Maney Publishing

ARCHAIC BIFACE MANUFACTURE: PRODUCTION FAILURES, A CHRONICLE OF THE

MISBEGOTTEN
Author(s): Jay K. Johnson
Source: Lithic Technology, Vol. 8, No. 2 (August, 1979), pp. 25-35
Published by: Maney Publishing
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/23272880 .
Accessed: 15/06/2014 09:46

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Maney Publishing is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Lithic Technology.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.49 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 09:46:03 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
ARTICLES PRODUCTION FAILURE TYPOLOGY

It is possible to divide the production failures into two

ARCHAIC BIFACE MANUFACTURE: PRODUCTION FAIL broad categories: those that originate from the point of force
and those
URES, A CHRONICLE OF THE MISBEGOTTEN which, although they may result from bifacial
thinning, occur at a point on the biface removed from the area
being worked. These have been labeled direct fractures and
indirect fractures respectively.
Jay K. Johnson
Department of Sociology and Anthropology Direct Fractures
University of Mississippi
— An
Hinge Fracture abruptly curving right angle termination
to a thinning flake scar. Strictly speaking, step fracture as well
Biface production rejects recovered from the site of the as hinge fracture is included under this failure type; it is
Yellow Creek Power Plant in northeastern Mississippi display a
recorded only when successive hinge fractures in a restricted
number of different kinds of manufacturing errors.A produc
area appear to have made further bifacial thinning impossible.
tion failure typology is applied to a subsample of the Yellow It is the most common of the direct failures appearing in 125
Creek material in order to place these fractures within the
of 177 bifaces under study.
production trajectory. Considerable behavioral information is
revealed. — A
Reverse Fracture (Figs. 1, 2) bifacial thinning flake which
begins normally but curves back through the body of the

the Tennessee biface to remove the bifacial edge opposite the point of origin.
For the past two years, Valley Authority
of Mississippi in a program of There are seven examples in the study set.
has funded the University
archaeological research directed toward the excavation and
Perverse —
Fracture (Fig. 3) This type, defined and named by
analysis of a number of aboriginal quarry sites in northeastern
sites are located near Pickwick Reservoir on Crabtree (1972:82), results when the fracture plane twists on
Mississippi. These
an axis of rotation corresponding with the direction of force.
the site of the Yellow Creek Power Plant. The primary activity
As a consequence, the biface is truncated. Four of Site 19's
represented by the material recovered from the Yellow Creek
specimens show this error, or.
sites is chert biface manufacture. Earlier preliminary reports
have dealt with debitage (Thorne, Broyles and Johnson 1977),
Fracture — oriented flake scars
models Impact Longitudinally de
biface morphology (Johnson 1977), and settlement
rived from the end of the blade,
distal possibly indicative of
(Johnson 1978); a final report is due in September of 1979. A
impact . . (Ahler 1971:52). There are four recorded
common goal of all these reports has been the explication of
instances of impact fracture in this sample.
biface production trajectories. This paper will deal with
another aspect of Yellow Creek biface manufacture, produc
Remote Fractures
tion failures.

The
preliminary results reported herein are based on the — A transverse the
Lateral Snap (Figs. 4, 5) fracture, bisecting
analysis of the 177 whole or nearly whole bifaces from Site 19
biface in a relatively straight line forming an obtuse angle with
(22-TS-818), one of the larger sites in the project area. Of the
the longitudinal axis. In profile the fracture face forms a gentle
177 bifaces under consideration, 28 were completed to the
"s" curve. Both Purdy (1975:134) and Crabtree (1972:60)
point that they display basal modification which was presum or 'end
discuss this fracture type; they agree that lateral snap,
ably related to hafting. These stemmed bifaces are generally
shock' as Crabtree calls it, results when the force of the
homogeneous in haft configuration, suggesting that the Site 19
thinning blow exceeds the elastic properties of the artifact.
collection represents a relatively restricted span of occupation. Lateral is the most common of the remote fractures in
snap
The artifacts are typologically similar to Benton and White
the sample, accounting for 44 of the 177 bifaces. Of that
Springs types indicating a Middle to Late Archaic temporal
number, 36 show fossiliferous inclusions on the fracture face
assignment. Debitage analysis has suggested that Site 19
corroborating Purdy's (1975:135) suggestion that lateral snap
represents the final stages in the biface production trajectory
is more apt to occur at a point of weakness.
at Yellow Creek.

This constitutes only a portion of the total — all of the Site 19

sample Incipient Fracture Plane (Fig. 6) Nearly
number of bifaces which will be studied in the final analysis, bifaces to have been made from Fort Payne chert. In
appear
but a progress report at this stage in the research will serve at occurs in broad
the Yellow Creek area, this material typically
least two purposes: it will force a codification of problems, horizontal beds in which the limestone matrix has been
methodologies, and goals; and it will provide an overview of of the resulting vertical
weathered into clay. As a consequence
this aspect of the Yellow Creek analysis which may be of use numerous fracture have These
movement, planes developed.
to others working on similar problems. cracks are often discontinuous and hard
are, to detect. There
One of the main goals of the production failure analysis therefore, some fairly complete bifaces which were destroyed
is a classification and description of such failures. Primary by fracture along one of these fault lines. This error is
reliance is placed on previous work (Crabtree 1972,Purdy distinguished by a completely flat fracture face which, in the
Ahler 1971), observation of recurring patterns in the Yellow Creek material, has coarse texture and a reddish hue.
1975,
Yellow Creek material, and a limited amount of experimenta The color and texture are likely the result of weathering due
tion. This classification will provide a basis for understanding to ground water. There are 18 examples of this fracture type
the technological system represented by the Site 19 bifaces. in the study collection.
Since these artifacts are, for the most part, production rejects,
— This fracture has been
it has been to determine their placement in the Crenated Fracture (Fig. 7) type
possible
means of a series of ordinal and ratio discussed by Purdy (1975:137), who feels that it is a likely
production trajectory by
variables the failure result of improper thermal treatment. Therefore, the fracture
(Johnson 1977). By projecting production
classification the indices, the faces show none of the features characteristic of mechanically
against production trajectory
errors be placed in their proper induced fractures. When bifaces displaying this error are seen
manufacturing may systemic
within a biface model. in plainview, the fracture forms a sinuous line across the face
context production
25

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.49 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 09:46:03 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
of the artifact giving the appearance of having been cut with a PRODUCTION TRAJECTORY PLACEMENT
jigsaw. Nine bifaces from Site 19 show crenated fractures.
A number of different indices have been developed in an
Pot Lid Fracture — to measure the of bifaces within the
Another heat related failure, this fracture attempt placement
takes the formof shallow, cone-shaped depressions on the face Yellow Creek production trajectory (Johnson 1977). Among
of the artifact, often overlapping one another. There are five the more successful of the continuous scales is a variable called
examples of this type of error. the thinning index. This index is derived by dividing the
plainview area of the biface into its weight. Thus, an overall
— A measure of the of thinning is achieved. The smaller the
Haft Snap transverse break across the stem of the artifact, degree
likely the result of utilization. There is one example. thinning index value, the thinner the artifact.

figure ö shows thefrequency distribution of the

thinning index for the 177 biface samples. There is a strong
peak at 1.25 and a second at 2.00. Since most of these
INTERRELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN FRACTURE TYPES
artifacts are production rejects, this bimodality suggests that
there are two critical points in the production trajectory.
Table 1 is a crosstabulation of the production failure
Using the mid-point of the intermediate class to divide these
types. The principal diagonal records the total number of
modes, the thinning index continuum was dichotomized into
occurrences of each error. Off-diagonal entries give the
two groups: those bifaces less than 1.7 and those greater than
co-occurrence of the fracture types. If the table dealt only or equal to 1.7. The latter group includes initial production
with single and double occurrences, the row and column
rejects while the former represents middle and late stages of
corresponding with each error would sum to equal the
the production trajectory.
diagonal. However, there are six cases where three types of
error are found on one biface. Four show In order to examine the distribution of the production
production hinge
fractures and lateral with two of these failures within the two modes, it was necessary to assign each
snap, having incipient
fracture as their third production error. One of these artifact to a single failure type. In those cases where bifaces
planes
four has a crenated fracture and the last exhibit two or more failures, the fracture most likely to have
has a perverse
fracture. The two bifaces have fractures and caused rejection from the production trajectory was chosen.
remaining hinge
reverse one a crenated fracture as the third For example, while it is sometimes possible to recover from a
fractures, having
failure and the other a lateral Most of the bifaces which thinning failure such as hinge fracture, the truncation of a
snap.
show three biface by a lateral snap would eliminate the possibility of
production errors, and many of these which have
further reduction. A biface showing both fractures and
two, are the result of attempts to recover from an earlier error. hinge
the sample includes four of lateral snap would be tabulated under lateral snap. In instances
Although only examples
their pattern of occurrence is informative. where an artifact has two fractures, both of which were
perverse fractures,
are found in combination with hinge fractures. disastrous, it was counted under the less common of the two.
They always
Moreover, in these four bifaces, the point of origin for the Table 2 is a crosstabulationof production failures and
perverse fracture corresponds with the area where the hinge the thinning index
dichotomy. This distribution proves to be
fracture occurred. This supports Crabtree's non-random at a confidence level of 95%, yielding a chi-square
(1972:82) sugges
tion that perverse fractures are often the result of excessive value of 35.84. Since there are a total of 69 early stage bifaces
force being applied biface in an to and 108 late stage artifacts for any one production error
during thinning attempt
remove the mass left by successive hinge fractures. would be 0.64 if the distribution of errors was independent of
The lack of correspondence between pot lid fractures position within the production trajectory. If the production
and crenated fractures is somewhat They are both errors are arranged in descending order according to the early
surprising.
thermal fractures but
it appears, based on this limited sample, stage/late stage ratio (Table 3), it may be seen that three errors
that they resulted from different have a ratio greater than 0.64 indicating that they are more
processes. Purdy
(1975:136-7) indicates that pot lid fractures occur when the common in the early stages than might be expected by chance
temperature is elevated too quickly while crenated fractures alone.
result from too rapid cooling. It seems likely that crenated The Table 3 arrangement also gives two other gauges of
fractures are due to improper, although intentional, thermal the position of the production errors within the manufacturing
treatment. Pot lid fractures, on the other hand, may be the The mean index value for each fracture
sequence. thinning
result of accidental exposure to heat. type a second means for ordering the errors. These
provides
The last pattern to be observed in Table 1 is somewhat values are included in Table 3 and it may be seen that there is
more subtle. It requires a brief sidetrack into probability between the order of the early
good agreement stage/late stage
theory. If two attributes are independent, the likelihood of ratios and that of the index means. This table also
thinning
their co-occurrence is equal to the product of their individual includes the standard deviations and coefficients of variation
probabilities of occurrence. In this case, probability of of the thinning index for each fracture type.
occurrence is computed by dividing the number of examples There is a third means of placing production errors
of eachfracture type by the sample size. The expected within the manufacturing sequence, by reference to a three
frequency for a particular combination of attributes may be part The
production typology. manufacturing trajectory has
derived by multiplying the probability of their co-occurrence been broken down into and Stemmed
Blanks, Preforms,
by the sample size. The logic and computations are similar to Bifaces (Johnson 1977),by means of a key (Fig. 9). The key is
those upon which the chi-square statistic is based. based on four variables:type of percussor, precentage of the
Expected values were computed for all of the cells in biface not covered with bifacial thinning scars, thinning index,
Table 1. In all but two instances, there is fairly good and presence or absence of basal modification. A crosstabula
agreement between observed and expected values. One of tion of this typology and the production error tvoes (Table 4)
these exceptions is the correspondence between hinge frac gives a chi-square value of 61.08 the distribution to be
showing
tures and perverse fractures which has already been discussed. non-random at a confidence level of 95%.
significantly
The other is the occurrence of lateral snap as a single error. Furthermore, all the failures lid
production except pot
The expected value, 26.4, is more than twice the observed fractures are associated with a These
clearly single stage.
value of 11. Lateral
snap occurs most often with are shown in the
hinge assignments right hand column of Table 3,
fractures suggesting, once again, that thinning failures due to once the initial of the
confirming again ordering production
hinge fracture precipitated more serious fractures. errors.

26

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.49 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 09:46:03 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Heat Treatment doesn't occur until considerable bifacial modification has been
done. This fits nicely with the results of this preliminary
The last major element to be
placed in the production
analysis. In computing a mean thinning index for crenated
trajectory model is thermal treatment. After heat induced
fractures, the three examples with complete gloss have been
improvement of the working qualities of chert was demon
eliminated in an attempt to limit consideration to those
strated (Crabtree and Butler 1964, Purdv and Brooks 1971),
bifaces which have just undergone thermal treatment. The
the technique was found to have broad spatial and temporal
mean index for six specimens is 2.22, with a standard
distribution in North America. However, there has been only a
deviation of 0.96.
limited amount of work directed toward placing the process A second approach is to examine the frequency distri
within a specific manufacturing sequence (Purdy 1973, Collins
bution of artifacts with and without gloss relative to the
1973, Collins and Fenwich 1974).
have
thinning index (Fig. 10). There are a total of 144 bifaces with
Our own experiments with Fort Payne chert
gloss and 33 without. The ratio of nogloss to gloss is 0.23.
demonstrated that most of this material may be improved by Class intervals on the thinning index with a higher ratio than
heating (Raspet 1978). Moreover, although color changes this have more artifacts without gloss than would be expected
accompany this alteration, the best single indicator of im
by chance. Those with a smaller ratio have fewer. If
proved flaking is an increase in luster on the scars produced by distribution is divided at a point corresponding to 2.53, all of
flakes which were removed after thermal alteration. Similar
the categories to the right have more non-glossy artifacts than
conclusions have been reached in other studies (Crabtree and
might be expected while in those to the left, artifacts with
Butler 1964, Purdy and Brooks 1971, Collins and Fenwich
gloss predominate. This suggests that tne most strategic
1974). placement for thermal treatment in the production trajectory
In order to derive a finer measure of the location of
is at about this point. Its near agreement with the mean
thermal treatment in the reduction
sequence, a six-part ordinal
thinning index value for crenated fractures lends confidence to
typology has been used. It is based entirely upon the
both measures.
distribution of gloss and its relationship to truncating fractures

(the fracture face created by lateral snap, reverse, perverse and

crenated fractures) and bifacial thinning (flake scars resulting Conclusions
from that activity). Bifacial thinning gloss was classified as
absent, partial, or total while truncating fracture gloss was The Yellow Creek production trajectory model, as it
recorded as absent or present since these failures result from a now stands, is presented schematically in Figure 11. The
single fracture. The combination of these two dimensions, horzontal axis corresponds to the thinning index with the
bifacial thinning gloss and truncating fracture gloss, produces values decreasing from left to right. Each of the production
six classes. In Table 5 these classes are ordered so that each errors is located in reference to its mean thinning index value
category reflects increasing amounts of bifacial reduction plus or minus one standard deviation. The horizontal axis is
subsequent to thermal alteration. If thermal treatment consist divided and subdivided according to the early stage/late stage
ently occurs at the same point in the production trajectory, dichotomy and the Blank/Perform/Stemmed Biface tricho
the sequence of the
groups defined by the gloss categories tomy. Other features of the production trajectory such as the
should duplicate the order of the scale. Table 5 presents the placement of thermal treatment are also marked.
mean thinning index values for each of the groups of artifacts. Hinge fracture, reverse fracture, and crenated fracture all
With the exception of the category "truncating fracture have high thinning index values placing them in the early stage

only," there is a decrease in the index that conforms with the segment of the chart. These fracture types are not dependent

predicted order for the gloss classes. The exceptional category upon relative thinness of the artifact. Unlike the other
is represented by only one specimen. production errors, the mechanical force does not travel
The mean thinning index values also indicate that through the mass of the biface. In fact, one of the early stage
thermal treatment takes place at some point prior to the errors, crenated fracture, is more apt to occur with thicker

early/late stage breakpoint A of 1.7. of this crosstabulation artifacts since greater mass increases the risk of thermal shock

dichotomy with gloss (Table 6) shows that 63% of the early (Mandeville 1973:191). Hinge fracture is also more likely in

stage bitaces show gloss, conhrming the early stage placement the early stages of production since the regularized pattern of
of thermal treatment. The chi-square statistic for this paradigm bifacial removal is not fully established and platform irregular
is 55.15, showing the two classifications to be dependent at a ities as well
as unwieldy protuberances are common.
confidence level of 95%. This supports the observation that Of the
late failures, lateral snap, incipient fracture plane,
thermal alteration occurs at a fairly consistent point in the and perverse fractures are production related failures. All three

production trajectory. involve transmittal of force through the body of the biface and
There are at least
two approaches to defining the precise are therefore more apt to occur on thinner artifacts. Perverse

production trajectory placement of thermal treatment. The fracture seems particularly dependent upon thinness; not only
first is by reference to production errors. Of the fracture does it display the smallest mean thinning index of the

types, crenated fracture appears to relate most closely with production errors, it has the smallest coefficient of variation
intentional thermal alteration. As is presently understood, (Table 3).
crenated fracture occurs when temperature changes during the It was suggested in the discussion of interrelationships
cooling phase of thermal alteration are improperly controlled. between the biface failures that pot lid fractures are not the
As such, bifaces displaying this fracture type should have result of intentional heat treatment. If this is so, their

dropped out of the production trajectory immediately after occurrence should be independent of their placement in the
thermal treatment. Therefore, gloss should be restricted to the production trajectory. The thinning index should display a
face of the crenated fractures. In fact, of the nine examples of broad range of vanation. It does not. Its coefficient of
crenated fracture, one shows no gloss, five show gloss on the variation is comparable to that of the other fracture types
uncontrolled fracture and partial gloss on the controlled (Table 3). Since
are there
only five examples of pot lid
fracture, and three show complete gloss. The lack of gloss on fracture, this may reflect a sampling problem.
one specimen could be explained if the threshold of alteration Impact fracture and haft snap predominate in the
had not been reached. The remaining eight specimens were a stemmed biface category (Table 4) as expected. However, one
dilemma until Purdy (personal communication) pointed out of the four examples of impact fractures occurred on a
that the conditions which produce crenated fracture don't preform. Either preforms were being hafted or impact fracture

always result in immediate truncation. Often the fracture can result from something other than use as a projectile point.

27

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.49 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 09:46:03 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 The placement of thermal treatment relatively early in Collins, M. B. and J. M. Fenwick
the Site 19 production trajectory is in agreement with the 1974 Heat treating of chert: methods of interpretation
findings of Collins and Fenwich (1974:141) in a study of and their application. Plains Anthropologist
material from Kentucky. Purdy (1973:15), on the other hand, 19(64):134-145.
found that thermal treatment occurred much later in the
production trajectory represented by a Florida assemblage.
This be a function of differences in the nature of the Crabtree, D. E.
may
response of raw material to thermal treatment. 1972 An introduction to flintworking. Occasional
The structural reasons the bimodal distribu Papers of the Idaho State University Museum 28.
underlying
tion of bifaces within the Yellow Creek production trajectory
(Fig. 8) are evident when it is observed that the early and late
Crabtree, D. E. and B. R. Butler
stage modes fall at the points of maximum overlap of the
1964 Notes on experiments in flint knapping, I: heat
respective early and late stage production errors (Fig. 11). The
treatments of silica minerals. Tebiwa 7:1-6.
early mode is the result of failure to overcome irregularities in
the Blanks and improper thermal treatment. After a threshold
thinning index value of about 1.7, late stage production errors,
Johnson, Jay K.
dependent on relative thinness, become critical. Finally, there
1977 Archaic biface manufacture: con
morphological
are a few bifaces with fractures (haft snap and impact fracture) siderations. Paper given at the 34th annual South
which are not related
production, to being the result of
eastern Archaeological Conference, Lafayette,
utilization or post-depositional activity. Louisiana.
It should be emphasized, once again, that this is a
tentative model. The sample size, 177, is somewhat restricted
1978 Settlement systems at Yellow Creek. Manuscript
with some production errors represented by as few as four on file, University of Mississippi, Department of
bifaces. The proposed production trajectory will be tested by
Anthropology.
reference to the total Yellow
sample. Creek
Additionally, Site
19 is not representative of the full range of activities involved
m the Yellow Creek sample. Specifically, Blanks from the very
Mandeville, M. D.
earliest portion of the production trajectory, those from the
1973 A consideration of the thermal of
are not included pretreatment
quarry sites, in the present study. However, it
chert. Plains Anthropologist 18(61):177-202.
may be predicted, on the basis of the above model, that
production errors from the quarry sites will be almost
exclusively hinge fractures and reverse fractures. B. A.
Purdy,
1973 A processual analysis of projectile manu
point
Acknowledgements facture. at the 38th annual
Paper given meetinng
of the Society for American Wash
Archaeology,
I thank R. M. Thorne and as
Bettye Broyles who, ington, D.C.
principal investigator and field investigator, have been critical
to the success of the Yellow Creek project. The Tennessee 1975 Fractures for the archaeologist. In Lithic techno
Valley Authority has provided support, both financial and
logy: making and using stone tools, ed. by E.
logistic, throughout the course of the project and I would like 133-141. Mouton
Swanson, pp. Publishers, The
to thank the various people who administer TVA's archae Hague.
oiogicai program, in particular Bennett Graham and Major
McCollough. This paper was presented at the 35th Annual
of the Southeastern Purdy, B. A. and H. K. Brooks
Meeting Archaeological Conference in
Tennessee. Conversations with 1971 Thermal alteration of silica minerals: an archaeo
Knoxville, Barbara Purdy,
Wayne Roberts and Ken were useful in logical approach. Science 173:322-325.
Binkley particularly
rewriting this report.

Raspet, C. A.
References Cited
1978 Thermal alterations of Fort chert from the
Payne
Yellow Creek Power Plant Site. Manuscript on file,
Ahler, S. A.
University of Mississippi, Department of Anthro
1971 Projectile point form and function at Rodgers
pology.
Shelter, Missouri. Missouri Archaeological Society,
Research Series 8.

Thome, R. M., B. J. Broyles, and J. K. Johnson

Collins, M. B. 1977 Intensive archaeological survey and testing at the
1973 Additional observations of the thermal treatment Yellow
proposed Creek Power Plant Site, Tisho
of chert in the Solutrean of Laugerie Haute. mingo County, Mississippi. Manuscript on file,
Proceedings of the Historical Society for 1973. Tennessee Valley Authority, Chattanooga.

28

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.49 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 09:46:03 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 TABLE 1

CO-OCCURRENCE OF FRACTURE TYPES

p
0) to 0) 0) to C to T3 to to
SU to f-. w ^ 1—1 to su to Sh T> SU
to 3 to 3 Eh 3 P 3 cd •H 3 P 3 •H 3
rH £■« to -P SU P to P o P SU O.P to cd p J P
hO o b0 O to O > O cd O to a •HOC C o o P Q.
C C cd > cd SU cd Q< cd p cd o cd cd to cd p cd V4 cd
•rH Sh •H SU S-. to k E Ph cd C C u su o su cd C
CO w X Ph PC fr, a, M fa 1-5 CO H Exi CU O fa O-i fc. "X. CO

Single Error 106

Hinge Fracture 74 125

Reverse Fracture i» 2 7

Perverse Fracture 0 H 0 4

Impact Fracture 3 1 0 0 ¿4

Lateral Snap 11 31 2 1 0 44

Incipient Fracture Plane 9 8 0 0 0 3 18

Crenated Fracture U 6 1 0 0 1 0 9

Pot Lid Fracture 1 U 0 0 0 0 0 0 5

Haft Snap 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

TABLE 2

CROSSTADULATION OF THINNING INDEX DICHOTOMY WITH FRACTURE TYPES

THINNING INDEX
FRACTURE TYPES >1.7 < 1.7

Mo Error 4 14
Hinge Fracture 46 28
Reverse Fracture 3 4
Perverse Fracture 0 4
Impact Fracture 0 4
Lateral Snap 5 32
Incipient Fracture Plane 6 12
Crenated Fracture M 5
Pot Lid Fracture 1 4
Haft Snap 0 1

TABLE 3

PRODUCTION TRAJECTORY PLACEMENT OF FRACTURE TYPES

*
T H I N N I N G INDEX

FRACTURE TYPES RATIO (> 1.7 / < 1/7) MEAN S.D. C.V.

Hinge Fracture 46/28 1. .64 2. .20 1. .02 46.

Crenated Fracture 4/5 0. ,80 1. • 76 0. .97 55. ,1% BLANK
Reverse Fracture 3/4 0. .75 1. .83 0, .94 55. . 4 %
Incipient Fracture Plane 6/12 0. .50 1. ,66 0. .77 46. ,4% PREFORM
Pot Lid Fracture 1/4 0. .25 1. .35 0. .61 45. ,2% 7
Lateral 5/32 0, . 16 1. .39 0. .77 55. M
Snap PREFORM
Perverse Fracture 0/4 0. .00 1. .17 0. .27 23. .1%
Impact Fracture 0/4 0. ,00 1, . 40 0. .06 4. .3%
0/1 0. ,00 0. .98 — — — STEMMED BIFACE
Haft Snap

29

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.49 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 09:46:03 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 TABLE 4
CROSSTABULATION OP PRODUCTION TRAJECTORY TYPES AND FRACTURE TYPES

PRODUCTION TRAJECTORY TYPES

FRACTURE TYPES BLANK PREFORM STEMMED BIFACE

No Error 7 ^ 7
Hinge Fracture 57 11 6
Reverse Fracture 5 2 0
Perverse Fracture 13 0
Impact Fracture 0 1 3
Lateral Snap 13 20 4
Incipient Fracture Plane 6 9 3
Crenated Fracture 4 3 2
Pot Lid Fracture 2 1 2
Haft Snap 0 0 1

TABLE 5
PRODUCTION TRAJECTORY PLACEMENT OF GLOSS TYPES

THINNING INDEX

GLOSS DISTRIBUTION TYPES NUMBER MEAN S .D.

No Gloss 33 2.94 1 .28

Truncating Only 1 3.29 -■
Thinning Partial 46 1.90 0 .59
Truncating and Thinning Partial 43 1.57 0 .66
Thinning Total 27 1.22 0 .29
Truncating and Thinning Total 27 1.17 0 .21

TABLE 6
CROSSTABULATION OP GLOSS TYPES AND THINNING INDEX DICHOTOMY

THINNING INDEX
> 1.7 < 1.7
GLOSS DISTRIBUTION TYPES

No Gloss 25 8
Truncating Only 1 0
Thinning Partial 26 20
Truncating and Thinning Partial 15 28
Thinning Total 2 25
Truncating and Thinning Total 0 27

30

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.49 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 09:46:03 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Figure 1. Reverse fracture, Figure 2. Reverse fracture,
artifact on left is 4.3 cm long. close upj 7-3 cm long.

Figure 3. Perverse fracture, Figure 4. Lateral snap,

artifact on right is 6.8 cm long. artifact on left is 8.2 cm long.

31

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.49 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 09:46:03 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Figure 5. Lateral snap, end view,
close up, 2.8 cm wide.

Figure 6. Incipient fracture plane,

10.3 cm long.

32

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.49 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 09:46:03 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Figure 7- Crenated. fracture,
5-9 cm long.

FIGURE 8. THINNING INDEX FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION, UNDIFFERENTIATED

33

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.49 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 09:46:03 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 FIGURE 9. BIFACE MANUFACTURING STAGE KEY

(PREDOM. HARD HAMMER)

YES NO

I \
(FLAKE £ 10)

NO YES

/ \
BLANK (THINNING <_1.7)

NO YES

/ \
BLANK (STEMMED)

NO YES

/ \
PREFORM STEMMED BIFACE

FIGURE 10. THINNING INDEX FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION, GLOSS AND NO GLOSS

34

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.49 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 09:46:03 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 FIGURE 11. PRODUCTION TRAJECTORY PLACEMENT OF FRACTURE TYPES

THINNING INDEX
3.2 2.8 2.4 2.0 1.6 1.2 0.8
i i I j. i
T
Mode Mod*
Incipient froc ure plane
i

Hinge
H—
Lateral
^snop
Crenated
—i
Pot lid
—I—
Reverse

i Perverse
i 4
Thermal Impact Haftsnap
Treatment
+ i
I
Blanks Preforms Stemmed bi faces

Early stage Late stage

35

This content downloaded from 62.122.78.49 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 09:46:03 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions