments
- List of Contributors
- PART I INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND, AND REVIEW
- PART II PRODUCTION, REDUCTION, AND RETOUCH
- PART III NEW PERSPECTIVES ON LITHIC RAW MATERIAL AND TECHNOLOGY
- 9 Projectile Point Provisioning Strategies and Human Land Use
- 10 The Role of Lithic Raw Material Availability and Quality in Determining Tool Kit Size, Tool Function, and Degree of Retouch: A Case Study from Skink Rockshelter (46NI445), West Virginia
- 11 Raw Material and Retouched Flakes
- PART IV EVOLUTIONARY APPROACHES TO LITHIC TECHNOLOGIES
- Index
- References
Summary
Abstract
The classification of projectile points in North America often emphasizes the shape and size of the haft element and not of the blade element. Emphasis on the haft element in classification is an advisable strategy because the blade element morphology and size tend to change during the use life of the specimen. This is exactly why the characteristics of projectile point blade elements such as retouch amount, size, and shape are useful for inferring characteristics of technological organization. Variability in retouch amount and location on projectile point blade elements is shown to be directly associated with prehistoric hunter–gatherer land use patterns.
INTRODUCTION
Hafted biface provisioning strategies (production, consumption, discard) have been shown to be directly related to artifact function and processing requirements for various tasks (Ahler 1971; Churchill 1993; Ellis 1997; Frison 1991; Hester and Green 1972; Odell and Cowan 1986; Tomka 2001; Truncer 1988). However, others have shown that hafted biface provisioning strategies are also directly related to human land-use practices and raw material availability (Andrefsky 1994, 2005; Daniel 2001; Flenniken and Wilke 1989; Greaves 1997; Hoffman 1985; Kelly 1988; Sassaman 1994; Tankersley 1994). This is particularly true of hunting and gathering populations, which often leave residential base camps for extended periods of time to acquire resources outside of a one- or two-day spatial range. Such tool makers and users must be equipped with an adequate supply of hafted bifaces while on the move or they must have the ability to resupply their tool kits while away.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Lithic TechnologyMeasures of Production, Use and Curation, pp. 195 - 215Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2008
References
1971. Projectile Point Form and Function at Roger's Shelter, Missouri. College of Arts and Science, University of Missouri – Columbia and the Missouri Archaeological Society, Columbia, Missouri.
1994. Raw Material Availability and the Organization of Technology. American Antiquity 59:21–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2005. Lithics: Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis. 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2006. Experimental and Archaeological Verification of an Index of Retouch for Hafted Bifaces. American Antiquity 71:743–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , and , eds. 2003. An Introduction to the Birch Creek Site: Six Seasons of Washington State University Archaeological Study. Center for Northwest Anthropology. Contributions in Cultural Resource Management. No. 69. Washington State University, Pullman.
. 1998. The McKellips Site: Contributions to Dalton Occupation, Technology, and Mobility from Eastern Oklahoma. Southeastern Archaeology 17:158–65.Google Scholar
1977. Forty-seven Trips. In Stone Tools as Cultural Markers, edited by , pp. 24–36. Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies, Canberra.Google Scholar
2003. End Scraper Reduction and Hunter–Gatherer Mobility. American Antiquity 68:141–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 2004. Deconstructing Lithic Technology: A Study from the Birch Creek Site (35ML181), Southeastern Oregon. M.A. thesis, Department of Anthropology, Washington State University, Pullman.
1993. Weapon Technology, Prey Size Selection, and Hunting Methods in Modern Hunter–Gatherers: Implications for Hunting in the Paleolithic and Mesolithic. In Hunting and Animal Exploitation in the Later Paleolithic and Mesolithic of Eurasia, edited by , , and , pp. 11–24. Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association, Number 4, Washington D.C.Google Scholar
. 2002. An Index of Invasiveness for the Measurement of Unifacial and Bifacial Retouch: A Theoretical, Experimental and Archaeological Verification. Journal of Archaeological Science 29:65–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1999. Newberry Crater: A Ten-Thousand Year Record of Human Occupation and Environmental Change in the Basin-Plateau Borderlands. University of Utah Anthropological Papers, No. 121. University of Utah, Salt Lake City.
. 2006. Grinding It Out: A Temporal Analysis of Ground Stone Assemblage Variation at the Birch Creek Site (35ML181) in Southeastern Oregon. M.A. Thesis, Department of Anthropology, Washington State University, Pullman.
2001. Stone Raw Material Availability and Early Archaic Settlement in the Southeastern United States. American Antiquity 66:237–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and . 1998. Quantifying Lithic Curation: An Experimental Test of Dibble and Pelcin's Original Flake-Tool Mass Predictor. Journal of Archaeological Science 25:603–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1997. Platform Variability and Flake Morphology: A Comparison of Experimental and Archeological Data and Implications for Interpreting Prehistoric Lithic Technological Strategies. Lithic Technology 22:150–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and . 1995. The Effect of Hammer Mass and Velocity on Flake Mass. Journal of Archaeological Science 22:429–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and . 2005. The Emerging Archaeology of Glaciers and Ice Patches: Examples from Alaska's Wrangell–St. Elias National Park and Preserve. American Antiquity 70:129–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1997. Factors Influencing the Use of Stone Projectile Tips: An Ethnographic Perspective. In Projectile Technology, edited by , pp. 37–78. Plenum Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1986. Prehistory of the Western Area. In Handbook of North American Indians. Volume 11. Great Basin, edited by (volume editor), pp. 135–48. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
, , , , , and . 2005. Defining and Measuring Reduction in Unifacial Stone Tools. Journal of Archaeological Science 32:1190–1206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and . 1989. Typology, Technology, and Chronology of Great Basin Dart Points. American Anthropologist 91:149–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1982. Settlement Patterns and Subsistence Systems in the Great Basin: The Ethnographic Record. In Man and Environment in the Great Basin, edited by and , pp. 121–38. Society for American Archaeology Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
. 1980. Raw Material Source Areas and “Curated” Tool Assemblages. American Antiquity 45:823–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1997. Hunting and Multifunctional Use of Bows and Arrows: Ethnoarchaeology of Technological Organization among Pume' Hunters of Venezuela. In Projectile Technology, edited by , pp. 287–320. Plenum Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1977. Micro-Analysis of Wear Patterns on Projectile Points and Knives from the Jurgens Site, Kersey, Colorado. Plains Anthropologist 22:107–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1999. Rocks, Range, Renfrew: Using Distance–Decay Effects to Study Late Pre-Mazama Period Obsidian Acquisition and Mobility in Oregon and Washington. Ph.D diss., Washington State University, Pullman.
, and . 1972. Functional Analysis of Large Bifaces from San Saba County, Texas. The Texas Journal of Science 24:343–50.Google Scholar
, and . 1987. Observations on Ancient Maya Core Technology at Colha, Belize. In The Organization of Core Technology, edited by and , pp. 239–58. Westview Press, Boulder, CO.Google Scholar
. 1985. Projectile Point Maintenance and Typology: Assessment with Factor Analysis and Canonical Correlation. In For Concordance in Archaeological Analysis: Bridging Data Structure, Quantitative Technique, and Theory, edited by , pp. 566–612. Westport Press, Kansas City.Google Scholar
. 1996. Microwear Analysis of Some Clovis and Experimental Chipped Stone Tools. In Stone Tools: Theoretical Insights into Human Prehistory, edited by , pp. 315–44. Plenum Press, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1964. Southern Paiute Ethnography. University of Utah Anthropological Papers 69. University of Utah, Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
, and . 1986. Southern Paiute. In Handbook of North American Indians. Volume 11. Great Basin. Edited by (volume editor), pp. 368–97. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
1990. A Geometric Index of Reduction for Unifacial Stone Tools. Journal of Archaeological Science 17:585–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
. 1997. End Scraper Morphology and Use-Life: An Approach for Studying Paleoindian Lithic Technology and Mobility. Lithic Technology 22:70–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , and . 2003. Deformation Modeling: A Methodology for the Analysis of Handaxe Morphology and Variability. In Multiple Approaches to the Study of Bifacial Technologies, edited by and , pp. 193–208. University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
, and . 1986. Experiments with Spears and Arrows on Animal Targets. Journal of Field Archaeology 13(2):195–212.Google Scholar
1994. Changing Strategies of Biface Production in the South Carolina Coastal Plain. In The Organization of North American Prehistoric Chipped Stone Tool Technologies, ed. , pp. 99–117. International Monographs in Prehistory: Archaeological Series 7. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
, , , and . 2000. Flake Size from Platform Attributes: Predictive and Empirical Approaches. Journal of Archaeological Science 27:877–94.CrossRef
2000. The Effects of Stone and Technology on Fluted-Point Morphometry. American Antiquity 59:498–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2001. The Effect of Processing Requirements on Reduction Strategies and Tool Form: A New Perspective. In Lithic Debitage: Context, Form, Meaning. edited by , pp. 207–24. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
1988. Perkiomen Points: A Functional Analysis of a Terminal Archaic Point Type in the Middle Atlantic Region. Journal of Middle Atlantic Archaeology 4:61–70.Google Scholar
1990. Perkiomen Points: A Study in Variability. In Experiments and Observations on the Terminal Archaic of the Middle Atlantic Region, edited by , pp. 1–62. Archaeological Services, Bethlehem, CT.Google Scholar
. 2004. Obsidian Projectile Points and Human Mobility around the Birch Creek Site (35ML181), Southeastern Oregon. M.A. thesis, Department of Anthropology, Washington State University, Pullman.
- 6
- Cited by