Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T07:10:23.018Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Reduction Strategies and Geochemical Characterization of Lithic Assemblages: A Comparison of Three Case Studies from Western North America

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Jelmer W. Eerkens ,
Jeffrey R. Ferguson ,
Michael D. Glascock ,
Craig E. Skinner  and
Sharon A. Waechter
Jelmer W. Eerkens
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology, University of California, Davis.One Shields Ave., Davis, CA 95616
Jeffrey R. Ferguson
Affiliation:
Department of Anthropology 233 UCB, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80309-0233
Michael D. Glascock
Affiliation:
Missouri UniversityResearch Reactor, Research Reactor Center, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211
Craig E. Skinner
Affiliation:
Northwest Research Obsidian Studies Laboratory, 1414 NW Polk, Corvallis, OR 97330
Sharon A. Waechter
Affiliation:
Far Western Anthropological Research Group, 2727 Del Rio Place - Suite A, Davis, CA 95618-7729
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Based on a simple model of lithic procurement, reduction, and use, we generate predictions for patterns in source diversity and average distance-to-source measurements for flaked stone assemblages left behind by small-scale and residentially mobile populations. We apply this model to geochemical data from obsidian artifacts from three regions in western North America. As predicted, results show markedly different patterns in the geochemical composition of small flakes, large flakes, and formal tools. While small flakes and tools tend to have greater source diversity and are on average farther from their original source, the large flake assemblage is composed of fewer and closer sources. These results suggest that a failure to include very late stage reduction (e.g., pressure flakes) and microdebitage in characterization studies may bias interpretations about the extent of residential mobility and/or trade patterns because more distant sources will be underrepresented.

Résumé

Résumé

Basado en un modelo sencillo de obtención, reducción y uso líticos, generamos predicciones para patrones de diversidad de fuentes y medidas de media-distancia desde las fuentes de colecciones de piedras talladas dejadas por poblaciones ambulantes. Aplicamos este modelo a los datos geoquímicos reunidos de artefactos de obsidiana procedentes de tres regiones norteamericanas-occidentales. Como era previsto, los resultados muestran patrones notablemente distintos en la composición geoquímica de las lascas pequeñas y grandes y de herramientas formales. Mientras las herramientas y lascas pequeñas suelen tener una mayor diversidad de fuentes y como promedio se encuentran más lejos de sus fuentes originales, las lascas grandes tienden a componerse de menos fuentes que también están más cercanas. Los resultados sugieren que el dejar de incluir reducciones (desbastes) y microdebitage (micro desechos) de las etapas finales (e.g., lascas de presión) en los estudios de fuentes, se puede sesgar las interpretaciones sobre la extensión/los límites de movilidad residencial y/o patrones de comercio porque las fuentes más lejanas quedan sub-representadas.

Type
Reports
Information
American Antiquity , Volume 72 , Issue 3 , July 2007 , pp. 585 - 597
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for American Archaeology 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References Cited

Allen, Ralph O., Luckenbach, Allen H., and Holland, C.G. 1975 Application of Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis to a Study of Prehistoric Steatite Artifacts and Source Materials. Archaeometry 17:69–83.Google Scholar
Bamforth, Douglas B. 1986 Technological Efficiency and Tool Curation. American Antiquity 51:38–50.Google Scholar
Bamforth, Douglas B. 1990 Settlement, Raw Material, and Lithic Procurement in the Central Mojave Desert. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 9:70–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bamforth, Douglas B. 1991 Technological Organization and Hunter-Gatherer Land Use: a California Example. American Antiquity 56:216–234.Google Scholar
Basgall, Mark E. 1989 Obsidian Acquisition and Use in Prehistoric Central-Eastern California. In Current Directions in California Obsidian Studies, edited by Richard E. Hughes, pp. 111–126. Contributions of the University of California Archaeological Research Facility No.45, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Bayman, James M., and Shackley, Steven M. 1999 Dynamics of Hohokam Obsidian Circulation in the North American Southwest. Antiquity 73:836–845.Google Scholar
Beck, Charlotte, Taylor, Amanda K., Jones, George T., Fadem, Cynthia M., Cook, Caitlyn R., and Millward, Sara 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, Robert L. 1982 Aboriginal Exchange and Territoriality in Owens Valley, California. In Contexts for Prehistoric Exchange, edited by J. E. Ericson and T. K. Earle, pp. 103–127. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Bettinger, Robert L., Delacorte, Michael G., and Jackson, Robert J. 1984 Visual Sourcing of Central-Eastern California Obsidians. In Obsidian Studies in the Great Basin, edited by Richard E. Hughes, pp. 63–78. Contributions of the University of California Archaeological Research Facility No. 45, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Binford, Lewis R. 1979 Organization and Formation Processes: Looking at Curated Technologies. Journal of Anthropological Research 35:255–273.Google Scholar
Bostwick, Todd W., and Burton, James H. 1993 A Study in Sourcing Hohokam Basalt Ground Stone Implements. Kiva 58:357–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bouey, Paul D., and Basgall, Mark E. 1984 Trans-Sierran Exchange in Prehistoric California: The Concept of Economic Articulation. In Obsidian Studies in the Great Basin, edited by Richard E. Hughes, pp. 135–172. Contributions of the University of California Archaeological Research Facility No. 45, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Brantingham, P. Jeffrey 2003 A Neutral Model of Stone Raw Material Procurement. American Antiquity 68:487–509.Google Scholar
Brantingham, P. Jeffrey 2006 Measuring Forager Mobility. Current Anthropology 47:435–459 Google Scholar
Brantingham, P. Jeffrey, Olsen, John W., Rech, Jason A., and Krivoshapkin, Andrei I. 2000 Raw Material Quality and Prepared Core Technologies in Northeast Asia. Journal of Archaeological Science 27:255–271.Google Scholar
Clark, John E. 1986 Another Look at Small Debitage and Microdebitage. Lithic Technology 15:21–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cowan, Frank L. 1999 Making Sense of Flake Scatters: Lithic Technological Strategies and Mobility. American Antiquity 64:593–607.Google Scholar
Davis, M. Kathleen, Jackson, Thomas L., Steven Shackley, M., Teague, Timothy, and Hampel, Joachim H. 1998 Factors Affecting the Energy-Dispersive X-Ray Fluorescence (EDXRF) Analysis of Archaeological Obsidian. In Archaeological Obsidian Studies: Method and Theory, edited by M.S. Shackley, pp. 159–180. Advances in Archaeological and Museum Science 3. Plenum Press, New York.Google Scholar
DeBoer, Warren R. 2004 Little Bighorn on the Scioto: The Rocky Mountain Connection to Ohio Hopewell. American Antiquity 69:85–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dreyer, William, and Kowta, Makoto 1986 Phase IIInvestigation at CA-PLU-226, Mohawk Valley, Plumas County, California. Prepared by Archaeological Research California State University, Chico, for California State Department of Transportation, District 2. Redding, California.Google Scholar
Eerkens, Jelmer W., and Glascock, Michael D. 2000 Northern Fish Lake Valley and the Volcanic Tablelands of Owens Valley: Description and Characterization of Two Minor Sources of Obsidian in the Western Great Basin. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 22:331–342.Google Scholar
Eerkens, Jelmer W., and King, Jerome 2002 Phase II Archaeological Investigations for the Sherwin Summit Rehabilitation Project, U.S. Highway 395, Inyo County, California. Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Davis, California.Google Scholar
Eerkens, Jelmer W., and Rosenthal, Jeffrey 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
Ferguson, Jeffrey R. 1999 Bone Cave: a Special-Use Site in the High Lava Plains. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Department of Anthropology, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon.Google Scholar
Ferguson, Jeffrey R., and Skinner, Craig E. 2005 Bone Cave: a Severely Disturbed Cave Site in Central Oregon. North American Archaeologist 26:221–244.Google Scholar
Feyhl, Kenneth J. 1997 Steatite: Some Sources and Aboriginal Utilization in Montana. Archaeology in Montana 38:55–83.Google Scholar
Fladmark, Knut R. 1982 Microdebitage Analysis: Initial Considerations. Journal of Archaeological Science 9:205–220.Google Scholar
Fredrickson, David A. 1994 Changes in Prehistoric Exchange Systems in the Alamo Locality, Contra Costa County, California. In Toward a New Taxonomic Framework for Central California Archaeology: Essays by James A. Bennyhoff and David A. Fredrickson, edited by Richard E. Hughes, pp. 57–63. Contributions of the University of California Archaeological Research Facility No. 52. Berkeley.Google Scholar
Gilreath, Amy J., and Hildebrandt, William R. 1997 Prehistoric Use of the Coso Volcanic Field. Contributions of the University of California Archaeological Research Facility, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Glascock, Michael D. 1998 Activation Analysis. In Instrumental Multi-Element Chemical Analysis, edited by Zeev B. Alfassi, pp. 93–150. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Netherlands.Google Scholar
Glascock, Michael D., Neff, Hector, Stryker, K. S., and Johnson, T. N. 1994 Sourcing of Archaeological Obsidian by an Abbreviated-NAA Procedure. Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry, Articles 180:29–35.Google Scholar
Hall, Matthew C. 1983 Late Holocene Hunter-Gatherers and Volcanism in the Long Valley-Mono Basin Region: Prehistoric Culture Change in the Eastern Sierra Nevada. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Riverside.Google Scholar
Hermes, O. Don, and Ritchie, D. 1997 Nondestructive Trace Element Analysis of Archaeological Felsites by Energy-Dispersive X-Ray Fluorescence Spectroscopy. Geoarchaeology 12:31–40.Google Scholar
Hughes, Richard E. 1982 Age and Exploitation of Obsidian from the Medicine Lake Highland, California. Journal of Archaeological Science 9:55–66.Google Scholar
Hughes, Richard E. 1986 Diachronic Variability in Obsidian Procurement Patterns in Northeast California and Southcentral Oregon. University of California Publications in Anthropology 17, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Hughes, Richard E. 1988 The Coso Volcanic Field Reexamined: Implications for Obsidian Sourcing and Hydration Dating Research. Geoarchaeology 3:253–265.Google Scholar
Hughes, Richard E. 1989 A New Look at Mono Basin Obsidians. In Current Directions in California Obsidian Studies, edited by Richard E. Hughes, pp. 1–12. Contributions of the University of California Archaeological Research Facility No.48, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Hughes, Richard E. 1994 Intrasource Chemical Variability of Artefact-Quality Obsidians from the Casa Diablo Area, California. Journal of Archaeological Science 21:263–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hughes, Richard E. 1998 On Reliability, Validity, and Scale in Obsidian Sourcing Research. In Unit Issues in Archaeology, edited by Ann F. Ramenofsky and Anastasia Steffen, pp. 103–114. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
Hull, Kathleen L. 1987 Identification of Cultural Site Formation Processes Through Microdebitage Analysis. American Antiquity 52:772–783.Google Scholar
Johnson, Lynn, Skinner, Craig E., and Wagner, David L. 1999 An Update on Obsidian Sources in the Saline Range, Inyo County California. International Association for Obsidian Studies Bulletin 23:8–10.Google Scholar
Jones, George T, Bailey, David G., and Beck, Charlotte 1997 Source Provenance of Andesite Artifacts Using Non-Destructive Analysis. Journal of Archaeological Science 24:929–943.Google Scholar
Jones, George T, Beck, Charlotte, Jones, Eric E., and Hughes, Richard E. 2003 Lithic Source Use and Paleoarchaic Foraging Territories in the Great Basin. American Antiquity 68:5–38 Google Scholar
Kelly, Robert L. 1988 Three Sides of a Biface. American Antiquity 53:717–734.Google Scholar
Kintigh, Keith W. 1984 Measuring Archaeological Diversity by Comparison with Simulated Assemblages. American Antiquity 49(1):44–54.Google Scholar
Kuhn, Steven L. 1989 Hunter-Gatherer Foraging Organization and Strategies of Artifact Replacement and Discard. In Experiments in Lithic Technology, edited by Daniel S. Amick and Raymond P. Mauldin, pp. 33–47. BAR International Series 528. British Archaeological Reports, Oxford.Google Scholar
Latham, Thomas, Sutton, Paula A., and Verosub, Kenneth L. 1992 Non-Destructive XRF Characterization of Basaltic Artifacts from Truckee, California. Geoarchaeology 7:81–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luedtke, Barbara E. 1978 Chert Sources and Trace Element Analysis. American Antiquity 43:413–423.Google Scholar
Luedtke, Barbara E. 1979 The Identification of Sources of Chert Artifacts. American Antiquity 44:744–757.Google Scholar
Malyk-Selivanova, Natalia Gail M. Ashley, Robert Gal, Glascock, Michael D., and Neff, Hector 1998 Geological-Geochemical Approach to Sourcing of Prehistoric Chert Artifacts, Northwestern Alaska. Geoarchaeology 13:673–708.Google Scholar
Minor, Rick, and Toepel, Kathryn A. 1989 Exchange Items or Hunters' Tools?: Another Look at Lanceolate Biface Caches in Central Oregon. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 11:99–107.Google Scholar
Neuenschwander, Neal 1991 An Extended Archaeological Test Excavation at CA-PLU-237, Mohawk Valley, Plumas County, California. Prepared by Peak & Associates for Plumas National Forest, California.Google Scholar
Ogburn, Dennis E. 2004 Evidence for Long-Distance Transportation of Building Stones in the Inka Empire, from Cuzco, Peru to Saraguro, Ecuador. Latin American Antiquity 15:419–439.Google Scholar
Olausson, Deborah 1998 Different Strokes for Different Folks: Possible Reasons for Variation in Quality of Knapping. Lithic Technology 23:90–115.Google Scholar
Parry, William J., and Kelly, Robert L. 1987 Expedient Core Technology and Sedentism. In The Organization of Core Technology, edited by Jay Johnson and Carol A. Morrow, pp. 285–304, Westview Press, Boulder.Google Scholar
Parsons, Gary A. 1990 Sourcing Monterey Banded Chert, a Cryptocrystalline Hydrosilicate: with Emphasis on its Physical and Thermal Traits as Applied to Central California Archaeology. Unpublished Master's thesis, Department of Anthropology, San Jose State University.Google Scholar
Ramos, Brian A. 2000 Prehistoric Obsidian Quarry Use and Technological Change in Western Great Basin: Examining Lithic Procurement at the Truman/Queen Obsidian Source, California and Nevada. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Davis.Google Scholar
Renfrew, Colin 1977 Alternative Models for Exchange and Spatial Distribution. In Exchange Systems in Prehistory, edited by Timothy K. Earle and Jonathan E. Ericson, pp. 71–90. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Roth, Barbara J. 2000 Obsidian Source Characterization and Hunter-Gatherer Mobility: an Example from the Tucson Basin. Journal of Archaeological Science 27:305–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shackley, M. Steven 1994 Intersource and Intrasource Geochemical Variability in Two Newly Discovered Archaeological Obsidian Sources in the Southern Great Basin. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 16:118–129.Google Scholar
Shackley, M. Steven 1996 Range and Mobility in the Early Hunter-Gatherer Southwest. In Early Formative Adaptations in the Southern Southwest, edited by Barbara J. Roth, pp. 1–16. Monographs in World Archaeology 25. Prehistory Press, Madison, Wisconsin.Google Scholar
Shackley, M. Steven 1998 Intrasource Chemical Variability and Secondary Depositional Processes: Lessons from the American Southwest. In Archaeological Obsidian Studies: Method and Theory, edited by M. S. Shackley, pp. 83–102. Plenum Press, New York.Google Scholar
Shackley, M. Steven 2005 Obsidian: Geology and Archaeology in the North American Southwest. University of Arizona Press, Tuscon.Google Scholar
Shott, Michael J. 1989 On Tool-Class Use Lives and the Formation of Archaeological Assemblages. American Antiquity 54:9–30.Google Scholar
Shott, Michael J. 1994 Size and Form in the Analysis of Flake Debris: Review and Recent Approaches. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory 1:69–110.Google Scholar
Skinner, Craig 1995 Obsidian Characterization Studies. In Archaeological Investigations, PGT-PG&E Pipeline Expansion Project, Idaho, Washington, Oregon, and California, Volume V: Technical Studies, edited by Robert U. Bryson, Craig E. Skinner, and Richard M. Pettigrew, pp. 4.1–4.54. Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Davis, California.Google Scholar
Skinner, Craig 2001 How to Select and Submit Samples for Analysis. Electronic document, http://www.obsidianlab.com/howto.html, accessed November 14, 2005.Google Scholar
Speakman, Robert J., and Neff, Hector 2005 The Application of Laser Ablation ICP-MS to the Study of Archaeological Materials: an Introduction. In Laser Ablation ICP-MS in Archaeology, edited by Robert J. Speakman and Hector Neff, pp. 1–15. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.Google Scholar
Steward, Julian H. 1933 Ethnography of the Owens Valley Paiute. Publications in American Archaeology and Ethnology 33. University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
Tremaine, Kim 1986 Obsidian Hydration, Source Determinations and Sampling at CA-YOL-139: a Study in Method. Paper presented at the 21st Annual Meeting of the Society for California Archaeology, Santa Rosa, California.Google Scholar
Truncer, J., Glascock, Michael D., and Neff, Hector 1998 Steatite Source Characterization in Eastern North America: New Results Using Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis. Archaeometry 40:23–44.Google Scholar
Waechter, Sharon A. 2001 Report on Phase-II Test Excavations at CA-PLU-1541/H and CA-PLU-130 near Clio, Southern Plumas County. Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Davis, California. Report on file at the Northeast Information Center, California State University, Chico.Google Scholar
Waechter, Sharon A. 2002 Report on Phase-II Test Excavations at CA-PLU-131 and CA-PLU-421 in Mohawk Valley, Southern Plumas County. Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Davis, California. Report on file at the Northeast Information Center, California State University, Chico.Google Scholar
Weigand, Phil C, Harbottle, Garman, and Sayre, Edward V. 1977 Turquoise Sources and Source Analysis: Mesoamerica and the Southwestern USA. In Exchange Systems in Prehistory, edited by Timothy K. Earle and Jonathon E. Ericson, pp. 15 Davis, California. Report on file at the Northeast 34. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Yohe, Robert M. II. 1998 The Introduction of the Bow and Arrow and Lithic Resource Use at Rose Spring (CA-INY-372). Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 20:26–52.Google Scholar
Young, D. Craig 2002 Secondary Obsidian Sources of the Madeline Plains: Paleolandscapes and Archaeological Implications. In Boundary Lands: Archaeological Investigations Along the California-Great Basin Interface, edited by Kelly R. McGuire, pp. 75–84. Nevada State Museum Anthropological Papers Number 24, Carson City, Nevada.Google Scholar