Cited by 434

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Surface modification on bone: Trampling versus butchery

Olsen, Sandra L., Shipman, Pat·1988·Journal of Archaeological Science

Abstract

Previous researchers have reported difficulties in distinguishing between surface marks on bone formed by sedimentary abrasion and those inflicted while butchering. Trampling by large ungulates and humans has been credited with producing pseudocut marks: natural alterations to the bone that mimic cultural ones. The purposes of this research are: (1) to re-examine trampling as a taphonomic process, and (2) to suggest criteria useful for distinguishing sedimentary abrasion, including trampling, from butchery. Macroscopic and microscopic comparison of experimentally trampled bones and those which have had soft tissue removed with a flint tool demonstrate significant differences between the surface modifications produced by the two processes.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0305-4403(88)90081-7

Cites

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 17

  1. Andrews, 1985, Natural modifications to bones in a temperate setting, Man, 20, 675, 10.2307/2802756 · DOI
  2. Behrensmeyer, 1986, Trampling as a cause of bone surface damage and pseudo-cutmarks, Nature, 319, 768, 10.1038/319768a0 · DOI
  3. Brain, 1967, Bone weathering and the problem of bone pseudo-tools, South Africa Journal of Science, 63, 97
  4. Bunn, 1986, Systematic butchery by Plio/Pleistocene hominids at Olduvai Gorge, Tanzania, Current Anthropology, 27, 431, 10.1086/203467 · DOI
  5. Gifford, 1977, Observed formation and burial of a recent human occupation site in Kenya, Quaternary Research, 8, 245, 10.1016/0033-5894(77)90071-0 · DOI
  6. Gifford-Gonzalez, 1985, The third dimension in site structure: an experiment in trampling and vertical dispersal, American Antiquity, 50, 803, 10.2307/280169 · DOI
  7. Haynes, 1986, Spiral fractures and cut mark mimics in noncultural elephant bone assemblages, Current Research in the Pleistocene, 3, 45
  8. Hill, 1976, On carnivore and weathering damage to bone, Current Anthropology, 17, 335, 10.1086/201732 · DOI
  9. Hill, 1972, Procedures in vertebrate taphonomy, Journal of the Geological Society of London, 128, 399, 10.1144/gsjgs.128.4.0399 · DOI
  10. Myers, 1980, Spiral fractures and bone pseudotools at paleontological sites, American Antiquity, 45, 483, 10.2307/279863 · DOI
  11. Newcomer, 1974, Study and replication of bone tools from Ksar Akil (Lebanon), World Archaeology, 6, 138, 10.1080/00438243.1974.9979598 · DOI
  12. Olsen, 1987, Magdalenian reindeer exploitation at the Grotte des Eyzies, Southwest France, Archaeozoologia, I, 171
  13. Potts, 1981, Cutmarks made by stone tools on bones from Olduvai Gorge, Tanzania, Nature, 291, 577, 10.1038/291577a0 · DOI
  14. Rose, 1983, A replication technique for scanning electron microscopy: applications for anthropologists, American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 62, 255, 10.1002/ajpa.1330620305 · DOI
  15. Stockton, 1973, Shaw's Creek Shelter: human displacement of artefacts and its significance, Mankind, 9, 112
  16. Villa, 1983, The interpretation of stratified sites: a view from underground, Journal of Archaeological Science, 10, 267, 10.1016/0305-4403(83)90011-0 · DOI
  17. Villa, 1986, Cannibalism in the Neolithic, Science, 233, 431, 10.1126/science.233.4762.431 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Olsen, S. L., & Shipman, P.
Venue
Journal of Archaeological Science
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1988-09
Volume
15
Issue
5
Pages
535-553
ISSN
0305-4403
Cited by
434
References
0
Language
en

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