2021
DOI: 10.5334/jcaa.80
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Documenting Functional Use-Wear on Bone Tools: An RTI Approach

Abstract: Bone tools have a long archaeological history, and have recently been shown to retain use-traces distinctive of different perishable crafting practices. When examined in a controlled way, these diagnostic use-traces can serve as proxies for the crafted forms the bone tools were used to produce (e.g., baskets, leather goods, etc.). However, a number of methodological stumbling-blocks have hindered the sharing of bone tool use-wear results in a consistent standardized format. We suggest the application of Reflec… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0
2

Year Published

2022
2022
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 54 publications
0
4
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…2F). For more examples of use-traces incommensurate with those found on this Taforalt subset, please see Desmond et al (2021).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 95%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…2F). For more examples of use-traces incommensurate with those found on this Taforalt subset, please see Desmond et al (2021).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…Since bone is softer than stone, its surface features more readily deform during use and develop diagnostic use-traces indicative of function (Legrand & Sidera 2007;Legrand & Radi 2008). Because of the relatively rapid deformation of bone surfaces during use, it is possible to interpret the uses of archaeological osseous tools through a comparison with diagnostic use-trace matches on ethnographic osseous tools (Desmond et al 2021). This method has been profitably applied to bone tools from southern African, Australian, North American, and European archaeological contexts (e.g., Olsen 1979;LeMoine 1994;Soffer 2004;Stone 2009;Langley et al 2016;Bradfield & Antonites 2018;Bradfield 2020), and the current study underscores the productivity of this line of enquiry.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Prilikom šivanja kože u neolitiku pretpostavlja se da su korištena šila i igle od kosti i roga (Darvill 2002, 31;Minichreiter i Bunčić 2008, 32;Mozota et al 2017). Ova je funkcija obično pretpostavljena na temelju morfologije oruđa te se javlja potreba za funkcionalnom analizom koštanih, odnosno predmeta od roga koja je danas sve učestalija (Buc 2011;Mozota et al 2017;Desmond et al 2021). Kako je kožu, da bi se od nje proizveli uporabni predmeti potrebno rezati, bušiti i drugačije dorađivati moguće je pretpostaviti da je prilikom njezine obrade bilo upotrebljavano i kameno oruđe za struganje i rezanje te bušenje, ali je za tu tvrdnju potrebna determinacija funkcije oruđa.…”
Section: Oruđe Za šTavljenje I Obradu Kožeunclassified