Flaked Lithic Tools: Temporal-Spatial Dataset

The Reductive Technologies Group (RTG) was responsible for supporting the broad research goals of the DAP through the implementation of mid-level research design governing the collection and analysis of data from “artifacts which were manufactured by reductive, or subtractive techniques” (Phagan 1986a: 79). The RTG was headed by Roger A. Moore between 1978 and 1979; Carl J. Phagan assumed this position from 1979 to 1985, with the assistance of T. Homer Hruby between 1980 and 1984. Supporting work was provided by crew chiefs Gail G. Snyder and Phillip D. Neusius. Through two integrated analytic systems, the Reductive Technologies Group provided the “maximum latitude” (Phagan 1986a:81) needed to meet the scope of DAP research spanning the General Research Design (Phagan 1986b), Modeling Effort (Lipe 1981), and the 1978 Lithics Research Design (Knudson 1980). Stone tools represent a fairly stable cultural subsystem and significant changes in their production and use are not anticipated during the nearly 300 years of Anasazi occupation in the project area (ibid: 6). Analysis of their technological or functional characteristics has, however, provided meaningful information regarding the spatial and structural variability in Anasazi behavior. In the preliminary analysis system, a number of attribute categories were created for the purpose of documenting variability in the reductive techniques which give tools their utility. There are two basic types of stone tools recognized by the RTG; those characterized by useful surfaces and those with useful edges (Phagan and Hurby 1984:32). The functional edges of flaked-lithic tools are typically formed through abrading and grinding or flaking techniques and for the most part, are used for chopping, scraping, or cutting tasks. Refining the terms used to adequately and accurately characterize these edges, the adjoining surfaces which create them, and the objects on which they occur was an important goal of the RTG. Since lithic technology can be considered to extend beyond the aspects of production, the preliminary analysis system also includes several variables which incorporate aspects raw material procurement and tool use. Intensive analysis further differentiated between projectile points and flaked items exhibiting patterns of microwear. Additional variables, recorded during a series of RTG substantive studies (Phagan 1984a, 1984b; Vierra and Phagan 1984; Orth and Phagan 1984) and the DAP modeling project (Lipe 1984), comprise a third system of synthetic analysis.

The DAP flaked-lithic tool dataset is organized by attribute rather than complete item; it is the product of what Phagan and Hurby consider to be "an integrated set of procedures applied at different analytical intensities to technological categories of items in response to a flexible but limited range of archaeological concerns" (1984:6). As with all DAP datasets, flaked lithic tools come with basic provenience data that minimally includes components of their corresponding Smithsonian site number, a field specimen number, catalog number, and point location number if applicable.

In this case, a set of accepted conventions and terminology for describing and quantifying patterns in the archaeological record of the DAP area, otherwise known as program systematics in the DAP reports, has also been appended to the flaked-lithic tools dataset. The DAP systematics "package" actually incorporates a complimentary set of temporal, spatial, and site typological units into a "common frame of reference" (Kane 1986:353) for navigating the archaeological record of the project. These units have, in a sense, been converted into attributes and made available to users in a single location. The size and complexity of the temporal-spatial files such as this one are consequences of reducing a vast amount of archaeological data into a theoretical-based matrix of space and time. As a result, the interpretive power of these files should not be taken lightly (Wilshusen et al. 1999:147-148); but when used appropriately, the DAP's program systematics defines and develops the plot, and even delineates the chapters, of the historic narrative detailing this portion of the Dolores River Valley” ((Wilshusen et al. 1999:33).

Temporal-spatial designations for each item in the flaked-lithic tools dataset, supported by multiple lines of evidence, will be indicated by high confidence values; low ranked values are supported by “best guesses” and the experience of crew-members making the determination. Undisturbed cultural deposits provide the best contextual evidence for making temporal-spatial assignments and will be denoted by high integrity values. Items recovered from deposits containing increasingly higher proportions of extraneous materials will be represented by lower integrity values.

Variables for the flaked-lithic tool: temporal-spatial dataset have been described by Wilshusen et al. (1999); see especially the section entitled "Flaked Lithic Artifacts" by Sarah B. Barber in Chapter 3. In most cases, hear descriptions are suitable for use as metadata and have been repeated almost verbatim here. Selected resources from the collection of published and unpublished DAP reports have been used for clarification in some cases and are appropriately referenced. The complexity of the temporal-spatial files is only minimally outlined here; anyone attempting to use the flaked-lithic tools temporal-spatial dataset should first consult Wilshusen et al. (1999:31-42) and Kane (1986:353-435).

减材技术小组（Reductive Technologies Group, RTG）负责通过实施中层研究设计，支撑多洛雷斯考古项目（DAP）的整体研究目标，该设计用于规范对"通过减材或去除加工技术制作的人工制品"的数据采集与分析工作（Phagan，1986a：79）。该小组于1978至1979年间由罗杰·A·摩尔（Roger A. Moore）担任负责人；1979至1985年间，卡尔·J·费根（Carl J. Phagan）接任该职位，并于1980至1984年间在T·霍默·赫鲁比（T. Homer Hruby）的协助下开展工作。团队主管盖尔·G·斯奈德（Gail G. Snyder）与菲利普·D·纽修斯（Phillip D. Neusius）提供了辅助支持工作。
减材技术小组通过两套整合分析体系，为满足DAP研究的范围需求提供了所需的"最大操作弹性"（Phagan，1986a：81），该研究涵盖了《通用研究设计》（Phagan，1986b）、《建模工作》（Lipe，1981）以及《1978年石器研究设计》（Knudson，1980）。
在项目区域内阿纳萨齐人（Anasazi）占据的近300年间，石器属于相当稳定的文化子系统，其生产与使用方式预计不会发生显著变化（同前引：6）。但对其技术或功能特征的分析，却为揭示阿纳萨齐人行为的空间与结构变异提供了极具价值的信息。
在初步分析体系中，研究人员构建了多组属性类别，用于记录赋予工具实用价值的减材加工技术的变异特征。减材技术小组将石器划分为两大基本类别：一类以实用工作面为特征，另一类以实用刃缘为特征（Phagan与Hurby，1984：32）。打制石器（flaked-lithic tools）的功能性刃缘通常通过研磨、打磨或打制工艺形成，其主要用途包括砍斫、刮削与切割。优化用于充分、精准描述这些刃缘、形成刃缘的相邻工作面以及承载刃缘的器物的术语体系，是减材技术小组的重要研究目标之一。
由于石器技术的研究范畴可延伸至生产环节之外，初步分析体系还纳入了多项涵盖原材料采购与工具使用相关维度的变量。深度分析进一步区分了投射尖状器与呈现微磨痕特征的打制器物。在减材技术小组的一系列专项研究（Phagan，1984a、1984b；Vierra与Phagan，1984；Orth与Phagan，1984）以及DAP建模项目（Lipe，1984）中记录的额外变量，构成了第三套综合分析体系。

DAP打制石器数据集按照属性而非完整器物进行组织，其构建源于费根与赫鲁比所称的"一套整合的操作流程，该流程根据考古研究需求的灵活但有限的范围，针对不同技术类别的器物采用差异化的分析强度"（1984：6）。与所有DAP数据集一致，打制石器附带基础出土背景数据，至少包含对应史密森学会遗址编号、野外标本编号、目录编号以及（如适用的）点位编号。

在此数据集基础上，一套用于描述与量化DAP区域考古记录模式的公认规范与术语体系（在DAP报告中亦称为项目系统学）也被附加至打制石器数据集中。DAP系统学"套件"实际上将一套互补的时序、空间与遗址类型学单元整合为一个"通用参考框架"（Kane，1986：353），用于梳理该项目的考古记录。从某种意义而言，这些单元已被转化为属性，并集中向用户开放获取。此类时空档案的规模与复杂性，源于将海量考古数据精简为基于理论的时空矩阵的处理过程。因此，这些档案的阐释效力不容小觑（Wilshusen等，1999：147-148）；但若使用得当，DAP的项目系统学可构建并完善讲述多洛雷斯河谷这一区域的历史叙事的脉络，甚至可划定该叙事的章节结构（Wilshusen等，1999：33）。

打制石器数据集中每件器物的时空归属，若依托多重证据链，则会标注为高置信度值；低置信度值则基于"推测性判断"与参与判定的研究人员的经验得出。未受扰动的文化堆积为时空归属判定提供了最佳背景证据，将被标注为高完整性值。从含有越来越多外源物质的堆积中出土的器物，则会被标注为低完整性值。

打制石器时空数据集的变量已由Wilshusen等（1999）进行了阐述，尤其可参考其第3章中莎拉·B·巴伯（Sarah B. Barber）撰写的《打制石制人工制品》一节。在多数情况下，此处的描述可作为元数据使用，因此本文几乎逐字照搬了相关内容。在部分案例中，研究人员引用了已发表与未发表的DAP报告合集中的相关资料以进行阐释，并已按规范标注了参考文献。本文仅简要概述了时空档案的复杂性；任何尝试使用打制石器时空数据集的研究人员，都应首先参考Wilshusen等（1999：31-42）与Kane（1986：353-435）的相关文献。