CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 12Pleistocene-Era Hominins and ArchaeologyArchaeological and Geological StudiesArchaeology and ancient environmental studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 36 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Smudge Pits and Stone “Drills”: The Use of Chipped Stone Tools at Burrell Orchard

Miller, G. Logan, Redmond, Brian G.·2016·Lithic Technology
DOI 10.1080/01977261.2016.1168145
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Recent investigations by the Cleveland Museum of Natural History (CMNH) identified an extensive Late Archaic occupation at Burrell Orchard (33LN15), located on a promontory overlooking the Black River in northern Ohio. CMNH excavations have documented widespread midden deposits, prepared clay floors, post molds, and pit features including numerous smudge pits. The formal chipped stone tool assemblage is dominated by lanceolate projectile points and bifacial “drills.” High-powered lithic microwear analysis was performed on 28 formal chipped stone tools recovered from the 2008 and 2014 CMNH field seasons. Tool types examined included complete and fragmentary lanceolate points, drills, and other bifaces. The results indicate that many “drills” were actually used to perforate dry hide and, thus, may have held a unique place in the hide-processing activities conducted at the site.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/01977261.2016.1168145

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 36 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 13

  1. Ahler Stanley A., 1971, Projectile Point Form and Function at Rogers Shelter Missouri
  2. Ellis Chris J., 1991, Canadian Journal of Archaeology, 15, 1
  3. van Gijn Annelou, 1990, The Wear and Tear of Flint: Principles of Microwear Analysis Applied to Dutch Neolithic Assemblages
  4. Ives Timothy H., 2014, Archaeology of Eastern North America, 42, 1
  5. Keeley Lawrence H., 1980, Experimental Determination of Stone Tool Use. A Micro-Wear Analysis
  6. Kimball Larry R., 1994, Journal of Middle Atlantic Archaeology, 10, 169
  7. Mayer-Oakes William J., 1955, Prehistory of the Upper Ohio Valley: An Introductory Archaeological Study
  8. Miller G. Logan, 2013, Lithic Technology, 38, 97
  9. Purtill Matthew P., 2009, Archaic Societies of the Midcontinent, 565
  10. 10.5744/florida/9780813060408.003.0002 · DOI
  11. Stothers David M., 1993, Archaeology of Eastern North America, 21, 25
  12. Stothers David M., 2001, Archaic Transitions in Ohio and Kentuck Prehistory, 233
  13. Winters Howard D., 1969, The Riverton Culture: A Second Millenium[sic] Occupation in the Central Wabash Valley

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Miller, G. L., & Redmond, B. G.
Affiliations
  • Illinois State University (US)
  • Cleveland Museum of Natural History (US)
Corresponding author
Miller, G. Logan
ORCID
Venue
Lithic Technology
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2016-04-02
Volume
41
Issue
2
Pages
164-178
ISSN
  • 0197-7261 (ISSN-L)
  • 2051-6185
DOI
10.1080/01977261.2016.1168145
OpenAlex
W2313713922
Cited by
12
References
36
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3
FWCI
6.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Lithic Technology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Anthropology › Pleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Archeology (arts and humanities) › Archaeological and Geological Studies
  • Social Sciences › Archeology › Archaeology and ancient environmental studies
Keywords
chipped stone tools, hide processing, Black River, midden deposits

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