Hafting and Retooling: Effects on the Archaeological Record

Abstract

Hafting has long been recognized by archaeologists as a process affecting stone tools. However, the effects of this process on the archaeological record have been virtually ignored. Hafting affects the final typological form of tools because hafted tools are usually more extensively and intensively worked than their unhafted counterparts. Ethnoarchaeological and some recent archaeological evidence indicates that functionally equivalent but typologically diverse hafted and unhafted tools may be in use at the same site. Because hafted tools are disposed of as a consequence of the “retooling” of hafts, the context of their disposal may not be equivalent to the context of their use. But, unhafted tools appear to be disposed of more often at or near the focus of use. Indifference to the hafted/unhafted distinction then may seriously distort inferences based upon intrasite spatial analysis. It is also argued that hafting is a strategy that will be differentially employed by any social group at different sites according to circumstances, thereby contributing to interassemblage variability. Finally, some methods of analysis are suggested that will allow the typological and distributional effects of hafting and retooling to be taken into account by lithic analysts.

Human (Clovis)–gomphothere (Cuvieroniussp.) association ∼13,390 calibrated yBP in Sonora, Mexico

“…S12). This pattern of the distribution of complete points and basal fragments is similar to that reported from other Paleoindian kills and camps (6,(14)(15)(16).…”

Variability in the Middle Stone Age of Eastern Africa

“…3f), a difference in form that may result from extending the use-life of hafted implements through resharpening (cf. Keeley 1982), suggested in particular by distinctive resharpening flakes found at Gademotta/Kulkuletti (Wendorf and Schild 1974; fig. 3e).…”

Intensificación Y Dinámica Ocupacional en El Período Prehispánico Tardío De Las Sierras De Córdoba (Argentina): Una Aproximación Desde El Registro Artefactual Óseo

“…Ratto 2003) e intercambiables (Keeley 1982;Loponte 2008;. La literatura etnográfica vincula el empleo de estas puntas con la captura de pequeños animales, fundamentalmente aves (Ellis 1997).…”