Reply to Hughes
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 7603368 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Christopher M Stevenson (0000-0002-3575-2363), Barry E Scheetz (Pennsylvania State University), Barry Scheetz, James W Hatch (Pennsylvania State University) |
| Year | 1992 |
| Volume | 57 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 524-525 |
| Publication date | 1992-07-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | American Antiquity (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0002-7316 • E-ISSN: 2325-5064 |
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.2307/280940 |
| OpenAlex | W2325132560 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 2 |
| References cited | 6 |
Hughes (1992) raises two points in his evaluation of our paper on Hopewell obsidian studies (Hatch et al. 1990): (a) Why did we not attempt to identify the several possible western United States sources from which our Hopewell specimens were derived, and (b) was it legitimate to report hydration-rim measurements with a.1 μm or less level of accuracy? These issues are addressed within the context of our initial research goals and through reference to the literature on optical microscopy
Archaeology · Context (archaeology) · Geography · Geochemistry and Geologic Mapping · Geological formations and processes · History · Hydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
| Citations per year | 0.07 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 1997 - 1998 (2) |
| Highly cited | No |