Blacksmith - The Origins Of Metallurgy Distinguishing Stone.pdf - Książki - Kowalstwo - Polakonoid

Journal of Archaeological Science (1999) 26, 797–808

Article No. jasc.1998.0348, available online at http://www.idealibrary.com on

The Origins of Metallurgy: Distinguishing Stone from Metal

Cut-marks on Bones from Archaeological Sites

Haskel J. Greeneld*

Department of Anthropology, University of Manitoba, Fletcher Argue 435, Winnipeg, MB, R3T 5V5, Canada

( Received 12 May 1998, revised manuscript accepted 1 September 1998 )

This paper presents an analytical procedure for identifying and mapping the introduction and spread of metallurgy to

regions based upon the relative frequency of metal versus stone tool slicing cut-marks in butchered animal bone

assemblages. The author conducted experiments to establish the relationship between the edge characteristics of metal

and stone tools that create slicing cut-marks and the marks they produce when applied to bone. The type of tool used

to produce such cut-marks on bone can be identied by taking silicone moulds of slicing cut-marks and analysing them

in a scanning electron microscope. Quantifying the distribution of metal versus stone tool types over time and space

provides insight into the processes underlying the introduction and di

) through the end of the Bronze Age ( c. 1000

1999 Academic Press

Keywords: METALLURGY, ZOOARCHAEOLOGY, SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPY,

CUT-MARKS, EXPERIMENTAL ARCHAEOLOGY.

archaeologists (e.g., Branigan, 1974 ; Levy &

Shalev, 1989 ; Muhly, 1985 ; Renfrew, 1969 ;

Rosen, 1984 ; Tylecote, 1986 , 1987 , 1992 ; Wertheim &

Muhly, 1980 ) . However, relatively little is known about

the use of early metal tools or their rate of adoption.

Metal tools begin to appear toward the close of the

Neolithic period in the Old World ( Shephard, 1980 ;

Tylecote, 1986 , 1987 , 1992 ) . During the subsequent

Eneolithic, Bronze and Iron Ages, stone tools dramati-

cally decline in frequency.† It has been commonly

assumed that metal tools take their place. However,

metal tools are relatively rare nds in sites because they

were either recycled by their users, or they deteriorated

in their post-depositional context. Thus, monitoring

the importance of metal tools has heretofore been

restricted to inferential suppositions based on the dis-

appearance of stone tools ( Rosen, 1984 , 1993 , 1997 , in

press ) or the occasional metal nd. In order to make

more substantive statements about the e

ects of the introduction and use of metal tools upon

cultures.

Most research concerned with the origins of metal-

lurgy has relied upon the analysis of metal artefacts

(e.g., Branigan, 1974 ; Chernykh, 1992 ; Levy & Shalev,

1989 ; Shephard, 1980 ; Tripathi, 1988 ; Tylecote, 1986 ,

1992 ) . This approach, however, is fraught with a major

problem. The number and types of metal tools from

the earliest metal-using prehistoric periods (Neolithic,

Eneolithic, and Bronze Ages) is quite small ( Rosen,

1984 , 1993 , 1997 , in press ) and almost certainly does

not reect the full range then available ( Olsen, 1988:

337 ) . One possible interpretation for the archaeological

rarity of metal tools is that it reects the actual

prehistoric rarity of metal tools. Another possible

explanation was that metal was such a precious com-

modity in antiquity that it was not discarded, but used

and reused. In such a scenario, metal would typically

be discarded only when there was too little to salvage,

a condition that would be relatively infrequent, and

most metal would be recycled. This interpretation is

supported by the paucity of discarded broken or worn

tools. Of the metal objects that are found, most are

worn, broken, or nished tools and weapons that were

lost, ritually deposited, or hidden and forgotten. A

ect of the

erential recovery procedures conducted by Neolithic versus post-

Neolithic prehistorians (cf. Greeneld, 198 6 a , 1991 , 1993 ) . In gen-

eral, the former have generally used sieves longer and traditionally

pay more attention to chipped stone remains during recovery,

analysis, and publication.

797

0305–4403/99/070797+12 $30.00/0

1999 Academic Press

usion of a functional metallurgical technology

for subsistence activities. Prehistoric data from the central Balkans of southeast Europe are presented to illustrate the

utility of the procedure. These data are used to calculate the frequency of use and relative importance of stone and metal

implements over time in the central Balkans, from the introduction of metallurgy during the Late Neolithic

( c. 3900–3300

Introduction

T he origins of metallurgy have long intrigued

introduction and use of metal tools on the societies

that adopted them, a more direct source of data must

be sought. It is only when such data are assembled can

hypotheses truly be suggested and tested about the

*For correspondence. Tel: 204–474–6332; Fax: 1–204–474–7600;

E-mail: Greenf@cc.umanitoba.ca

†To some extent, the decline of int is probably a function of the

798 H. J. Greeneld

erences in

cut-marks, it should also be possible (1) to expand our

understanding of the types of butchering tools in each

of the prehistoric periods and (2) to more accurately

calculate the relative importance of stone versus metal

in the subsistence technology. Thus, cut-marks can be

used, in the absence of metal tools, to study the

introduction and spread of metallurgy both within and

between regions (and potentially even within complex

societies) through time.

This investigation was accomplished in two steps:

rst, through the analysis of modern experimental cut-

marks made by the author with metal and stone tools

and, second, by the comparison of the results of the

cut-mark experiments with cut-marks on bones from

prehistoric sites spanning the introduction of metal

tools in the central Balkans. The central Balkans of

southeastern Europe were chosen to supply the com-

parative archaeological material because this is one of

the Old World regions which experienced the auton-

omous development of metallurgy ( Jovanovi, 1980 ;

Renfrew, 1969 ) . The zooarchaeological remains with

cut-marks used in this study come from two prehistoric

sites: Petnica and Ljuljaci ( Greeneld, 1986 a , b , 1991 ) ,

both located in central Serbia. Their data will be used

to demonstrate the utility of the method.

The slicing cut-marks examined in this study are the

residual remains of slaughtering, butchering and skin-

ning activities. A cut-mark is functionally equivalent to

a slice on the bone created by the drawing of a knife (or

dagger) blade across the surface of the bone. It is this

type of cut-mark that is being studied here. A slicing

cut-mark is not to be confused with a chop-mark,

which is created by the impact of a knife, sword, or

axe-like blade. It is also not to be confused with the

slicing-like activity of a saw. The marks produced by

chopping and sawing are easily distinguished from

those of slicing cut-marks ( Olsen, 1988 ) .

Previous Research on Later Prehistoric Metal

Versus Stone Tool Cut-marks

There has been a great deal of research over the last 20

years in distinguishing chipped stone tool cut-marks on

bones from other kinds of marks on bones (teeth,

trampling, vascular grooves, roots, preparator-marks,

etc.—e.g., Blumenschine, Marean & Capaldo, 1996 ;

Olsen & Shipman, 1988 ; Potts & Shipman, 1981 ;

Shipman & Rose, 1983 ; White & Toth, 1989 ) . In later

prehistoric/early historic faunal assemblages, slicing

cut-marks are not easily confused with other kinds of

marks commonly studies (e.g., tooth and preparator-

marks). There has been little attention directed at

distinguishing cut-marks made by prehistoric or

historic stone from metal butchering implements.

Walker & Long (1977) conducted a series of exper-

iments that initially established the relationship

between the edge characteristics of a series of stone and

metal cutting tools and the marks they produce when

applied to bone. Their experiments were the rst to

indicate that clearly recognizable morphological di

erences Between Stone and Metal Tools

There are some fundamental di

erences between stone

and metal tools that are relevant to the analysis at

hand. First, experiments with steel knives have shown

them to be superior to stone ake tools in a number of

ways. They are stronger, have greater longevity, retain

their cutting edge longer, are generally sharper, can be

more frequently and extensively sharpened, and re-

quire less energy to cut through greater amounts of

tissue with fewer strokes ( Walker, 1978 ) .

Second, as a result of the heavy investment in raw

material procurement and manufacture, metal tools

are kept and used for long periods of time and not

quickly discarded. In contrast, chipped stone tools

have a shorter functional life ( Brose, 1975 ) . Stone tools

er-

ences existed between the cut-marks of metal and stone

knives. The results of their research are supported by

this study.

The most extensive replication study of metal versus

stone-cut tool marks was conducted by Olsen (1988) in

a seminal, but relatively unnoticed study. She was the

rst to examine the relative abundance of metal versus

stone tool slicing cut-marks on bone, to do so through

the experimental replication of cut-marks on bone by

a variety of metal and stone tools, and was the rst

to utilize a scanning electron microscope (SEM) to

investigate stone and metal cut-marks in a later

prehistoric context. She developed a series of morpho-

logical criteria for distinguishing stone from metal

tools and types of metal tools using a SEM. Olsen was

mainly concerned with the analysis of bone and antler

artefacts from the British Bronze and Iron Ages, and

was attempting to understand the production tech-

niques for such tools. The results of her study are

corroborated and enhanced by the data presented here.

third possible reason for the paucity of archaeological

metal nds is that early metals were chemically un-

stable and decomposed relatively rapidly under most

conditions. Considering any or all of these reasons,

little direct metallic evidence exists to show the range

of all types of early metal tools ( Olsen, 1988: 337 ;

Shephard, 1980 ; Tylecote, 1992 ) and to determine

exactly when the change-over from a stone- to a

metal-oriented technology took place. Did this tran-

sition take place slowly or rapidly? Was the spread of

metallurgy a relatively uniform process? These are vital

questions which must be answered before one can

address the question of causal priority in the adoption

of metallurgy.

This paper will present the results of new research

into the origins and spread of metallurgy from a new

perspective—the analysis of cut-marks on the bone

remains of animals slaughtered and butchered by metal

and stone implements. It will be shown that cut-marks

on bones made by chipped stone tools during the

butchering of animals can be distinguished from those

made by metal tools. By examining the di

The Origins of Metallurgy 799

have the advantage that their raw material is often

much more readily available and their production

requires less energy and specialized manufacturing

technology. This implies that they can be more easily

produced and were probably more frequently

discarded.

Third, the relative e

cient for

observing the diagnostic criteria. Higher power obser-

vations served to conrm what was already visible at

the lower levels. The magnication used was, to some

extent, dependent on the size of the object under

observation and the range in sample size was a func-

tion of the cut-mark itself. The larger the cut-mark

(width, not length), the lower the power that could be

used.

The angle of observation was also important for the

accurate identication of slicing cut-marks. When

viewed from directly overhead (90

power) were su

ciency of stone and metal tools

seems to vary by function. For example, Steensberg’s

(1943) experiments on int, bronze, and iron sickles

indicate virtually no di

ciency between

sickles of bronze and int.† In contrast, Mathieu &

Meyer’s (1997) experiments with stone, bronze, and

steel axes show that bronze is as e

erence in e

cient as steel for

felling trees, and that both types of metal axes are more

angle), cut-marks

lose their shape and depth. In general, an angle of

75–90

)

cient than stone axes.

was preferred because it enhanced rather than

obscured the morphological characteristics of slicing

cut-marks. The best perspectives were generally from

the side of the specimen where the edge of the mould

was cut and the prole could be brought into view with

the ridge behind it. This allowed the prole to be

accurately drawn. However, the shape of the ridge and

any evidence for ancillary striations were also crucial,

and the SEM often had to be moved to a di

)

ers high resolution

images, with a great depth of eld and a wide range of

magnications. Most or all of the surface of the object

can be brought into focus at once with the SEM

( Olsen, 1988: 341 ) . This contrasts with the use of

photomicrographs from an optical microscope where

the curvature of the bone and the depth of many of the

cut-marks inhibit high quality photomicrographs. A

variety of shapes of steel knives and chipped stone

tools were chosen to try to account for the source of

variability in the analysis. Each blade was drawn

across a soft wooden board (pine) in the same direc-

tion, and with the same angle and hand-held pressure.

A soft wood was chosen as the medium, rather than

bone, because it is softer and more likely to accurately

record details of the imprint of the blade during the

cutting process. The problem with conducting the

exercise on bone is that di

erent

position for their viewing.

erent metal steel knives were used during

the experiment ( Table 1 ) . These knives were chosen to

reect a variety of blade shapes, some of which were

similar to metal blade shapes from prehistoric assem-

blages. In general, the metal knife-marks can be

grouped into two categories: at-edged and serrated-

edged blades. Two signicant di

erences exist between

the modern sample (used in this study) and prehistoric

assemblages (not used in this study). First, the blades

tend to be narrower in the modern assemblage.

Second, serrated-edged metal blades are absent from

prehistoric assemblages in the central Balkans.

Serrated-blades were included in the study to deter-

mine if they would have a di

erent parts of each bone

have varying degrees of hardness and angle ( Lyman,

1994: 238–252 ) .

In order to analyse the cut-marks in a SEM, small

moulds of the cut-marks were made.‡ A variety of

magnications were used for viewing the specimens.

erent morphology than

smooth blades. The results from each type were quite

cient than bronze or int sickles

remains to be determined from experimental studies.

‡The SEM chamber accepts relatively small-sized samples (2–3 cm).

Small silicone rubber moulds of each of the experimental cut-marks

were made using Dow Corning Silastic 9161 molding compound and

Cutter Perfourm Light Vinyl Polysiloxane Impression Material (type

I, low viscosity) dental impression compounds. These are extremely

sensitive media for replicating microscopic morphology ( Rose,

1983 ) . The shape of the mould is the reverse of the original

specimen—it is everted rather than inverted. After curing, the mould

was peeled o

erent and are described below.

, attached to an aluminum stub with an epoxy

adhesive, and sputter-coated with gold palladium. Gold palladium

(often mistaken as silver because of its greyish colouration) yields a

better image in the SEM because its grain size is much smaller than

any other metal (Sergio Mejia, University of Manitoba, Faculty of

Geology, Computer Imaging Laboratory—pers. comm., November

1, 1996).

Serrated-edged blades

Knives with serrated-edged blades could be divided

into two types: those with high and widely spaced

serration (such as steak and bread cutting knives) and

knives with a low and tightly spaced serration (which

are very saw-like in function). The characteristics of

the high and widely spaced serrated knives ( Figure

1 ) include a wide and shallow cut-mark, with poor

denition of the edges and bottom of the groove.

The edges slope very gradually and unevenly, while the

apex seems to have a wave that weaves across the

surface.

The morphology of the cut-mark was obscured if

the magnication was too high. In general, lower

magnications (30–100

The Experiment: Methodology

A series of experiments comparing metal and stone

tool cut-marks was conducted by the author. The

resultant marks were examined under various levels of

power using a SEM. The SEM o

Results of the Experiment

Steel knife-marks

Twelve di

†Whether iron sickles were more e

Table 1. Summary of results of experimental tests of stone and metal blades on a soft wooden board

Raw

material

Sample

Type of instrument

Edge

Angle of V

Comments on knife

Quality of mould

Petnica Inventory #

Steel

Scalpel/razor for paper cutting

Flat-sided

Even V-shape

Did not take

groove too narrow

Steel

Medical scalpel

Flat-sided

Even V-shape

Not very sharp-used

Did not take,

groove too narrow

Steel

Medical scalpel

Flat-sided

Even V-shape

Not very sharp-used; broken tip Did not take,

groove too narrow

Steel

Eating (table) knife

Flat-sided

Uneven V-shape

Good

Steel

Eating (table) knife

Shallow, tightly

spaced serration

Good

Steel

Serrated steak knife

Deep and widely

spaced serration

Good

Steel

Bread cutting knife

Deep and widely

spaced serration

Bread cutting side

Good

Steel

Bread cutting knife

Small, tightly spaced

serration

Bone cutting side

Good

Steel

Kitchen knife with wooden handle Flat-sided

Uneven V-shape

Good

Steel

Kitchen knife with plastic handle

Flat-sided

Uneven V-shape

Good

Steel

Pocket (folding) knife

Flat-sided

Even V-shape

Large

Good

Steel

Pocket (folding) knife

Flat-sided

Even V-shape

Small

Good

Stone

Backed short blade

Retouched on one

side

Uneven on one side

and smooth on other

Good

6762

Stone

Triple backed short blade

Without retouch

Uneven on one side

and smooth on other

Good

6056

Stone

Curved single backed short blade

Without retouch

Uneven on one side

and smooth on other

Good

5099

Stone

Triple backed short blade

Without retouch

Uneven on one side

and smooth on other

Good

5613, 5013 or 58

Stone

Scraper

Without retouch

Uneven on one side

and smooth on other

Good

6118

Stone

Short blade

Without retouch

Uneven on one side

and smooth on other

Good

4976

Stone

Long blade

Without retouch

Uneven on one side

and smooth on other

Good

8389

Stone

Long blade

Without retouch

Uneven on one side

and smooth on other

Good

5635

Stone

Curved short blade

Without retouch

Uneven on one side

and smooth on other

Good

5166

Stone

Large scraper

Without retouch

Uneven on one side

and smooth on other

Good

Stone

Small scraper

Without retouch

Uneven on one side

and smooth on other

Good

Stone

Long blade fragment

Without retouch

Uneven on one side

and smooth on other

Good

The Origins of Metallurgy 801

Figure 1. SEM photograph of the groove from modern metal knife

8, 25

magnication, 80

)

Figure 3. SEM photograph of the groove from modern metal knife

9, 200

magnication, 80

)

Flat-edged blades

This type includes modern scalpels, razors, typical

carbon steel kitchen knives, and most pocket knives.

The cutting edges are sharpened on both sides in order

to maintain their sharpness. Both sides steeply angle at

the same degree toward the cutting edge to form a

V-shape prole ( Figure 3 ) . The bottom of the cut-mark

by metal blades is often slightly attened. Only in

razor-edged blades is the bottom of the blade a sharp

V-shape.

erent sharp-edged chipped stone tool

types were initially selected for the analysis from the

prehistoric assemblage at Petnica ( Table 1 ; Greeneld,

1986 a ; Greeneld, Jeˇ & Starovi, n.d. ; Jeˇ, 1985 ;

Starovi, 1993 ) . The stone tools can be typologically

divided into three groups. These are common lithic

types found on Neolithic and post-Neolithic sites in

the central Balkans.† There were six short blades

Figure 2. SEM photograph of the groove from modern metal knife

7, 206

magnication, 75

)

†The artefacts from the Petnica assemblage were representative of

the prevalent chipped stone types that morphologically could have

been used for butchering activities. No alternative slicing tool types

were found in the assemblage. It is unlikely that part of the

assemblage is not represented owing to the extensive nature of the

excavations and that the site is a sedentary settlement ( Greeneld,

1986 a ). The names of the tools are based upon the formal typology

used by local prehistorians. The local lithic typology system is based

upon formal morphology rather than use-wear. For example, the

erent pattern. The blade is at on one side and scalloped

on the other. It makes a broad and relatively shallow

groove, with sides that gradually slope downwards until

half the depth is reached and then slope at a steeper angle.

The slope is much more gradual on the left side of the

groove than on the right side. This pattern is found on all

serrated knives, but is accentuated on the tightly serrated

knife edges. This pattern would be di

erence between short-and long-blades is probably an articial

erence as a result of breakage during use. The tools selected for

this analysis appear to still be functional for butchering activities

since there is no evidence of damage to the slicing edge and they still

possessed sharp edges. They may have been used originally for a

variety of activities but this cannot be determined without extensive

edge-wear analysis.

cult to distinguish

from that of some of the stone tool cut-marks because

both sides of the blade do not have the same shape.

Stone blade-marks

Twelve di

The low and tightly spaced serrated knives ( Figure 2 ) have

adi

Blacksmith - The Origins Of Metallurgy Distinguishing Stone.pdf

Plik z chomika:

Inne pliki z tego folderu:

Inne foldery tego chomika: