After an initial examination of this assemblage, it was decided to concentrate on the functional aspect. The reasons for this are that the technology is fairly straightforward and has been described several times before (Blackwood 1950; Sillitoe 1982; 1988; Strathern 1969; Watson 1995; White 1967; 1979; White and Thomas 1972), and also the relative paucity of use-wear analyses of ethnographic stone artefacts.
In addition to providing use-wear information on the tools, five basic questions were addressed:
In order to maximise information gained from use-wear analyses, it is necessary to undertake an extensive experimental programme, in which experimentally produced artefacts are used on a range of raw materials and the subsequent use-wear traces compared with archaeological samples. In this study, it was not possible to create experimental artefacts. Though an attempt was made to interpret 'blind' the traces on the artefacts, which was an interesting exercise, though limited owing to the absence of comparative experimental material, the real value of this study lies in the description of the use-wear traces and also in the correlations between the ethnographic data and the use-wear information.
* Dr Robert S. Shiel
Agriculture, Food and Rural Development
University of Newcastle upon Tyne
© Internet Archaeology/Authors
Last updated: Wed Oct 8 2003