Hunter-Gatherer Mobility and Versatility: A Consideration of Long-Term Lithic Supply in the Midwest

Seeman, Mark F.; Colucci, Amanda Nicole; Fulk, Charles

doi:10.1017/aaq.2019.72

Cited by 6 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Combined with data on site numbers, distributions and settings, and regional subsistence-settlement trends, allometric patterns and curation rates can be correlated with broader cultural trends and hypotheses—for instance, higher curation rates as populations became more sedentary—tested. (For analysis of land-use scale using collector-derived stone tools from Ohio, see Seeman et al 2020. )…”

Section: Collaboration and Big Data In Archaeologymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Central Ohio Archaeological Digitization Survey

Nolan

Shott

Olson

2022

Adv. archaeol. pract.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Significant parts of the archaeological record are in private hands, including those of responsible and responsive stewards (RRS). This is not necessarily a bad thing. The Central Ohio Archaeological Digitization Survey (COADS) engages RRS in collaborative study of central Ohio prehistory. COADS leverages the mass of RRS data constructively to add depth and breadth to a regional archaeological record. We recorded over 12,000 diagnostic points and about 5,000 other stone tools from 32 RRS collections. All were scanned as two-dimensional (2D) images, and a sample as three-dimensional (3D) models for landmark-based geometric morphometric (LGM) analysis and GIS analysis of prehistoric land use. The resulting dataset is >4.7 times the number of diagnostics recorded in the Ohio SHPO database for the region, shedding new light on land use and tool use over millennia. In addition to academic research, COADS creates an accessible collection of 3D models available to RRS colleagues and to society at large. This reciprocal sharing mutually benefits professionals and the RRS community. Professionals are not the only ones who research the cultural past; the more and better we collaborate with RRS and others with legitimate interests, the better our common understanding of that past.

show abstract

Section: Collaboration and Big Data In Archaeologymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Central Ohio Archaeological Digitization Survey

Nolan

Shott

Olson

2022

Adv. archaeol. pract.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, macroscopic identification of Upper Mercer chert should be considered provisional until objective and quantitative sourcing methods are employed, not simply assumed to be correct based on proximity to source (cf. Seeman et al, 2020:127).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Empirically and objectively linking a lithic artifact found at an archaeological site to a particular outcrop is also not without obstacles (Boulanger et al, 2015:551; Speer, 2019:200). Many toolstone identification methods are based on qualitative descriptions of macroscopic properties (e.g., Ellis, 2011; Seeman et al, 2020). The problems with these approaches are that such properties alone are insufficient for discriminating among similar materials or for assigning specific provenance to materials if they occur in geographically widespread outcrops (Boulanger et al, 2015:551; see also Hoard et al, 1992; Huckell et al, 2011; Luedtke, 1979, 1992; Speer, 2014a, 2014b).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In some instances, archaeologists have claimed that it was transported hundreds of kilometers (Gramly, 1999; Simons et al, 1984). Despite assertions that Upper Mercer is “among the easier midwestern materials to identify based on texture, luster, compositional homogeneity, and diagnostic inclusions” (Seeman et al, 2020:119), in actuality it possesses several look‐alikes, such as Zaleski, Boggs, Kanawha, Plum Run, andFlint Ridge (DeRegnaucourt & Georgiady, 1998). DeRegnaucourt and Georgiady (1998:80) even note that the Ferdinand variety of Holland chert from southwestern Indiana “is identical to Upper Mercer and can only be separated by provenience”.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Using visible derivative spectroscopy to assess flaked projectile point provenance: Application and preliminary analysis of the welling site, Ohio, U.S.A

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Linking the stone raw material of a lithic artifact to its original outcrop is an important endeavor that facilitates archaeologists' understanding of prehistoric mobility, trade, economics, and land use. Based on macroscopic identification, archaeologists' presume that prehistoric Holocene occupants of the Welling Site, Ohio, made use of the locally available Upper Mercer chert for the majority of their projectile points.Here we apply visible derivative spectroscopy (VDS) to quantitatively assess this claim by examining 55 projectile points from the site. VDS identified 85%, whereas macroscopic analysis found 73% of the projectile points examined derived from the Upper Mercer Chert. These proportions are not statistically different given the sample size. Although the VDS analysis supported the hypothesis that Welling's Holocene projectile points were predominately produced from Upper Mercer chert, discrepancies between the results of macroscopic versus VDS chert identification point to future avenues of research including an expansion of VDS analyzed hand samples and comparison of VDS to other sourcing methods. Nevertheless, we propose that VDS has much promise and should be researched further so that archaeologists' can add another tool to their lithic artifact raw material sourcing toolbox.

show abstract

“…Therefore, when discussing "quality," specificity is essential and subjectivity should be eschewed (cf. Seeman et al, 2020). In what particular manner is a lithic analyst thinking about raw material quality?…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Knapping quality of local versus exotic Upper Mercer chert (Ohio, USA) during the Holocene

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Stone that fractured conchoidally was an important resource for prehistoric huntergatherers. In recent years, archaeologists have come to realize that rather than defining stone "quality" simply and implicitly as "high" or "low," a stone's quality can be best defined in several different explicit and often quantitative ways involving production, function, or social benefits. Here, we examine the stone quality-defined as "fracture predictability"-of Upper Mercer chert when it is locally versus nonlocally acquired by prehistoric people in Ohio, USA. By quantitatively assessing silicon dioxide (SiO 2 ) content and loss on ignition, we compared stone tools from a site at the Upper Mercer outcrop (n = 42) to those found at archaeological sites over 100 km north of it (n = 126). Our results showed that the former on average were of significantly higher quality than the latter. We conclude with a consideration of factors that could cause this difference in quality, suggesting that the lower quality of Upper Mercer chert in northern Ohio might be explained by northern people's decreased familiarity with it during the Archaic period and by their decreased access to it during the Woodland and Late Precontact periods.

show abstract

Hunter-Gatherer Mobility and Versatility: A Consideration of Long-Term Lithic Supply in the Midwest

Cited by 6 publications

References 35 publications

The Central Ohio Archaeological Digitization Survey

The Central Ohio Archaeological Digitization Survey

Using visible derivative spectroscopy to assess flaked projectile point provenance: Application and preliminary analysis of the welling site, Ohio, U.S.A

Knapping quality of local versus exotic Upper Mercer chert (Ohio, USA) during the Holocene

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About