Macro Analysis: In the Field Versus In the Lab Use Wear
Document Type
Oral Presentation
Campus where you would like to present
SURC Ballroom B/C/D
Start Date
21-5-2015
End Date
21-5-2015
Keywords
Archaeology, Debitage, Use-Wear
Abstract
Recent efforts on the Yakima Training Center established research questions that stone tool data can address. For instance, are springs the location of diverse past human activities or do they represent a more limited activity location? The Bishop Hollow site (45KT1975) is located on the Yakima Training Center. Initial lithic analyses were performed on the material excavated at the site in the field and laboratory without the aid of magnification. An additional sample from this site was analyzed using magnification. The two samples are compared and the similarities and differences were used to assess the effects on the data that could be used to test hypotheses about past land use at springs. Results show that, in the initial analysis, two percent of objects were identified with wear while, in the subsequent analysis, five percent were identified with use wear. We have taken these results and explored the implications of such analytical biases imposed by doing lithic analysis with and without magnification. These results are relevant to those Cultural Resource Management and research settings where analysts are considering whether they should use magnification in stone tool analysis.
Recommended Citation
Chenvert, Erin and Probasco, Desirae, "Macro Analysis: In the Field Versus In the Lab Use Wear" (2015). Symposium Of University Research and Creative Expression (SOURCE). 98.
https://digitalcommons.cwu.edu/source/2015/posters/98
Poster Number
44
Department/Program
Anthropology & Museum Studies
Additional Mentoring Department
Anthropology & Museum Studies
Macro Analysis: In the Field Versus In the Lab Use Wear
SURC Ballroom B/C/D
Recent efforts on the Yakima Training Center established research questions that stone tool data can address. For instance, are springs the location of diverse past human activities or do they represent a more limited activity location? The Bishop Hollow site (45KT1975) is located on the Yakima Training Center. Initial lithic analyses were performed on the material excavated at the site in the field and laboratory without the aid of magnification. An additional sample from this site was analyzed using magnification. The two samples are compared and the similarities and differences were used to assess the effects on the data that could be used to test hypotheses about past land use at springs. Results show that, in the initial analysis, two percent of objects were identified with wear while, in the subsequent analysis, five percent were identified with use wear. We have taken these results and explored the implications of such analytical biases imposed by doing lithic analysis with and without magnification. These results are relevant to those Cultural Resource Management and research settings where analysts are considering whether they should use magnification in stone tool analysis.
Faculty Mentor(s)
Patrick McCutcheon