Anth 106 PPT Lecture 11 Summary of and S

Introduction to Archaeology: SPRING 2023
Renfrew & Bahn 2019 (8th ed.): chp.8

Lecture 17: How Did They Make Use of
Tools? Technology.
Notes and images compiled by Gregory Mumford (© 2023)
Contents:
8. How did they make use of tools? Technology.
1. Introduction: 5
Survival of the evidence: 8
Are they artifacts at all? 11
Interpreting the evidence: ethnographic analogy 13
2. Unaltered materials: stone. 16
Extraction: mines and quarries 18
How was stone transported? 25
How were stones worked and fitted 32
Stone tool manufacture 38
Identifying the function of stone tools: microwear 57
Identifying function: further experiments 69
Assessing the technology of Stone Age art 73
3. Other unaltered materials: 81
Bone, antler, shell, and leather 82
Wood 94
Plant and animal fibres 117
Contents:
8. How did they make use of tools? Technology.
4. Synthetic materials: 122
Firing and pyrotechnology 123
Pottery 128
Faience and glass 141
5. Archaeometallurgy: 144
Non-ferrous materials : copper technology evolution 145
Alloying 152
Casting 154
Silver, lead, and platinum: 162
Fine metalwork 166
Plating 169
Iron and steel: 172
6. Summary: 178
7. Case Study-1: Pharaonic stone working.
8. Case Study-2: Pharaonic metallurgy.
9. Case Study-3: Early Bronze Technology EH, EC, EM
Instructor tips for lectures, etc.:
(1). Attend class regularly (& listen) …
→ Many clarifications, tips, announcements,
reinforcement & reviews of materials/concepts.
(2). Take notes on lectures, etc. …

→ The act of writing down notes, even with
most course materials and instructions online,
serves as an invaluable aid to one focusing on
a class topic and retaining information better.
https://howtostudyincollege.com/how-to-get-good-grades/note-taking-strategies/
(3). Complete the required textbook
readings, and/or review the ppt.,
prior to the specific class day …
→ This will provide greater clarity and
comprehension of the material, and will enable
asking focused questions where something
may be less clear (in the textbook or lecture).
(4). Ask questions during the class if

you are confused/wish more data
→ The class is an ideal place to ask for more
clarity or further information not contained in
the textbook, ppt., and/or lecture (If nobody
asks questions, the lecture proceeds …).
(5). Complete optional materials:

→ Additional reinforcement, studying & bonus?
Renfrew and Bahn
2019 (8th. Ed.)
Chapter 8:
How did they make use
of tools?
Technology.
Introduction to Archaeology: Renfrew & Bahn 2019 (8th ed.): chp.8
8. How Did They Make Use of Tools? Technology.
1.1. Introduction:
• Humanity = often defined by
tool-making abilities.
Progression:
Stone →AE → Fe → computers
This chapter assesses:
• How artifacts = made & used
Different approaches:
a. Archaeological
b. Scientific analysis
c. Ethnographic
d. Experimental
• Each artifact’s manufacturing
process & application =
best understood by closest
modern manufacturer & user
of a similar technology & item
→ Industrial archaeology.
1.1. Introduction:
• Humanity = often defined by
tool-making abilities.
Progression:
Stone →AE → Fe → computers
This chapter assesses: Dr. H. L. Gates
• How artifacts = made & used
Different approaches:
a. Archaeological
b. Scientific analysis
c. Ethnographic (ethnoarchaeology)
d. Experimental
• Each artifact’s manufacturing
process & application =
best understood by closest
modern manufacturer & user
of a similar technology & item
→ Industrial archaeology.
1.2. Survival of the evidence: Medieval fish basket
• Biased preservation may affect
the surviving artifacts/technology
• E.g., Palaeolithic:
- Stone tools survive mostly
- Few wood & bone items survive
- Except wet, cold, & dry sites,
sometimes imprints, hollows,
soil discolorations, etc.
• E.g., A “pseudomorph” (hollow) at
a Middle Paleolithic site in NE
Spain (Abru Romani) → yielded
a hollow from a pointed wooden
Ukraine:
stick (1 m long) ca. 50,000 BP.
Palaeolithic
• Some ancient depictions = tools: Gontsy
E.g., Boomerangs in Australia mammoth
• Other evidence from: bone hut
E.g., Sword-cuts; pick marks; etc. site
1.2. Survival of the evidence:
• E.g., Paleolithic:
- Few wood & bone items survive
• E.g., A “pseudomorph” (hollow)
at a Middle Paleolithic site in NE
a hollow from a pointed wooden
• Some ancient depictions = tools:
E.g., Boomerangs in Australia
• Other (indirect) evidence from:
E.g., Sword-cuts; pick marks; etc.
1.2. Survival of the evidence:
• E.g., Paleolithic:
- Few wood & bone items survive Roman period chisel
• E.g., A “pseudomorph” (hollow)
at a Middle Paleolithic site in NE
a hollow from
Pointed a pointed
chisel marks wooden
and
impressions on white marble
• Some ancient depictions = tools:
E.g., Boomerangs in Australia
Incised grooves from blade/edge
• Other (indirect) evidence from:
E.g., Sword-cuts; pick marks; etc.
1.3. Are they artifacts at all?
• Archaeologists need to determine
whether each item found
= purposefully made/used? OR
= by-product of manufacture?
- Paleolithic flakes = less obvious!
- “Eoliths” human-made vs. natural.
Analysis of stone tool production
→ revealed “bulb of percussion” =
left on “human-made tools”
- Nature leaves irregular scars, Pedra Furada
fracturing (heat; frost; falls) → rock shelter
Eoliths = NATURAL. (NE Brazil):
Controversial
- Earliest tools = harder to discern
pebble “tool”
from natural items (see context) dating back to
- Now know some animals use tools 30,000 BP vs.
(e.g., Chimpanzees) → no longer 15,000 BP for
defines humanity (isolated finds =?) New World.
1.3. Are they artifacts at all?
• Archaeologists need to determine
whether each item found
= purposefully
Rock fall made/used? OR
= by-product of manufacture?
→
“flakes”flakes = less obvious!
- Paleolithic
(like “tools”)
- “Eoliths” human-made vs. natural.
Analysis of stone tool production
→ revealed “bulb of percussion”
left on “human-made tools”
- Nature leaves irregular scars and
fracturing (heat; frost; falls) →
Eoliths = NATURAL.
- Earliest tools = harder to discern
from natural items (see context)
- We now know some animals use tools
(e.g.,chimpanzees) → tools no longer
define humanity (isolated finds =?) Chimpanzee tool use
1.4. Interpreting the evidence:
Using ethnographic analogy:
• Careful use of ethnography &
ethnoarchaeology aids in assessing
ancient technologies:
- Generally people use readiest materials
for daily, ordinary work (e.g., transitory tools).
- Many people expend time & labour
on long-term tools (e.g., hardier, quality tools)
• Rel. % of artifacts = various meanings:
- Abundant items may = cheap items
- Uncommon items may = valuable
• Assessing meaning:
- 16th Cent. AD Tairona Indian pendants
= polished stone → may = decorative?
- Kogi Indian descendants now use them
Relative value:
as rattles/tinklers in dances!Material access
-Same use? Versus ChangedTool use?complexity
• Experimental archaeology: Common items
prod. & use
Kogi Indians
ancient technologies: Pre-Columbian
- gen. people use readiest materials
Tairona Indian
for daily, ordinary work.
Necklace with
- gen. people expend time & labor
on long-term tools. greenstone beads
& frog pendant
• Rel.% of artifacts = various meanings:
differently(?), as rattles/tinklers in dances!
Elsewhere: Same use versus changed use?
• Experimental archaeology: prod. & use
ancient technologies:
- gen. people use readiest materials
for daily, ordinary work.
- gen. people expend time & labor
on long-term tools.
• Rel.% of artifacts = various meanings: E.g., Early Iron Age ceramic project
as rattles/tinklers in dances!
The Duyfken sailing near Fremantle (1999). Early Neolithic wood technology
-Same use? Versus Changed use?
(Austria): stone axe to fell trees
• Experimental archaeology: =prod. & use
TECHNOLOGY:
unaltered materials
a. STONE
2.1. Unaltered Materials: Stone.
• Most common artifacts surviving from
ca. 3.3 million → 14,000 BP = stone.
Lake Turkana, Kenya:
2.2. Extraction: mines & quarries.
• Stone from surface,
Australopithecus afarensis or
streambeds, etc.
• Also mines & quarries.
Kenyanthropus platyops tool use
N. Europe Neolithic flint mines:
- Open cast & shaft mining following
desired seams:
- Rijckholt region has 60 mine shafts Recent: 3.3 million-year-old stone tools
10-16 m deep with side galleries. found, predating early humans …
- Region may have had 5000? Shafts
producing 153 million axeheads.
- Shaft shored up by plaited branches.
- Rope traces for raising nodule loads.
- 15,000 axes used in cutting galleries.
→ produced 2.5 million axe heads.
?- Mine
- 5 axes per cubic metre of chalk.
- Some heating to fracture rock face.
TECHNOLOGY:
a. STONE
Extraction techniques
(mines & quarries)
2.1. Unaltered Materials: Stone.
• Most common artifacts surviving from
ca. 2.5 million → 14,000 BP = stone.
2.2. Extraction: mines & quarries.
• Stone from surface, streambeds, etc.
• Stone also from mines & quarries.
N. Europe Neolithic flint mines:
- Open cast & shaft mining following
desired seams:
- Rijckholt region has 60 mine shafts
10-16 m deep with side galleries.
- Region may have had 5,000+? shafts
producing 153 million axeheads.
- Shaft shored up by plaited branches.
- Rope traces for raising nodule loads.
- 15,000 axes used in cutting galleries.
- Mine produced 2.5 million axe heads.
- 5 axes per cubic metre of chalk.
- Some heating to fracture rock face.
Quarries:
• Study abandoned/unfinished items:
- Easter Island statue quarry:

Shape drawn → fully carved statues
Experiments: 6 carvers produced
a 5 metre high statue in one year.
- Aswan granite quarry (Egypt):

A 42 metre long obelisk (1,168 tons)
Dolerite balls → 5 mm depth per hour Easter Island moai / statue production
= takes 400 workers 15 months
“Walking” to site (part of ritual)
(Dyn.18, Thutmose III, ca. 1450 BC)
- Rumiqolqa quarry in Peru (Inca):

Hard stone hammers used to shape
250 blocks found in a 100 m long pit.
More to the moai than previously thought

Various theories regarding transport …
Quarries:


Dolerite balls → 5 mm depth per hour
(may date: Dyn.18, Thutmose III, ca. 1450 BC)

STONE
QUARRIES
Quarries:


Dolerite balls → 5 mm depth per hour
(Dyn.18,
Inca stoneThutmose III, ca. 1450 BC)
quarrying
TECHNOLOGY:
a. STONE
Transportation techniques
(from mines & quarries)
and installation …
2.3. How was stone transported?
• Sufficient evidence may remain to
answer such questions:
- Kachiqhata granite quarry (Inca)
has slides & ramps.
- Wear pattern study reveals drag
marks on one face of blocks.
- Dragging details remain unknown
- Elsewhere: 140 ton block req. 2,400 men
- BUT ramp = 8 metres wide
→ needs experimentation.
- Egypt: Dyn.12, 7-m high statue of
Djehutihotep: 58-60 tons with 90 men!/?
- Experiments in transport & placement
→ 10 persons in 3 days raised stones
of several tons using fat lubricant.
- Stonehenge; Easter Island (8 tons);
Grand Menhir Brise (32 tons -20 men)
has slides & ramps.
- 140 ton block req. 2400 men
Djehutihotep: 58-60 tons with 90 men!/?
- Experiments in transport & placement
- Stonehenge; Easter Island (8 tons);
Dyn.12: Deir el-Bersheh Tomb of nomarch Djehutyhotep
• Private statuary and the relative status and power of some nomarchs in
relation to the king.
• Only evidence = actually this illustration (otherwise = circumstantial evid.)
• Approximately 58 ton statue moved by 172 men (is the drawing realistic?)
has slides & ramps.
- 140 ton block req. 2400 men
Easter Island: statue
Djehutihotep: 58-60still
tonsattached
with 90via keel
men!/? 8 ton
Topknot
- Experiments in transport & placement installed.
- E.g., Stonehenge; Easter Island (8 tons);
Experimental Stonehenge Hypothetical technique
Archaeology:
- Hypothetical techniques
for erecting the trilithons
and capping them with
lintels (at Stonehenge).
- Multiple options exist(!)
Experimental archaeology:
Transporting a 3-ton blue stone from Wales
TECHNOLOGY:
a. STONE
Working and fitting
(design & production
process)
2.4. How were stones worked & fitted?
Protzen’s experiments reveal var. ways
to duplicate Inca stonework (Peru).
- Hammering & dressing stone blocks,
shaping one face in 20 min.
- Preparing bedding for upper course
block-by-block
- 90 minutes to obtain a good fit.
Haselberger found architect’s drawings
in 4th Cent. BC Apollo Temple (Didyma).
- Full sized & scaled down incised plans
- Other temples with similar plans
AD 120 Roman Pantheon:
- Part of its plan found incised in paving
beside Mausoleum of Augustus.
Egyptian architect’s plans of Tomb of
Ramesses IV (12th cent BC) on papyrus:
- Including placement of interior shrines.
to duplicate Inca stonework3-d view:
(Peru).
- Hammering & dressing stone Apollo
blocks,
Temple,
block-by-block Didyma
Apollo Temple, Didyma
Plan
- Part of its plan found incised in view:
paving
beside Mausoleum of Augustus. Apollo
Egyptian architect’s plans of Tomb
Temple,of
Didyma
block-by-block
Roman Pantheon
Egyptian architect’s plans of Tomb of
- Including placement of interior shrines. Mausoleum of Augustus
Protzen’s experiments reveal ways
block-by-block
Egyptian architect’s plan of the Tomb of
Designing the royal tomb (Ramesside example).
Ancient Egyptian plan of R. IV’s tomb (on papyrus)

TECHNOLOGY:
a. STONE
Stone tool manufacture
process …
2.5. Stone tool manufacture.
a. Flake off exterior nodule →obtain
desired core/interior shape:
b. Primary flakes bear surface/cortex
c. Trim interior flakes (fine-tuning)
d. Remove var. tiny flakes (retouch)
Evolution of stone tools:
a. Oldowan choppers & flakes
Break → sharp edges (5 cm edge)
b. Acheulian handaxe bifacial flaking
(20 cm worth of blade edge)
c. Levallois technique (100,000 BP):
Preparing core → standard flake
d. Upper Paleolithic (35,000 BP)
Hammer + punch → many parallel
sided blanks → scrapers, burins,
borers (minimized wastage)
(300-1200 cm worth of blade edge)
2.5. Stone tool manufacture. Evolution of stone tool technology
a. Flake off exterior nodule → obtain
desired core shape:
b. Primary flakes bear surface/cortex
c. Trim interior flakes (fine-tuning)
d. Remove var. tiny flakes (retouch)
Evolution of stone tools:
a. Oldowan choppers & flakes
Break → sharp edges (5 cm edge)
b. Acheulian handaxe bifacial flaking
c. Levallois technique (100,000 BP):
Preparing core → standard flake
d. Upper Paleolithic (35,000 BP)
Hammer + punch → many parallel
sided blanks → scrapers, burins,
borers (minimized wastage)
(300-1200 cm worth of blade edge)
e. Mesolithic (10,000 BP):
→ microlithics dominate assemblage
(= tiny blades used in composite tools)
Manufacturing process:
- Ideally study all waste materials in
one spot & anc. Flint knapping areas.
- Taku (Japan): cluster of 40 sites beside
stone source (ca. 15,000-10,000 BP).
Each site facilitated a diff. stage in the
manufacturing process.
- Most finished artifacts are found away
from stone sources.
- Different sites → different tool types.
E.g., Hunting camp vs. settlement
- Hafting traces 80,000 BP+ (Germany).
- Modern Australian Aborigines are still
producing stone tools.
e. Mesolithic
Oldowan (10,000
through BP):
Mesolithic:
→ Maximizing
i.e., microlithics investment
dominate assemblage
(labour / effort
(tiny blades
/ time) used in to
in relation composite tools)…
final product
one spot & ancient flint knapping areas.
from stone sources.
producing stone tools.
e. Mesolithic (10,000 BP):
→ microlithics dominate assemblage
(tiny blades used in composite tools) replica
one spot & anc. Flint knapping areas.
from stone sources.
producing stone tools. = study resource!
Egypt MK industry:
Making flint blades.
• Materials (flint etc.)
• Skilled flint-knapper
(apprenticeship)
• Market & usage:

butcher, hunter,
various industries,
home (still using
flints in Roman per)
TECHNOLOGY:
a. STONE
Working and fitting
process)
i. Replication (experiment)
2.5.a. Stone tool replication.
• Making duplicate copies of ancient
stone tools using past technology
to assess probable prod.-processes:
- Requires many years of practice
E.g., Francois Bordes.
- N. Toth produced full tool range for
Koobi Fora, Kenya (2-1.5 mill. BP):
Hammerstones, choppers, scrapers
flakes → believes flakes = main tool
(former belief core = objective)
- D. Crabtree discovered one technique
to produce N. American folsom points
(11,000-10,000 BP)
17th Cent. AD Spanish text on Aztecs
- G. Frison experimented with replica
clovis points in hunting: he could
penetrate elephant hide from 20 m.
to assess prob. prod.-processes:
(former belief that core = objective)
(11,000-10,000 BP)
Crabtree
-D. Crabtree discovered one technique
to produce N.American folsom points
(11,000-10,000 BP)
17th Cent. AD Spanish text on ‘Aztecs’
‘Aztecs’ = various cultural groups
…
(11,000-10,000 BP)
• Flints heated:
- Heating Florida cherts
→ pinkish colour at 240C/464F
→ lustrous at 350-400 C/662-752F
(= shiny surface).
20-40% > compressive strength
45% < in breakage resistance.
Augmenting flint
• Electron Spin points by
resonance heat
(ESR)
and Thermoluminescence (TL):
- Reveals defects in lithics
E.g., Heated flint has a signature
Heating chert enables the
of largerHeated
Heated chert
production chert
flakes via
pressure flaking.
• Flints heated:
- Heating Florida cherts
→ pinkish colour at 240C/464F
→ lustrous at 350-400 C/662-752F
(= shiny surface).
20-40% > compressive strength
45% < in breakage resistance.
•
Heating up chert in quarry
• Electron Spin resonance (ESR)

and Thermoluminescence (TL):
- Reveals defects in lithics
E.g., Heated flint has a signature:
Heating chert enables the
production of larger flakes via
pressure flaking.
TECHNOLOGY:
a. STONE
Working and fitting
process)
ii. Refitting (backtracking)
2.5.b. Refitting of stone tools.
• Initiated in 1880 by F.C.J. Spurrell
• Reactivated by A. Leroi-Gourhan
→ Refitting tools/flakes from debitage:
E.g., Late Upper Paleolithic tool
originally part of a stone reduced
into 124 pieces (some blades = 30 cm)
• Refitting enables accurate reconstr.
of flint-knapping process, activity Separate activity
patterns, & dispersal at prod.-site. areas at Rekem:
• BUT, conjoined pieces are also
dispersed in other ways(!).
• Tool function interpretation = aided
by ethnographic observation.
• Experimenting in use can reveal its
possible to probable applications.
• Some tools=multipurpose: A-handaxe
• Function also revealed by microwear
Conjoining pieces from tools:
- What does the dispersal of conjoined
pieces of tools being worked suggest?
(a). Multiple stages in lithic production;
(b). The raw material and in-progress
tool = going through different work
stations (& different specialists?)
(c). A production line &/or diff stages?
E.g., Re-fitted stone flakes …
2.5.b. Refitting of stone tools.
• Initiated in 1880 by F.C.J. Spurrell
• Reactivated by A. Leroi-Gourhan
→ Refitting tools/flakes from debitage:
E.g., Late Upper Paleolithic tool
originally part of a stone reduced
into 124 pieces (some blades 30 cm)
• Refitting enables accurate reconstr.
of flint-knapping process, activity
patterns, & dispersal at prod.-site.
• BUT, conjoined pieces are also Acheulian
Aborigine
dispersed in otherhunting
ways. kit handaxe
• Tool function interpretation = aided
by ethnographic observation.
• Experimenting in use can reveal its
possible to probable applications.
• Some tools=multipurpose: A-handaxe
• Function also revealed by microwear
TECHNOLOGY:
a. STONE
Identifying function …
TECHNOLOGY:
a. STONE
Identifying function(s):
i. Microwear analysis …
2.6. Identifying the function of
stone tools: microwear studies.
• Late 1800s: microwear analysis began
• 1957: S. Semenov launched microwear
He found wear traces on all stone types
i.e., = Striations & polish marks
• R. Tringham assessed micro-flaking
caused through usage.
• L. Keeley: scanning electron microscope
applied to improve microwear studies.
• Experimental archaeology correlated
wear marks with diff. usages: 6 types
1. on wood
2. on bone
3. on hide
4. on meat
5. on antler
6. on non-woody plants
ALSO traces of piercing, cutting, scraping.
2.6. Identifying the function of Edge damage:
stone tools: microwear studies. Attested via
• Late 1800s: microwear analysis began microflaking
• 1957: S. Semenov launched microwear visible along
Found wear traces on all stone types edge
i.e., Striations & polish marks
applied to improve microwear studies.
wear marks with diff. usages: 6 types
1. on wood
2. on bone
3. on hide
4. on meat
5. on antler
ALSO traces of piercing, cutting, scraping.
• Late 1800s: microwear analysis Scraper
began
• 1957: S. Semenov launched microwearmicro-
Found wear traces on all stone types
wear:
i.e., Striations & polish marks via use
• R. Tringham assessed micro-flaking on hides
(SEM) applied to improve microwear studies.

wear marks with diff. usages: 6Electron
types
1. on wood micro-
2. on bone scope:
3. on hide High-res
4. on meat image
5. on antler of wear
6. on non-woody plants in molar
ALSO traces of piercing, cutting, (gorilla)
scraping. Electron microscope
• Late 1800s: microwear analysis began
• 1957: S. Semenov launched Motza:
microwear
Tranchet
Found wear traces on all stone types
axe with
i.e., Striations & polish marks
wear from
caused through usage. wood-
• L. Keeley: scanning electron working
microscope Distal end of unifacial endscraper:
applied to improve microwear studies. Heavy wear from use on a dry hide

wear marks with diff. usages: 6 types …
1. on wood
2. on bone
3. on hide
4. on meat
5. on antler
ALSO traces of piercing, cutting, scraping. Natural flint with no wear
Microwear studies (cont.’):
- E.g., Lower Paleolithic S. England:
Tools used on meat, wood, hide, bone …
Side-scrapers applied to hides → wear
- E.g., Boomplaas Cave (S. Africa):
Stone adzes used in woodworking.
- E.g., S. Okazaki studied the density &
direction of striations on stone tools:
Obsidian yielded no polish.
Diff. striations for cutting vs. scraping.
- E.g., Rekem (Belgium): Tools & waste
often concentrate around hearths.
Sometimes cores move between
hearths → diff. manufacturing (burins)
Microdebitage:
- Wet-sieving → assessing minute debris
from flint knapping (under 1 mm).
- Locating stone-working areas.
Tools stone
E.g., used onadzes
meat, wood, hide, bone
with hafts
Side-scrapers applied to hides
Microdebitage:
- LocatingPolynesian stone
stone-working adze
areas.
SEE https://sites.utexas.edu/tarl/2015/03/18/finding-microwear-patterns-on-stone-tools-marilyn-shoberg-tarl-microwear-analyst/
Marilyn Shoberg, Microwear Analyst, Texas Archeological Research Laboratory

Tools used on meat, wood, hide, bone
Obsidian yielded no polish. SEE http://ic.ucsc.edu/~dianegg/anth184/IM/hum.html
http://www.texasbeyondhistory.net/gault/clovis.html
Different striations for cutting vs. scraping.
- E.g., Rekem (Belgium): Tools & wasteMarilyn
often concentrate around hearths. Shoberg
Microdebitage:
- Locating
Mission stone-working
San Bernardo: areas. hide scraper
chipped-stone Gault clovis: polish & striations from meat cutting
- E.g.,
J. Lower
B. White: Paleolithic S. England:
http://www.texasbeyondhistory.net/jbwhite/toolmaking.html
Microdebitage:
- Locating stone-working areas.
oftenmicro
Flint concentrate around
debitage hearths.
(plus smaller bits)
Sometimes
Scale cores1-2
approx.: move
cmbetween
large pieces
Micro-debitage:
from flint knapping (under 1 mm). *Flotation!
- Locating stone-working areas. Core processing: debitage production
TECHNOLOGY:
a. STONE
Identifying function(s):
ii. Other analysis …
experiments
2.7. Identifying function: further
Experiments with stone tools.
• Replicating & experimenting with
stone tools aids in interpretation:
E.g., axes; sickle blades; projectiles
- Initially, Lower Paleolithic handaxes
= believed to be multi-purpose. BUT →
a professional butcher applied Acheulian
handaxe very efficiently to a deer carcass.
- Upper Paleolithic stone “lamps” were Experiment with Acheulian handaxe
analyzed revealing 24% = definite lamps.
Experiments with replicas left similar
residues (trying all fuel types).
Modern Eskimo lamps = similar.
- E. Haury examined tiny beads from
pueblos in Arizona: 1 10-m necklace
produced 15,000 beads (2 mm diam).
Replication → 15 minutes per bead
= 480 workdays value.
http://makingflakes.blogspot.com/2014/03/handaxes-and-san-pedro-shootout.html
• Replicating & experimenting
Eskimo stone lamp:with
1800-1850
= believed to be multi-purpose.
→ A professional butcher applied a
handaxe efficiently to a deer carcass.
- Upper Paleolithic stone “lamps” were
analyzed revealing 24% = definite lamps. Replica lamp experiment
residues (i.e., trying all fuel types).
Modern Eskimo/Inuit lamps = similar.
pueblos in Arizona: 1 10-m necklace
= 480 workdays value.
• Replicating & experimenting with
= believed to be multi-purpose.
→ A professional butcher applied a
handaxe efficiently to a deer carcass.
- Upper Paleolithic stone “lamps” were
analyzed revealing 24% = definite lamps.
residues (trying all fuel types).
Modern Eskimo lamps = similar.
pueblos in Arizona: a 10-m necklace
= 480 workdays’ value. SW (Pueblos) drilled turquoise beads
TECHNOLOGY:
a. STONE
Identifying technology
of Stone Age art:
Using diverse studies
2.8. Assessing the technology
of Stone Age art:
• Analyzing Stone Age paintings
& pigments:
- Black = manganese dioxide
= charcoal
- Red = Iron oxide
• Binder = Talc or gypsum
= Animal fat
= Plant oil
• Detecting different layers & other
ocher pigments & impurities: Lascaux cave painting
Infrared film (seeing through red).
• Replicating compositions
to determine time expended:
1 hour for a simple frieze
32 hours for Spotted Horse frieze
(probably completed in four stages) Pigments used in Cave Paintings
2.8. Assessing the technology Ancient through modern art analyses
of Stone Age art:
& pigments:
= charcoal
- Red = Iron oxide
= Animal fat
= Plant oil
• Detecting different layers & other
ochre pigments & impurities:
(probably completed in four stages)
2.8. Assessing the technology
of Stone Age art:
& pigments:
= charcoal
- Red = Iron oxide
= Animal fat
= Plant oil
• Detecting different
Replication assessment:
layers & other
ocher pigments
- Professional & impurities:
artist = 32 hours
Michel Lorblanchet replicating frieze
(probably completed in four stages)
from Pech Merle Cave (France)
Replicating various past art compositions:
i.e., To understand better how they were likely produced, time spent, etc.
• Analyzing engraved Stone Age art:
- Binocular microscope:
Reveals the stone tool types, tool sizes,
sequence of application, & techniques.
- E.g., La Marche Cave (France): Viewing
silicone imprint of engraved art shows
a harness = added later to horse head.
• Replicas and various analyses

reveal the sequence of production in
engraving.
• Scanning
now allows direct analysis of delicate
surfaces (without harm).
Binocular microscope Generic image

reveals the stone tool types, tool sizes,
Generic
image
of stages
In art
• Replicas and various analyses →

engraving.
• Scanning
reveals the stone tool types, tool sizes,
macro-X-ray fluorescence scanning
• Replicas and various analyses
Scanning artwork of all types
engraving.
•Laser scanning engraved art:

→ High precision recording / replica
→ No damage to original surface
•
• Scanning
X-ray scanning beneath art
TECHNOLOGY:
unaltered materials
b. BONE,
ANTLER, SHELL
3. Other Unaltered Materials:
3.1. bone, antler, shell & leather.
• “Self-explanatory origin” of materials
• Now analyzing production method
and function.
• Need to confirm whether they are
natural or human-made implements.
• BUT, even unmodified items can be
used as tools (need wear analysis).
E.g., Different bones used in butchery
at North American Bison kill sites.
• Shell “perforations” may be natural,
depending on perforation location,
but = still often used for necklaces.
• Replicating perforation techniques:
a. Scratching; b. Sawing; c. Grinding
(gouging & hammering = problematic)
• Rely on context
Dismembered for final
sheep bone withdetermination
cut marks
3. Other Unaltered Materials:
3.1. bone, antler, shell & leather.
• Self-explanatory origin of materials
• Now analyzing production method
and function.
• Need to confirm whether they are
natural or human-made implements.
• BUT, even unmodified items can be
used as tools (need wear analysis).
E.g., Different bones used in butchery
at North American
Experimental Bison killshell
archaeology: sites.perf.
• Shell “perforations” may be natural,
depending on perforation location,
BUT = still often used for necklaces.
• Replicating perforation techniques:
a. Scratching; b. Sawing; c. Grinding
(gouging & hammering = problematic)
• Rely on context for final determination
TECHNOLOGY:
b. Bone, antler, shell, leather
i. Deducing manufacture
process …
Ethnography, etc.
3.1.a. Deducing techniques of
manufacture.
- Occasionally prod.-techniques = clear:
- AD 950 at Kasteelberg (S. Africa):
Bone tool production area using eland
& hartebeest foot bones (metapodials):
a. Hammer & punch removing bone ends
b. Grooving bone shaft
c. Grinding & polishing shaft → splinters
d. Stones shaping splinters (much waste)
e. Grinding & polishing projectile points.
= like modern Kalahari Bushmen points
Eland
- Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM)
& experimental archaeology reveals
production processes for bone tools.
→ Different tools leave detectable marks
similar to Prehistoric tools
→ Also detecting polishing.
Southwest Africa: Khoisan tribes
3.1.a. Deducing techniques of Eland
manufacture.
d. Stones shaping splinters (much waste) Hartebeest
E.g., Deer metapodials
3.1.a. Deducing techniques of
manufacture.
d. Stones shaping splinters (much waste)
TECHNOLOGY:
b. Bone, antler, shell, leather
ii. Deducing function(s)

of tools …
Experiment & wear patterns
3.1.b. Deducing function.
- Using experimental archaeology &
wear pattern analyses:
E.g., European Upper Paleolithic:
- Debated function of perforated antler
batons.
a. Ethnography suggests arrow shaft
straighteners
b. 40+ theories: tent pegs → harness!
- Andre Glory studied wear patterns →
rope/thong abrasions (reduced poss.)
- He suggested antlers = sling handles
E.g., 9000 BP Mugharet El-Wad Israel Hunkpapa 1870:
- Wear analysis and experimentation on Arrow shaft
perforated deer shoulder-blades → straightener
supports idea of wooden shaft
straightener.
3.1.b. Deducing function.
- Using experimental archaeology &
wear pattern analyses:
E.g., European Upper Paleolithic:
- Debated function of perforated antler
batons.
a. Ethnography suggests arrow Deer
shaft
straighteners shoulder
b. 40+ theories: tent pegs → harness!
blades
- Andre Glory studied wear patterns →
rope/thong abrasions (reduced poss.)
- He suggested antlers = sling handles
E.g., 9000 BP Mugharet El-Wad Israel
- Wear analysis and experimentation
on perforated deer shoulder-blades →
supports idea of wooden arrow shaft
straightener.
Deducing function (cont.’):
- Experimenting with replicas
- E.g., Using projectile points against

animal carcasses indicated that tiny
barbed points = toggle harpoons.
- E.g., Replica & use of Irish Bronze

Age shield revealed leather =
superior to metal shields after
hardening by hot water & beeswax.
- Leather absorbs & deflects blows
- Metal shields = cut to shreds.
- Suggests that bronze shields were
ceremonial & ritual offerings.
Celtic
Deducing function (cont.’):
ceremonial
- Experimenting with replicas
shield
- E.g., Using projectile points against
Replica
animal carcasses indicated that tiny
Celtic
barbed points = toggle harpoons.
leather
- shield
E.g., Replica & use of Irish Bronze

Age shield revealed leather shield =
superior to metal shields after
hardening by hot water & beeswax.
- Leather absorbs & deflects blows
- Metal shields = cut to shreds.
- Suggests that bronze shields → =
ceremonial & ritual offerings.
Ornate Celtic shields & function:
2019: Paula Ware and other
Archaeologists found an Iron Age
chariot burial of a 46+ year old
Celtic warrior (in Yorkshire,U.K.)
accompanied by weapons,
provisions, and his horses.
The presence of a sword? puncture
hole, and repair work, on an
elaborate, “ornamental” metal
shield (in early La Tene style: 320-
174 BC) revealed that such shields
were used in battle sometimes,
and contradicted earlier notions
that ornate metal shields had been
restricted to status items for ritual
offerings and ceremonial usage.
See also Melanie Giles, University
of Manchester.
SPECIAL THANKS to one of my students who brought this discovery to my attention
during the Spring 2021 offering of this course (Anth.106: Introduction to Archaeology)
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/celtic-chariot-grave-found-england-includes-horses-and-
elaborate-shield-180973730/
TECHNOLOGY:
unaltered materials
c. WOOD &
VEG-MATERIALS
3.2. Wood: Stone axe
• Wood is a major material used for usage.
tools, but = generally not preserved.
• Preserved pieces reveal marks from
different shaping tools, versus
natural marks (e.g., beaver teeth).
• Analysis of beaver teeth marks →shows
some “anc. lumber” = actually natural.
• Special conditions, such as dry sites,
preserve wood farming tools, Beavers
furniture, weaponry, etc. (e.g., Egypt). at work
E.g., Rakes, hoes, grain scoops,
sickles, chairs, boxes, bows, staves,
chariots, coffins, shrines, statues, etc.
• Depictions of such tools may reveal
their function & techniques of use.
• Beaver
Models also
teethaid in analysis
marks
3.2. Wood:
• Wood is a major material used for
tools, but = generally not preserved.
Farming
• Preserved pieces reveal marks from
hoe from
different shaping tools versus
Ancient
natural marks (e.g., beaver teeth).
Egypt
• Analysis of beaver teeth marks →
shown some anc. lumber = natural.
• Special conditions, such as dry sites,
preserve wood farming tools,
furniture, weaponry, etc. (e.g., Egypt).
E.g., Rakes, hoes, grain scoops,
sickles, chairs, boxes, bows, staves,
chariots, coffins, shrines, statues, etc.
• Depictions of such tools may reveal
their function & techniques of use.
• Models also aid in analysis
• Texts may discuss such things too(!)
Dyns.17-18 virtually intact tombs:
Daily life items placed in burials:
Furniture in Ancient Egypt:
• Furniture appears in many tombs,
reflecting an important funerary item.
• The wealthiest burials included items
of furniture.
• Poor burials sometimes included a
simple headrest.
• The main items consisted of furniture
for sleeping on and sitting on:
i.e., 1+ chairs/seats, a bed, headrest
• The individual pieces of furniture
varied in form, materials, & decoration
depending upon the burial owner’s
wealth/status.
E.g., Ornate gilded and inlaid furniture
E.g., Simple stools.
Daily life furniture from a NK tomb/burial
• Waterlogged sites produce the
best assemblage of wooden items:
- E.g., 6000-3500 BC Somerset:
Wood working techniques = studied
in trackways:
Stone axes: dish-shaped marks
Bronze axes: stepped, sharper cuts
Each axe: leaves its own signature
E.g., 10 axes made 1 trackway.
- Other items preserved:
Tree trunk coffins
Mortuary structures
Bridges
Waterfront docks/quays
Housing
Vehicles (various types)
Etc.
Experimental
Archaeology:
Assessing how the
trackway = made:
Woodworking …
• Waterlogged sites produce the
best assemblage of wooden items:
- E.g., 6000-3500 BC Somerset:
Wood working techniques studied
in trackways.
Stone axes: dish-shaped marks
Bronze axes: stepped, sharper cuts
Each axe: leaves its own signature
E.g., 10 axes made 1 trackway.
-
- Other items preserved:
Tree trunk coffins
Mortuary structures
Bridges
Waterfront docks/quays
Housing
Vehicles (various types)
Etc.
Cambridgeshire: Bronze Age wheel
Pre-Columbian model from Veracruzl: revealing knowledge of wheel
-- alebeit not used in vehicles
until post 1492 AD …
TECHNOLOGY:
c. Wood & vegetative materials
i. Investigating
watercraft (boats; rafts+)
3.2.a. Investigating watercraft.
• Wood has been used for most
watercraft (prior to 1800s).
• = a specialized field of study.
• E.g., Underwater archaeology:
1960s: 4th cent. BC Greek ship
near Kyrenia, Cyprus.
Hull planking: mortise-&-tenons.
• E.g., 14th cent. BC shipwreck near
Ulu Burun (Kas, Turkey).
Bass found similar construction.
• Ship specialist J.R. Steffy uses
1/10th scale replicas of all planking
& excav. plans → refit anc. Hulls.
• Hag Ahmed Youssef spent 14 yrs
rebuilding Khufu’s dismantled ship
(4,500 years old; Dyn.4, Egypt).
3.2.a. Investigating watercraft.
• Specialized field of study.
near Kyrena, Cyprus.
& excav. plans → refit anc.Mortise
Hulls.
and
• Hag Ahmed Youssef spenttenon 14 yrs
construction
3.2.a. Investigating watercraft. J. R. Steffy
Steffy’s son(prior to 1800s).
watercraft
• Ship specialist J.R. Steffy used
& excav. plans → refit anc. hulls.
3.2.a. Investigating watercraft. Khufu boat model
Khufu
boat
pit
& excav. plans → refit anc. Hulls.
Khufu’s ship: ca.4,500 yrs. BP
• Assessing sailing capabilities:
→ building scale replicas for
testing on rivers / at sea.
• E.g., 1984-1986 Viking knarr/cargo
ship built & sailed around world.
• E.g., 1987: J.F. Coates & J.S.

Morrison built a Greek trireme
revealing much data on its
possible construction & usage.
• Assessing sailing capabilities:
→ building scale replicas for
testing on rivers / at sea.
• E.g., 1984-1986 Viking knarr/cargo
ship built & sailed around world.
• E.g., 1987: J. F. Coates & J. S.
Morrison built a Greek trireme
revealing much data on its
possible construction & usage.
TECHNOLOGY:
Plant & animal fibers:

3.3. Plant & animal fibers:
• Such materials are normally
not preserved.
• They do appear in exceptional
conditions: in wet & dry sites.
E.g., baskets, cordage, etc.
• Waterlogged sites:
- 10th Cent. AD Viking York (UK)
- Extensive data on var. industries.
- Dyestuffs: madder root, woad, &
greenweed residues.
- Confirmed by analyzing textiles.
- Vikings preferred reds (vesus
British Romans love of purples).
Animal
-E.g., fibers = wool &Bronze
Cambridgeshire: silk. Age
- wet site → excellent
Vegetable preservation
fibers = flax (linen)
3.3. Plant & animal fibers:
• SuchYork
Viking materials are waterlogged
(Jorvik): normally site
not preserved.
• They do appear in exceptional
conditions: wet & dry sites.
E.g., baskets, cordage, etc.
• Waterlogged sites:
- 10th Cent. AD Viking York (UK)
- Extensive data on var. industries.
- Dyestuffs: madder root, woad, &
greenweed residues.
- Confirmed by analyzing textiles.
- Vikings preferred reds (versus
British Romans’ love of purples).
- Animal fibers = wool & silk.
- Vegetable fibers = flax (linen)
TECHNOLOGY:

i. Analyzing textiles …
3.3.a. Analyzing textiles:
• Investigating prod.-techniques
materials
Pre-Columbian New World:
- E.g., Moche pottery (Peru):
Depictions of weaving factories
- Weaving tools (looms, etc.) found
in Peruvian desert.
- Peruvian textiles:
3000 BC cotton textiles produced
animal fibres (e.g., camelids)
190 different colour tones in dyes
S. Broadbent: weaving techniques Ancient Peruvian textiles
- E.g., Ancient Egypt:
Looms & textiles (Kahun/Lahun)
- Model weaving workshops (Dyn.11)
- Illustrated workshops (var. periods)
- Dyes from wool (red; blue; etc.)
- Textiles (flax → linen = popular)
3.3.a. Analyzing textiles:
• Investigating prod.-techniques
materials
Pre-Columbian New World:
- E.g., Moche pottery (Peru):
Depictions of weaving factories
- Weaving tools (looms, etc.) found
in Peruvian desert.
- Peruvian textiles:
3000 BC cotton textiles produced
Animal fibers (camelids)
190 diff. color tones in dyes
S. Broadbent: weaving techniques
- E.g., Ancient Egypt:
Looms & textiles (Kahun/Lahun)
- Model weaving workshops (Dyn.11)
- Illustrated workshops (var. periods)
- Dyes from wool (red; blue; etc.)
- Textiles (flax → linen = popular)
Dyns.17-18 virtually intact tombs:
Daily life items placed in burials:
Other personal items:
• Various personal items occur in tombs.
• Staves and sandals tend to indicate
mid-high status, but are quite common.
Staves/staff:
- In or on male and female coffins
- Reflect social status; role in afterlife?
- Usually have a forked or lotiform head
Sandals:
- Very common.
- Rare in poorest tombs (middle class)
https://museumcrush.org/some-of-the-worlds-oldest-textiles-bolton-museums-ancient-egyptian-textiles-collection/
Clothes/linen:
- Mainly tunics, dresses, loin-cloths.
- Only appears in a few tombs from
various social backgrounds.
- Possibly much linen had been robbed.
- Some tombs had large quantities.
TECHNOLOGY:

ii. Microwear analysis …
3.3.b. Microwear analysis of fibers:
• Damage & wear appears variously
in textiles of different types:
- Tearing versus long-term wear
- Cutting = quite distinct
• Analyzing garment/textile use:
- New items placed in tomb
- Worn items placed in tomb
- Discarding old item (e.g., midden)
- Loss of relatively new item (street)
- Reuse of other items (e.g., sailcloth
as linen bandages for mummies).
Other traces:
- Impressions left by fabrics in
baked clay, bitumen on mummies,
human bone, etc.
Tutankhamun embalming cache

Sem-priest outfit
3.3.b. Microwear analysis of fibers:
Analyzing garment/textile use (cont):
- Discarding old item (midden)
- Reuse of other items (e.g., sailcloth Tutankhamun:
as linen bandages for mummies). New linen bandages
Other traces:
human bone, etc.
3.3.b. Microwear analysis of fibers: Plant fibre impressions from Dolní Věstonice
• Analyzing garment/textile use:
- Discarding old item (midden)
- Reuse of other items (e.g., sailcloth) Arabia: Woven reed pattern (in bitumen)
as linen bandages for mummies.
Other traces:
human bone, etc.
TECHNOLOGY:
synthetic materials
d. ANCIENT
PYROTECHNOLOGY
TECHNOLOGY:
d. Firing & pyrotechnology
i. Pyrotechnology
& its applications:
4. Synthetic Materials: Swartkrans Cave: Burnt bone
4.1. Firing & pyrotechnology:
• Many ancient Industries relied on
fire/heating applications.
• Earliest known use of fire occurs
ca. 1.5 million BP (Swartkrans Cave)
*ca. 1+ million BP Wonderwerk Cave
Wonderwerk Cave: cooking
Traces of “human-controlled fire”

4. Synthetic Materials:
• Many anc. Industries relied on
fire/heating applications. Fire-
hardened
wood
ca. 1.5 million BP (Swartkrans spear
Cave)
• Prehistoric applications of fire:
- Cooked food (e.g., meat)
- Heat-worked flint Fire for warmth, cooking, etc.
- Fire-hardened wood
- Baked clay figurines (26,000 BP in
Czech Republic: 500-800C (832-1472F))
• Neolithic (10,000 BP) and later (NE):
- Parching grain (aiding threshing)
- Baking bread (fuel chamber → bread)
- Pots in fire→kilns 1000-1200C (1832-2192F)
- 1083C (1981F) = copper’s melting point
- 800-1100C (1472-2012F) Iron smelting
- 1540C (2804F) = cast iron (China 500 BC) Open fire; grilling / spitting
4. Synthetic Materials: Replica: Neolithic bread baking
Neolithic grain parching (Avgi, Kastoria)
- Heat-worked flint
Czech Republic: 500-800C (832-1472F)
- Parching grain (aiding threshing)
- 1083C (1981F) = copper’s melting point
- 800-1100C (1472-2012F) Iron smelting
- 1540C (2804F) = cast iron (China 500 BC)
4. Synthetic Materials: Smelting iron (bloom)
- Heat-worked flint
Czech Republic: 500-800C (832-1472F)
Replicating
- Parching graincopper smelting
(aiding threshing)
- 1,083 C (1981F) = copper’s melting point
- 800-1100 C (1472-2012F) Iron smelting
- 1,540 C (2804F) = cast iron(China 500 BC)
TECHNOLOGY:
ii. Pottery:
- Temper
- Manufacture
- Firing
- Ethnography
4.2. Pottery:
• Paleolithic lifestyle was not
conducive to carrying pottery:
Nomads cannot carry as much
• More settled Neolithic lifestyle
witnessed the development of
pottery.
• Pottery fabrics reveal:

- Data on clay sources
- Data on clay components
- Pottery production techniques
- Pottery firing temperatures
E.g., Open fire firing of

handmade Neolithic pottery
and Bronze Age (in Europe) Neolithic Europe: handmade Beaker pottery
4.2. Pottery:
• Paleolithic
Various types oflifestyle
Beaker was not
pottery/culture:
conducive to carrying pottery.
• More settled Neolithic lifestyle

witnessed the development of
pottery.
•
• Video clip: Beaker firing (beakerfolk amesbury archer)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YmFQdfzVbg
• Pottery fabrics reveal:

- Data on clay sources
- Data on clay components
- Pottery production techniques
- Pottery firing temperatures
4.2.a. Pot tempers:
Temper:
- Inclusions in clay → providing
strength against breakage and
shrinkage in kilns.
- Usually consisting of crushed
shell, rock & potsherds [grog];
sand; grass; straw; sponge frags.
Qualities of temper:
- Crushed burnt shell enables the
pot to resist heat better
- Fine sand is also quite good for
heat resistance.
- Finer grained temper creates
the best strength in pottery.
E.g., Crushed potsherds
= added to clay as temper
→ stronger pottery vessel.
Introduction to Archaeology: Renfrew & Bahn 2012 (6th ed.): 2019 (
4.2.a. Pot tempers:
Temper:
- Inclusions in clay providing
strength against breakage and
shrinkage in kilns.
- Usually consisting of crushed
shell, rock & potsherds [grog];
sand; grass; straw; sponge frags.
Qualities of temper:
- Crushed burnt shell enables the
pot to resist heat better
Sand-
- Fine sand is also quite good for tempered
heat resistance. pottery
- Finer grained temper creates
the best strength in pottery.
4.2.b. How were pots made?
• Initially pottery vessels = made by
building up the body using coils
or slabs → smoothed into walls.
• Also pressed-pottery (bowl made in
hollow or over a small mound).
• 3400 BC Mesopotamia introduces
slow wheel/turntable-made pottery
• Wheel-made pottery normally
displays parallel ridges E.g., basin
• The distinctness and regularity wall built
of these ridges also depends upon by slabs …
the nature of the potter’s wheel
(i.e., slow; fast; kick-wheel).
• Hand-made pottery reveals
irregular finger marks, or paddle-
smoothing.
Hump-moulded pottery bowl
building up the body Slow
usingturn-wheel
coils
•
- 3,400 BC Mesopotamia introduces

displays parallel ridges
• The distinctness and regularity
of these ridges also depends upon
i.e., slow wheel; fast wheel; kick-wheel ...
•
Faster kick
wheel
- 3400 BC Mesopotamia introduces

Uniform,
parallel
ridges
= wheel
i.e., slow wheel; fast wheel; kick-wheel ...
• 3400 BC Mesopotamia introduces
Handmade
(i.e., slow;pottery: = NO parallel ridging
fast; kick-wheel).
• Hand-made pottery reveals
irregular finger marks,
or paddle-smoothing.
4.2.c. How were pots fired?
• Kilns/firing of pottery:
- 900 C (1652 F)+ → vitrifies/gazes
surface of pot.
- High temperatures → complete
oxidization of pottery:
Uniform color & organic materials
= completely burnt out.
- Low temperatures or short firing:
core is dark (grey/black)
e.g.,
- Opengrey → surface discolorations
core
firing:
(blotchy appearance).
- Re-heating pottery vessels to detect
their original firing temperature e.g., solid red core
(i.e., the point of change).
e.g., kilns
4.2.c. How were pots fired?
• Kilns/firing of pottery:
Open-fire
- 900C (1652F)+ → vitrifies/gazes
surface of pot. fired pottery
- High temperatures → complete
oxidization of pottery:
Uniform color & organic materials
= completely burnt out.
- Low temperatures or short firing:
core is dark (grey/black)
- Open firing: → surface discolorations Raise
(blotchy appearance). firing
- Re-heating pottery vessels to detect until
their original firing temperature uniform
(i.e., the point of change). = same
heat
Test sherds: heated to diff. degrees…

4.2.d. Evidence from ethnography:
• D. Lathrap studied Shipibo-Conibo
Indians in Upper Amazon (E. Peru).
• First millennium AD: techniques =still
in use.
• Most females = potters producing
pots for their household
(cooking; storage).
• Clays & some temper = local
• Some imported temper & pigments
• Pottery = coil-built mostly in dry
season (May-October).
Ethnographic studies should be
done in the region/area of study,
and can help understand some aspects
of past pottery production (Caution!).
4.2.d. Evidence from ethnography:
• D. Lathrap studied Shipibo-Conibo
Indians in Upper Amazon (E. Peru).
• First millennium AD techniques still
in use.
• Most females = potters producing
pots for their household
(cooking; storage).
• Clays & some temper = local
• Some imported temper & pigments
• Pottery = coil-built mostly in dry
Don’t use(May-October).
season totally different regions …
Ethnographic studies should be

done in the region/area of study,
and can help understand some aspects
of past pottery production (Caution!).
http://www.tripadvisor.com/LocationPhotoDirectLink-g1816343-d320379-i17404435-
Kizhi_State_Open_Air_Museum_of_History_Architecture_and_Ethnography-Kizhi.html
TECHNOLOGY:
iii. Faience
and glass:
4.3. Faience and glass:
• Vitreous/glassy materials appeared
later (at “end” of Prehistory: N.East).
Pre-Glass / Faience:
• Powdered quartz / silica (sand)
• Late Predynastic (pre-3000 BC)+
Egypt had beads and pendants.
• Later some faience tiles & vessels
• Composition reveals source (NAA)
Glass: Activation Analysis (NAA) lab.
Neutron
• Melting sand (silica) & cooling: glass
• Ca. 2500 BC in Mesopotamia
• Late Bronze Age (Dyn.18 Egypt)
• Glass made round clay core; moulds.
• Silica melts at 1723C (3133F)
• Adding soda/potash → 850C (1562F)
= poor quality glass.
• Best: 75% silica; 15% soda; 10% lime
• Glass blowing 50 BC+ (Romans)
4.3. Faience and glass:
• Vitreous/glassy materials appeared
later (at “end” of Prehistory: N.East).
Pre-Glass / Faience:
• Powdered quartz / silica (sand)
• Late Predynastic (pre-3000 BC)+
Egypt had beads and pendants.
• Later some faience tiles & vessels
• Composition reveals source (NAA)
Glass:
• Melting sand (silica) & cooling: glass
• Ca. 2500 BC in Mesopotamia
• > Late Bronze Age (Dyn.18 Egypt)
• Glass made round clay core; moulds.
• Silica melts at 1,723 C (3,133 F)
• Adding soda/potash → 850C (1562F)
= poor quality glass.
• Best: 75% silica; 15% soda; 10% lime
• Glass blowing 50 BC+ (Romans)
TECHNOLOGY:
synthetic materials
e. ARCHAEO-
METALLURGY …
TECHNOLOGY:
d. Archaeometallurgy:
i. Non-ferrous
Materials, esp. Cu
- Technology …
5. Archaeometallurgy:
5.1. Non-ferrous materials:
• Copper = most important metal in
antiquity; copper + tin → bronze.
• Gold & silver = high value metals
• Lead; tin & antimony (additives).
Copper technology evolution:
1.Shaping native copper (nuggets):
Hammering, cutting, polishing, etc.
2.Annealing native copper:
Heating & hammering
(hammering only → brittle metal) Cassiterite tin ore
3.Smelting oxide & carbonate ores: Silver
4. Melting & casting copper: ore
Open mould → two-piece moulds
5.Alloying copper with tin →bronze
6. Smelting from sulphide ores
More complex.
7. E.g., (“cire
Native
Lost-wax perdue”)
/ raw copperprocess Gold nugget
5. Archaeometallurgy:
5.1. Non-ferrous materials:
• Copper = most important metal in
antiquity; copper + tin → bronze.
• Gold & silver = high value metals
• Lead; tin & antimony (additives).
Copper technology evolution:
1.Shaping native copper (nuggets):
Hammering, cutting, polishing, etc.
2.Annealing native copper:
Heating & hammering
(hammering only → brittle metal)
3.Smelting oxide & carbonate ores:
4. Melting & casting copper:
Open mould → two-piece moulds
5.Alloying copper with tin →bronze
6. Smelting from sulphide ores
More complex.
7. Lost-wax (“cire perdue”) process Lost wax
Melting points:
• Lead: 327C (620F)
• Lead from ores: 800C (1472F)
• Copper: 1,083C (1981F)
• Silver: 960C (1760F)
• Gold: 1,063C (1945F)
Composition of metals:
• Laboratory detection methods
• Trace element analysis
• Optical emission spectrometry (OES)
• Atomic absorption spectrometry
• X-ray fluorescence (XRF)
Metallo-graphic examination:
• Microscopic view of an item’s structure
• May answer whether it is cold-
hammered, annealed, cast, etc.
Bronze Age copper furnace

Melting points:
• Lead: 327C (620F)
• Copper: 1083C (1981F)
• Silver: 960C (1760F)
• Gold: 1063C (1945F)
Composition of metals: determining by
• Microscopic view of Micro-
an item’s structure
• May answer whetherphotograph
it is cold-
hammered, annealed, cast, etc. Trace element
of bronze analysis on pottery
nail … from Oaxaca
Melting points:
• Lead: 327C (620F)
• Copper: 1083C (1981F)
• Silver: 960C (1760F)
• Gold: 1063C (1945F)
Composition of metals:
• Microscopic view of an item’s structure
• May answer whether it is cold-

hammered, annealed, cast, etc.
TECHNOLOGY:
ii. Non-ferrous
Materials, esp. Cu
- Alloying …
5.2. Alloying:
• Alloying = major advances in
metallurgy:
- Copper + tin (*10%) = bronze
- Copper + arsenic (*10%) = bronze
→ Bronze is harder & less brittle

= excellent for weaponry.
- Can have naturally occurring

arsenical copper (= like bronze)
Ca. 3,000 – 1,600 BC:

-25% - 33% of all metal in
Mesopotamia = arsenical copper
TECHNOLOGY:
ii. Non-ferrous
Materials, esp. Cu
- Casting …
5.3. Casting:
• Atifacts often reveal data on
casting technology (mould marks)
E.g., surface traces of casting =
sometimes left.
• Cire perdue (lost wax technique)

a. Item detail modelling in wax
b. Item coated in clay → baked
c. Wax escapes through hole(s)
d. Metal cast through one hole
(air hole(s) needed).
e. Mould broken open
f. Mould marks removed
• Evidence:
- Some texts detail it
- Casting casings left
- Study of item cast.
5.3. Casting:
• Atifacts often reveal data on
casting technology (mould marks)
E.g., surface traces of casting =
sometimes left.
•
Cire perdue (lost wax technique)
a. Item detail modelling in wax
b. Item coated in clay → baked
c. Wax escapes through hole(s)
d. Metal cast through one hole
(air hole(s) needed).
e. Mould broken open
f. Mould marks removed
• Evidence:
- Some texts detail it
- Casting casings left
- Study of item cast.
Casting cont.’:
• Hammering & annealing sometimes
yield similar results to casting.
• Unfinished items sometimes are
incompletely cast.
• May have vertical line from the seam
between the two mould halves.
Moulds:
• Usually of stone
• Sometimes have an air-escape hole
(reduce/remove bubbling)
Slags:
• Identify type of slag (copper; iron)
• Test for sulphur (i.e., sulphur ore)
• Crucible slag = higher % copper
Smelting furnaces:
• By-products: ingots, slag, moulds,
crucible frags., broken castings, scrap
metal, tuyeres (furnace pipe-nozzles)
Casting cont.’:
incompletely cast.
Moulds (for casting):
• Sometimes have an air-escape hole Pouring molten metal into the mould
Slags:
Smelting furnaces:
Casting cont.’:
incompletely cast.
Moulds:
Bronze Age: Copper slag
(reduce/remove bubbling) Experiment: Iron slag …
http://warehamforgeblog.blogspot.com/2008_06_01_archive.html
Slags (… from casting):
• Identify type of slag (copper; iron) slag
Smelting furnaces:
Casting cont.’: Ox-hide ingot
incompletely cast.
Moulds:
Slags:
Smelting furnaces:
TECHNOLOGY:
iii. Silver, lead &

platinum …
5.4. Silver, lead & platinum:
Lead:
- 327 C (620 F) = lead smelting point
- Easily manipulated
- Some figurines, clamps,
- BUT = too soft for most uses
- Often found near silver mines.
Silver:
- 1000-1100C (1832-2077F) smelting
- Cupellation = oxidizing lead to litharge Carolingian
→ to extract silver.
Lead figurines
- Litharge = removed or enters hearth
- Silver/gold = left separated 8th – 10th
Centuries AD
Platinum:
- 1800C
Lead seal(3277F)
usage =smelting
AD earlypoint
1300sof platinum
- 1724
nd
- 2 Cent 4BCcent.
th smelting in Ecuador
AD lead coffin (France)
- 16th Cent AD used in Europe
- 1870s smelting platinum in Europe
Lead:
- 327C (620F) = lead smelting point
late 13th cent. BC:
- Easily manipulated
Tutankhamun’s
- Some figurines, clamps, silver
trumpet
- Often found near silver mines. Silver tetradrachm Nerva AD 97-98
Silver:
- 1,000 – 1,100 C (1832-2077 F) smelting
- Cupellation = oxidizing lead to litharge
- Silver/gold = left separated
Platinum: 3IP (10th
- 1800C (3277F) smelting point cent
of platinum
BC):
nd
- 2 Cent BC smelting in Ecuadorsolid silver
th
- 16 Cent AD used in Europe coffin Silver bowl, Gudestrup,
(Tanis) Denmark 100 BC – AD 1
Lead:
La Tolita
- 327C (620F) = lead smelting point
- Easily manipulated (Ecuador):
- Some figurines, clamps, Masks with
platinum
within them …
- Often found near silver mines.
Gold mask:
Silver: platinum eyes
- 1000-1100C (1832-2077F) smelting La Tolita 5th Cent. BC (or later!!!)
- Cupellation = oxidizing lead to litharge
Platinum eyes
- Silver/gold = left separated
Platinum:
- 1,800 C (3277 F) smelting point of platinum
- 2nd Cent BC smelting in Ecuador (!)
- 16th Cent AD used in Europe
TECHNOLOGY:
iv. Fine metal-

work & working
5.5. Fine metalwork:
1500 BC+ (LB Age) → broad range
of metal-working techniques in the
Mediterranean – Near East.
a. Sheet metal working
b. Stamping
c. Engraving
d. Repousse work (relief)
e. Filigree (wire & soldering
open work) 3rd mill. BC+
f. Granulation (attached
to background) Etruscan 1300 BC
• Ethnographic
research in N. Africa
& Middle East where
traditional metallurg-
ical techniques survive.
5.5. Fine metalwork:
• 1500 BC+ (LB Age) → broad range
of metal-working techniques in the
Mediterranean – Near East.
a. Sheet metal working
b. Stamping
c. Engraving
d. Repousse work (relief)
e. Filigree (wire & soldering
open work) 3rd mill. BC+
f. Granulation (attached
North Africa: traditional metalworking.
to background)
• Ethnographic
research in N. Africa
& Middle East where
traditional metallurg-
ical techniques survive.
• Other fine metal working
Adagez, Niger
TECHNOLOGY:
v. Metal plating
(joining techniques)
5.6. Plating:
• Plating joins metals together by
various means
• E.g., Peruvians evidently used
a form of electrochemical
plating to join valuable metals
in early centuries AD (early Moche)
• Apparently heat had been used to
join gold to copper surfaces on some
figurines, masks, & ornaments.
• It is superficially similar to modern
electroplating.
• BUT, an aqueous solution of
minerals and salts indigenous to
Peru had apparently been boiled
(5 min at 650-800C) to enable
bonding between the surfaces.
• Otherwise, electroplating appears in
late Medieval/Renaissance Europe.
5.6. Plating:
• Plating joins metals together by
various means
• E.g., Peruvians evidently used
a form of electrochemical
plating to join valuable metals
in early centuries AD (early Moche)
• Apparently heat had been used to
join gold to copper surfaces on some
figurines, masks, & ornaments.
• It is superficially similar to modern
electroplating.
1853 AD electroplated medallion
• BUT, an aqueous solution of
minerals and salts indigenous to
Peru had apparently been boiled
(5 min at 650-800C) to enable
bonding between the surfaces.
• Otherwise, electroplating appears in
late Medieval/Renaissance Europe.
TECHNOLOGY:
v. Iron and steel

5.7. Iron and steel:
Iron becomes popular in Near East
ca. 1000 BC+
It is absent in Americas prior to
Columbus (nb: *Meteoric iron in Arctic).
Meteoric iron occurs naturally and
is known early throughout Near East.
Iron = harder to reduce than copper,
but begins at 800C (1472F), with a
melting temperature at 1540C (2804F)
Many minerals need to be extracted
from iron ores (by slagging):
Late 13th cent. BC: Tutankhamun’s
Iron working areas:
iron dagger
1. Bowl furnaces (brick-lined pits):
Bellows increase temperatures.
2. Forging iron at smithy site
5.7. Iron and steel: Jamestown iron smelting
• Iron becomes popular in Near East
ca. 1000 BC
• It is absent in Americas prior to
Columbus.
• Meteoric iron occurs naturally and
is known early throughout Near East.
• Iron = harder to reduce than copper,
but begins at 800C (1472F), with a
melting temperature at 1540C (2804F)
• Many minerals need to be extracted
Sub-Saharan Africa iron working
from iron ores (by slagging):
Iron Age Africa …
Iron working areas:
1. Bowl furnaces (brick-lined pits):
Bellows increase temperatures.
2. Forging iron at smithy site
Fitchburg iron furnace
BaFipa natural draft furnace
(Tanzania)
The Haya (Tanzania)
AD 1 – 500 (via C14 dating of charcoal)

Cast iron:
• A more complex furnace installation
is required.
• Some examples appear in 6th cent
BC Greece
• Cast iron = a brittle alloy of iron
• It has a lower melting point
• It has 1.5% - 5% carbon content
Steel:
E.g., cast iron
•Buddha
Steel is iron with 0.3% - 1.2% carbon
statues
• It is easily worked
• It hardens with cooling
• True steel appears in the Roman
period.
• Carburizing → made a similar
product.
Cast iron:
• A more complex furnace installation
is required.
• Some examples appear in 6th cent
BC Greece
• Cast iron = a brittle alloy of iron
• It has a lower melting point
• It has 1.5% - 5% carbon content
Steel:
• Steel is iron with 0.3% - 1.2% carbon
• It is easily worked
• It hardens with cooling
• “True steel” appears in the Roman
period.
• Carburizing → made a similar
product.
Damascus steel
SUMMARY:
6. Summary:
• Archaeologists can recover and extrapolate much information on ancient
technology by excavation, analysis in laboratories, ethnographic data, and
experimenting (e.g., reconstructing items, events, etc.).
• The archaeological context and ethnography may suggest the function(s) of
an artifact, while microwear analysis reveals likely past usage(s).
• Microwear analysis relies on running experiments to see what usages leave
specific traces on a given tool type and material.
• Ethnographic studies are still invaluable for living crafts persons using similar
technologies for comparing known living technologies with past similar ones.
• Such ethnographic studies help mainly in assessing how ancient technologies
MAY have functioned, using similar items, materials, and contexts.
• The absence of more definite information from past textual-pictorial records
leaves archaeologists with having to reconstruct a range of possibilities to
probabilities using a broad range of evidence: excavation, analysis,
ethnography, and experimentation.
CASE STUDY-1:
PHARAONIC
TECHNOLOGY:
i.e., Ancient Egypt stone-working
-Blocks arrive at site roughly hewn
-Smoothed in location prior to
addition of each wall course.
-Column and wall exteriors
smoothed & inscribed after
construction.
- Ramps and
scaffolding of
solid mudbrick
are used to
raise blocks
(see Karnak
Temple for
in-situ mudbrick
ramp).
Old Kingdom:
Producing rock-cut statuary
Techniques in Painting,
Relief work, & Statuary:
Wall-face:
• Plaster uneven surface with mud
and a fine gypsum plaster wash.
Walls & Statuary:

• Preparation of wall-face or block
using guide-lines / squared grids.
- Square = proportional to a fist

- Usually for major figures.
• Initial outline of figure in red

• Correction of master artist in black
Statuary:
• Cut excess stone away from the
outlined figure (5-6 planes).
Equipment:
• Hammers, copper chisels, drills,
and saws (with sand abrasive)
OK: Deshasheh mallet
MK industry:
Making flint blades.
• materials (flint etc.)
• Skilled flint-knapper
(apprenticeship)
• Market: butcher,
hunter, various
industries, home.
CASE STUDY-2:
PHARAONIC
TECHNOLOGY:
i.e., Ancient Egypt metal-working
NEGEV: Southern Arabah
Gulf of Aqaba (Elat):
Site 582:Ramesses III rock-text
near well at Borot Roded.
TIMNA Site 212 Copper mine.
• Sophisticated shaft-and-gallery mining system.
-some Chalcolithic - Early Bronze Age activity
-mostly Ramesside activity.
• shafts up to 35+ m deep cutting through various
rock formations (conglomerates, etc.)
• Copper ores in cupriferous white sandstone.
• Galleries 70 cm wide x 1 m high –can broaden.
• New Kingdom pottery and stone & metal tools.
ventilation
system
above
galleries.
TIMNA Site 2 Area D-K:
Egyptian copper smelting site
• Two Egyptian Dyn.19 scarabs
Note Area B:
• A 10 x 7.5 m installation for
reducing Acacia wood into
charcoal for smelting fuel.
• Adjacent furnace → Cu pellets
(melted in small crucibles)
• Small workshop (5 x 4 m) for
crushing copper bearing ore.
Dicotyledons:
FUEL -Broad-leafed flowering plants
providing hard-wood lumbers.
Acacia species
(Leguminosae-Mimosoidaea)
-Characteristically flat-topped trees
-Yellow/white flowers; fruit = pods
-Occurs in hot deserts
Wood-type:
-Heartwood = red, hard and durable
-In antiquity, acacia charcoal = used
for smelting.
Flowering twig
of acacia & pod
Working+storage
TIMNA Site 2 Area D-K complex:
Courtyard:
Casting -Smelting charge
workshop prepared here,
-Ore store pits.
-Stone-paved
platform for
crushing Cu ore.
-Many crushing &
grinding tools &
crushed Cu ore.
Large stone- Casting workshop
lined storage -smelting furnaces
pit for ores -much wood ash
-charcoal dust
Workshop & -copper pellets
living quarters -copper slag
Small oven -slagged crucible
Storage pits fragments.
-large storage pit
Timna Site 2 Area C:
Copper-smelting furnace.
Two smelting furnaces (Fu 3-4)
• Smelting hearth: hole in ground
-45 cm diameter
-40 cm deep
-Lined with thick clay → dome
-Slag adhering to walls
-Slag-tapping pit in front of
furnace (stone lining)
-Tapping hole in furnace side.
-Clay tube opposite tapping
hole (= for tuyere)
New Kingdom: Copper smelting at Timna explained via NK art:
TT39 Puyemra: metal-working. Handling crucible

using wood strips
TT100 Rekhmire: metal-working. Handling crucible

using wood strips
E.g., Moulds for axe blades
• Open casting.
Metal-working:
• Smelting copper, gold, etc.
• Casting ingots or finished products
• Cooling molten metal using water

Hammering out sheets
Early Bronze Age: Early Helladic / Early Cycladic / Early Minoan.
CASE STUDY-3:
EARLY BRONZE
TECHNOLOGY:
i.e., Helladic, Cycladic & Minoan
Early Minoan gold bee-pendant from Chrysolakkos cemetery at Mallia.
Early Cycladic, Keros-Syros culture, ca.2,700 – 2,200 BCE
Jewelry: Silver torque and silver bracelets from Antiparos.
Early Cycladic, Keros-Syros culture, ca. 2,700 – 2,200 BCE:
Copper wood-working tools from Naxos: axes, adzes, and various chisels.
Obsidian core & 4 blades from Antiparos, ca. 3,000 – 2,000 BCE.
Early Cycladic Grotta-Pelos culture
Ca. 3,200 – 2,800 BCE.
Pottery vessel:
• Collared jar from Antiparos.
• Vertically incised herring-bone design
around lower body.
• Horizontal band of herringbone design
around lower part of neck.
Footed
example
Flat-based example
Early Cycladic, Keros-Syros culture (ca. 2,700 – 2,200 BCE):
Conical pottery cups, from Chalandriani on island of Syros.
Early Cycladic period: entryway to a marble quarry at Paros.
Early Cycladic period: Grotta-Pelos culture: marble kandila-beaker type vases;
Antiparos culture: marble kandila-beaker type vases (from Antiparos).
Different types of Early Cycladic marble
figurines:
Top row: Grotta-Pelos culture

3,200 – 2,800 BCE
- Plastiras
- Louros
Middle row: Keros-Syros culture
2,700 – 2,500 BCE
- Kapsala
- Spedos
- Dokathismata
- Chalandri
Bottom row: Phylakopi culture

Early Cycladic period:
Grotta-Pelos culture.
ca.3,200 - 2,800 BC
Marble figurines from Antiparos.
Sculpted & violin-shaped figures

Early Cycladic, Plastiras culture,
ca. 3,000 – 2,800 BCE
(a). Grave D Kapros cemetery, Amorgos
(b). Figure from MMA.
Grotta-Pelos culture spanning
into Keros-Syros culture:
Ca. 2800 – 2600 BCE
Marble seated harpist figure
(Metropolitan Museum of Art)
Early Cycladic, Spedos-type marble
female figurines ca.2,700 – 2,500 BC.
NOTE:
Huge
example
=
140 cm
in
length
Late Spedos-culture
Ca. 2,600 – 2,400 BCE.
Marble female figurines; 1 = pregnant.
Early Cycladic
Dokathismata-type marble figure
ca. 2,500 – 2,300 BC
Early Cycladic
Drawing of Goulandris-like male
marble figurines (now lost).
2,400 – 2,200 BCE

Early Cycladic period, late Spedos-culture, ca. 2,600 – 2,400 BCE:
FUNCTION: Marble pregnant female designed to recline on back.
Early Cycladic, Keros-Syros culture 2,800 – 2,200 BC:
Model ship in lead, narrow prow; flat stern; from Island of Naxos.
Seals & seal impressions in clay:
i.e., Marks of authority/ownership
impressed into wet clay.
E.g., Lead seal from Tsoungiza
dating to EH IIA.
E.g., Clay impressions from seals
from Level III at Lerna (in
the “House of Tiles”), with
some geometric designs,
dating to EH II.
Early Helladic IIA lead seal

from Tsoungiza

Anth 106 PPT Lecture 11 Summary of and S

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Anth 106 PPT Lecture 11 Summary of and S

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Anth 106 PPT Lecture 11 Summary of and S

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Introduction to Archaeology: SPRING 2023

Renfrew & Bahn 2019 (8th ed.): chp.8

(2). Take notes on lectures, etc. …

(4). Ask questions during the class if

(5). Complete optional materials:

- Easter Island statue quarry:

- Aswan granite quarry (Egypt):

- Rumiqolqa quarry in Peru (Inca):

More to the moai than previously thought

- Easter Island statue quarry:

- Aswan granite quarry (Egypt):

- Rumiqolqa quarry in Peru (Inca):

- Easter Island statue quarry:

- Aswan granite quarry (Egypt):

Ancient Egyptian plan of R. IV’s tomb (on papyrus)

• Market & usage:

• Electron Spin resonance (ESR)

• Experimental archaeology correlated

• Experimental archaeology correlated

Marilyn Shoberg, Microwear Analyst, Texas Archeological Research Laboratory

• Replicas and various analyses

Binocular microscope Generic image

• Replicas and various analyses →

•Laser scanning engraved art:

ii. Deducing function(s)

- E.g., Using projectile points against

- E.g., Replica & use of Irish Bronze

E.g., Replica & use of Irish Bronze

• E.g., 1987: J.F. Coates & J.S.

Plant & animal fibers:

Plant & animal fibers:

Plant & animal fibers:

Tutankhamun embalming cache

Wonderwerk Cave: cooking

Traces of “human-controlled fire”

• Pottery fabrics reveal:

E.g., Open fire firing of

• More settled Neolithic lifestyle

• Pottery fabrics reveal:

- 3,400 BC Mesopotamia introduces

- 3400 BC Mesopotamia introduces

Test sherds: heated to diff. degrees…

Ethnographic studies should be

Bronze Age copper furnace

• May answer whether it is cold-

→ Bronze is harder & less brittle

- Can have naturally occurring

Ca. 3,000 – 1,600 BC:

• Cire perdue (lost wax technique)

iii. Silver, lead &

iv. Fine metal-

v. Iron and steel

The Haya (Tanzania)

AD 1 – 500 (via C14 dating of charcoal)

Walls & Statuary:

- Square = proportional to a fist

• Initial outline of figure in red

TT39 Puyemra: metal-working. Handling crucible

TT100 Rekhmire: metal-working. Handling crucible