2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.jas.2010.11.013
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Discerning use-related micro-residues on tools: testing the multi-stranded approach for archaeological studies

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
17
0
1

Year Published

2011
2011
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
4
4

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 51 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
0
17
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…micro-wear was recorded using the criteria described in Lombard (2003;2005b), and the origin of micro-residues was investigated using the morphological characteristics published in (Lombard, 2004(Lombard, , 2005b(Lombard, , 2008 [see Appendix A for descriptions of residues]; Lombard and Wadley, 2007a;Wadley and Lombard, 2007). Some outcomes and applications of these methods have also been blind or independently tested Lombard and Wadley, 2007b;Langejans, 2010Langejans, , 2011, so that this multi-analytical approach is being continuously assessed and improved (also see Rots et al, 2011).…”
Section: Site Sample and Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…micro-wear was recorded using the criteria described in Lombard (2003;2005b), and the origin of micro-residues was investigated using the morphological characteristics published in (Lombard, 2004(Lombard, , 2005b(Lombard, , 2008 [see Appendix A for descriptions of residues]; Lombard and Wadley, 2007a;Wadley and Lombard, 2007). Some outcomes and applications of these methods have also been blind or independently tested Lombard and Wadley, 2007b;Langejans, 2010Langejans, , 2011, so that this multi-analytical approach is being continuously assessed and improved (also see Rots et al, 2011).…”
Section: Site Sample and Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Also, similar to other archaeological material, traces are interpreted as use-related within the context of the tool itself, i.e., layering on the tool, how they adhere to the tool surface/edge (i.e., were they originally wet, viscous or dry), where they are located in relation to tool morphology and other traces, and how they compare to the soil samples of the respective layers of the site (e.g. Wadley and Lombard, 2007;Langejans, 2011). This multi-stranded, contextual approach also helps to eliminate 'white noise' or coincidental residues, fungal growth and dust (e.g.…”
Section: Site Sample and Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Sibudu Cave is a finely stratified in situ shelter; there is no evidence for water-borne transport or remobilisation of materials (Pickering, 2006;Schiegl and Conard, 2006;Wadley et al, 2011). Experimental studies confirm that Sibudu Cave has excellent residue preservation and that material from the site is very suitable for residue studies (Langejans, 2010(Langejans, , 2011. In this paper I present results from a residue study conducted on so-called pièces esquillées from Sibudu Cave.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…For example, the repetitive clustering of attendant residues, such as the combination of fat, blood, bone, and animal tissue on a tool portion provides a far more secure interpretation of an animal residue type than any single residue . This approach is particularly relevant to archaeological contexts where some residues may be partially degraded and where the potential of ancient, post-depositional or post-excavation contaminants is high (Langejans, 2011).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%