v=c§J - Memorial University of Newfoundland DAI

List of Tables
Table 1.1: Examples of the sorts ofobjects produced with ground stone tools. 13
Table 2.1: Breakdown of2003·2006 excavations at achvak Village (lgCx·3). 23
Table 3.1 : Relationship between technique and implements. 36
Table 4.1 : Breakdown ofartifacts according to tool and material type. provisional
function totals in parenlheses. 45
Table 4.2: Distribution ofdrill bits by house and material type. 80
Table 4.3: Distribution ofdrill bits by portion remaining and material type. 82
Table 4.4: Comparison of number of nephrite and slate awl/gravers according to
feature. 85
Table 4.5: Distribution ofadze blades by house, material and degree ofcompletion. 88
Table 4.6: Division ofartifacts according to role in the production process. 97
Table 4.7: Distribution of manufacturing implements. 98
Table 4.8: Categories used in the identification ofwhetstone material type and
coarseness (Stow 2005). 102
Table 4.9: Distribution of whetstones by grain. rock type and percentage of total
whetstones. 105
Table 4.10: Distribution of whetstones by number of facets polished. 106
Table 4.11: Using degree ofchipping and grinding as a proxy for stage of prefonn
production. 114
Table 5. I: Moh's scale of hardness (Chestennan 1979:27). 124
Table 5.2: Distribution of unfinished tool by matcrialtype. 134
Table 6. I: Dimensions ofprefonns before grinding. 152
Table 6.2: Manufacturing techniques for each nephrite bit used in timed experiment. 153
Table 6.3: Completion times and estimated strokes per tool. 154
Table 6.4: Dimensions ofcomplete drill bit specimens. 154
Table 6.5: Weight comparison of prefonn and completed replicas. 155
Table 6.6: Experimental drilling times for various media. 165
- ix-