Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Analysis of Stone Tool Procurement, Production, and Maintenance

  • Published:
Journal of Archaeological Research Aims and scope

Abstract

Researchers who analyze stone tools and their production debris have made significant progress in understanding the relationship between stone tools and human organizational strategies. Stone tools are understood to be morphologically dynamic throughout their use-lives; the ever-changing morphology of stone tools is intimately associated with the needs of tool users. It also has become apparent to researchers that interpretations of lithic analysis are more productive when the unique contexts and situations for which lithic artifacts were made, used, modified, and ultimately discarded are considered. This article reviews the recent literature on stone tool production with an emphasis on raw material procurement, manufacturing techniques, and tool maintenance processes as they relate to adaptive strategies of toolmakers and users.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References cited

  • Ahler, S. A. (1989). Mass analysis of flaking debris: Studying the forest rather than the trees. In Henry, D. O., and Odell, G. H. (eds.), Alternative Approaches to Lithic Analysis, Archeological Papers No. 1, American Anthropological Association, Washington, DC, pp. 85–118.

  • Ahler, S. A., and Christensen, R. C. (1983). A Pilot Study of Knife River Flint Procurement and Reduction as Site 32DU508, A Quarry and Workshop Location in Dunn County, North Dakota, Department of Anthropology and Archaeology, University of North Dakota, Bismarck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Akridge, D. G., and Benoit, P. H. (2001). Luminescence properties of chert and some archaeological applications. Journal of Archaeological Science 28: 143–151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amick, D. S. (1999). Raw material variation in Folsom stone tool assemblages and the division of labor in hunter-gatherer societies. In Amick, D. S. (ed.), Folsom Lithic Technology, International Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor, MI, pp. 169–187.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amick, D. S., and Mauldin, R. P. (eds.) (1989). Experiments in Lithic Technology, BAR International Series No. 528, Archaeopress, Oxford.

  • Amick, D. S., Mauldin, R. P., and Tomka, S. A. (1988). An evaluation of debitage produced by experimental bifacial core reduction of a Georgetown chert nodule. Lithic Technology 17: 26–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ammerman, A. J., and Andrefsky Jr., W. (1982). Reduction sequences and the exchange of obsidian in Neolithic Calabria. In Ericson, J., and Earle, T. (eds.), Contexts for Prehistoric Exchange, Academic Press, New York, pp. 149–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrefsky Jr., W. (1986). A consideration of blade and flake curvature. Lithic Technology 15: 48–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrefsky Jr., W. (1991). Inferring trends in prehistoric settlement behavior from lithic production technology in the southern Plains. North American Archaeologist 12: 129–144.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrefsky Jr., W. (1994a). The geological occurrence of lithic material and stone tool production strategies. Geoarchaeology: An International Journal 9: 345–362.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrefsky Jr., W. (1994b). Raw material availability and the organization of technology. American Antiquity 59: 21–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrefsky Jr., W. (1995). Cascade phase lithic technology: An example for the lower Snake River. North American Archaeologist 16: 95–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrefsky Jr., W. (1997). Thoughts on stone tool shape and inferred function. Journal of Middle Atlantic Archaeology 13: 125–144.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrefsky Jr., W. (ed.) (2001a). Lithic Debitage: Context, Form, Meaning, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrefsky Jr., W. (2001b). Emerging directions in debitage analysis. In Andrefsky Jr., W. (ed.), Lithic Debitage: Context, Form, Meaning, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrefsky Jr., W. (2004). Partitioning the aggregate: Mass analysis and debitage assemblages. In Larson, M. L., and Hall, C. T. (eds.), Aggregate Analysis in Chipped Stone, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 201–210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrefsky Jr., W. (2005). Lithics: Macroscopic Approaches to Analysis, 2nd. ed., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrefsky Jr., W. (2006). Experimental and archaeological verification of an index of retouch for hafted bifaces. American Antiquity 71: 743–759.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrefsky Jr., W. (2007a). The application and misapplication of mass analysis in lithic debitage studies. Journal of Archaeological Science 34: 392–402.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrefsky Jr., W. (2007b). Cobble tool or cobble core: Exploring alternative typologies. In McPherron, S. P. (ed.), Tools versus Cores: Alternative Approaches to Stone Tool Analysis, Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Cambridge, pp. 253–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrefsky Jr., W. (ed.) (2008a). Lithic Technology: Measures of Production, Use and Curation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrefsky Jr., W. (2008b). An introduction to lithic technology and stone tool life history. In Andrefsky Jr., W. (ed.), Lithic Technology: Measures of Production, Use and Curation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 1–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrefsky Jr., W. (2008c). Projectile point provisioning strategies and human land-use. In Andrefsky Jr., W. (ed.), Lithic Technology: Measures of Production, Use and Curation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 195–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ashton, N., and White, M. (2003). Bifaces and raw materials: Flexible flaking in the British Early Paleolithic. In Soressi, M., and Dibble, H. L. (eds.), Multiple Approaches to the Study of Bifacial Technologies, University Museum Monograph 115, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, pp. 109–124.

  • Audouze, F. (1999). New advances in French prehistory. Antiquity 73: 167–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baales, M. (2001). From lithics to spatial and social organization: Interpreting the lithic distribution and raw material composition at the final Paleolithic site of Kettig (Central Rhineland, Germany). Journal of Archaeological Science 28: 127–141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakewell, E. F. (2003). Evidence for thermal preconditioning in patinated basaltic chipped stone artifacts. Journal of Northwest Anthropology 37: 151–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bamforth, D. B. (1986). Technological efficiency and tool curation. American Antiquity 51: 38–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bamforth, D. B. (1990). Settlement, raw material, and lithic procurement in the central Mojave Desert. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 9: 70–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bamforth, D. B. (1991). Technological organization and hunter–gatherer land use: A California example. American Antiquity 56: 216–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bamforth, D. B. (2002). High-tech foragers? Folsom and later Paleoindian technology on the Great Plains. Journal of World Prehistory 16: 55–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bamforth, D. B. (2003). Rethinking the role of bifacial technology in Paleoindian adaptations on the Great Plains. In Soressi, M., and Dibble, H. L. (eds.), Multiple Approaches to the Study of Bifacial Technologies, University Museum Monograph 115, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, pp. 209–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bamforth, D. B., and Becker, M. S. (2000). Core/biface ratios, mobility, refitting, and artifact use-lives: A Paleoindian example. Plains Anthropologist 45: 273–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banks, L. D. (1990). From Mountain Peaks to Alligator Stomachs: A Review of Lithic Sources in theTrans-Mississippi South, the Southern Plains, and Adjacent Southwest, Oklahoma Anthropological Society, Norman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bar-Yosef, O. (1991). Raw material exploitation in the Levantine Epi-Paleolithic. In Montet-White, A., and Holen, S. (eds.), Raw Material Economies Among Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherers, Publications in Anthropology 19, University of Kansas, Lawrence, pp. 235–250.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barton, C. M. (1988). Lithic Variability and Middle Paleolithic Behavior, BAR International Series No. 408, Archaeopress, Oxford.

  • Baumler, M. F., and Davis, L. B. (2000). Upon closer examination: Paleoindian behavioral inferences from a Folsom feature lithic assemblage at the Indian Creek occupation site, west-central Montana Rockies. Archaeology in Montana 41: 17–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumler, M. F., and Davis, L. B. (2004). The role of small-sized debitage in aggregate lithic analysis. In Larson, M. L., and Hall, C. T. (eds.), Aggregate Analysis in Chipped Stone, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 45–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumler, M. F., and Downum, C. E. (1989). Between micro and macro: A study in the interpretation of small-sized lithic debitage. In Amick, D. S., and Mauldin, R. P. (eds.), Experiments in Lithic Technology, BAR International Series No. 528, Archaeopress, Oxford, pp. 101–116.

  • Bayman, J. M., and Shackley, S. M. (1999). Dynamics of Hohokam obsidian circulation in the North American Southwest. Antiquity 73: 836–845.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, C., Taylor, A. K., Jones, G. T., Fadem, C. M., Cook, C. R., and Millward, S. A. (2002). Rocks are heavy: Transport costs and Paleoarchaic quarry behavior in the Great Basin. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 21: 481–507.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bettinger, R. L. (1987). Archaeological approaches to hunter-gatherers. Annual Review of Anthropology 16: 121–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bettinger, R. L., Winterhalder, B., and McElreath, R. (2006). A simple model of technological intensification. Journal of Archaeological Science 33: 538–545.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Binford, L. R. (1977). Forty-seven trips. In Wright, R. S. (ed.), Stone Tools as Cultural Markers, Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies, Canberra, pp. 24–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Binford, L. R. (1979). Organization and formation processes: Looking at curated technologies. Journal of Anthropological Research 35: 255–273.

    Google Scholar 

  • Binford, L. R. (1980). Willow smoke and dogs’ tails: Hunter-gatherer settlement systems and archaeological site formation. American Antiquity 45: 4–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Binford, L. R. (1985). “Brand X” versus the recommended product. American Antiquity 50: 580–590.

    Google Scholar 

  • Binford, L. R. (1986). An Alyawara day: Making men’s knives and beyond. American Antiquity 51: 547–562.

    Google Scholar 

  • Binford, L. R., and Stone, N. M. (1985). “Righteous rocks” and Richard Gould: Some observations on misguided “debate.” American Antiquity 50: 151–153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bisson, M. S. (2000). Nineteenth century tools for twenty-first century archaeology? Why the Middle Paleolithic typology of Francois Bordes must be replaced. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 7: 1–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blades, B. S. (2003). End scraper reduction and hunter-gatherer mobility. American Antiquity 68: 141–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bleed, P. (1986). The optimal design of hunting weapons: Maintainability or reliability. American Antiquity 51: 737–747.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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: 101–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bleed, P. (2002a). Obviously sequential, but continuous or staged? Refits and cognition in three Late Paleolithic assemblages from Japan. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 21: 329–343.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bleed, P. (2002b). Cheap, regular, and reliable: Implications of design variation in Late Pleistocene Japanese microblade technology. In Elston, R. G., and Kuhn, S. L. (eds.), Thinking Small: Global Perspectives on Microlithization, Archeological Papers No. 12, American Anthropological Association, Arlington, VA, pp. 95–102.

  • Bleed, P. (2004). Refitting as aggregate analysis. In Larson, M. L., and Hall, C. T. (eds.), Aggregate Analysis in Chipped Stone, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 184–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloomer, W.W., and Ingbar, E. E. (1992). Debitage analysis. In Elston, R. G., and Raven, C. (eds.), Archaeological Investigations at Tosawihi, A Great Basin Quarry, Part I: The Periphery, U.S. Bureau of Land Management, Elko, NV, pp. 229–270.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boeda, E. (1995). Levallois: A volumetric construction, methods, a technique. In Dibble, H. L., and Bar-Yosef, O. (eds.), The Definition and Interpretation of Levallois Technology, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, pp. 41–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradbury, A. P., and Carr, P. J. (1999). Examining stage and continuum models of flake debris analysis: An experimental approach. Journal of Archaeological Science 26: 105–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradbury, A. P., and Franklin, J. D. (2000). Material variability, package size and mass analysis. Lithic Technology 25: 42–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradbury, A. P., Carr, P. J., and Cooper, D. R. (2008). Raw material and retouched flakes. In Andrefsky Jr., W. (ed.), Lithic Technology: Measures of Production, Use, and Curation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 233–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradley, B. A. (1975). Lithic reduction sequences: A glossary and discussion. In Swanson, E. (ed.), Lithic Technology: Making and Using Stone Tools, Mouton, The Hague, pp. 5-14.

  • Brantingham, P. J. (2003). A neutral model of stone raw material procurement. American Antiquity 68: 487–509.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brantingham, P. J., and Kuhn, S. L. (2001). Constraints on Levallois core technology: A mathematical model. Journal of Archaeological Science 28: 747–761.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brantingham, P. J., Olsen, J. W., Rech, J. A., and Krivoshapkin, A. I. (2000). Raw material quality and prepared core technologies in northeastern Asia. Journal of Archaeological Science 27: 255–271.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braun, D. R. (2005). Examining flake production strategies: Examples from the Middle Paleolithic of southwest Asia. Lithic Technology 30: 107–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callahan, E. (1979). The basics of biface knapping in the eastern fluted point tradition: A manual for flintknappers and lithic analysts. Archaeology of Eastern North America 7(1): 1–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carr, P. J. (ed.) (1994). The Organization of North American Prehistoric Chipped Stone Tool Technologies, International Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor, MI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carr, P. J., and Bradbury, A. P. (2001). Flake debris analysis, levels of production, and the organization of technology. In Andrefsky Jr., W. (ed.), Lithic Debitage: Context, Form, Meaning, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 126–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carr, P. J., and Bradbury, A. P. (2004) Exploring mass analysis, screens, and attributes. In Hall, C. T., and Larson, M. L. (eds.), Aggregate Analysis in Chipped Stone, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 21–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chatters, J. C. (1987). Hunter-gatherer adaptations and assemblage structure. Journal of Anthropological Research 6: 336–375.

    Google Scholar 

  • Church, T. (1990). An investigation into prehistoric lithic procurement in the Bearlodge Mountains, Wyoming, unpublished M.A. thesis, Department of Anthropology, University of Montana, Missoula.

  • Church, T. (1994). Lithic Resource Studies: A Sourcebook for Archaeologists, Lithic Technology, Special Publication #3, Tulsa, OK.

  • Clark, J. E. (1991). Flintknapping and debitage disposal among the Lacandon Maya of Chiapas, Mexico. In Staski, E., and Sutro, L. D. (eds.), The Ethnoarchaeology of Refuse Disposal, Anthropological Research Papers No. 42, Arizona State University, Tempe, pp. 63–78.

  • Clarkson, C. (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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarkson, C., and Lamb, L. (eds.) (2006). Lithics “Down Under”: Australian Approaches to Lithic Reduction, Use, and Classification, BAR International Series No. 1408, Archaeopress, Oxford.

  • Close, A. E. (1991). On the validity of Middle Paleolithic tool types: A test case for the eastern Sahara. Journal of Field Archaeology 18: 256–264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Close, A. E. (1996). Carry that weight: The use and transportation of stone tools. Current Anthropology 37: 545–553.

    Google Scholar 

  • Close, A. E. (2000). Reconstructing movement in prehistory. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 7: 49–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cochrane, G. W. (2003). On the measurement and analysis of platform angles. Lithic Technology 28: 13–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, M. B. (1975). Lithic technology as a means of processual inference. In Swanson, E. (ed.), Lithic Technology: Making and Using Stone Tools, Mouton, The Hague, pp. 15–34.

  • Cooper, J., and Qiu, F. (2006). Expediting and standardizing stone artifact refitting using a computerized suitability model. Journal of Archaeological Science 33: 987–998.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crabtree, D. E. (1972). An Introduction to Flintworking, Occasional Papers No. 28, Idaho State Museum, Pocatello.

  • Cziesla, E. (1990). On refitting stone artefacts. In Cziesla, E., Eichoff, S., Arts, N., and Winter, D. (eds.), The Big Puzzle: International Symposium on Refitting Stone Artefacts, Studies in Modern Archaeology 1, Holos, Bonn, pp. 9–44.

  • Davis, Z. J., and Shea, J. J. (1998). Quantifying lithic curation: An experimental test of Dibble and Pelcin’s original flake-tool mass predictor. Journal of Archaeological Science 25: 603–610.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dibble, H. L. (1987). The interpretation of Middle Paleolithic scraper morphology. American Antiquity 52: 109–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dibble, H. L. (1991). Local raw material exploitation and its effects on Lower and Middle Paleolithic assemblage variability. In Montet-White, A., and Holen, S. (eds.), Raw Material Economies Among Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherers, Publications in Anthropology 19, University of Kansas, Lawrence, pp. 33–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dibble, H. L. (1995). Middle Paleolithic scraper reduction: Background, clarification, and review of the evidence to date. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 2: 299–368.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dibble, H. L. (1997). Platform variability and flake morphology: A comparison of experimental and archeological data and implications for interpreting prehistoric lithic technological strategies. Lithic Technology 22: 150–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dibble, H. L. (1998). Comments on “quantifying lithic curation: An experimental test of Dibble and Pelcin’s original flake-tool mass predictor” (Z. J. Davis and J. J. Shea.) Journal of Archaeological Science 25: 611–613.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dibble, H. L., and Pelcin, A. (1995). The effect of hammer mass and velocity on flake mass. Journal of Archaeological Science 22: 429–239.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dietrich, D., and Grant, P. R. (1985). Cathodoluminescence petrography of syntectonic quartz fibres. Journal of Structural Geology 7: 541–553.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eerkens, J. W., and Glascock, M. D. (2000). Northern Fish Lake Valley and the volcanic tablelands of Owens Valley: Description and characterization of two sources of obsidian in the western Great Basin. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 22: 331–342.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eerkens, J. W., and Rosenthal, J. S. (2004). Are obsidian subsources meaningful units of analysis? Temporal and spatial patterning of subsources in the Coso Volcanic Field, southeastern California. Journal of Archaeological Science 31: 21–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eerkens, J. W., Ferguson, J. R., Glascock, M. D., Skinner, C. E., and Waechter, S. A. (2007). Reduction strategies and geochemical characterization of lithic assemblages: A comparison of three case studies from western North America. American Antiquity 72: 585–597.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elston, R. G. (1992). The lithic terrane of Tosawihi. In Elston, R. G., and Ravens, C. (eds.), Archaeological Investigations at Tosawihi, A Great Basin Quarry, Part 1: The Periphery, U.S. Bureau of Land Management, Elko, NV, pp. 71–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elston, R. G., and Brantingham, P. J. (2002). Microlithic technology in northern Asia: A risk-minimizing strategy of the Late Paleolithic and Early Holocene. In Elston, R. G., and Kuhn, S. L. (eds.), Thinking Small: Global Perspectives on Microlithization, Archeological Papers No.12, American Anthropological Association, Arlington, VA, pp. 103–116.

  • Elston, R. G., and Kuhn, S. L. (eds.), (2002). Thinking Small: Global Perspectives on Microlithization, Archeological Papers No. 12, American Anthropological Association, Arlington, VA.

  • Eren, M., and Prendergast, M. E. (2008). Comparing and synthesizing unifacial stone tool reduction indices. In Andrefsky Jr., W. (ed.), Lithic Technology: Measures of Production, Use, and Curation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 49–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eren, M., Dominguez-Rorigo, I. M., Kuhn, S. L., Adler, D. S., Le, I., and Bar-Yosef, O. (2005). Defining and measuring reduction in unifacial stone tools. Journal of Archaeological Science 32: 1190–1206.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson, J. R., and Skinner, C. R. (2005). Bone Cave: A severely disturbed cave site in central Oregon. North American Archaeologist 26: 221–244.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitzhugh, B. (2001). Risk and invention in human technological evolution. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 20: 125–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fladmark, K. R. (1982). Microdebitage analysis: Initial considerations. Journal of Archaeological Science 9: 205–220.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flenniken, J. J. (1985). Stone tool reduction techniques as cultural markers. In Plew, M. G., Woods, J. C., and Pavesic, M. G. (eds.), Stone Tool Analysis: Essays in Honor of Don E. Crabtree, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, pp. 265–276.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flenniken, J. J., and Raymond, A. W. (1986). Morphological projectile point typology: Replication experimentation and technological analysis. American Antiquity 51: 603–614.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flenniken, J. J., and Wilke, P. J. (1989). Typology, technology, and chronology of Great Basin dart points. American Anthropologist 91: 149–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foradas, J. G. (2003). Chemical sourcing of Hopewell bladelets: Implications for building a chert database for Ohio. In Kardulias, P. N., and Yerkes, R. W. (eds.), Written in Stone: The Multiple Dimensions of Lithic Analysis, Lexington Books, Lanham, MD, pp. 87–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franklin, J. D., and Simek, J. F. (2001). Core refitting and the accuracy of techniques for aggregate lithic analysis. Paper presented at the 66th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, New Orleans, LA.

  • Frison, G. C. (1991). Prehistoric Hunters of the High Plains, 2nd ed., Academic Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geneste, J. M. (1991). Systemes techniques de production lithique: variations techno-economiques dans les processus de realisatoni des Outillages Paleolithiques. Techniques et Culture 17–18: 1–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilreath, A. (1984). Stages of bifacial manufacture: Learning from experiments. Paper presented at the 49th Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, Portland, OR.

  • Glascock, M. D., Neff, H., Stryker, K. S., and Johnson, T. N. (1994). Sourcing of archaeological obsidian by abbreviated NAA procedure. Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry 180: 29–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodale, N. B., Kuijt, I., MacFarlan, S., Osterhoudt, C., and Finlayson, B. (2008). Lithic core reduction techniques: A model for predicting expected diversity. In Andrefsky Jr., W. (ed.), Lithic Technology: Measures of Production, Use and Curation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 317–336.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodyear, A. C. (1974). The Brand Site: A Techno-Functional Study of a Dalton Site in Northeast Arkansas, Research Series No. 7, Arkansas Archaeological Survey Publications on Archaeology, Fayetteville.

  • Goodyear, A. C. (1979). A Hypothesis for the Use of Cryptocrystalline Raw Material among Paleo-Indian Groups of North America, Research Manuscript No. 156, Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology, University of South Carolina, Columbia.

  • Goodyear, A. C. (1993). Tool kit entropy and bipolar reduction: A study of interassemblage lithic variability among Paleo-Indian sites in the northeastern United States. North American Archaeologist 14: 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould, R. A. (1980). Raw material source areas and “curated” tool assemblages. American Antiquity 45: 823–833.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould, R. A. (1985). The empiricist strikes back: A reply to Binford. American Antiquity 50: 638–644.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould, R. A., and Saggers, S. (1985). Lithic procurement in central Australia: A closer look at Binford’s idea of embeddedness in archaeology. American Antiquity 50: 117–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gramly, R. M. (1980). Raw material source areas and “curated” tool assemblages. American Antiquity 45: 823–833.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greiser, S. T., and Sheets, P. D. (1979). Raw materials as a functional variable in use-wear studies. In Hayen, B. (ed.), Lithic Wear Analysis, Academic Press, New York, pp. 289–296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grimaldi, S. (1998). Methodological problems in the reconstruction of chaînes opératoire in Lower-Middle Paleolithic industries. In Milliken, S., and Peresani, M. (eds.), Lithic Technology: From Raw Material Procurement to Tool Production, Dipartamento di Scienze Geologiche e Paleontologiche, Universita Degli Studi de Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy, pp. 19–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grimes, J. R., and Grimes, B. G. (1985). Flakeshavers: Morphometric, functional and life-cycle analysis of a Paleoindian unifacial tool class. Archaeology of Eastern North America 13: 35–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grimm L. T., and Koetje, T. A. (1992). Spatial patterns in the Upper Perigordian at Solvieux: Implications for activity reconstruction. In Hofman, J., and Enloe, J. (eds.), Piecing Together the Past: Applications of Refitting Studies in Archaeology, BAR International Series No. 678, Archaeopress, Oxford, pp. 264–286.

  • Hall, C. T. (2004). Evaluating prehistoric hunter-gatherer mobility, land use, and technological organization strategies. In Hall, C. T., and Larson, M. L. (eds.), Aggregate Analysis in Chipped Stone, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 139–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardy, B. L., Kaye, M., Marks, A. E., and Monigal, K. (2001). Stone tool function at the Palaeolithic sites of Starosele and Buran Kaya III, Crimea: Behavioral implications. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 98: 10972–10977.

  • Hayden, B. (1993). The cultural capacities of Neanderthals: A review and re-evaluation. Journal of Human Evolution 24: 113–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henry, D. O., Haynes, C. V., and Bradley, B. (1976). Quantitative variations in flaked stone debitage. Plains Anthropologist 21: 57–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hess, S. C. (1996). Chert provenance analysis at the Mack Canyon Site, Sherman County, Oregon: An evaluative study. Geoarchaeology 11: 51–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hiscock, P. (1996). Transformations of Upper Paleolithic implements in the Dabba industry from Haua Fteah (Libya). Antiquity 70: 657–664.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hiscock, P., and Attenbrow, V. (2003). Early Australian implement variation: A reduction model. Journal of Archaeological Science 30: 239–249.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hiscock, P., and Attenbrow, V. (2006). Reduction continuums and tool use. In Clarkson, C., and Lamb, L. (eds.), Lithics “Down Under”: Australian Approaches to Lithic Reduction, Use, and Classification, BAR International Series No. 1408, Archaeopress, Oxford, pp. 122–136.

  • Hiscock, P., and Clarkson, C. (2005). Experimental evaluation of Kuhn’s geometric index of reduction and the flat-flake problem. Journal of Archaeological Science 32: 1015–1022.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hiscock, P., and Clarkson, C. (2007). Retouched notches at Combe Grenal (France) and the reduction hypothesis. American Antiquity 72: 176–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hiscock, P., and Clarkson, C. (2008). The construction of morphological diversity: A study of Mousterian implement retouching at Combe Grenal. In Andrefsky Jr., W. (ed.), Lithic Technology: Measures of Production, Use and Curation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 106–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoard, R. J., Holen, R. A., Glascock, M. D., Neff, H., and Elam, J. M. (1992). Neutron activation analysis of stone from the Chadron Formation and a Clovis site on the Great Plains. Journal of Archaeological Science 19: 655–665.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoard, R. J., Bozell, J. R., Holen, S. R., Glascock, M. D., Neff, H., and Elam, J. M. (1993). Source determination of White River group silicates from two archaeological sites in the Great Plains. American Antiquity 58: 698–710.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, C. M. (1985). Projectile point maintenance and typology: Assessment with factor analysis and canonical correlation. In Carr, C. (ed.), For Concordance in Archaeological Analysis: Bridging Data Structure, Quantitative Technique, and Theory, Westport Press, Kansas City, MO, pp. 566–612.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofman, J. L. (1981). The refitting of chipped-stone artifacts as an analytical and interpretive tool. Current Anthropology 22: 35–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofman, J. L. (1999). Folsom fragments, site types, and assemblage formation. In Amick, D. S. (ed.), Folsom Lithic Technology, International Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor, MI, pp. 122–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofman, J. L. (2003). Tethered to stone or freedom to move: Folsom biface technology in regional perspective. In Soressi, M., and Dibble, H. L. (eds.), Multiple Approaches to the Study of Bifacial Technologies, University Museum Monograph 115, University of Pennsylvania Museum, Philadelphia, pp. 229–250.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofman, J. L., Amick, D. S., and Rose, R. O. (1991). Shifting sands: A Folsom-Midland assemblage from a campsite in western Texas. Plains Anthropologist 35(129): 221–253.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofman, J. L., and Enloe, J. G. (eds.) (1992). Piecing Together the Past: Applications of Refitting Studies in Archaeology, BAR International Series No. 578, Archaeopress, Oxford.

  • Hofman, J. L., Todd, L., and Collins, M. B. (1991). Identification of central Texas Edwards chert at the Folsom and Lindenmeier sites. Plains Anthropologist 36: 297–308.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holdaway, S., and Stern, N. (2004). A Record in Stone: The Study of Australia’s Flaked Stone Artifacts, Aboriginal Studies Press, Melbourne.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holdaway, S., McPherron, S. P., and Roth, B. (1996). Notched tool reuse and raw material availability in French Middle Paleolithic sites. American Antiquity 61: 377–387.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holmes, W. H. (1894). Natural history of flaked stone implements. In Wake, C. S. (ed.), Memoirs of the International Congress of Anthropology, Schulte, Chicago, pp. 120–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, R. E. (1998). On reliability, validity, and scale in obsidian sourcing research. In Ramenofsky, A. F., and Steffen, A. (eds.), Unit Issues in Archaeology, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 103–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hull, K. L. (1987). Identification of cultural site formation processes through microdebitage analysis. American Antiquity 52: 772–783.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ingbar, E. E., and Hofman, J. L. (1999). Folsom fluting fallacies. In Amick, D. S. (ed.), Folsom Lithic Technology, International Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor, MI, pp. 98–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ingbar, E. E., Larson, M. L., and Bradley, B. (1989). A nontypological approach to debitage analysis. In Amick, D. S., and Mauldin, R. P. (eds.), Experiments in Lithic Technology, BAR International Series No. 528, Archaeopress, Oxford, pp. 117–136.

  • Inizan, M. L., Roche, H., and Tixier, J. (1992). Technology of Knapped Stone, Cercle de Recherches et d’Etudes Préhistoriques, Meudon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jefferies, R. W. (1990). A technological and functional analysis of Middle Archaic hafted endscrapers from the Black Earth site, Saline County, Illinois. Midcontinental Journal of Archaeology 15: 3–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jelinek, A. J. (1991). Observations on reduction patterns and raw materials in some Middle Paleolithic industries in the Perigord. In Montet-White, A., and Holen, S. (eds.), Raw Material Economies Among Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherers, Publications in Anthropology 19, University of Kansas, Lawrence, pp. 7–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeske, R. J. (1989). Economies in raw material use by prehistoric hunter-gatherers. In Torrence, R. (ed.), Time, Energy, and Stone Tools, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 34–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, J. K. (1989). The utility of production trajectory modeling as a framework for regional analysis. In Henry, D. O., and Odell, G. H. (eds.), Alternative Approaches to Lithic Analysis, Archeological Papers No. 1, American Anthropological Association, Washington, DC, pp. 119–138.

  • Jodry, M. A. (1992). Fitting together Folsom: Refitting lithics and site formation processes at Stewart’s Cattle Guard site. In Hofman, J., and Enloe, J. (eds.), Piecing Together the Past: Applications of Refitting Studies in Archaeology, BAR International Series No. 678, Arhaeopress, Oxford, pp. 179–209.

  • Kalin, J. (1981). Stem point manufacture and debitage recovery. Archaeology of Eastern North America 9: 134–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kardulias, N. P., and Yerkes, R. W. (2003). Written in Stone: The Multiple Dimensions of Lithic Analysis, Lexington Books, Lanham, MD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, R. L. (1983). Hunter-gatherer mobility strategies. Journal of Anthropological Research 39: 277–306.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, R. L. (1985). Hunter-Gatherer Mobility and Sedentism: A Great Basin Study, Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

  • Kelly, R. L. (1988). The three sides of a biface. American Antiquity 53: 717–734.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, R. L., and Todd, L. C. (1988). Coming into the country: Early Paleoindian hunting and mobility. American Antiquity 53: 231–244.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knecht, H. (1997). Projectile Technology, Plenum Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knell, E. J. (2004). Coarse-scale chipped stone aggregates and technological organization strategies at Hell Gap Locality V Cody complex component, Wyoming. In Hall, C. T., and Larson, M. L. (eds.), Aggregate Analysis in Chipped Stone, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 156–183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knell, E. J. (2007). The Organization of Late Paleoindian Cody Complex Land-Use on the North American Great Plains, Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Washington State University, Pullman.

  • Koldehoff, B. (1987). The Cahokia flake tool industry: Socio–economic implications for late prehistory in the central Mississippi Valley. In Johnson, J. K., and Morrow, C. A. (eds.), The Organization of Core Technology, Westview Press, Boulder, CO, pp. 151–186.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kooyman, B. P. (2000). Understanding Stone Tools and Archaeological Sites, University of Calgary Press, Calgary, Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, S. L. (1990). A geometric index of reduction for unifacial stone tools. Journal of Archaeological Science 17: 585–593.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, S. L. (1991). “Unpacking” reduction: Lithic raw material economy in the Mousterian of west–central Italy. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 10: 76–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, S. L. (1992). Blank form and reduction as determinants of Mousterian scraper morphology. American Antiquity 57: 115–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, S. L. (1995). Mousterian Lithic Technology, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuijt, I., Prentiss, W. C., and Pokotylo, D. J. (1995). Bipolar reduction: An experimental study of debitage variability. Lithic Technology 20: 116–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larson, M. L. (1990). Early Plains Archaic Technological Organization: The Laddie Creek Example, Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Santa Barbara.

  • Larson, M. L. (1994). Toward a holistic analysis of chipped stone assemblages. In Carr, P. J., (ed.), The Organization of North American Stone Tool Technology, International Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor, MI, pp. 57–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larson, M. L. (2004). Chipped stone aggregate analysis in archaeology. In Hall, C. T., and Larson, M. L. (eds.), Aggregate Analysis in Chipped Stone, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 3–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larson, M. L., and Finley, J. B. (2004). Seeing the forest but missing the trees: Production sequences and multiple linear regression. In Hall, C. T., and Larson, M. L. (eds.), Aggregate Analysis in Chipped Stone, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 95–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larson, M. L., and Ingbar, E. E. (1992). Perspectives on refitting: Critique and a complementary approach. In Hofman, J. L., and Enloe, J. G. (eds.), Piecing Together the Past: Applications of Refitting Studies in Archaeology, BAR International Series No. 578, Archaeopress, Oxford, pp. 151–162.

  • Larson, M. L., and Kornfeld, M. (1997). Chipped stone nodules: Theory, method, and examples. Lithic Technology 22: 4–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, K. W, and Lee, Y. J. (2006). Organization of lithic technology and raw material availability: An example with Suyanggae and Changnae sites, Korea. Paper presented at the International Paleoanthropological Symposium on Salawusu, Ordors-Inner Mongolia, China.

  • Leroi-Gourhan, A. (1964). Le geste et la parole I, technique et langage, Albin Michel, Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luedtke, B. E. (1992). An Archaeologist’s Guide to Chert and Flint, Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lurie, R. (1989). Lithic technology and mobility strategies: The Koster site Middle Archaic. In Torrence, R. (ed.), Time, Energy, and Stone Tools, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 46–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyons, W. H., Glascock, M. D., and Mehringer, P. J. (2003). Silica from sources to sites: Ultraviolet fluorescence and trace elements identify cherts from Lost Dunes, southeastern Oregon, USA. Journal of Archaeological Science 30: 1139–1159.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacDonald, D. H. (2008). 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. In Andrefsky Jr., W. (ed.), Lithic Technology: Measures of Production, Use and Curation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 216–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Magne, M. P. (1985). Lithics and Livelihood: Stone Tool Technologies of Central and Southern Interior British Columbia, National Museum of Man Mercury Series, Ottawa.

  • Magne, M. P., and Pokotylo, D. (1981). A pilot study in bifacial lithic reduction sequences. Lithic Technology 10: 34–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malyk-Selivanova, N., Ashley, G. M., Gal, R., Glascock, M. D., and Neff, H. (1998). Geological-geochemical approach to sourcing of prehistoric chert artifacts, northwestern Alaska. Geoarchaeology 13: 673–708.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, D. J. (1988). Cathodoluminescence of Geological Materials, Unwin Hyman, Boston, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCall, G. S. (2007). Behavioral ecological models of lithic technological change during the later Middle Stone Age of South Africa. Journal of Archaeological Science 34: 1738–1751.

    Google Scholar 

  • McPherron, S. P. (2000). Handaxes as a measure of the mental capabilities of early hominids. Journal of Archaeological Science 27: 655–663.

    Google Scholar 

  • McPherron, S. P. (2003). Technological and typological variability in the bifaces from Tabun Cave, Israel. In Soressi, M., and Dibble, H. L. (eds.), Multiple Approaches to the Study of Bifacial Technologies, University Museum Monograph 115, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, pp. 55–76.

  • McPherron, S. P. (ed.) (2007). Tools versus Cores: Alternative Approaches to Stone Tool Analysis, Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milliken, S., and Peresani, M. (eds.) (1998). Lithic Technology: From Raw Material Procurement to Tool Production, Dipartimento di Scienze Geologiche e Paleontologiche, Universita Degli Studi de Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, M. W. (2002). Australian aboriginal blade production methods on the Georgina River, Camooweal, Queensland. Lithic Technology 28: 35–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrow, C. A., and Jefferies, R. W. (1989). Trade or embedded procurement? A test case from southern Illinois. In Torrence, R. (ed.), Time, Energy and Stone Tools, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 27–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrow, J. (1997). End scraper morphology and use-life: An approach for studying Paleoindian lithic technology and mobility. Lithic Technology 22: 70–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrow, T. M. (1996). Lithic refitting and archaeological site formation processes: A case study from the twin ditch site, Greene County, Illinois. In Odell, G. H. (ed.), Stone Tools: Theoretical Insights into Human Prehistory, Plenum Press, New York, pp. 345–376.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrow, T. M. (1997). A chip off the old block: Alternative approaches to debitage analysis. Lithic Technology 22: 51–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nadel, D. (2001). Indoor/outdoor flint knapping and minute debitage remains: The evidence from the Ohalo II submerged camp (19.5 KY, Jordan Valley). Lithic Technology 26: 118–137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nash, S. E. (1996). Is curation a useful heuristic? In Odell, G. H. (ed.), Stone Tools: Theoretical Insights into Human Prehistory, Plenum Press, New York, pp. 81–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Negash, A., Shackley, M. S., and Alene, M. (2006). Source provenance of obsidian artifacts from the Early Stone Age (ESA) site of Melka Konture, Ethiopia. Journal of Archaeological Science 33: 1647–1650.

    Google Scholar 

  • Negash, A., Alene, M., Brown, F. H., Nash, B. P., and Shackley, M. S. (2007). Geochemical sources for the terminal Pleistocene/Early Holocene obsidian artifacts of the site of Beseka, central Ethiopia. Journal of Archaeological Science 34: 1205–1210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, M. C. (1991). The study of technological organization. In Schiffer, M. B. (ed.), Archaeological Method and Theory,Vol. 3, University of Arizona Press, Tucson, pp. 57–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nowell, A., Park, K., Mutaxas, D., and Park, J. (2003). Deformation modeling: A methodology for the analysis of handaxe morphology and variability. In Soressi, M., and Dibble, H. L. (eds.), Multiple Approaches to the Study of Bifacial Technologies, University Museum Monograph 115, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, pp. 193–208.

  • O’Connell, J. F. (1977). Aspects of variation in central Australian lithic assemblages. In Wright, R. V. (ed.), Stone Tools as Cultural Markers: Change, Evolution and Complexity, Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies, Canberra, pp. 269–281.

    Google Scholar 

  • Odell, G. H. (1989). Experiments in lithic reduction. In Amick, D. S., and Mauldin, R. P. (eds.), Experiments in Lithic Technology, BAR International Series No. 528, Archaeopress, pp. 163–198.

  • Odell, G. H. (ed.) (1996a). Stone Tools: Theoretical Insights into Human Prehistory, Plenum Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Odell, G. H. (1996b). Economizing behavior and the concept of “curation.” In Odell, G. H. (ed.), Stone Tools: Theoretical Insights into Human Prehistory, Plenum, New York, pp. 51–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Odell, G. H. (2004). Lithic Analysis, Springer, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olausson, D. (1998). Different strokes for different folks, possible reasons for variation in quality of knapping. Lithic Technology 23: 90–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orr, E. L., Orr, W. N., and Baldwin E. M. (1999). Geology of Oregon, Kendall/Hunt, Dubuque, IA.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Patterson, L. W. (1990). Characteristics of bifacial-reduction flake-size distribution. American Antiquity 55: 550–558.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patterson, L. W., and Sollberger, J. B. (1978). Replication and classification of small size lithic debitage. Plains Anthropologist 23: 103–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pecora, A. M. (2001). Chipped stone tool production strategies and lithic debris patterns. In Andrefsky, Jr., W. (ed.), Lithic Debitage: Context, Form, Meaning, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 173–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pelcin, A. (1997). The formation of flakes: The role of platform thickness and exterior platform angle in the production of flake initiations and terminations. Journal of Archaeological Science 24: 1107–1113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pelcin, A. (1998). The threshold effect of platform width: A reply to Davis and Shea. Journal of Archaeological Science 25: 615–620.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petraglia, M. D. (1992). Stone artifact refitting and formation process at the Abri Dufaure, an Upper Paleolithic site in southwestern France. In Hofman, J. L., and Enloe, J. L (eds.), Piecing Together the Past: Applications of Refitting Studies in Archaeology, BAR International Series No. 578, Archaeopress, Oxford, pp. 163–178.

  • Pitblado, B. L. (2003). Late Paleoindian Occupation of the Southern Rocky Mountains: Early Holocene Projectile Points and Land Use in the High Country, University of Colorado Press, Boulder.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prasciunas, M. M. (2007). Bifacial cores and flake production efficiency: An experimental test of technological assumptions. American Antiquity 72: 334–348.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prescott, J. R., and Robertson, G. B. (1997). Sediment dating by luminescence: A review. Radiation Measurements 27: 893–922.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quinn, C. P., Andrefsky Jr., W., Kuijt, I., and Finlayson, B. (2008). Stone tool perforating and retouch intensity: A Neolithic case study. In Andrefsky Jr., W. (ed.), Lithic Technology: Measures of Production, Use and Curation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 150–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rasic, J. C., and Andrefsky Jr., W. (2001). Alaskan blade cores as specialized components of mobile toolkits: Assessing design parameters and toolkit organization through debitage analysis. In Andrefsky, Jr., W. (ed.), Lithic Debitage: Context, Form, Meaning, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 61–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Redman, K. L. (1998). An experiment-based evaluation of the debitage attributes associated with “hard” and “soft” hammer percussion, unpublished M.A. thesis, Department of Anthropology, Washington State University, Pullman.

  • Riel-Salvatore, J., and Barton, C. M. (2004). Late Pleistocene technology, economic behavior, and land-use dynamics in southern Italy. American Antiquity 69: 257–274.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riel-Salvatore, J., Bae, M., McCartney, P., and Razdan, A. (2002). Paleolithic archaeology and 3D visualization technology: Recent developments. Antiquity 78: 929–930.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, R. G. (1997). Luminescence data in archaeology: From origins to optical. Radiation Measurements 27: 819–892.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rolland, N., and Dibble, H. L. (1990). A new synthesis of Middle Paleolithic variability. American Antiquity 55: 480–499.

    Google Scholar 

  • Root, M. J. (1992). The Knife River Flint Quarries: The Organization of Stone Tool Production, Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Washington State University, Pullman.

  • Root, M. J. (2004). Technological analysis of flake debris and the limitations of size-grade techniques. In Hall, C. T., and Larson, M. L. (eds.), Aggregate Analysis in Chipped Stone, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 65–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, B. (2000). Obsidian source characterization and hunter-gatherer mobility: An example from the Tucson Basin. Journal of Archaeological Science 27: 305–314.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, B., and Dibble, H. L. (1998). The production and transport of blanks and tools at the French Middle Paleolithic site of Combe-Capelle Bas. American Antiquity 63: 47–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roux, V., and Bril, B. (2005). Stone Knapping: The Necessary Conditions for a Uniquely Hominid Behavior, McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sassaman, K. E. (1994). Changing strategies of biface production in the South Carolina coastal plain. In Carr, P. J. (ed.), The Organization of North American Prehistoric Chipped Stone Tool Technologies, International Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor, MI, pp. 99–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schlanger, N. (1994). Mindful technology: Unleashing the chaîne opératoire for an archaeology of mind. In Renfrew, C., and Zubrow, E. (eds.), The Ancient Mind: Elements of Cognitive Archaeology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 143–151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, S. A. (1991). Problems with the use of flake size in inferring stages of lithic reduction. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 13: 172–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sellet, F. (1993). Chaîne opératoire: The concept and its applications. Lithic Technology 18: 106–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sellet, F. (1999). A Dynamic View of Paleoindian Assemblages at the Hell Gap Site, Wyoming: Reconstructing Lithic Technological Systems, Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, TX.

  • Sellet, F. (2004). Beyond the point: Projectile manufacture and behavioral inference. Journal of Archaeological Science 31: 1553–1566.

    Google Scholar 

  • Serizawa, C. (1978). The stone age of Japan. Asian Perspectives 19: 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shackley, M. S. (ed.) (1998a). Archaeological Obsidian Studies: Method and Theory, Plenum Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shackley, M. S. (1998b). Intrasource chemical variability and secondary depositional processes: Lessons from the American Southwest. In Shackley, M. S. (ed.), Archaeological Obsidian Studies: Method and Theory, Plenum Press, New York, pp. 83–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shackley M. S. (2005). Obsidian: Geology and Archaeology in the North American Southwest, University of Arizona Press, Tucson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shafer, H. J. (1991). Late Preclassic formal stone tool production at Colha, Belize. In Hester, T. R., and Shafer, H. J. (eds.), Maya Stone Tools, Prehistory Press, Madison, WI, pp. 31–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shafer, H. J., and Hester, T. R. (1983). Ancient Maya chert workshops in northern Belize, Central America. American Antiquity 48: 519–543.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shelley, P. H. (1990). Variation in lithic assemblages: An experiment. Journal of Field Archaeology 17: 187–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shott, M. J. (1986). Settlement mobility and technological organization: An ethnographic examination. Journal of Anthropological Research 42: 15–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shott, M. J. (1993). The Leavitt Site: A Parkhill Phase Paleo–Indian Occupation in Central Michigan, Memoirs No. 25, Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

  • Shott, M. J. (1996). An exegesis of the curation concept. Journal of Anthropological Research 52: 259–280.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shott, M. J. (2003). Chaîne opératoire and reduction sequence. Lithic Technology 28: 95–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shott, M. J., and Ballenger, J. A. (2007). Biface reduction and the measurement of Dalton curation: A southeastern case study. American Antiquity 72: 153–175.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shott, M. J., and Sillitoe, P. (2004). Modeling use-life distributions in archaeology using New Guinea Wola ethnographic data. American Antiquity 69: 339–355.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shott, M. J., and Sillitoe, P. (2005). Use life and curation in New Guinea experimental used flakes. Journal of Archaeological Science 32: 653–663.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shott, M. J., Bradbury, A. P., Carr, P. J., and Odell, G. H. (2000). Flake size from platform attributes: Predictive and empirical approaches. Journal of Archaeological Science 27: 877–894.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sievert, A. K., and Wise, K. (2001). A generalized technology for a specialized economy: Archaic period chipped stone at kilometer 4, Peru. In Andrefsky Jr., W. (ed.), Lithic Debitage: Context, Form, Meaning, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 188–206.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simek, J. F. (1994). The organization of lithic technology and evolution: Notes from the continent. In Carr, P. J. (ed.), The Organization of North American Prehistoric Chipped Stone Tool Technologies, International Monographs in Prehistory, Ann Arbor, MI, pp. 118–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soressi, M., and Dibble, H. L. (eds.) (2003). Multiple Approaches to the Study of Bifacial Technologies, University Museum Monograph 115,University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soressi, M., and Hays, M. A. (2003). Manufacture, transport, and use of Mousterian bifaces: A case study from the Perigord (France). In Soressi, M., and Dibble, H. L. (eds.), Multiple Approaches to the Study of Bifacial Technologies, University Museum Monograph 115, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, pp. 125–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soriano, S., Villa, P., and Wadley, L. (2007). Blade technology and tool forms in the Middle Stone Age of South Africa: The Howiesons Poort and post-Howiesons Poort at Rose Cottage Cave. Journal of Archaeological Science 34: 681–703.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoltman, J. B., and Hughes, R. E. (2004). Obsidian in Early Woodland contexts in the upper Mississippi Valley. American Antiquity 69: 751–760.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan III, A. P., and Rozen, K. C. (1985). Debitage analysis and archaeological interpretation. American Antiquity 50: 755–779.

    Google Scholar 

  • Takase, K. (2004). Hide processing of oxen and koryak: An ethnoarchaeological survey in Kamchatka Peninsula, Russia. Material Culture 77: 57–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Terry, K., Andrefsky Jr., W., and Konstantinov, M. V. (2008). Raw material durability, function, and retouch in the Upper Paleolithic of the Transbikal region. In Adams, B., and Blades, B. (eds.), Lithic Materials and Paleolithic Societies, Blackwell, Oxford, in press.

  • Titmus, G. (1985). Some aspects of stone tool notching. In Plew, M. G., Woods, J. C., and Pavesic, M. G. (eds.), Stone Tool Analysis: Essays in Honor of Don E. Crabtree, University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, pp. 243–264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomaskova, S. (2005). What is a burin? Typology, technology, and interregional comparison. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 12: 79–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomka, S. A. (1989). Differentiating lithic reduction techniques: An experimental approach. In Amick, D. S., and Mauldin, R. P. (eds.), Experiments in Lithic Technology, BAR International Series No. 528, Archaeopress, Oxford, pp. 137–162.

  • Tomka, S. A. (2001). The effect of processing requirements on reduction strategies and tool form: A new perspective. In Andrefsky Jr., W. (ed.), Lithic Debitage: Context Form Meaning, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 207–225.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torrence, R. (1983). Time budgeting and hunter-gatherer technology. In Bailey, G. (ed.), Hunter-Gatherer Economy in Prehistory, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 11–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tostevin, G. B. (2007). Levels of theory and social practice in the reduction sequence and chaîne opératoire methods of lithic analysis. Paper presented at the 71st Annual Meeting of the Society for American Archaeology, San Juan, Puerto Rico.

  • Truncer, J. J. (1990). Perkiomen points: A study in variability. In Moeller, R. W. (ed.), Experiments and Observations on the Terminal Archaic of the Middle Atlantic Region, Archaeological Services, Bethlehem, CT, pp. 1–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tykot, R. H. (2002). Geochemical analysis of obsidian and the reconstruction of trade mechanisms in the Early Neolithic period of the western Mediterranean. In Jakes, K. (ed.), Archaeological Chemistry: Materials, Methods, and Meaning, American Chemical Society, Washington, DC, pp. 169–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tykot, R. H. (2003). Determining the source of lithic artifacts and reconstructing trade in the ancient world. In Kardulias, P. N., and Yerkes, R. W. (eds.), Written in Stone: The Multiple Dimensions of Lithic Analysis, Lexington Books, Lanham, MD, pp. 59–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ugan, A., Bright, J., and Rogers, A. (2003). When is technology worth the trouble? Journal of Archaeological Science 30: 1315–1329.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Peer, P. (1992). The Levallois Reduction Strategy, Prehistory Press, Madison, WI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veil, S. (1990). A dynamic model of a Magdalenian settlement by spatial analysis of refitted artifacts. In Cziesla, E., Eichoff, S., Arts, N., and Winter, D. (eds.), The Big Puzzle: International Symposium on Refitting Stone Artefacts, Studies in Modern Archaeology 1, Holos, Bonn, pp. 45–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Villa, P. (1982). Conjoinable pieces and site formation processes. American Antiquity 47: 276–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Villa, P., and Soressi, M. (2000). Stone tools in carnivore sites: The case of BoisRoche. Journal of Anthropological Research 56: 187–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waechter, S. A. (2002). Report on Phase-II Test Excavations at CA-PLU-131 and CA-PLU-421 near Clio, Southern Plumas County, Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Davis, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, I. J., and Shea, J. J. (2006). Mobility patterns and core technologies in the middle Paleolithic of the Levant. Journal of Archaeological Science 33: 1293–1309.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weedman, K. J. (2002). On the spur of the moment: Effects of age and experience on hafted stone scraper morphology. American Antiquity 67: 731–744.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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: 189–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenzel, K. E., and Shelley, P. H. (2001). What put the small in the Arctic small tool tradition: Raw material constraints on lithic technology. In Andrefsky Jr., W. (ed.), Lithic Debitage: Context, Form, Meaning, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 106–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whittaker, J. C. (1994). Flintknapping: Making and Understanding Stone Tools, University of Texas Press, Austin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiant M., and Hassen, H. (1985). The role of lithic resource availability and accessibility in the organization of technology. In Vehik, S. C. (ed.), Lithic Resource Procurement: Proceedings from the Second Conference on Prehistoric Chert Exploitation, Occasional Paper No. 4, Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, pp. 101–114.

  • Wilmsen, E. S. (1970). Lithic Analysis and Cultural Inference: A Paleo-Indian Case, Anthropological Papers No. 16, University of Arizona, Tucson.

  • Wilson, J. K., and Andrefsky Jr., W. (2008). Unpacking production, resharpening and hammer type. In Andrefsky Jr., W. (ed.), Lithic Technology: Measures of Production, Use and Curation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 86–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wurz, S. (2002). Variability in the Middle Stone Age lithic sequence, 115,000–60,000 years ago at Klasies River, South Africa. Journal of Archaeological Science 29: 1001–1015.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wurz, S., le Roux, N. J., Gardner, S., and Deacon, H. J. (2003). Discriminating between the end products of the earlier Middle Stone Age sub-stages at Klasies River using biplot methodology. Journal of Archaeological Science 30: 1107–1126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, D. C. (2002). Secondary obsidian sources of the Madeline Plains: paleolandscapes and archaeological implications. In McGuire, K. R. (ed.), Boundary Lands: Archaeological Investigations Along the California-Great Basin Interface, Anthropological Papers No. 24, Nevada State Museum, Carson City, pp. 75–84.

Bibliography of recent literature

  • Ahler, S. A., and Geib, P. R. (2000). Why flute? Folsom point design and adaptation. Journal of Archaeological Science 27: 799–820.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambrose, S. H. (2001). Paleolithic technology and human evolution. Science 291: 1748–1753.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrefsky Jr., W. (2005). Lithic studies. In Maschner, H. D., and Chippindale, C. (eds.), Handbook of Methods in Archaeology, AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek, CA, pp. 713–770.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aubry, T., Almeida, M., Neves, M. J., and Walter, B. (2003). Solutrean laurel leaf point production and raw material procurement during the last glacial maximum in southern Europe: Two examples from central France and Portugal. In Soressi, M., and Dibble, H. L. (eds.), Multiple Approaches to the Study of Bifacial Technologies, University Museum Monograph 115, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, pp. 165–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Austin, R. J. (1999). Technological characterization of lithic waste-flake assemblages: Multivariate analysis of experimental and archaeological data. Lithic Technology 24: 53–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bamforth, D. B., and Woodman, P. C. (2004). Tool hoards and Neolithic use of the landscape in north-eastern Ireland. Oxford Journal of Archaeology 23: 21–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barton, C. M., Bernabeu, J., Aura, J. E., Garcia, O., and La Roca, N. (2002). Dynamic landscapes, artifact taphonomy, and landuse modeling in the western Mediterranean. Geoarchaeology 17: 155–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bement, L. (2002). Pickin’ up the pieces: Folsom projectile point resharpening technology. In Clark, J. E., and Collins, M. B. (eds.), Folsom Technology and Lifeways, Lithic Technology Special Publication No. 4, University of Tulsa, Tulsa, OK, pp. 135–140.

  • Binford, L. R. (2001). Where do research problems come from? American Antiquity 66: 669–678.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blades, B. S. (2001). Aurignacian Lithic Economy: Ecological Perspectives from Southwestern France, Plenum Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brantingham, P. J. (2006). Measuring forager mobility. Current Anthropology 47: 435–459.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, C. T. (2000). The fractal dimensions of lithic reduction. Journal of Archaeological Science 28: 619–631.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, B. (2006). An analysis of Folsom projectile point resharpening using quantitative comparisons of form and allometry. Journal of Archaeological Science 33: 185–199.

    Google Scholar 

  • Centola, L. (2004). Deconstructing lithic technology: A study from the Birch Creek site (35ML181), southeastern Oregon. Unpublished M.A. thesis, Department of Anthropology, Washington State University, Pullman.

  • Cheshier, J., and Kelly, R. L. (2006). Projectile point shape and durability: the effects of thickness:length. American Antiquity 71: 353–364.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarkson, C. (2002). Holocene scraper reduction, technological organization and landuse at Ingaladdi Rockshelter, northern Australia. Archaeology in Oceania 37: 79–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarkson, C. (2007). Lithics in the Land of the Lightning Brothers: The Archaeology of Wardaman Country, Northern Territory, Terra Australis 25, ANU E Press, Canberra.

  • Clarkson, C., Vinicius, L., and Lahr, M. M. (2006). Quantifying flake scar patterning on cores using 3D recording techniques. Journal of Archaeological Science 33: 132–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collard, M., Kemery, M., and Banks, S. (2005). Causes of toolkit variation among hunter-gatherers: A test of four competing hypotheses. Canadian Journal of Archaeology 29: 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad, N. J., Soressi, M., Parkington, J. E., Wurz, S., and Yates, R. (2004). A unified lithic taxonomy based on patterns of core reduction. South African Archeological Bulletin 50: 12–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dag, D., and Goren-Inbar, N. (2000). An actualistic study of dorsally plain flakes: A technological note. Lithic Technology 26: 105–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daniel Jr., I. R. (2001). Stone raw material availability and Early Archaic settlement in the southeastern United States. American Antiquity 66: 237–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delagnes, A., and Meignen, L. (2006). Diversity of lithic production systems during the MP in western Europe: Are there any chronological tendencies? In Hovers, E., and Kuhn, S. L. (eds.), Transitions before the Transition: Evolution and Stability in the Middle Paleolithic and Middle Stone Age, Springer, New York, pp. 85–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dibble, H. L., Schurmans, U. A., Iovita, R. P., and McLaughlin, M. V. (2005). The measurement and interpretation of cortex in lithic assemblages. American Antiquity 70: 545–560.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, S. W. (2000). Flaked stone basalt technology in the northern Sierra Nevada of California. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 22: 361–374.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson, J. R. (2003). An experimental test of the conservation of raw material in flintknapping skill acquisition. Lithic Technology 28: 113–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, C. T., and Larson, M. L. (eds.) (2004). Aggregate Analyses in Chipped Stone, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henry, D. O. (2003). Human behavior and the stone tools from Tor Faraj. In Henry, D. O. (ed.), Neanderthals in the Levant, Behavioral Organization and the Beginnings of Human Modernity, Continuum, London, pp. 60–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hiscock, P. (2004). Slippery and Billy: Intention, selection, and equifinality in lithic artefacts. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 14: 71–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hiscock, P. (2006). Blunt and to the point: Changing technological strategies in Holocene Australia. In Lilley, I. (ed.), Archaeology of Oceania: Australia and the Pacific Islands, Blackwell, Malden, MA, pp. 69–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffecker, J. F., and Cleghorn, N. (2000). Mousterian hunting patterns in the northwestern Caucasus and the ecology of the Neanderthals. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology 10: 369–378.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hovers, E., and Kuhn, S. L. (eds.) (2006). Transitions before the Transition, Springer, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hovers, E., and Raveh, A. (2000). The use of a multivariate graphic display technique as an exploratory tool in the analysis of inter-assemblage lithic variability: A case study from Qafzeh Cave, Israel. Journal of Archaeological Science 27: 1023–1038.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, G. T., Beck, C., Jones, E. E., and Hughes, R. E. (2003). Lithic source use and Paleoarchaic foraging territories in the Great Basin. American Antiquity 68: 5–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, S. L., and Stiner, M. C. (2006). What’s a mother to do? The division of labor among Neanderthals and modern humans in Eurasia. Current Anthropology 47: 953–980.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lintz, C., and Dockall, J. (2002). The Spreen cache: A case study of a prehistoric curated collection of broken tools from 41RN108, Runnels County, Texas. Lithic Technology 27: 13–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lycett, S. J., von Cramon-Taubadel, N., and Foley, R. A. (2006). A crossbeam co-ordinate caliper for the morphometric analysis of lithic nuclei: A description, test and empirical examples of application. Journal of Archaeological Science 33: 847–861.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyons, W. H., Thomas, S. P., and Skinner, C. (2001). Changing obsidian sources at the Lost Dune and McCoy Creek sites, Blitzen Valley, southeastern Oregon. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 23: 273–296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marks, A. E., Hietala, H. J., and Williams, J. K. (2001). Tools standardization in the Middle and Upper Paleolithic: A closer look. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 11: 17–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martinez, M. M. (1998). Differential raw material use in the Middle Pleistocene of Spain: Evidence from Sierra de Atapuerca, Torralba, Ambrona and Aridos. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 8: 15–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien, M. J., Darwent, J., and Lyman, R. L. (2001). Cladistics is useful for reconstructing archaeological phylogenies: Paleoindian points from the southeastern United States. Journal of Archaeological Science 28: 1115–1136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Odell, G. H. (2001). Stone tool research at the end of the millennium: Classification, function, and behavior. Journal of Archaeological Research 9: 45–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Odess, D., and Rasic, J. T. (2007). Toolkit composition and assemblage variability: The implications of Nogahabara I, northern Alaska. American Antiquity 72: 691–718.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petraglia, M., Korisettar, R., Boivin N., Clarkson, C., Ditchfield, P., Jones, S., Lahr, M. M., Oppenheimer, C., Pyle, D., Roberts, R., Schwenninger, J. L., Arnold, L. and White, K. (2007). Middle Palaeolithic assemblages from the Indian sub-continent before and after the Toba super-eruption. Science 317: 114–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, J. L. (2003). The use of the chaîne opératoire approach in the Upper Paleolithic period of Sinai. In Kardulias, P. N., and Yerkes, R. W. (eds.), Written in Stone: The Multiple Dimensions of Lithic Analysis, Lexington Books, Lanham, MD, pp. 7–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rots, V. (2004). Prehensile wear on flint tools. Lithic Technology 29: 7–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rots, V., Pirnay, L., Pirson, P., and Baudoux, O. (2006). Blind tests shed light on possibilities and limitations for identifying stone tool prehension and hafting. Journal of Archaeological Science 33: 935–952.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandgathe, D. M. (2004). Alternative interpretations of the Levallois reduction technique. Lithic Technology 29: 147–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schroth, A., and Yohe II, R. M. (2001). Obsidian use and technological change in Rose Valley: Conclusions based on the analysis of debitage from two sites. Lithic Technology 26: 50–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shea, J. J. (2003). Neanderthals, competition, and the origin of modern human behavior in the Levant. Evolutionary Anthropology 12: 173–187.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shea, J. J. (2006). The origins of lithic projectile point technology: Evidence from Africa, the Levant, and Europe. Journal of Archaeological Science 33: 823–847.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shea, J. J., Davis, Z., and Brown, K. (2001). Experimental tests of Middle Paleolithic spear points using a calibrated crossbow. Journal of Archaeological Science 28: 807–816.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shott, M. J., and Sillitoe, P. (2001). The mortality of things: correlates of use life in Wola material culture using age-at-census data. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 8: 269–302.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shott, M. J., and Weedman, K. J. (2007). Measuring reduction in stone tools: An ethnoarchaeological study of Gamo hidescrapers from Ethiopia. Journal of Archaeological Science 34: 1016–1035.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sillitoe, P., and Hardy, K. (2003). Living lithics: Ethnoarchaeology in highland New Guinea. Antiquity 77: 555–566.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stout, D. (2002). Skill and cognition in stone tool production: An ethnographic case study from Irian Jaya. Current Anthropology 43: 693–722.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tankersley, K. B. (2000). The effects of stone and technology on fluted-point morphometry. American Antiquity 59: 498–509.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsirk, A., and Parry, W. J. (2000). Fractographic evidence for liquid on obsidian tools. Journal of Archaeological Science 27: 987–991.

    Google Scholar 

  • Villa, P., and Lenoir, M. (2006). Hunting weapons of the Middle Stone Age and the Middle Palaeolithic: Spear points from Sibudu, Rose Cottage and Bouheben. Southern African Humanities 18: 89–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Villa, P., Delagnes, A., and Wadley, L. (2005). A late Middle Stone Age artifact assemblage from Sibudu (KwaZulu-Natal): Comparisons with the European Middle Paleolithic. Journal of Archaeological Science 32: 399–422.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wadley, L., Williamson, B. S., and Lombard, M. (2004). Ochre in hafting in Middle Stone Age southern Africa: A practical role. Antiquity 78: 661–675.

    Google Scholar 

  • Will, R. T. (2000). A tale of two flint-knappers: Implications for lithic debitage studies in northeastern America. Lithic Technology 25: 101–119.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This article was written over quite a long period of time mainly because of an injury and a long recovery period. I have to thank the editors of the journal for sticking with me and giving me the extra time needed to complete this article. In particular, I extend my gratitude to Gary Feinman for his wise suggestions and kind words. I also thank the editors for selecting a strong group of anonymous external reviewers. All six had important and helpful comments and suggestions. A wide group of friends and colleagues also made wonderful comments on the earliest version of the manuscript; I thank each of them for their suggestions, even if I didn’t take all of them too seriously. Thank you Peter Bleed, Chris Clarkson, Jennifer Ferris, Nathan Goodale, Colin Grier, Peter Hiscock, Brett Houk, Mary Lou Larson, Doug MacDonald, Colin Quinn, Barbara Roth, and last of all, Biddy Bender.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Anthropology, Washington State University, Pullman, WA, 99164-4910, USA

    William Andrefsky Jr.

Authors
  1. William Andrefsky Jr.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to William Andrefsky Jr..

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Andrefsky, W. The Analysis of Stone Tool Procurement, Production, and Maintenance. J Archaeol Res 17, 65–103 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10814-008-9026-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10814-008-9026-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation