Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
---|---|---|---|---|
1037035 | Journal of Archaeological Science | 2009 | 6 Pages |
Abstract
There is no ambiguity in the existing empirical support for a GIUR as a robust predictor of mass lost from flakes through unifacial retouching. We demonstrate why the GIUR is a reliable method for inferring mass loss, in appropriate circumstances, and why it is a more powerful predictor of mass loss than touted competitors. We explain why Eren, M.I., Sampson's, G. [2009. Kuhn's geometric index of unifacial stone tool reduction (GIUR): does it measure missing flake mass? J. Archaeol. Sci.] arguments are faulty and why researchers should use the GIUR in preference to other methods of estimating the extent of unifacial retouch.
Keywords
Related Topics
Physical Sciences and Engineering
Materials Science
Materials Science (General)
Authors
Peter Hiscock, Chris Clarkson,