Step by Step

Abstract

Reduction models have a long and significant history in stone tool analysis. This is particularly true for bifacial technologies, but is the case for some other tool forms as well. Recent advances in recognizing learning and skill transmission in stone tool manufacture, however, raise a number of questions about the suitability of previous middle- and high-level approaches for understanding the organization and execution of chipped stone technologies. This paper considers how the use of some stage- or series-based reduction models, combined with certain theoretical perspectives, actually obscures evidence for learning. Using an example of Folsom biface reduction and point production from the Hanson site in Wyoming, this article explores how archaeologists can improve their understanding of skill variation and the process of learning.