Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 58Archaeological and Geological StudiesCultural Heritage Materials AnalysisPleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 70 of the 70 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Use-wear Analysis of Nonflint Lithic Raw Materials: The Cases of Quartz/Quartzite and Obsidian

Clemente Conte, I., Lazuén Fernández, T., Astruc, L., Rodríguez Rodríguez, A. C.·2015·Manuals in Archaeological Method, Theory and Technique
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-08257-8_5
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/978-3-319-08257-8_5

Cites

70 of 70 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Citations

Cites

Show all 69 references

Research works printed but not linked: 33

  1. Almeida, F., Brugal, J.-P., Zilhão, J., & Plisson, H. (2007). An upper Paleolithic Pompeii: Technology, subsistence and paleoethnography at Lapa do Anecrial. In N. F. Bicho (Ed.), From the Mediterranean basin to the Portuguese Atlantic shore: Papers in honor of Anthony Marks (pp. 119–140). Faro: Actas do IV Congresso de Arqueologia Peninsular. Promontoria Monográfica 07.
  2. Altınbilek, Ç., & Iovino M. R. (2001). From shape to function: Notes on some end-scrapers from Çayönü. In I. Caneva, C. Lemorini, D. Zampetti, & P. Biagi (Eds.), Beyond tools. Redefining the PPN lithic assemblages of the Levant (pp. 161–164). Berlin: Ex Oriente. (Proceedings of the third workshop on PPN chipped lithic industries, 1–4 November 1998, Venice).
  3. Anderson, P. C. (1994). Reflections on the significance of two typological classes in the light of experimentation and microwear analysis: Flint sickles and obsidian “Cayönü tools”. In H. G. Gebel & S. K. et Koslowski (Eds.), Neolithic chipped stone industries of the fertile crescent (pp. 61–82). Berlin: Ex Oriente. (Proceedings of the first workshop on PPN chipped lithic industries).
  4. Aoyama, K. (1993). Experimental microwear analysis on Maya obsidian tools: Case study of the La Entrada Region, Honduras. In P. C. Anderson, S. Beyries, M. Otte, et al. (Eds.), Traces et fonction, les gestes retrouvés (Vol. 2, pp. 423–432). Liège: Université de Liège. (ERAUL; 50. actes du colloque international de Liège, 8–10 décembre 1990).
  5. Astruc, L., Jautée, E., Vargiolu R., & et Zahouani H. (2001). La texture des matières siliceuses et son influence sur le nature et le développement des traces d’usure: apports des méthodes expérimentales. L’exemple des cherts de la formation de Lefkara (Chypre). In L. Bourguignon, I. Ortega, & M.-Ch. Frère-Sautot (Eds.), Préhistoire et approche expérimentale (pp. 205–224). Montagnac: Editions Monique Mergoil.
  6. Astruc, L., Kayacan, N., & Özbaşaran, M. (2008). Technical activities held at Musular: First approach through use-wear analysis. Arkeometry sonuçları toplantısı, 23, 165–172.
  7. Ataman, K. (1988). The chipped stone assemblages from Can Hassan III: A study in typology, technology and function. PhD Thesis, Institute of Archaeology, University College, London, December 1988.
  8. Badalyan, R. S., Harutyunyan, A. A., Chataigner, C., Le Mort F., Chabot, J., Brochier, J.-E., Balasescu, A., Radu, V., & Hovsepyan, R., (2010). The settlement of Aknashen-Khatunarkh, a Neolithic site in the Ararat Plain (Armenia): Excavation results 2004–2009. Tüba-Ar, 13, 187–220.
  9. Beyries, S. (1982). Comparaison de traces d’utilisation sur différentes roches siliceuses (pp. 235–240). Louvain: Studia Praehistorica Belgica 2.
  10. Bracco, J.-P., & Morel, P. (1998). Outillage en quartz et boucherie au Paléolithique supérieur: quelques observations expérimentales. In J.-P. Brugal, L. Meignen, & M. et Patou-Mathis (Eds.), Économie préhistorique: les comportements de subsistance au Paléolithique (pp. 387–395). Sophia Antipolis: A.P.D.C.A.
  11. Caneva, I., Lemorini, C., & Zampetti, D. (1996). Lithic technology and functionality through time and space at Çayönü. In S. K. Kozlowski & H. G. K. Gebel (Eds), Neolithic chipped stone industries of the fertile crescent, and their contemporaries in adjacent regions, studies in early near eastern production, subsistence, and environment 3 (pp. 385–402). Berlin: Ex Oriente.
  12. Fullagar, R. (1986). Use-wear on quartz. In G. Ward (Ed.), Archaeology at ANZAAS (pp. 191–197). Canberra: Canberra Archaeological Society.
  13. Gibaja, J. F., Clemente, I., & Carvalho, A. F. (2009). The use of quartzite tools in Prehistory. Some examples from the Portuguese Neolithic. In M. Araujo Igreja & I. Clemente Conte (Eds.), Recent functional studies on non flint stone tools: Methodological improvements and archaeological inferences (p. 41). Portugal: Fundação para a Ciencia e Tecnologia (Ministerio da Ciencia e da Tecnologia) IGESPAR Ministerio da Cultura.
  14. González Urquijo, J. E., & Ibáñez Estévez, J. J. (1994). Metodología de análisis funcional de instrumentos talaldos en sílex. Bilbao: Cuadernos de Arqueología 14, Universidad de Deusto.
  15. Greiser, S. T., & Sheets, P. D. (1979). Raw materials as a functional variable in use-wear studies. In B. Hayden (Ed.), Lithic use-wear analysis (pp. 289–296). New York: Academic.
  16. Hay, C. A. (1977). Use-scratch morphology: A functionally significant aspect of edge damage on obsidian tools. Journal of Field Archaeology, 4, 491–494.
  17. Hayden, B. (Ed.). (1979). The Ho Ho classification and nomenclature committee report. In B. Hayden (Ed.), Lithic use-wear analysis (pp. 133–135). New York: Academic.
  18. Kazaryan, H. (1993). Butchery knives in the Mousterian Sites of Armenia. In P. Anderson, S. Beyries, M. Otte, & H. Plisson (Eds.), Traces et Fonction:Les Gestes Retrouvés (pp. 79–85). Liège: ERAUL, No. 50, Université de Liège.
  19. Keeley, L. H. (1980). Experimental determination of stone tools uses. A micro-wear analysis. Prehistory, archaeology and ecology series. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  20. Knight, J. (1991). Vein quartz. Lithics, 12, 37–56.
  21. Lewenstein, S. (1991). Edge angles and tool function among the Maya: A meaningful relationship? In T. Hester & H. Shafer (Eds.), Maya stone tools (pp. 207–217). Madison: Prehistory.
  22. Mansur, M. E. (1999). Análisis funcional de instrumental lítico: problemas de formación y deformación de rastros de uso. In Actas Del XII Congreso Nacionalde Arqueologia Argentina, La plata, pp. 355–366.
  23. Mansur-Franchomme, M. E. (1988). Tracéologie et technologie: quelques données sur l’obsidienne. Industries Lithiques. Tracéologie et Technologie (Vol. 411, pp. 29–47). Oxford: BAR International Series.
  24. Odell, G. H. (1983). Problèmes dans d’étude des traces d’utilisation. Traces d’utilisation sur les outils néolithiques du Proche Orient. Travaux de la maison de l’orient nº 5, pp. 17–24.
  25. Pant, R. K. (1989). Etude microscopique des traces d’utilisation sur les outils de quartz de la Grotte de l’Arago, Tautavel, France. L’Anthropologie, 9(3), 689–704.
  26. Rodríguez Rodríguez, A. C. (1993b). Analyse fonctionnelle des outillages lithiques en basalte de l’île de La Palma (Iles Canaries). Prémiers résultats. Actes du Colloque Le Geste Retrouvé á Liege 1990. ERAUL 50, pp. 295–301.
  27. Rodríguez Rodríguez, A. C. (1999). The reconstruction of ancient leather technology or how to mix methodological approaches. Urgeschichtliche Materialhefte, 14, 99–110.
  28. Rodríguez Rodríguez, A. (2009). Use-wear analysis on volcanic grainy rocks: Problems and perspectives. The exemple of Canary Island. Material. In M. de Araújo & I. Clemente (Eds.), Recent functional studies on non flint stone tools: Methodological improvements and archaeological inferences. Lisboa: CD Publication, 26–45.
  29. Semenov, S. A. (1972). Obsidian knives from burials in the crater of Ngorongoro Volcano. Kratie soobschenia Instituta arkheologii, 131, 31–35. (in Russian).
  30. Sussman, C. (1987). Résultats d’une étude des microtraces d’usure sur un échantillon d’artefacts d’Olduvai (Tanzanie). L’Anthropologie, 91, 375–380.
  31. Toselli, A., Pijoan, J., & Barceló, J. A. (2002). La descripción de trazas de uso en materias primas volcánicas:Rresultados preliminares de un análisis estadístico descriptivo. In I. Clemente, R. Risch, & J. Gibaja (Eds.), Análisis Funcional. Su aplicación al estudio de sociedades prehistóricas. BAR International Series (Vol. S1073, pp. 65–79). Oxford: Archeopress.
  32. Tykot, R. H., Iovino, M. R., Martinelli, M. C., & Beyer, L. (2006). Ossidiana da Lipari: le fonti, la distribuzione, la tipologia e le tracce d’usura. Atti del XXXIX Riunione Scientifica dell’Istituto Italiano di Preistoria e Protostoria: Materie prime e scambi nella preistoria italiana, Firenze, 25–27 November 2004, pp. 592–597.
  33. Vaughan, P. C., & Perlès, C. (1983). Pièces lustrées, travail des plantes et moisson à Franchti (Grèce). In M. C. Cauvin (Ed.), Traces d’utilisation sur les outils néolithiques du Proche-Orient (pp. 209–222). Lyon: CNRS.

Cited by

See all 58

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Clemente Conte, I., Lazuén Fernández, T., Astruc, L., & Rodríguez Rodríguez, A. C.
Affiliations
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
ORCID
Astruc, L.
Venue
Manuals in Archaeological Method, Theory and Technique
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published
2014-11-07
Pages
59-81
ISSN
1571-5752 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1007/978-3-319-08257-8_5
OpenAlex
W1874464708
Cited by
54
References
69
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 1
FWCI
41.44
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Manuals in archaeological method, theory and technique (publishedVersion)
  • Acceda (Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria) (submittedVersion)
  • DIGITAL.CSIC (Spanish National Research Council (CSIC)) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology (arts and humanities) › Archaeological and Geological Studies
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology (arts and humanities) › Cultural Heritage Materials Analysis
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Pleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology
Keywords
use-wear analysis, quartz, quartzite, obsidian, microtraces, lithic technology, raw material selection, experimental archaeology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Use-wear Analysis of Nonflint Lithic Raw Materials: The Cases of Quartz/Quartzite and Obsidian. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/978-3-319-08257-8_5
The paper
Clemente Conte, I., Lazuén Fernández, T., Astruc, L., & Rodríguez Rodríguez, A. C. (2015). Use-wear Analysis of Nonflint Lithic Raw Materials: The Cases of Quartz/Quartzite and Obsidian. Manuals in Archaeological Method, Theory and Technique. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08257-8_5

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.