• Ahler, S. (1971).Projectile Point Form and Function at Rodgers Shelter, Missouri. Missouri Archaeological Society Research Series No. 8, Missouri Archaeological Society, Columbia.

  Google Scholar 

• Ahler, S. (1989a). Experimental knapping with KRF and midcontinent cherts: Overview and applications. In Amick, D., and Mauldin, R. (eds.),Experiments in Lithic Technology, British Archaeological Reports International Series 528, Oxford, pp. 199–234.

• Ahler, S. (1989b). Mass analysis of flaking debris: Studying the forest rather than the tree. In Henry, D., and Odell, G. (eds.),Alternative Approaches to Lithic Analysis, Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association No. 1, pp. 85–118.

• Anderson-Gerfaud, P. (1990). Aspects of behaviour in the Middle Palaeolithic: Functional analysis of stone tools from southwest France. In Mellars, P. (ed.),The Emergence of Modern Humans: An Archaeological Perspective, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY, pp. 389–418.

  Google Scholar 

• Andrefsky, W. (1994). Raw-material availability and the organization of technology.American Antiquity59: 21–35.

  Google Scholar 

• Bamforth, D. (1986). Technological efficiency and tool curation.American Antiquity51(1): 38–50.

  Google Scholar 

• Bamforth, D. (1990). Settlement, raw material, and lithic procurement in the Central Mojave Desert.Journal of Anthropological Archaeology9: 70–104.

  Google Scholar 

• Bamforth, D. (1991). Population dispersion and paleoindian technology at the Allen Site. In Montet-White, A., and Holen, S. (eds.),Raw Material Economies Among Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherers, University of Kansas Publications in Anthropology 19, University of Kansas, Lawrence, pp. 357–374.

  Google Scholar 

• Barton, C. M. (1988). Lithic variability and Middle Paleolithic behavior.British Archaeological Research International Series 408, Oxford.

• Barton, C. M. (1990a). Beyond style and function: A view from the Middle Paleolithic.American Anthropologist92: 57–72.

  Google Scholar 

• Barton, C. M. (1990b). Stone tools and Paleolithic settlement in the Iberian Peninsula.Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society56: 15–32.

  Google Scholar 

• Barton, C. M. (1991). Retouched tools: Fact or fiction? Paradigms for interpreting Paleolithic chipped stone. In Clark, G. (ed.),Perspectives on the Past, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, pp. 143–163.

  Google Scholar 

• Bar-Yosef, O. (1991). Raw material exploitation in the Levantine Epi-Paleolithic. In Montet-White, A., and Holen, S. (eds.),Raw Material Economies Among Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherers, University of Kansas Publications in Anthropology 19, Lawrence, pp. 235–250

  Google Scholar 

• Baumler, M. (1988). Core reduction, flake production, and the Middle Paleolithic industry of Zobiste (Yugoslavia). In Dibble, H., and Montet-White, A. (eds.),Upper Pleistocene Prehistory of Western Eurasia, University Museum Press, Philadelphia, pp. 255–274

  Google Scholar 

• Baumler, M., and Speth, J. (1993). A Middle Paleolithic assemblage from Kunji Cave, Iran. In Olszewski, D., and Dibble, H. (eds.),Paleolithic Prehistory of the Zagros-Taurus, University Museum Press, Philadelphia, pp. 1–74.

  Google Scholar 

• Beyriès, S. (1987).Variabilite de l'industrie lithique au Moustérien: Approche Fonctionnelle sur Quelques Gisements Francais, British Archaeological Reports International 238, Oxford.

• Beyriès, S. (1988a). Functional variability of lithic sets in the Middle Palaeolithic. In Montet-White, A., and Dibble, H. (eds.),Upper Pleistocene Prehistory of Western Eurasia, University Museum, Philadelphia, pp. 213–224.

  Google Scholar 

• Beyriès, S. (1988b). Etude tracéologique des racloirs du Niveau IIa. In Tuffreau, A., and Sommé, J. (eds.),Le Gisement Paleolithique Moyen de Biache-Saint-Vaast (Pas-de-Calais), Vol. I, Mémoires de la Société Préhistorique Française, pp. 215–230.

• Bierwirth, S. (1991).Lithic Analysis in Southwest France: Middle Paleoloithic Assemblages from La Quina (Charente), Ph.D. dissertation, University of Arizona, Tucson.

  Google Scholar 

• Bietti, A., and Grimaldi, S. (1995). Levallois debitage in central Italy: Technical achievements and raw material procurement. In Dibble, H., and Bar-Yosef, O. (eds.),The Definition and Interpretation of Levallois Technology, Prehistory Press, Madison, WI.

  Google Scholar 

• Binford, L. (1965). Archaeological systematics and the study of cultural process.American Antiquity31: 203–210.

  Google Scholar 

• Binford, L. (1977). Forty-seven trips. In Wright, R. (ed.),Stone Tools as Cultural Makers, Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies, Canberra, pp. 24–36.

  Google Scholar 

• Binford, L. (1979). Organization and formation processes: Looking at curated technologies.Journal of Anthropological Research35: 255–273.

  Google Scholar 

• Binford, L. (1980). Willow smoke and dogs' tails: Hunter-gatherer settlement systems and archaeological site formation.American Antiquity45(1): 4–20.

  Google Scholar 

• Binford, L. (1985). Human ancestors: Changing views of their behaviOR.Journal of Anthropological Archaeology4: 292–327.

  Google Scholar 

• Binford, L. (1989). Isolating the transition to cultural adaptations: An organizational approach. In Trinkaus, E. (ed.),The Emergence of Modern Humans: Biocultural Adaptations in the Later Pleistocene, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 18–41.

  Google Scholar 

• Binford, L., and Sabloff, J. (1982). Paradigms, systematics and archaeology.Journal of Anthropological Research38: 137–153.

  Google Scholar 

• Bleed, P. (1986). The optimal design of hunting weapons: Maintainability or reliability.American Antiquity51(4): 737–747.

  Google Scholar 

• Boëda, E. (1982). Approche technologique de la variabilité de la méthode Levallois: Industries de Bagarre et de Corbehem (Pas-de-Calais).Bulletin de l'Association Française pour l'Étude du Quaternaire19(2–3): 63–66.

  Google Scholar 

• Boëda, E. (1986).Approche technologique du concept Levallois et evaluation de son champ d'application, Thèse de IIIème Cycle, Université de Paris.

• Boëda, E. (1988). Le concept Levallois et évaluation de son champ d'application. In Binford, L., and Rigaud, J.-Ph. (eds.),L'Homme de Neandertal, Vol. 4, La Technique, Liège, pp. 13–26.

  Google Scholar 

• Boëda, E. (1991). Approche de la variabilité des systèmes de production lithique des industries du paléolithique inférieur et moyen: Chronologique d'une variabilité attendue.Techniques et Culture17–18: 37–79.

  Google Scholar 

• Boëda, E., and Pelegrin, J. (1983). Approche technologique du nucléus Levallois à éclat.Etudes Préhistoriques (1979–1980)15: 41–48.

  Google Scholar 

• Boëda, E., Geneste, J.-M., and Meignen, L. (1990). Identification de chaines operatoires lithiques du paleolithique ancien et moyen.Paléo2: 43–80.

  Google Scholar 

• Bordes, F. (1950). Principes d'une methode d'étude des techniques de debitage et de la typologie du Paléolithique ancien et moyen.L'Anthropologie54: 19–34.

  Google Scholar 

• Bordes, F. (1953). Levalloisien et Moustérien.Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Française50: 226–235.

  Google Scholar 

• Bordes, F. (1961).Typologie du Paléolithique ancien et moyen, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris.

  Google Scholar 

• Bordes, F. and Bourgon, M. (1951). Le complexe mousterien: Mousterien, Levalloisien et Tayacien.L'Anthropologie55: 1–23.

  Google Scholar 

• Boutié, P. (1981).L'industrie Mousterienne de la Grotte de Kebara, Mount Carmel, Israel. Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Musée de l'Homme Memoire No. 10, Centre Nationale de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris.

  Google Scholar 

• Butler, B., and May, E. (1984). Prehistoric chert exploitation: Studies from the Midcontinent.Center for Archaeological Investigations Occasional Paper No. 2.

• Byers, M. (1994). Symboling and the Middle-Upper Palaeolithic transition: A theoretical and methodological critique.Current Anthropology35: 369–881

  Google Scholar 

• Callow, P. (1986). The flint tools. In Callow, P., and Cornford, (eds.),La Cotte de St. Brelade 1961–1978 Excavations by C.B.M. McBurney, Geo Books, Norwich, CT, pp. 251–314.

  Google Scholar 

• Carrere, P. (1990). Contribution de la balistique au perfectionnement des études technofonctionnelles des pointes de projectiles préhistoriques.Paléo2: 167–176.

  Google Scholar 

• Chase, P. (1990). Tool-making tools and Middle Paleolithic behaviOR.Current Anthropology31: 443–446.

  Google Scholar 

• Chase, P. (1991). Symbols and Paleolithic artifacts: Style, standardization, and the imposition of arbitrary form.Journal of Anthropological Archaeology10: 193–214.

  Google Scholar 

• Chase, P., and Dibble, H. (1987). Middle Paleolithic symbolism: A review of current evidence and interpretations.Journal of Anthropological Archaeology6: 263–296.

  Google Scholar 

• Chauchat, C. (1992). Réflexions sur les outillages du Paléolithique moyen.Paléo4: 49–60.

  Google Scholar 

• Clark, G. (1991).Perspectives on the Past, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.

  Google Scholar 

• Clark, G. (1993). Paradigms in science and archaeology.Journal of Archaeological Research1: 203–234.

  Google Scholar 

• Clark, G. (1994). Migration as an explanatory concept in paleolithic archaeology.Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory1: 305–343.

  Google Scholar 

• Close, A. (1980). The Identification of Style in Lithic Artefacts.World Archaeology10: 223–236.

  Google Scholar 

• Close, A. (1991). On the validity of Middle Paleolithic tool types: A test case from the Eastern Sahara.Journal of Field Archaeology18(2): 256–264.

  Google Scholar 

• Collins, M. (1975). Lithic technology as a means of processual inference. In Swanson, E. (ed.),Lithic Technology: Making and Using Stone Tools, Mouton: The Hague, pp. 15–34.

  Google Scholar 

• Combier, J. (1967). Le Paléolithique de l'Ardèche dans son cadre paléoclimatique.Publications de l'Institut de Préhistoire de l'Université de Bordeaux, Memoire No. 4, Delmas, Bordeaux.

  Google Scholar 

• Commont, V. (1914). Les Hommes contemporains du renne dans la vallée de la Somme.Memoire de la Société des Antiquaires de Picardie7: 207–646.

  Google Scholar 

• Copeland, L. (1983). The palaeolithic industries at Adlun. In Roe, D. (ed.),Adlun in the Stone Age. The Excavations of D.A.E. Garrod in the Lebanon, 1958–1963, British Archaeological Research International Series 159(i, ii): 89–365.

• Copeland, L., and Hours, F. (1983). Le Yabroudien d'el Kowm (Syrie) et sa place dans le Paléolithique du Levant.Paleorient9: 21–37.

  Google Scholar 

• Cooper, H. (1954). Material culture of the Australian aborigines.Records of the South Australian Museum11: 91–103.

  Google Scholar 

• Davis, Z. (1994).On the Validity of Middle Palaeolithic Typology: An Explanation of the Variability in Scraper Morphology at Le Moustier and Tabun, M.A. Thesis, University of London, London.

  Google Scholar 

• Debénath, A., and Dibble, H. (1994).The Handbook of Paleolithic Typology. Vol I. The Lower and Middle Paleolithic of Europe, University Museum Press, Philadelphia.

  Google Scholar 

• de Loecker, D. (1992). Site K: A middle Palaeolithic site at Maastricht-Belvédére (Limburg, The Netherlands).Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt22: 449–460.

  Google Scholar 

• de Loecker, K. (1993). A Saalian riverside settlement: Maastricht-Belvédère Site K (Limburg, the Netherlands).Notae Praehistoricae12: 7–14.

  Google Scholar 

• Demars, P. (1982). L'Utilisation du silex au Paléolithique Supérieur: Choix, approvisionnement, circulation. L'example du Bassin de Brive.Cahiers du Quatemaire5, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris.

  Google Scholar 

• Dibble, H. (1984a). Interpreting typological variation of Middle Paleolithic scrapers: Function, style, or sequence of reduction?Journal of Field Archaeology11: 431–436.

  Google Scholar 

• Dibble, H. (1984b). The Mousterian Industry from Bisitun Cave (Iran).Paleorient10: 23–34.

  Google Scholar 

• Dibble, H. (1987a). The interpretation of Middle Paleolithic scraper morphology.American Antiquity52: 109–117.

  Google Scholar 

• Dibble, H. (1987b). Reduction sequences in the manufacture of Mousterian implements of France. In Soffer, O. (ed.),The Pleistocene Old World: Regional Perspectives, Plenum, New York, pp. 33–45.

  Google Scholar 

• Dibble, H. (1988). Typological aspects of reduction and intensity of utilization of Lithic resources in the French Mousterian. In Dibble, H., and Montet-White, A. (eds.),Upper Pleistocene Prehistory of Western Eurasia, University Museum Press, Philadelphia, Symposium Series I, pp. 188–191.

  Google Scholar 

• Dibble, H. (1989). The implications of stone tool types for the presence of language during the Middle Paleolithic. In Mellars, P., and Stringer, C. (eds.),The Human Revolution: Behavioural and Biological Perspectives on the Origins of Modern Humans, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, pp. 415–432.

  Google Scholar 

• Dibble, H. (1991a). Mousterian assemblage variability on an interregional scale.Journal of Anthropological Research47: 239–258.

  Google Scholar 

• Dibble, H. (1991b). Rebuttal to Close.Journal of Field Archaeology18: 264–267.

  Google Scholar 

• Dibble, H. (1991c). Local raw material exploitation and its effects on Lower and Middle Paleolithic assemblage variability. In Montet-White, A., and Holen, S. (eds.),Raw Material Economies Among Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherers, University of Kansas Publications in Anthropology 19, University of Kansas, Lawrence, pp. 33–48.

  Google Scholar 

• Dibble, H. (1995a). Raw material availability and intensity of utilization: A test of current models of Middle Paleolithic assemblage variability. In Dibble, H., and Lenoir, M. (eds.),The Middle Paleolithic Site of Combe-Capelle Bas (France), University Museum Press, Philadelphia.

  Google Scholar 

• Dibble, H. (1995b). An assessment of the integrity of the archaeological assemblages. In Dibble, H., and Lenoir, M. (eds.),The Middle Paleolithic Site of Combe-Capelle Bas (France), University Museum Press, Philadelphia.

  Google Scholar 

• Dibble, H. (1995c). The Biache-Saint-Vaast, Level IIa: A comparison of analytical approaches. In Dibble, H., and Bar Yosef, O. (eds.),The Interpretation and Definition of Levallois Variability, Prehistory Press, Madison, WI.

  Google Scholar 

• Dibble, H., and Bar-Yosef, O. (1995).The Definition and Interpretation of Levallois Technology, Prehistory Press, Madison, WI.

  Google Scholar 

• Dibble, H., and Debénath, A. (1991). Paradigmatic differences in a collaborative research project. In Clark, G. (ed.),Perspectives on the Past, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, pp. 217–226.

  Google Scholar 

• Dibble, H., and Holdaway, S. (1990). Le Paléolithique moyen de l'abri sous roche de Warwasi et ses relations avec le Moustérien du Levant.L'Anthropologie94(4): 619–642.

  Google Scholar 

• Dibble, H. and Holdaway, S. (1993). The Middle Paleolithic of Warwasi Rockshelter. In Olszewski, D., and Dibble, H. (eds.),The Paleolithic Prehistory of the Zagros, University Museum Press, Philadelphia, pp. 75–99.

  Google Scholar 

• Dibble, H. and Lenoir, M. (1995).The Middle Paleolithic Site of Combe-Capelle Bas (France), University Museum Press, Philadelphia.

  Google Scholar 

• Dibble, H, and Pelcin, A. (1995). The effect of hammer mass and velocity on flake weight.Journal of Archaeological Science (in press).

• Dibble, H., and Rolland, N. (1992). On assemblage variability in the Middle Paleolithic of western Europe: History, perspectives and a new synthesis. In Dibble, H., and Mellars, P. (eds.),The Middle Paleolithic: Adaptation, Behavior and Variability, University Museum Press, Philadelphia, pp. 1–28.

  Google Scholar 

• Dibble, H., and Whittaker, J. (1981). New experimental evidence on the relation between percussion flaking and flake variation.Journal of Archaeological Science6: 283–296.

  Google Scholar 

• Dibble, H., Lenoir, M., and Roth, B. (1995). The use of raw materials at Combe-Capelle Bas. In Dibble, H., and Lenoir, M. (eds.),The Middle Paleolithic Site of Combe-Capelle Bas (France), University Museum Press, Philadelphia.

  Google Scholar 

• Flenniken, J., and Raymond, A. (1986). Replication experimentation and technological analysis.American Antiquity51(3): 603–614

  Google Scholar 

• Frison, G. (1968). A functional analysis of certain chipped stone tools.American Antiquity33: 149–155.

  Google Scholar 

• Frison, G. (ed.) (1975).The Casper Site, Academic Press, New York.

  Google Scholar 

• Frison, G. (1989). Experimental use of Clovis weaponry and tools on African elephants.Amerian Antiquity54: 766–784.

  Google Scholar 

• Gallagher, J. (1977). Contemporary stone tools in Ethiopia: Implications for archaeology.Journal of Field Archaeology4: 407–414.

  Google Scholar 

• Geneste, J.-M. (1985).Analyse lithique d'industries moustériennes du Périgord: Une approche technologique du comportement des groupes humains au Paléolithique Moyen, Thèse a l'Université de Bordeaux I, Bordeaux, 1985.

• Geneste, J.-M. (1988). Systèmes d'approvisionnement en matières premières au Paléolithique moyen et au Paléolithique superieur en Aquitaine. In Kozlowski, J. (ed.),L'Homme de Neandertal, Vol 8. La Mutation, Etudes et Recherches Archéologiques de l'Université de Liège, no. 35, pp. 61–70.

• Girard, C. (1978). Les industries moustériennes de la Grotte de l'Hyène à Arcy-sur-Cure.XIe Supplement à Gallia Préhistoire, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris.

  Google Scholar 

• Goodenough, W. (1990). Evolution of the human capacity for beliefs.American Anthropologist92: 597–612.

  Google Scholar 

• Goodyear, A. (1974).The Brand Site: A Techno-Functional Study of a Dalton Site in Northeast Arkansas, Arkansas Archeological Survey No. 7, Fayetteville.

• Gordon, D. (1993). Mousterian tool selection, reduction, and discard at Ghar, Israel.Journal of Field Archaeology20: 105–218.

  Google Scholar 

• Goren-Inbar, N. (1988). Notes on “decision making” by Lower and Middle Palaeolithic hominids.Paléorient14(2): 99–108.

  Google Scholar 

• Gould, R., Koster, D., and Sontz, A. (1971). The lithic assemblage of the Western Desert Aborigines of Australia.American Antiquity36: 149–169.

  Google Scholar 

• Gowlett, J. (1984). Mental abilities of early man: A look at some hard evidence. In Foley, R. (ed.),Hominid Evolution and Community Ecology, Academic Press, New York, pp. 167–192.

  Google Scholar 

• Gramly, R. (1980). Raw materials source areas and “curated” tool assemblages.American Antiquity45: 823–833.

  Google Scholar 

• Hayden, B. (1977). Stone tool functions in the Western Desert. In Wright, R. (ed.),Stone Tools as Cultural Markers: Change, Evolution and Complexity, Humanities Press, Canberra, pp. 178–188.

  Google Scholar 

• Hayden, B. (1979).Paleolithic Reflections: Lithic Technology and Ethnographic Excavation Among the Australian Aborigines, Humanities Press, NJ.

  Google Scholar 

• Hayden, B. (1993). The cultural capacities of Neandertals: A review and reevaluation.Journal of Human Evolution24: 113–146.

  Google Scholar 

• Henry, D. (1989). Correlations between reduction strategies and settlement patterns. In Henry, D., and Odell, G. (eds.),Alternative Approaches to Lithic Analysis, Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association No. 1, pp. 139–156.

• Hoffman, C. (1985). Projectile point maintenance and typology: Assessment with factor analysis and canonical correlation. In Carr, C. (ed.),For Concordance in Archaeological Analysis: Bridging Data Structure, Quantitative Technique, and Theory, Wesport, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, pp. 566–612.

  Google Scholar 

• Holdaway, S. (1991).Resharpening Reduction and Lithic Assemblage Variability Across the Middle to Upper Paleolithic Transition, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

  Google Scholar 

• Holloway, R. (1981). Culture, symbols and human brain evolution.Dialectical Anthropology5: 287.

  Google Scholar 

• Huckell, B. (1979). Of chipped stone tools, elephants, and the Clovis hunters: An experiment.Plains Anthropologist24: 177–188.

  Google Scholar 

• Jelinek, A. (1976). Form, function and style in lithic analysis. In Cleland, C. (ed.),Cultural Change and Continuity: Essays in Honor of James Bennett Griffin, Academic Press, New York, pp. 19–33.

  Google Scholar 

• Jelinek, A. (1988). Technology, typlogy, and culture in the Middle Paleolithic. In Montet-White, A., and Dibble, H. (eds.),Upper Pleistocene Prehistory of Western Eurasia, University Museum Press, Philadelphia, pp. 199–212.

  Google Scholar 

• Kelly, R. (1988). The three sides of a biface.American Antiquity53: 717–734.

  Google Scholar 

• Kuhn, S. (1990). A geometric index of reduction for unifacial stone tools.Journal of Archaeological Science17: 583–593.

  Google Scholar 

• Kuhn, S. (1991). “Unpacking” reduction: Lithic raw material economy in the Mousterian of West-Central Italy.Journal of Anthropological Archaeology10: 76–106.

  Google Scholar 

• Kuhn, S. (1992). Blank form and reduction as determinants of Mousterian scraper morphology.American Antiquity57: 115–128.

  Google Scholar 

• Kuhn, S. (1994). A formal approach to the design and assembly of mobile toolkits.American Antiquity59: 426–442.

  Google Scholar 

• Kuhn, T. (1962).The Structure of Scientific Revolution, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

  Google Scholar 

• Leakey, M. D. (1971).Olduvai Gorge, Vol. III. Excavations in Beds II & III, 1960–1963. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

  Google Scholar 

• Lemmonier, P. (1983). L'Etude des systèmes techniques: Une urgence in technologie culturelle.Techniques et Culture1: 11–34.

  Google Scholar 

• Leroi-Gourhan, A. (1964).Le Geste et la Parole I: Technique et Language, Albin Michal, Paris.

  Google Scholar 

• Marcy, J.-L. (1993). Aperçu sur les stratégies de production des racloirs du niveau C. InRiencourt-lés-Baupaume (Pas-de-Calais): Un Gisement du Paléolithique Moyen. Documents d'Archéologie Français, No. 37, Paris, pp. 87–94.

• Marks, A. (1988). The curation of stone tools during the Upper Pleistocene: A view from the Central Negev, Israel. In Dibble, H., and Montet-White, A. (eds.),Upper Pleistocene Prehistory of Western Eurasia, University Museum Press, Philadelphia, pp.87–94.

  Google Scholar 

• Marks, A. (1992). Typological variability in the Levantine Middle Paleolithic. In Dibble, H., and Mellars, P. (eds.),The Middle Paleolithic: Adaptation, Behavior and Variability, University Museum Press, Philadelphia, pp. 127–142.

  Google Scholar 

• Marks, A., Shokler, J., and Zilhao, J. (1991). Raw material usage in the Paleolithic. The effects of local availability on selection and economy. In Montet-White, A., and Holen, S. (eds.),Raw Material Economies Among Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherers, University of Kansas Publications in Anthropology 19, Lawrence, pp. 127–140.

  Google Scholar 

• Mauldin, R., and Amick, D. (1989). Investigating patterning in debitage from experimental bifacial core reduction. In Amick, D., and Mauldin, R. (eds.),Experiments in Lithic Technology, British Archaeological Reports 528 International Series, Oxford, pp. 67–88.

• McDonald, M. (1991). Systematic reworking of lithics from earlier cultures in the early Holocene of Dakhleh Oasis, Egypt.Journal of Field Archaeology18(2): 269–273.

  Google Scholar 

• McPherron, S. (1994).A Reduction Model for Acheulean Biface Morphology, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

  Google Scholar 

• McPherron, S., and Dibble, H. (n.d.). Stone tool analysis using image digitization: Examples from the Lower and Middle Paleolithic.

• Meignen, L. (1988). Un exemple de comportement technologie différentiel selon les matières premières: Marillac, couches 9 et 10. In Binford, L., and Rigaud, J.-Ph. (eds.),L'Homme de Neandertal, Vol. 4. La Technique, Université de Liège, Liège, pp. 71–80.

  Google Scholar 

• Meignen, L. (1993).L'Abri des Canalettes. Un Habitat Moustérien sur les Grands Causses (Nant, Aveyron). Fouilles 1980–1986, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris.

  Google Scholar 

• Mellars, P. (1995).The Neanderthal Legacy, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.

  Google Scholar 

• Mellars, P. (1989a). Major issues in the emergence of modern humans.Current Anthropology30: 349–385.

  Google Scholar 

• Mellars, P. (1989b). Technological changes at the Middle-Upper Palaeolithic transition: Economic, social and cognitive perspectives. In Mellars, P., and Stringer, C. (eds.),The Human Revolution, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, pp. 338–365.

  Google Scholar 

• Mellars, P. (1991). Cognitive changes and the emergence of modern humans in Europe.Cambridge Archaeological Journal1: 63–76.

  Google Scholar 

• Montet-White, A. (1991). Lithic acquisition, settlements and territory in the Epigravettian of central Europe. In Montet-White, A., and Holen, S. (eds.),Raw Material Economies Among Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherers, University of Kansas Publications in Anthropology 19, Lawrence, pp. 205–220.

  Google Scholar 

• Morala, A. (1990). L'atelier périgordien supérieur de Rabier (Lanquais, Dordogne): Recherches sur l'origine des occupants du site sur les bases de la lithologie. In Séronie-Vivien and Lenoir, M. (eds.),Le Silex: De sa Genèse à l'Outil, Tome II, Cahiers du Quat 17, Centre Nationale de la Recherche Scientifique, pp. 391–404.

• Munday, F. (1977). Intersite variability in the Mousterian occupation of the Avdat/Aqev area. In Marks, A. (ed.),Prehistory and Paleoenvironments in the Central Negev, Israel, Vol. 1. The Avdat/Aqev Area, Part 1, Southern Methodist University Press, Dallas, pp. 113–140.

  Google Scholar 

• Neeley, M., and Barton, C. (1994). A new approach to interpreting late Pleistocene microlith industries in southwest Asia.Antiquity68: 275–288.

  Google Scholar 

• Newcomer, M. (1971). Some quantitative experiments in handaxe manufacture.World Archaeology3: 85–94.

  Google Scholar 

• Odell, G. (1989). Fitting analytical techniques to prehistoric problems with lithic data. In Henry, D., and Odell, G. (eds.),Alternative Approaches to Lithic Analysis, Archaeological Papers of the American Anthropological Association, No. 1, Washington, D.C., pp. 159–182.

  Google Scholar 

• Olszewski, D. (1993). The Zarzian occupation at Warwasi Rockshelter, Iran. In Olszewski, D., and Dibble, H. (eds.),The Paleolithic Prehistory of the Zagros-Taurus, University Museum Press, Philadelphia, pp. 207–236.

  Google Scholar 

• Panabières, F. (1989).Etude techno-typologique des racloirs de la couche 35 de Combe-Grenal, DiplÔme d'Etudes Approfondies en Anthropologie, Université de Bordeaux I, Bordeaux.

  Google Scholar 

• Patterson, L. (1990). Characteristics of bifacial reduction flake-size distribution.American Antiquity55: 550–558.

  Google Scholar 

• Pelegrin, J., Karlin, C., and Bodu, P. (1988). “Chaînes opératoires”: Un outil pour le préhistorien.Technologie préhistorique, dir. Tixier J., pp. 55–62.

• Pettitt, P. (1992). Reduction models and lithic variability in the Middle Palaeolithic of Southwest France.Lithics13: 17–32.

  Google Scholar 

• Potts, R. (1991). Why the Oldowan? Plio-Pleistocene toolmaking and the transport of resources.Journal of Anthropological Research47: 153–176.

  Google Scholar 

• Purdy, B. (1984). Quarry studies: Technological and chronological significance. In Ericson, J., and Purdy, B. (eds.),Prehistoric Quarries and Lithic Production, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 119–146.

  Google Scholar 

• Reher, C. (1991). Large scale lithic quarries and regional transport systems on the High Plains of eastern Wyoming. Spanish diggings revisited. In Montet-White, A., and Holen, S. (eds.),Raw Material Economies Among Prehistoric Hunter-Gatherers, University of Kansas Publications in Anthropology 19, University of Kansas, Lawrence, pp. 251–284.

  Google Scholar 

• Rigaud, J.-Ph. (1988). La Grotte Vaufrey. Paléoenvironnement, Chronologie, Activités Humaines.Mémoires de la Société Préhistorique Française, Tome XIX.

• Roebroeks, W., Kolen, J., and Rensink, E. (1988). Planning depth, anticipation and the organization of Middle Paleolithic technology: The “archaic natives” meet Eve's descendants.Helinium28: 17–34.

  Google Scholar 

• Rolland, N. (1977). New aspects of Middle Palaeolithic variability in Western Europe.Nature266: 251–252.

  Google Scholar 

• Rolland, N. (1981). The interpretation of Middle Paleolithic variability.Man16: 15–42.

  Google Scholar 

• Rolland, N., and Dibble, H. (1990). A new synthesis of Middle Paleolithic assemblage variability.American Antiquity55(3): 480–99.

  Google Scholar 

• Sackett, J. (1973). Style, function, and artifact variability in Palaeolithic assemblages. In Renfrew, C. (ed.),The Explanation of Culture Change, Duckworth, London, pp. 317–325 in

  Google Scholar 

• Sackett, J. (1982). From de Mortillet to Bordes. A century of French Paleolithic research. In Daniel, G. (ed.),Towards a History of Archaeology, Thames & Hudson, London, pp. 85–89.

  Google Scholar 

• Sackett, J. (1986). Isochrestism and style: A clarification.Journal of Anthropological Archaeology5: 266–277.

  Google Scholar 

• Schick, K. (1986). Stone age sites in the making: Experiments in the formation and transformation of archaeological occurrences.British Archaeological Reports International Series 314, Oxford.

• Schick, K. (1987). Modeling the formation of Early Stone Age artifact concentrations.Journal of Human Evolution16: 789–807.

  Google Scholar 

• Schiffer, M. (1972). Archaeological context and systemic context.American Antiquity37: 156–165.

  Google Scholar 

• Séronie-Vivien, M.-R., and Lenoir, M. (eds.) (1990).Le Silex: De sa Genèse à l'Outil, Vols. I and II, Editions du CNRS, Paris.

  Google Scholar 

• Shott, M. (1989). On tool-class use lives and the formation of archaeological assemblages.American Antiquity54: 9–30.

  Google Scholar 

• Shott, M. (1994). Size and form in the analysis of flake debris: Review and recent approaches.Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory1: 69–110.

  Google Scholar 

• Speth, J. (1972). The mechanical basis of percussion flaking.American Antiquity37: 34–60.

  Google Scholar 

• Speth, J. (1974). Experimental investigations of hard-hammer percussion flaking.TebiWA17: 7–36.

  Google Scholar 

• Speth, J. (1975). Miscellaneous studies in hard-hammer percussion flaking: The effects of oblique impact.American Antiquity40: 203–207.

  Google Scholar 

• Speth, J. (1981). The role of platform angle and core size in hard-hammer percussion flaking.Lithic Technology10: 16–21.

  Google Scholar 

• Stahle, D., and Dunn, J. (1982). An analysis and application of the size distribution of waste flakes from the manufacture of bifacial stone tools.World Archaeology14: 84–97.

  Google Scholar 

• Sullivan, A., and Rozen, K. (1985). Debitage analysis and archaeological interpretation.American Antiquity50: 755–779.

  Google Scholar 

• Tindale, N. (1965). Stone implement making among the Nakako, Ngadadjara and Pitjandjara of the Great Western Desert.Records of the South Australian Museum15: 131–164.

  Google Scholar 

• Tixier, J., Inizan, J., and Roche, H. (1980). Prehistoire de la Pierre Taillee 1: Terminologieet Technologie,Cercle de Recherches et d'Etudes Prehistoriques, Valbonne, France.

• Tobias, P. (1992). The speciesHomo habilis: Example of a premature discovery.Annales Zool. Fennici28: 371–380.

  Google Scholar 

• Torrence, R. (1983). Time budgeting and hunter-gatherer technology. In Bailey, G. (ed.),Hunter-Gatherer Economy in Prehistory, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 11–22.

  Google Scholar 

• Torrence, R. (1989). Re-tooling: Towards a behavioral theory of stone tools. In Torrence, R. (ed.),Time, Energy and Stone Tools, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 57–66.

  Google Scholar 

• Toth, N. (1982).The Stone Technologies of Early Hominids at Koobi Fora, Kenya: An Experimental Approach, Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Berkeley.

  Google Scholar 

• Toth, N. (1985). The Oldowan reassessed: A close look at Early Stone artefacts.Journal of Archaeological Science12: 101–121.

  Google Scholar 

• Tuffreau, A. (1988). L'industrie lithique du niveau IIA. Le gisement paléolithique moyen de Biache-Saint-Vaast (Pas-de-Calais), Vol. 1.Mémoires de la Société Préhistorique Française21: 171–184.

  Google Scholar 

• Tuffreau, A., and Sommé, J. (1988). Le gisement paléolithique moyen de Biache-Saint-Vaast (Pas-de-Calais): Stratigraphie, environnement, études archéologiques.Mémoires de la Société Préhistorique Française 21, Paris.

• Turq, A. (1985). Le Mousterien de type Quina du Roc de Marsal (Dordogne).BSPF82: 47–51.

  Google Scholar 

• Turq, A. (1988). Le Moustérien de type Quina du Roc de Marsal à Campagne (Dordogne).Documents d'Archéologie Périgourdien (ADRAP)3: 5–30.

  Google Scholar 

• Turq, A. (1989). Approche technologique et économique du faciès Moustérien de type Quina.Bulletin de la Societe Prehistorique Fracaise86: 244-.

  Google Scholar 

• Turq, A. (1990). Exploitation des matières premières lithiques dans le Moustérien entre Dordogne et Lot.Le Silex de sa Genèse à l'Outil. Actes du Ve Colloque International sur le Silex, Cahiers du Quaternaire No. 17, Bordeaux, pp. 415–427.

• Turq, A. (1992). Raw material and technological studies of the Quina Mousterian in Perigord. In Dibble, H., and Mellars, P. (eds.),The Middle Paleolithic: Adaptation, Behavior and Variability, Symposium Series Vol. 2, University Museum Press, Philadelphia, pp. 75–86.

  Google Scholar 

• Turq, A. (1995). Raw material sources in the region of Combe-Capelle Bas. In Dibble, H., and Lenoir, M. (eds.),The Middle Paleolithic Site of Combe-Capelle Bas (France), University Museum Press, Philadelphia, Appendix I (in press).

  Google Scholar 

• Tzonev, T. (1989).Dynamic Approach to the Notion of the Type in Archaeology on the Example of Side-Scraper Morphology in Polish and Bulgarian Middle Paleolithic, Ph.D. dissertation, Jagiellonian University.

• Wynn, T. (1985). Piaget, stone tools and the evolution of human intelligence.World Archaeology17: 32–53.

  Google Scholar 

Download references