The Misidentification of Mesoamerican Lithic Workshops

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
In Mesoamerica concentrations of stone debitage from archaeological contexts frequently are regarded as being in primary contexts and marking production loci or “workshops.”Ethnoarchaeological observations of stone- and glass-artifact manufacture and disposal of the resulting waste indicate that in sedentary societies debitage does not remain in primary context at workshops, but rather enters secondary context when it is moved into workshop dumps. Microdebitage, which often is left in place at the production locus, appears to be the most reliable indicator of workshop location.An awareness of ethnoarchaeological data can facilitate more plausible constructions of past behavior at different stages of the use-life trajectories of durable materials. Present evidence suggests that concentrations of stone debitage from archaeological settlements are secondary deposits and represent workshop dumps, not workshops.