Stone Tools: Theoretical Insights into Human Prehistory PDF
Preview Stone Tools: Theoretical Insights into Human Prehistory
Stone Tools Theoretical Insights into Human Prehistory INTERDISCIPLINARY CONTRIBUTIONS TO ARCHAEOLOGY Series Editor: MichaelJochim, Universily of California, Santa Barbara Founding Editor: Roy S. Dickens, Jr., Late of University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill Current Volumes in This Series: THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF GENDER Separating the Spheres in Urban America Diana diZerega Wall CHESAPEAKE PREHISTORY Old Traditions, New Directions Richard J. Dent, Jr. DIVERSITY AND COMPLEXITY IN PREHISTORIC MARITIME SOCIETIES A Gulf of Maine Perspective Bruce J. Bourque EARLY HUNTER-GATHERERS OF THE CALIFORNIA COAST Jon M. Erlandson HOUSES AND HOUSEHOLDS A Comparative Study Richard E. Blanton ORIGINS OF ANATOMICALLY MODERN HUMANS Edited by Matthew H. Nitecki and Doris V. Nitecki PREHISTORIC CULTURAL ECOLOGY AND EVOLUTION Insights from Southern Jordan Donald O. Henry PREHISTORIC EXCHANGE SYSTEMS IN NORTH AMERICA Edited by Timothy G. Baugh and Jonathon E. Ericson REGIONAL APPROACHES TO MORTUARY ANALYSIS Edited by Lane Anderson Beck STONE TOOLS Theoretical Insights into Human Prehistory Edited by George H. Odell STYLE, SOCIETY, AND PERSON Archaeological and Ethnological Perspectives Edited by Christopher Carr and Jill E. Neitzel A Chronological Listing oj Volumes in this series appears at the back oj this volume. A Continuation Order Plan is available for this series. A continuation order will bring delivery of each new volume immediately upon publication. Volumes are billed only upon actual shipment. For further information please contact the publisher. Stone Tools Theoretical Insights into Human Prehistory Edited by GEORGE H. ODELL University of Tulsa Tulsa. Oklahoma SPRINGER SCIENCE+BUSINESS MEDIA, LLC Library of Congress Catalog1ng-1n-Publ1cat1on Data Stone tools . theoretical Insights Into human prehistory / edited by George H. Odel1. p. cm. — (Interdisciplinary contributions to archaeology) Based on papers presented at the Second Tulsa Conference on L1th1c Analysis held 1n the summer of 1993 at the University of Tulsa. Includes bibliographical references and Index. 1. Tools, Prehistoric—Analysis—Congresses. 2. Stone Implements- -Analysls—Congresses. 3. Projectile points—Analysis—Congresses. I. Odell, George H. II. Tulsa Conference 1n Lithlc Analysis (2nd . 1993 : University of Tulsa) III. Series. GN799.T6S83 1996 930. r028'5~dc20 95-43087 CIP ISBN 978-1-4899-0175-0 ISBN 978-1-4899-0173-6 (eBook) DOI 10.1007/978-1-4899-0173-6 © Springer Science+Business Media New York 1996 Originally published by Plenum Press, New York in 1996 Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1st edition 1996 10 98765432 All rights reserved No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording, or otherwise, without written permission from the Publisher Contributors Nora Franco • Programa de Estudio Prehistoricos (CONICET), Bartolome Mitre 1970. 5 to '~ Capital (C.P. 1039), Argentina Brian Hayden • Department of Archaeology, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada V5A IS6 jay K. johnson • Department of Sociology and Anthropology, University of Mis sissippi, University, Mississippi 38677 Marvin Kay • Department of Anthropology, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701 Toby M. Morrow • Office of the State Archaeologist, University ofIowa, Iowa City, Iowa 52242 Stephen E. Nash. University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona 85721 Michael S. Nassaney • Department of Anthropology, Western Michigan Univer sity, Kalamazoo, Michigan 49008-5032 George H. Odell • Department of Anthropology, University of Tulsa, Tulsa, Okla homa 74104-3189 John W Rick • Department of Anthropology, Stanford University, Stanford, Cali fornia 94305 Michael E Rondeau. 10 Alvares Court, Sacramento California 95833 Steven A. Rosen • Archaeology Department, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva 84 105, Israel Michael J. Shott • Department of Sociology and Anthropology, University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, Iowa 50614-0513 jim Spafford • Department of Archaeology, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada V5A IS6 Paul T. Thacker. Department of Anthropology, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas 75275 v Preface Studies of prehistoric stone tools have progressed rapidly in the past few years and now possess enough analytical and methodological specificity to war rant recognition as a legitimate subfield of archaeology. This development can be documented by the appearance of several books and articles on the subject, and outstanding contributions to lithic analysis are now recognized by a specific award through the Society for American Archaeology. Clearly, the study of stone tools has emerged as a powerful instrument in the interpretation of human behavior in instances in which the written record is spotty or nonexistent. As interest in stone tool analysis has increased, so has the number of symposia dedicated to the subject, organized to compare data and discuss recent trends. Two such symposia have been conducted at the University of Tulsa. The first, which occurred in summer 1987, emphasized the analysis oflarge lithic data sets and resulted in a volume of papers edited by Don Henry and me, entitled Alternative Approaches to Lithic Analysis (Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association, Vol. 1,1989). You are now reading the results of the Second Tulsa Conference on Lithic Analysis, held during summer 1993. This conference followed a three-week Lithic Institute to which students from Argen tina and various parts of the United States came to study lithic analysis. Since the conference and institute were temporally contiguous and most of the students attended both, there was considerable structural overlap. I am indebted to several individuals and organizations for assuring the success of both of these endeavors. Institutional assistance was prOvided in abundance. Funding for the confer ence and production of this volume was kindly granted by the Social Science Interest Group at the University of Tulsa. TV's Research Office and Arts and Sciences Dean's Office, particularly Deans Kermit Hall (Arts and Sciences),janet Haggerty (Graduate School), and Al Soltow (Research), supported our efforts from their inception and deserve much of the credit for their success. The Philbrook vii viii PREFACE Museum cosponsored the banquet and accommodated our every wish on that occasion. The Geosciences Department at TV lent us several microscopes for the purpose of introducing use-wear analysis to students. And the TV Housing Department, particularly Walt Mauer and Trish Kerkstra, cheerfully provided food, lodging, and advice for participants in both events. On an individual level, the Lithic Institute could not have occurred without the superb teaching and replicative expertise of Errett Callahan (Lynchburg, Virginia) and Jacques Pelegrin (Paris, France). Don Wyckoff entertained us thoughtfully at the banquet and organized an unforgettable trip to procure Edwards chert upon which the students could vent their frustrations. Emotional release was facilitated by Charles Rippy of the Tulsa Zoo, who procured antler of several species from Alaska; and by Philip Wilke who, on a seasonal foraging mission from California to Nebraska, embedded Tulsa in this journey and dropped off a load of obsidian. Tulsa Archaeological Society member Ken McCauley fashioned Rippy's antlers into billets for the students to use. And geologist Van Odell and Mick Sullivan of Ponca City, Oklahoma, led a delightfully informative field trip to the Kay County flint quarries. Closer to home, Graduate Assistants Patricia Thomas and Russell Townsend were always on hand when needed, and their presence assured that events ran smoothly. Members of the Tulsa Archaeological Society provided airport shuttling services for conference participants, as well as a picnic lunch and transportation for our field trip to the Woolaroc Museum. Our secretary, Dale Phelps, assisted our efforts throughout this experience and produced the layout for the volume. Brian Hayden and Mike Shott freely offered their editorial assistance, thereby improving the final product immeasurably. And finally, my wife Frieda cheerfully put up with this mess and helped with many aspects of it while teaching French at the university. Without the efforts of all these individuals and institutions, these events could never have occurred. I apologize to anybody who, in the melee, may have been inadvertantly overlooked. GEORGE H. ODELL Contents Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 George H. Odell Recent Trends in Lithic Analysis .................................. 1 Theoreticians Enter Orbit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 A Call to Merge Theory and Practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 PART I. RESEARCH DESIGN Chapter 1. • Evaluating Lithic Strategies and Design Criteria . . . . . . . . . 9 Brian Hayden, Nora Franco, andJim Spafford Abstract. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Introduction .................................................. 10 Design Considerations .......................................... 12 The Keatley Creek Case ......................................... 14 Expedient Block Core Strategy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 16 Biface Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 22 Portable Long-Use Strategy ...................................... 26 Quarried Bipolar Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 29 Scavenged Bipolar Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 33 Ground Stone Cutting Strategy ................................... 33 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 37 Acknowledgments ............................................. 43 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 43 ix x CONTENTS PART II. CURAnON Chapter 2. • Economizing Behavior and the Concept of "Curation" 51 George H. Odell Abstract ..................................................... 51 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 51 Behavioral Influences on Tool Assemblages ......................... 52 The Concept of "Curation" ...................................... 54 Raw Material Availability and Economizing Behavior ................. 62 Examples from the Illinois Valley ................................. 64 Relations between Curation and Responses to Tool Resource Availability . . 73 Acknowledgments ............................................. 77 References ................................................... 77 Chapter 3. • Is Curation a Useful Heuristic? 81 Stephen E. Nash Abstract .................................................... . 81 Introduction ................................................. . 81 Framework for Current Analysis ................................. . 85 Summary ................................................... . 92 Is "Curation" a Useful Heuristic? ................................ . 93 Acknowledgments ............................................ . 96 Notes ...................................................... . 96 References 97 Chapter 4. • Hunter-Gatherer Lithic Economy and Settlement Systems: Understanding Regional Assemblage Variability in the Upper Paleolithic of Portuguese Estremadura ........................... . 101 Paul T. Thacker Abstract ..................................................... 101 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 102 The Upper Paleolithic of the Rio Maior Region: Land Use and Assemblage Variability .................................................. 102 Survey Methodology and Representative Samples .................... 105 Flint Sources ofthe Upper Rio Maior .............................. 106 Raw Material Procurement and Settlement Systems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 107 Upper Paleolithic Lithic Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 109 Quartz and Quartzite As Raw Material Choices ...................... 114 Raw Material Selection and Lithic Economy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 116 Conclusions: Planning and Conservation of Raw Material . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 119 Acknowledgments ............................................. 122 References ................................................... 122
The list of books you might like
