chapter

Prehistoric Bone Tools and the Archaeozoological Perspective: Research in Central Europe
Alice M. Choyke
Aquicum Museum, Hungary

Jrg Schibler
IPNA, Universitt Basel, Switzerland

Introduction Bone tool studies have come a long way since the 1980s, when worked bone assemblage reports were rare and the methodology used depended exclusively on the whim of the individual archaeologist. The work of the researchers presented here represents a branch of bone tool studies derived from a common background in archaeozoology. This is clearly reflected in the way this work emphasizes raw material and technology as opposed to formal typology, only recently enhanced by the study of use wear. By using similarly structured typologies, it should ultimately prove possible to compare coeval prehistoric bone tool assemblages in Switzerland and Hungary, taking mutual advantage of the incredibly detailed information from the Swiss wet-sites and the broad chronological palette available from the dry sites of Hungary (fig. 1).

Figure 1: Map of Europe with the Alpine foreland region of Switzerland and Hungary indicated in the oval areas.

Starting in the late 1970s, a number of archaeozoologists working in Central Europe began to regularly study bone tools, especially from prehistoric assemblages. This research mirrored parallel trends among archaeozoologists in Britain and the Netherlands. Somewhat later, scholarly attention also began to focus on worked osseous materials from proto-historic and historic periods from the point of view of archaeozoology and the technological process (Deschler-Erb 1998, 2001) as opposed to traditional typo-chronological approaches (Bir 1994; Mikler 1997). Previous to that point, with

the exception of a few rare and influential studies and published proceedings (Backalov 1979; Campana 1989; Camps-Fabrer 1974, 1979, 1982, 1985; Clarke 1951; Semenov 1969), bone tools were primarily studied by archaeologists who concentrated on the formal attributes of the tools, with less analytic rigor applied to the feedback relationship between the composition of the pool of raw materials animal bones, antler and teeth and technical tradition in terms of which skeletal elements are selected to manufacture tools and ornaments. In practice, this situation meant that it was the more complex, elaborated and unique objects that were published on an arbitrary basis at the back of site reports, a certain path to obscurity, or in focused reports. The tools and ornaments of everyday life remained largely underrepresented and poorly described in these publications. This was the case in Hungary, for example, with the well-known bone spoons of the Early Neolithic (Nandris 1972) or more elaborated objects such as the Bronze Age bridle-cheek pieces (Bknyi 1960; Foltiny 1965; Httel 1984; Mozsolics 1962). A few studies from the Danubian region, mostly from the former Yugoslavia, attempted overviews, which were largely typo-chronological (Backalov 1979; Korosec and Korosec 1969; Perii 1984; Uzelac 1975). In all these cases, improper sampling techniques during excavation and incompatible typologies have made inter-site comparisons difficult other than on a presenceabsence basis. Bone tool studies where the entire material was systematically presented, something common with more culturally diagnostic ceramics or lithic materials, were virtually non-existent. The situation in Switzerland was somewhat better since the spectacular nature of large bone tool assemblages, often in combination with wellpreserved wooden handles, arrow shafts or binding materials such as twine and pitch, preserved in the water-logged conditions at Neolithic lake-dwelling sites, attracted more attention earlier on (Schibler 1980, 1981; Strahm 1971; Suter 1977, 1981; Voruz 1984). This intensive study of site materials,

51

BONES AS TOOLS: CURRENT METHODS AND INTERPRETATIONS IN WORKED BONE STUDIES

sometimes comprising thousands of worked bone, antler and tusk objects from various Neolithic periods (4300-2500 BC cal) has largely been carried out at the bio-archaeology laboratory at the University of Basel. In addition, because the post structures of the Neolithic houses can be dated within a few years of each other using the technique of dendrochronology, changes in the raw material and form of these worked bones can be traced in chronological detail, impossible on dry-land sites. Furthermore, the environmental and economic contexts for these bone tools are now very well understood, especially for the area around Lake Zrich (Schibler 1987a, 1987b, 1987c, 1997). On the other hand, changes in lake level and variable rates of erosion both at the lake edges and outside this environmental zone have meant that less is known of later prehistoric periods in the region. The relatively great number of artifacts available for study compared to comparable dry-sites elsewhere is related to both careful excavation and the superior conditions of preservation characteristic of wet sites. Based on the few Bronze Age wet sites it is known that the importance of bone and antler raw material decreased with the use of bronze as a raw material in tool production (Schibler 1998). In the dry-sites of Hungary, the corpus of bone tool reports in the region has slowly grown. Material has become available from different types of sites in varied environmental zones. The chronological range is also slowly broadening from the Neolithic (Beldiman 1998, 2000a, 2000b, 2002; Beldiman and Popusoi 2001; Choyke in press c; Christidou 2001; Elster 2001; Kokabi 1994; Makkay 1990; Marinescu-Blcu and Beldiman 1997) to the end of the Bronze Age (Choyke 1998, 2000, in press a; in press b; Choyke and Bartosiewicz 1999, 2000, 1999; Choyke et al. 2004) and beyond (Becker 2003). Iron Age sites, especially Celtic sites in the region, also contain objects made from osseous materials, mostly decorative in nature, which await analysis. The increased knowledge concerning this class of prehistoric artifacts has occurred in parallel with an enhanced understanding of how choice of raw material reflects availability, tool manufacture traditions, the relative importance of the task particular tools were used in and, ultimately, various kinds of group identities (Choyke et al. 2004). In both Hungary and Switzerland, manufacturing sequences and experimental production of particular types, evident use wear, and the taphonomic situation of individual artifacts have also become a regular part of bone artifact analyses. Unfortunately, only a very few scholars, outside of France within the

context of CNRS research programs, have the time, money or facilities for extensive experimentation and implementing use wear studies requiring high magnifications. It is fair to say that Central European work on bone tools tends to be formulated around the cultural-biological aspects of these classes of raw materials. Thus, the archaeozoological perspective is especially strong in Central Europe. Both authors of this paper, although trained as archaeozoologists, have been especially interested early on in investigating the relationship between the raw material from which the tools are made and the refuse bone assemblage from which the raw material was selected. Not surprisingly, these studies of bone tools shared many characteristics related to our attempts to find a balance between the biological aspects of bone tools and purely culturally determined aspects including manufacturing techniques, function and style. Detailed studies of artifacts from a number of lakedwelling sites on Swiss lakes in the Alpine Foreland will be presented here, including some of the results related to the effects of over-hunting of red deer on the production of antler sleeves in the Swiss Neolithic. Additional work on prehistoric materials from the Carpathian Basin will be reviewed especially within the context of the so-called (Choyke 1998) manufacturing continuum, which has proven useful as a way of comparing attitudes toward use of bone between disparate assemblages over time and space.

Comparative Typology Neolithic bone, antler and tooth artifacts from lakedwelling sites number in the tens of thousands due to wonderful preservational conditions. The sample size is reflected in the great variability of formal types. All the basic types generally found in Europe are present on these Swiss sites. Thus, in order to guarantee comparability, some 15 years ago, Schiblers (1981) typology was adapted to worked bone assemblages from the Carpathian Basin. Suters (1981) antler tool typology, developed at the same time and adopted for worked antler from the upper levels of the same site by Furger (1981), is based on the particular circumstances of Swiss Neolithic lake-dwelling sites. The specific nature of this typology makes it somewhat less adaptable to other cultural circumstances. The bone tool typology is built around the following variables; 1) the size of the animal species; 2) the skeletal element or at least type of skeletal element (long versus flat bone, tooth, specific skeletal

52

PREHISTORIC BONE TOOLS AND THE ARCHAEOZOOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE: RESEARCH IN CENTRAL EUROPE CHOYKE AND SCHIBLER

element); 3) the form of the tools working end; 4) the form of the tools butt end; and 5) the position of the hafting hole relative to the long axis of burr and beam antler tools. Any object, which does not fit directly into the Swiss typological scheme, can be added with attention paid to these five variables. The types are differentiated and recorded although some types may later be lumped or further sub-divided based on: skeletal element, manufacturing wear, use wear and intratype measurements. By following the same typological structure, it is possibly to assess similarities and differences between Swiss and Hungarian materials. It is problematic in Europe that comparisons between even closely related bone tool assemblages are difficult because the variables of the typological structure differ greatly or are never made explicit. Recently, such problems have been encountered in the analysis of a small Early Neolithic site in Hungary. Although bone tools have been studied from a number of Krs culture sites in the area (Makkay 1990) as well as Cris culture sites in Romania (Beldiman 1998, 2000a, 2000b, 2002; Beldiman and Popusoi 2001; Marinescu-Blcu and Beldiman 1997) it was very difficult to compare type proportions between sites because the latter reports used totally different typologies largely based on the formal aspects of the tools with some attention paid to measurements as well. This means that some of the types thus introduced in Hungary were lumped together in these previous formal typologies while other types in Schiblers typology were split up. A regular problem has also been that some researchers do not recognize that certain formal differences used to define their types are related to curation or animal size rather than real stylistic differences. Furthermore, measurements on bone tools must be treated carefully, especially length and tip measurements because as tools are used, broken and repaired they are continually remodeled. These changes in measurements have no important significance in terms of either style or function, but relate to the length and intensity of their use.

with various building and highway projects around the country beginning in the 1980s. Lakeshore settlements are less common around the lake of Geneva. The reasons are not understood but differences in topography, preservation, and environment as well as less survey work may be possible explanations.

Figure 2: Map of Neolithic and Bronze Age lake dwelling sites and dry sediment sites from Switzerland in which animal bones and bone and antler tools were recovered and analyzed.

The houses of lake dwellings found today in Africa and elsewhere around the world are mostly constructed on high wooden posts because of seasonal variations in river levels. This might also be why prehistoric lake dwellings were sometimes built above the ground, although ground level houses also existed. However, each site is different and unstable ground may explain the use of these long posts sunk deeply into the earth. Villages of various sizes, ranging in size between 500 and 10,000 m2, are characteristic of the 3rd, 4th and the second half of the 5th millennium BC in this region. This means there could be hamlets with only 6 to 10 houses but also villages with as many as 100 houses. If we calculate 6 to 8 persons per house, there may have been villages with populations as small as 50 or as large as 800 people. Larger villages tended to become more numerous over time as the population grew until the end of the Neolithic with even more intense human impact on the environment. Because most lake dwelling layers lie below the water table, aerobic bacteria, which are responsible for decay, cannot damage organic materials. Therefore, fruits, seeds, leaves and wood or even fragments of textiles are frequently preserved. As at sites buried in dry sediment, animal bones, flint or stone tools, and ceramics are also present but are in much better condition. Tools made from animal bones or from red deer antler, for example, are preserved with both their manufacture and use wears clearly visible. This has

Swiss Neolithic Lake Dwelling Sites In Switzerland, many village sites from the Neolithic and, to a lesser extent, the Bronze Age became known around larger lakes such as Bienne, Constance, Neuchtel, Zug and Zrich (fig. 2). There were also lake dwellings built around smaller lakes and in or near peat bogs (Schibler 2001a: 52). Many of the lacustrian sites were excavated in conjunction

53

BONES AS TOOLS: CURRENT METHODS AND INTERPRETATIONS IN WORKED BONE STUDIES

made possible a range of experiments showing that bone chisels were probably used to work wood and antler with the macro-wear exactly comparable to those on experimental and archaeological specimens (Schibler 2001a: 50, 52). In addition, a number of composite artifacts such as linen combs, antler points with their shafts, fish hooks with their lines and axe/adzes with their shafts and stone blades have been found (fig. 3). Understanding where and how these kinds of tools tend to co-occur allow researchers to extrapolate to materials from less wellpreserved contexts on dry land sites. Antler, Hunting and the Economic Crash Antler in the Swiss Neolithic was most often used to produce sleeves, an intermediate piece between the valuable wooden handle and the stone blades for axes or adzes (fig. 4). The use of these sleeves marked a technical innovation. Sleeves were intended to absorb shock and protect the handle because the production of this part was time consuming and ash trees used for the handles are more limited in terms of availability. The fact that all parts of the lake dwelling houses were built with wood underlines the importance of axes and adzes in these settlements. Clearing arable land required felling trees, which would then have to be processed. Axes or adzes would have been indispensable for all work of this kind. Research on the increase of antler use in the Neolithic, set against the background of exploitation and raw material management of red deer by Neolithic artisans, comes from 42 uncontaminated, undisturbed occupation layers from Zrich. These layers have all been closely dated to within a few years using dendrochronology. The Neolithic levels date from between 4300 BC and 2571 BC and there is a small Bronze Age complex dating from 19th and 18th centuries BC (Conscience 2001). A total of 3,944 bone artifacts and 4,687 antler artifacts were recovered and analyzed out of 92,983 animal bones of which 52,506 could be identified to species and skeletal element. All objects, whether finished, halffinished or cut-offs were taken into consideration (Schibler 2001b: 82). The proportions of raw materials from earlier settlements (4300-3100 BC) were compared to those from later levels (3100-1600 BC). Schibler (1987 a-c, 1995, 1997; Schibler et al. 1997) discovered that, as at most earlier settlements, the proportion of bone tools was very high and stone blades were more often fixed directly to wooden handles. Antler seems to have come as often from hunted stags as gathered

supplies. The later occupation levels, on the other hand, contained over 50% worked, largely collected, antler. All assemblages from Corded Ware levels (ca. 2750 BC) contained substantially more antler artifacts.

Figure 3: Some examples of well preserved bone, tusk and antler tools from Neolithic lake-dwelling sites fromSwitzerland. a; fish hook made of wild boar tusk with fish line from Arbon Bleiche 3, Lake of Constance (Leuzinger 2002, Abb. 163). b; detail of the upper end of a fish hook with notches for attaching the fish line. Arbon Bleiche 3 (Deschler-Erb & al. 2002, Abb. 435,3). c; linen comb made from halved ribs of cattle or red deer, bound with bast fibers and fixed with birch tar. Nidau BKW, layer 5 (lake of Bienne), length: 22cm (Hafner and Suter 2004: 46). d; pendants made of metapodials from dogs and pig (right) from Twann (lake of Bienne), length: ca. 4.5 6 cm (Hafner & Suter 2004: 44). e; Arrow heads made from animal bone with remains of birch tar from Twann (Lake Bienne), length: ca. 3 5 cm (Hafner & Suter 2004: 32). f; retoucher made of red deer antler from Sutz-Lattrigen-Hauptstation-innen (Lake Bienne), length: 8 cm and 11 cm. g; lighter from a handle made from a red deer antler tine and a piece of flint from Feldmeilen-Vorderfeld (lake of Zrich), length: ca 11 cm (Furger & al. 1998, fig. 123). h; axe made from the basis of a red deer antler beam with a wooden handle from Arbon Bleiche 3 (Deschler-Erb & al. 2002, Abb. 471).

Antler sleeves represent a technological innovation designed to protect the valuable axe or adze ash wood shafts and handles from breaking by absorbing the force of blows. In the 4th millennium BC, antler sleeves became tools of fundamental importance with more parts of the antler rack exploited. The stylistic variability of sleeve types also increased. By the end of the Neolithic throughout the Alpine Foreland the

54

PREHISTORIC BONE TOOLS AND THE ARCHAEOZOOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE: RESEARCH IN CENTRAL EUROPE CHOYKE AND SCHIBLER

use of antler for sleeves was maximized all parts of the rack were used. By 3100 BC, antler tines were increasingly turned into sleeves for small stone blades. In the Corded Ware period at 2800 BC, stone blades were exclusively fixed in antler sleeves, shed antler was collected even more systematically and fewer unused bits of antler waste can be found in these later levels. This is also the time when the lowest numbers of red deer bones are found in the refuse bone illustrating that antler was mostly procured by gathering rather than hunting. The stone blades in all periods were continuously re-sharpened. The sleeves holding the blades became shorter as they were ground away along with the blades. Curation of sleeves becomes ever more important in the latest phase indicating that sleeves were used more intensively in this period (Schibler 2001b: 8587). Curiously, antler sleeves were unknown on contemporary sites in Hungary despite what would seem to be their obvious advantages.

from adult stags were available. The over-hunting was caused most probably by an economic crisis in agriculture, related to climatic stress resulting in poor grain harvests (high calorie fruits and seeds from wild plants became more common in the macrobotanical assemblages; Hster-Plogmann et al. 1999; Schibler et al. 1997: 178-179). Changes in antler use related to innovation and economic deterioration have been confirmed at other sites since the Zrich studies (de Capitani et al. 2002). Such a detailed understanding of the interaction between innovation, style and environmental factors would not be possible on drysites and in this way, the Swiss model will be useful for understanding contemporary sites in places such as Hungary.

Figure 4: Examples of antler sleeves from Vinelz-Hafen. a; Lake Bienne (Hafner & Suter 2004: 41). B; reconstruction of the use of the sleeves (Hafner & Suter 2000, Abb. 102).

Figure 5: Proportion of bone and antler tools, the importance of bone from red deer (Cervus elaphus) and the proportion of bones from juvenile red deer in Neolithic villages from Zrich.

These changes in the Swiss Neolithic are thus related to both innovation and the deteriorating environmental situation resulting in apparently contradictory shifts in hunting patterns. There seems to be a direct connection between deer hunting and the use of antlers during the 4300-3500 period, related to availability through hunting. At the turn of 4000 BC cal. to 3900 BC cal., as well as the second half of 3700 BC cal., the proportion of red deer bone in the refuse bone material of settlements reaches 60%. The period is, however, the time of the lowest percentage of antler artifacts in the worked osseous assemblages in the region. There was a clear increase in juvenile red deer in faunal assemblages, especially in 37th century BC cal., suggesting that regional red deer populations were being over-hunted (fig. 5). This meant that fewer usable antler beams

Hungary: A Gateway to Europe Hungary is located in the center of the Carpathian Basin (see fig. 1). The flat eastern two thirds of Hungary are dominated by two major rivers: the Danube and the Tisza. The north and west of the landscape are hillier, evolving into low mountains along the present political borders of the country. Before the river regulations of the 19th century, much of the country was marshy and wet. This has resulted in the formation of tell settlements since the Late Neolithic, especially in the eastern Plain. Until the recent advent of large highway projects crosscutting long swathes of the landscape of Hungary, archaeological excavation has concentrated on these more obvious prehistoric sites, so that settlement

55

BONES AS TOOLS: CURRENT METHODS AND INTERPRETATIONS IN WORKED BONE STUDIES

hierarchies are only now starting to be revealed. Over the long run, this should also have implications for our understanding of the compositions of bone tool assemblages. From the Early Neolithic onwards small groups and new ideas have flowed from the east and south into this region and on into the rest of Europe. Within the region, this mixture resulted in a highly variable set of indigenous cultural groups with material cultures exhibiting both continuities and discontinuities over time and across the landscape. Many of the technical innovations introduced and developed here such as agriculture and metal-working, would go on to be of decisive importance in the social and economic evolution of local populations throughout the rest of Europe. It is therefore unfortunate that only one researcher has worked consistently on prehistoric bone tool material in the region, albeit for the last 20 years. Choyke (1979, 1983, 1984, 1987, 2000, in press a, in press b, in press c; Choyke and Bartosiewicz 1999, 2000; Choyke et al. 2004) has concentrated most of her efforts on worked bone assemblages from the much neglected Chalcolithic and Bronze Age periods. Thus, a picture of raw material and tool exploitation is slowly beginning to emerge. Fortunately, she has always had access to the pertinent faunal materials as well, either as the primary analyst or in close cooperation with other archaeozoologists. In these situations it is always necessary to check and double check that worked bone combined with other materials or spectacular pieces have not been stored apart from the pieces recognized by the archaeologist in the field as having been worked, thus falling through the analytical cracks.

researcher in this class of prehistoric raw material in Hungary, progress has been slow in terms of understanding variability between assemblages. In addition to the loss of data resulting from poor preservation compared to wet-sites, other difficulties exist related to generally coarser excavation techniques. Nowhere has this been better highlighted than in the comparison of results from two recent excavations with other coeval sites. The site of Szzhalombatta-Fldvr was excavated in the 1960s and late 1980s and is now being excavated by a joint team from the Matrica Museum in the town of Szhalombatta and from the University of Gothenburg in Sweden. When materials are compared from the three excavations at this site, it is immediately apparent that there is a sharp increase in the proportion of worked specimens made from animal bones in the dog/hare size range, particularly small double points and perforated metapodials, especially with regard to the excavations from the 1960s. The site of Szzhallombatta-Fldvr is part of a larger and unusually well defined cluster of sites termed the Vatya culture in the Hungarian literature (fig. 6). This culture is characterized by numerous small hill-forts and a ring of large hill-forts at the entrance of shallow valleys (Novki 1952), as well as a relatively homogeneous material culture (Choyke et al. 2004: 177-178). Material from recent excavations at Szzhallombatta-Fldvr has turned up anomalous types simply unknown at other Vatya sites but it is difficult to say whether this is because of the finer excavation methods or because of the individual nature of this settlement. Another dramatic example of the effect of taphonomic bias comes from the Early Neolithic Krs culture site of Ecsegfalva 23 located east of the Tisza River in Hungary, near the center of the Great Hungarian Plain. The people of the Krs culture complex were the first farmers in the region, living in small hamlets, apparently occupied throughout the year, in a marshy environment. In a recently submitted article, Choyke (in press c) has shown that compared to the relatively large assemblages of worked bone, antler and tusk from the Krs culture sites of Endrod 35, Szarvas 23, and other neighboring Krs sites (Makkay 1990), the typological variability within and between tool classes is lower at Ecsegfalva 23. From a statistical point of view, this greater variability would be expected because the sample size at Ecsegfalva 23 is relatively small (N=98). Makkay (1990) describes over 600 objects from the neighboring sites of Endrod 35 and 119, as well as Szarvas 23, more than six times greater than what was found at Ecsegfalva 23. However, his excavations on these sites were much more extensive and long-lasting so that, in fact,

Taphonomic Biases The sites in this region virtually all consist of dry sediments, with the rare exception of wells. Nevertheless, the fact that most of the soils are alkaline means that bone, antler and tooth preserves relatively well, although often with surface concretions. Sites may be found near marshes, by rivers, in foothill areas and many other environmental contexts. The increase in highway development projects in the last 10 years has made it clear that people in the past occupied areas previously thought to have been uninhabited. As such, Hungary represents a broad prehistoric stage with important implications for technical and cultural changes elsewhere in Europe. The worked bone, antler and tooth assemblages also mirror aspects of all these developments. Since the principal author of this paper for all intents has been virtually the only

56

PREHISTORIC BONE TOOLS AND THE ARCHAEOZOOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE: RESEARCH IN CENTRAL EUROPE CHOYKE AND SCHIBLER

proportionally far fewer worked bones were brought to light than what might be expected based on the Ecsegfalva 23 recovery rate. A very low rate of recovery may be presumed for worked bone from Cris sites (Beldiman 2000a; 2000b; 2002; MarinescuBlcu and Beldiman 1997), some of which were excavated for around thirty years (1964-1996) but which produced bone tool assemblages of only about 100 specimens. Such differences reflect the exceptionally careful and fine excavation techniques employed at Ecsegfalva 23, especially the beneficial effect of screening and water sieving. Such sampling problems mean researchers must exercise extreme caution when drawing conclusions about the meaning of tool type compositions based on inter-site comparisons.

the species and skeletal element used in their manufacture; 2) the number of stages used in their manufacture; 3) whether they have been curated (related to the intensity of their use); and 4) their exploitation index (Choyke 2001: 63), which measures the degree of working (the proportion of surface covered by manufacturing marks) relative to the degree of use (the proportion of surface covered by use wear, handling wear and degree of curation). Class I tools are carefully planned according to a standardized template, made from selected raw materials and with at least a modicum of work invested in their manufacture. Worked antler, however, is by definition a selected raw material although the objects made from it also tend to be well made and therefore these tools usually fall well within the Class I range of the manufacturing continuum. These are the tools that encompass the notion of repetition, habituation, familiarity and repetition (Stark 1999: 28) as a reinforcement of social solidarity. Long-term maintenance of a technical style involves just these kinds of social messaging. It is assumed here that prehistoric bone tools from Hungary generally reflect activities carried out on the household levels and are thus slower to exhibit change related to stylistic fashions. Thus, when changes start to be observed in their form or composition, they should represent a wake-up call to the analyst that some kind of movement has occurred in the social fabric of the settlement or cultural hinterland of the settlement. Class I tools were intended for specific long-term, repeated tasks such as hide preparation and were often repaired (curated) as they broke during use (fig. 7).

Figure 6: Map of the distribution area of Vatya culture sites mentioned in text (after Kovacs 1982).

The Manufacturing Continuum One way of looking at worked osseous materials is in terms of the effort put into the manufacture of individual objects. This has been termed elsewhere a continuum of quality (Choyke 1997a; 2001). A continuum of quality reflects cultural attitudes towards the bone objects themselves and, possibly, attitudes toward the tasks they were used in. Objects are assessed in terms of; 1) the regularity in the choice of

Figure 7: Curated Class I awl made from small ruminant metatarsal.

At the other end of the manufacturing continuum are the Class II tools representing objects generally made in an ad hoc manner, often from bones which broke in a lucky way. They are used rather than worked. Such Class II objects give the impression of tools, which were made for individual short-term tasks and mostly abandoned thereafter. The proportions of such tools in artifact assemblages from sites also

57

BONES AS TOOLS: CURRENT METHODS AND INTERPRETATIONS IN WORKED BONE STUDIES

reflect a kind of technical style, which can be compared on a general level between sites and time periods (fig. 8). In reality, tools from particular assemblages not only cluster at the extremes of the manufacturing continuum but also tend to cluster towards one end or the other (Choyke 2001: 59). Finally, there is a third category of objects, which have a strong tradition of being made from specific bones and intensively used but were not modified at all. Such tools have only recently been brought to the authors attention from ethnographic contexts and might be termed Class I-Class II tools. Examples include objects such as the 20th century unmodified calf mandible and domestic pig tusk, traditionally used to flatten lace-work in Norway (Noss 1976: 1-4). How one differentiates these tools from soil-polished bones is a question for another day.

Figure 9: Typical Class II bevel-ended tools found together in a pit from the Middle Chalcolithic site of Gyor-Szabadrt-domb in the northwest corner of Hungary.

Figure 8: A schematic representation of the manufacturing continuum in the Neolithic and Bronze Age.

An interesting long-term trend in the use of osseous materials for manufacturing tools and ornaments reveals itself in this study of quality of manufacture. In earlier periods of the Neolithic, bone tools clearly form an integral and valued part of the tool inventory. Most tools are planned in terms of raw material choice, some degree of multi-stage manufacturing, and intensive use. Thus, large proportions tend to scatter along the Class I end of the manufacturing continuum with a smaller number clustering at the Class II end (fig. 9). However, by the middle of the Chalcolithic period in Hungary the use of bone, antler and teeth as raw materials seem to have become much reduced in importance so that most objects fall somewhere along the Class II end of the manufacturing continuum, with a few objects that are thoughtfully made clustering at the Class I end. Among these emerged a class of objects, probably made by specialists and most often part of multimedia objects such as harness elements, elaborate projectile points, skates etc. (fig. 10 and 11). This tendency continues, so that by the Celtic-Roman period, most bone objects seem to be produced in workshop environments by specialists, sometimes even using imported materials (fig. 12).

Figure 10: Late Bronze age elaborate projectile points from the upper levels at the fortified Vatya tell settlement of SzzhalombattaFldvr.

Continuity over Regions Objects manufactured from osseous materials such as bone, antler and teeth were mostly produced and used during household activities. As has been pointed out elsewhere in the literature (for example Hodder 1982; Stark 1999: 27), objects lacking clear iconographical information vary in their degree of closure compared to highly decorative items. As such, the character of such assemblages, and

58

PREHISTORIC BONE TOOLS AND THE ARCHAEOZOOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE: RESEARCH IN CENTRAL EUROPE CHOYKE AND SCHIBLER

especially everyday tools, tends to be more conservative and long-lived within localized regions. On the other hand, it may be expected that complex ornaments and objects such as projectile points, which may be associated with an individuals social status within a larger community or cultural setting, need to be recognizable over wider geographical distributions and are therefore more standardized in their form and decoration. Such objects are thus more impacted by style (Weissner 1984; Wobst 1972, 1999; etc.). These variable distributions of the mundane versus decorative objects are precisely what one finds in Middle Bronze Age settlement areas in Hungary. The aforementioned west Hungarian Vatya culture area is generally characterized by the regular use of rib scrapers for leather working (fig. 13) as well as heavy duty antler tools with squared-off bases (fig. 14) (Choyke 1984: 31-32; Choyke et al. 2004). On the other hand, contemporary Middle Bronze Age tell sites in the north and central part of the Great Hungarian Plain are instead characterized by the use of sheep/goat tibia scrapers for scraping hide or leather, large ruminant mandible smoothers, and ruminant astragali and proximal phalanges with faceted surfaces (fig. 15 and 16) (Choyke 1984: 32, Choyke in press a and b; Choyke and Bartosiewicz 1997: 65). The greater the number of worked osseous site materials analyzed, with their distribution areas cross-cutting the pottery type distribution areas used to define archaeological cultures in Hungary, the easier it will be to trace the degree of interaction between settlements or groups of settlements (Choyke in press a).

Figure 12: AD first century ivory comb from the grave of a young Roman girl from the territory of Aquincum.

Figure 13: Cattle rib scrapers from Szzhallombatta-Fldvr are characteristic hide or leather-working tools in the worked osseous assemblages of Vatya culture sites.

Continuity through Time It was argued above that the technical style marked by the species/skeletal elements chosen to make particular tools tends to be conservative. Thus, it is striking that certain tool types mostly come to light in site materials which are chronologically quite separated in time. Of course, it is possible that tool types were re-invented or re-introduced into places, but it seems even more likely that there was a degree of continuity in populations despite significant social and economic changes which apparently took place in the Carpathian Basin. It seems certain that the region was effected by a stream of new ideas and even, increasingly, small groups of people as time progressed. This tendency was to culminate in the Roman and Migration periods where life was

Figure 11: Late Bronze Age (Urnfield) skate pair found in a pit during rescue highway excavations near Budapest.

On the other hand, it is the ornamented pieces, the famous horse harness elements, fishing equipment, projectile points, boar tusk ornaments, and drilled bear canines that can be found on all contemporary Middle Bronze Age sites in Hungary. Although these objects, especially the harness elements with their Aegean derived meander designs (see above) have been most written about in the literature, they are far less evocative of the details of everyday life and social interaction on a local or regional scale in this period.

59

BONES AS TOOLS: CURRENT METHODS AND INTERPRETATIONS IN WORKED BONE STUDIES

transformed by population movements from both the east and the west after the Roman period. The Hungarians themselves consistuted one of the last of a series of nomadic populations who moved in from Central Asia. For this reason, Hungarian scholarship has tended to see prehistoric cultures as a series of largely discontinuous entities. However, the life-span of a number of mundane tool types makes it clear that in prehistoric times at least we are not looking at total changes in the population. Certain technical styles for production on the household level continued to be passed down from parent to child until the onset of the Iron Age (tab. 1).

a parallel chronological distribution, although frequencies in various periods may differ dramatically. Biel (1994: Abb.3) describes such objects from the Middle Bronze Age of Southern Germany.

Figure 14: Heavy duty hafted burr and beam tools made from red deer antler display the characteristic square cut end of such tools from Middle Bronze Age Vatya culture sites. This specimen is from Szzhallombatta-Fldvr.

Figure 16: These ruminant astragali and first phalanges are characteristic of worked bone assemblages from Middle Bronze sites in the northern half of the Great Hungarian Plain.

Figure 15: This cattle mandible smoothing tool is characteristic of worked bone assemblages from Middle Bronze sites in the northern half of the Great Hungarian Plain.

One trend, which is quite interesting, is the intensive use of hafted heavy duty burr and beam tools beginning in the Late Neolithic (fig. 17). T-shaped antler axes are important into the Chalcolithic in western Hungary. Heavy duty antler hammer/axe tools made from the burr and beam of red deer antler on the other hand begin to be intensively used throughout Hungary in the Late Neolithic. These objects continue to be an important part of everyday tool kits of people up until the end of the Bronze Age almost 3000 years later, although some of the technical details may vary from region to region. Small harpoons made from red deer antler tine tips display

Another tool which was used over wide areas of the Carpathian Basin was the spatulae made from split cattle ribs, with one rounded and one pointed end. This tool continues to be used through the Middle Chalcolithic but disappears towards the end of the period. Nevertheless, the use of this type of object continues for a good 300 years after the official end of the Late Neolithic. Another interesting tool type with the same life-span as the pointed rib spatulae are beamers, mostly made from the complete metatarsal bones of adult red deer or cattle. These tools are characterized by continuously renewed, concave and sharp-edged facets, sometimes along the length on all four diaphysial surfaces. Their use is inferred by analogy with similiar objects from ethnographic and historical contexts used to clean the back side of hides pinned to tree trunks. Such tools appear in considerable numbers on Late Neolithic sites in the north of the Great Hungarian Plain (fig. 18). These sites have many connections with contemporary sites in the west of Hungary. Although no worked osseous assemblages have yet been analyzed from the Late Neolithic in this part of the country, a bone beamer has been reported from a coeval Neolithic (Lengyel culture) site in Austria (Gnther Karl Kunst, personal communiction 2004). Analogous beamers have been

60

PREHISTORIC BONE TOOLS AND THE ARCHAEOZOOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE: RESEARCH IN CENTRAL EUROPE CHOYKE AND SCHIBLER

found on Chalcolithic sites in western Hungary (fig. 19). Thus, bone beamers were used for at least 1000 years.

on the Danube. These tools have been singled out because they are relatively unique, with apparently few parallels outside Hungary. It seems most likely

Table 1: Some important mundane tool types exhibiting continuity between periods End of the Neolithic to the Chalcolithic Bevel-end/pointed spatulae T-shaped antler axes Long bone beamer End of the Neolithic to end of the Bronze Age Antler tine-tip harpoon Hafted heavy duty antler hammer/axe haft from rose and beam Chalcolithic to the end of the Bronze Age Mandible with worndown oral part Beginning of the Bronze Age to the Middle Bronze Age Skates or runners made from cattle or horse radii

Another unique Hungarian prehistoric bone tool was mostly made from the mandible of sheep or goat and more rarely cattle. The premolars were extracted and a soft material pulled over the surface of the empty alveolars, smoothing and rounding their edges. These may have been some kind of a leather strap processor. These tools were first found in the Middle Chalcolithic (Choyke in press b) (fig. 20) but are also known from an Early Bronze Age Bell-Beaker culture site near Budapest (fig. 21) and are found consistently at Middle Bronze Age Vatya sites in particular (Choyke 1984).

that the technical traditions surrounding their manufacture continued in temporally contiguous societies on a household level, irrespective of other significant changes in broader social structures.

Figure 18: Late Neolithic beamers made from cattle metatarsal (here only the distal half remains) from the site of csd-Kovahalom on the Great Hungarian Plain.

Figure 17: Early Bronze Age heavy duty hafted burr and beam tool from the Bell-Beaker Csepel Hros site at Albertfalva in the outskirts of Budapest.

Finally, there seems to be both chronological and geographical continuity in the use of cattle and horse runners/skates. The first known runners made from horse radii, drilled through the distal end in a mediolateral direction and faceted on the dorsal surface, come from the Bell-Beaker culture sites found along the Budapest section of the Danube and date to the Early Bronze Age (2800 BC). Some 1400 years later, very similar objects, also made on complete horse and cattle radii were still being used at a relatively close-by Middle Bronze Age fortified settlement of SzzhalombattaFldvr, also located

Figure 19: Middle Chalcolithic beamer made from a red deer metatarsal with the joint still intact. This specimen comes from the site of Gyor-Szabadrt-domb in the northwest corner of Hungary.

Conclusions The research on worked osseous materials is a study in contrasts and possibilities for the future. On the

61

BONES AS TOOLS: CURRENT METHODS AND INTERPRETATIONS IN WORKED BONE STUDIES

one hand, the detailed study of huge tool assemblages has permitted development of a consistent typology which can easily be adapted to other archaeological contexts. Comparability between far-flung assemblages will be increased by using typologies structured in a similar manner, even if important differences in preservation and sampling remain a stumbling block. The worked bone, antler and tooth assemblages from the Neolithic and Bronze Age lake-dwelling sites in Switzerland exist in a precisely identified temporal and environmental context. Much more can be said about on-site distribution of tools and various daily activities. Drysites, with poorer preservation of organic material, are much more problematic in this regard. Nevertheless, analogy with the detailed Swiss information should prove useful in understanding material cultural patterning at sites of the same techno-cultural level elsewhere in Europe. Worked bone material from Hungary, on the other hand, comes from a wide variety of sites and environmental zones. Comparable information on these assemblages from Hungary may help fill in lacunae (by way of analogy) in the Swiss material resulting from changing lake levels or erosion.

the Neolithic. Failing agriculture lead to the overhunting of red deer. In parallel, there was a technical innovation in the use antler sleeves to protect valuable ash wood hafts from breaking when the axes and adzes were in use. It can be seen that there must have been an increased reliance on organized gathering of shed red deer antler towards the end of the Neolithic and afterwards in the region. Such integrated studies of tools made from osseous materials in terms of continuity in time, space and manufacturing is made possible only with the multidisciplinary and international cooperation of scholars specialized in this unique class of artifacts.
References Cited Backalov, A. 1979 Predmeti od kostii roga u preneolitu I neolitu Srbije. Beograd: Archaeologia Jugoslavica. Becker, C. 2003 Bone Artifacts and Man An Attempt at a Cultural Synthesis. In Decyphering Ancient Bones: The Research Potential of Bioarchaeological Collections, ed. G. Grupe and J. Peters, 83-124. Documenta Archaeobiologiae. Rahden/Wesf.: Verlag Marie Leidorf GmbH. Beldiman, C. 1998 L'industrie des matires dures animales dans le site de la civilization Starcevo-Cris Trestiana, dp. de Vaslui. Un exemple dtude: les spatules. Acta moldaviae Meridionalis; vol. 1520, No 1: 82115. 2000a L'industrie des matires dures animales dans le site Nolithique Ancien de Dudest II Vechi, dp. de Timis. Anales du Banat; vol. 7-8: 7592. 2000b Objets de parure en matires dures animales du Nolithique ancien de Roumanie: bracelets en bois de cerf. Bulletin du Muse dpartemental Teohari Antonescu; vol. 5-7: 3145. 2002 Sur la typologie des outils en matires dures animales du Nolithique ancien de Roumanie: le poinon sur demi-mtapode perfor. In Ateliers et techniques artisanales. Contributions a r c h o l o g i q u e s , ed. C. Gaiu, 7-31. Srie Historica 6. Cluj-Napoca: Muse dpartemental Bistrita: Nasaud, Bibliotheca Musei Bistrita. Beldiman, C. and E. Popusoi 2001 Lindustrie des matires dures animals dans le site nothlique ancien (culture de Starcevo-Cris) de Trestiana, dp. de Vaslui, Roumanie: aiguilles chas. Memoria Antiquitatis, Acta Musei Petrodavensis; vol. 22: 351402. Biel, J. 1994 Bronze- und Eisenszeit. In Knochenarbeit, ed. M. Kokabi, 57-82. Stuttgart: Landesdenkmalamt Baden-Wrttemberg.

Figure 20: Middle Chalcolithic mandible with smoothed oral section. This specimen comes from the site of Gyor-Szabadrt-domb in the northwest corner of Hungary.

Figure 21: Early Bronze Age cattle mandible with smoothed oral section from the Bell-Beaker Csepel Hros site at Albertfalva in the outskirts of Budapest.

The fabulous preservation of the Swiss material has permitted work to be carried out integrating environmental data on an economic crisis occuring in

62

PREHISTORIC BONE TOOLS AND THE ARCHAEOZOOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE: RESEARCH IN CENTRAL EUROPE CHOYKE AND SCHIBLER

Bir M. 1994

The Bone Objects of the Roman Collection. Budapest: Catalogi Musei Nationalis Hungarici.

Bknyi, S. 1960 Reconstruction des mors en bois de cerf et en os. Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae; vol. 12: 113122. Campana, D. 1989 Natufian and Protoneolithic Bone tools. The Manufacture and Use of Bone Implements in the Zagros and the Levant. Bar International Series No 494. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports. Camps-Fabrer, H. (ed) 1974 Premier colloque international sur lindustrie de los dans la prhistoire. Aix-en-Provence: ditions de lUniversit de Provence. 1979 Lindustrie en os et bois de cervid durant le Nolithique et lAge des mtaux: Premire runion du groupe de travail no. 3 sur lindustrie de los prhistorique. Paris: CNRS. 1982 Lindustrie en os et bois de cervid durant le Nolithique et lAge des mtaux: Deuxime runion du groupe de travail no. 3 sur lindustrie de los prhistorique. Paris: CNRS. 1985 Lindustrie en os et bois de cervid durant le Nolithique et lAge des mtaux: Troisime runion du groupe de travail no. 3 sur lindustrie de los prhistorique. Paris: CNRS. de Capitani, A., S. Deschler-Erb, U. Leuzinger, E. MartiGrdel and J. Schibler 2002 Die Jungsteinzeitliche Seeufersiedlung Arbon Bleiche 3. Funde. Archeologie im Thurgau, Band 11. Frauenfeld: Verffentlichung des Amtes fr Archeologie des Kantons Thurgau. Choyke, A. M. 1979 A Classification of the Bone and Antler Tools from the Bronze Age Hill-fortress of Pkozdvr. Alba Regia; vol. 17: 921. 1983 Elozetes jelents a tiszaug-kmnytetoi sats csontszerszmairl. Archeolgiai rtesto; vol. 109, No 1: 3541. 1984 An Analysis of Bone, Antler and Tooth Tools from Bronze Age Hungary. Mitteilungen des archologischen Instituts der ungarischen Akademie der Wissenschaften; vol. 12/13: 1357. 1987 The Exploitation of Red Deer in the Hungarian Bronze Age. Archaeozoologia; Vol. 1, No 1: 109116. 1997 The Bone Manufacturing Continuum. Anthropozoologica; No 25-26: 6572. 1998 Bronze Age Red Deer: Case Studies from the Great Hungarian Plain. In Man and the Animal World. Studies in Memoriam Sndor Bknyi, ed. P. Anreiter, L. Bartosiewicz, E. Jerem and W. Meid, 157-178. Budapest: Archaeolingua Kiad. 2000 Refuse and Modified Bone from SzzhalombattaFldvr: Some Preliminary Observations. In Szzhalombatta Archaeological

Expedition Annual Report 1, ed. I. Poroszlai and M. Vicze, 97-102. Szzhalombatta: Matrica Museum. 2001 A Quantitative Approach to the Concept of Quality in Prehistoric Bone Manufacturing. In Animals and Man in the Past, ed. H. Buitenhuis and W. Prummel, 50-66. Groningen: ARCPublicatie, 41. in press a Bronze Age Bone and Antler Working at the Jszdzsa-Kpolnahalom Tell. Muinasaja teadus. Tallinn: History Institute of the Estonian Academy of Sciences. in press b Continuity and Discontinuity at Gyor-Szabadrtdomb: Bone Tools from a Chalcolithic Settlement in Northwest Hungary. In Proceedings of the WBRG, Basel 2001. Archaeologie International. in press c Objects for a Lifetime Tools for a Season: The Worked Osseous Material from Ecsegfalva 23. Excavations at Ecsegfalva 23 University of Cardiff, Department of Archaeology. Choyke A. M. and L. Bartosiewicz 1999 Bronze Age Animal Keeping in Western Hungary. In Archaeology of the Bronze Age and Iron Age: Experimental Archaeology, Environmental Archaeology, Archaeological Parks, ed. E. Jerem and I. Poroszlai, 239-249. Budapest: Archaeolingua Series Major. 2000 Bronze Age Animal Exploitation in the Central Great Hungarian Plain. Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae; vol. 51: 4370. Choyke, A. M., M. Vretemark and S. Sten 2004 Levels of Social Identity Expressed in the Refuse and Worked Bone from the Middle Bronze Age Szzhalombatta-Fldvr, Vatya Culture, Hungary. In Behaviour Behind Bones: The Zooarchaeology of Ritual, Religion, Status and Identity, ed. S. J. O'Day, W. van Neer and A. Ervynck, 177-189. Oxford: Oxbow Books. Clark, J. G. D. and M. W. Thompson 1953 The Groove and Splinter Technique of Working Antler in Upper Palaeolithic and Mesolithic Europe. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society; vol. 19, Part 2: 148-160. Conscience, A.-C. 2001 Frhbronzezeitliche Uferdrfer aus ZrichMozartstrasse - eine folgenreiche Neudatierung. In Mit einem Exkurs von Eduard Gross: Ein kritischer Blick zurck, 147-157. Basel: Jahrbuch der Schweizerischen Gesellschaft fr Ur- und Frhgeschichte, Bd. 84. Deschler-Erb, S. 1998 Rmische Beinartefakte aus Augusta Raurica. Forschungen in Augst 27/1. 2001 Do-it-Yourself Manuacturing of Bone and Antler in Two Villas in Roman Switzerland. In Crafting Bone: Skeletal Technologies through Time and Space, ed. A. Choyke and L. Bartosiewicz, 31-

63

BONES AS TOOLS: CURRENT METHODS AND INTERPRETATIONS IN WORKED BONE STUDIES

40. BAR International Series No 937. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports. Deschler-Erb, S., E. Marti-Grdel and J. Schibler 2002 Die Knochen-, Zahn- und Geweihartefakte. In Die Jungsteinzeitliche Seeufersiedlung Arbon/Bleiche 3: Funde, ed. A. de Capitani, S. Deschler-Erb, U. Leuzinger, E. Marti-Grdel and J. Schibler, 277-366. Archeologie im Thurgau, Band 11. Frauenfeld: Verffentlichung des Amtes fr Archeologie des Kantons Thurgau. Elster, E. 2001 Middle Neolithic to Early Bronze Age Bone Tools from Sitagroi, Greece. In Crafting Bone: Skeletal Technologies through Time and Space, ed. A. M. Choyke and L. Bartosiewicz, 355-370. BAR International Series No 937. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports. Foltiny, S. 1965 Bronze- und urnenfelderzeitliche Hirshhorn- und Knochentrensen aus Neidersterreich. Mitteilungen der Anthropologischen Gesellschaft in Wien; vol. 95: 243249. Furger, A. 1981 Die Kleinfunde aus den Horgener Schichten. Die Neolithischen Uferseidlungen von Twann 13. Bern: Staatlicher Lehrmittelverlag. Furger, A., C. Fischer and M. Hneisen 1998 Die Ersten Jahrtausende: Die Schweiz von den Anfnen bis zur Eisenzeit. Archeologie und Kulturgeschichte der Schweiz, Band 1. Zrich: Verlag Neue Zrcher Zeitung. Hafner, A. and J. P. Suter 2004 5000 Jahre Aufgetaucht, 1984-2004. Bern: Archologischer Dienst des Kantons Bern. Hodder, I. 1982 Symbols in Action: Ethnoarchaeological Studies of Material Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hster-Plogmann, H., J. Schibler and K. Steppan 1999 The Relationship Between Wild Mammal Exploitation, Climatic Fluctuations, and Economic Adaptations: A Transdisciplinary Study on Neolithic Sites from Lake Zurich Region, Southwest Germany and Bavaria. In Historia Animalum Ex Ossibus: Festschrift fr Angela von den Driesch, ed. C. Becker, H. Manhart, J. Peters and J. Schibler, 189-200. Studia Honoraria 8. Rahden: Verlag Marie Leidorf Gmbh. Httel, H.-G. 1981 Bronzezeitliche Tensen in Mittel- und Osteuropa. Mnchen: Prhistorische Bronzefunde. Kokabi, M. (ed.) 1994 Knochenarbeit. Stuttgart: Landesdenkmalamt

Baden-Wrttemberg. Korosec, P. and J. Korosec 1969 Fundgut der Pfahlbausiedlungen bei Ig am Laibacher M o o r . Ljubljana: Catalogi Archaeologici Sloveniae, Editi Cvra Musei Nationalis Labacensis III. Kovacs, T. 1982 Befestinungsanlagen um die Mitte des 2. Jahrtausends v.u. Z. in Mittleungarn. In Beitrge zum bronzlezeitlichen Burgenbau in Mitteleuropa, ed. B. Chropovsky and J. Herrmann, 279-291. Berlin: Nitra. Marinescu-Blcu and C. Beldiman 1997 L'industrie des matires dures animales appartenant la civilisation Nolithique de Starcevo-Cris en Roumanie. Le site de Grumzesti, dp. de Neamt. M e m o r i a Antiquitatis. Acta Musei Petrodavensis Piatra Neamt; vol. 21: 273296. Makkay J. 1990 Knochen-, Geweih- und Eberzahngegenstnde der frhneolithischen Krs-Kultur. Communicationes Archaeologicae Hungariae; No 38: 2358. Mikler H. 1997 Die rmiscen Funde aus Bein im Landesmuseum M a i n z . Monographies instrumentum 1. Montagnac (France): ditions Monique Mergoil. Mozsolics, A. 1962 Die Herkunftfragen der ltesten Hirshgeweihtrensen. Acta Archaeologcia Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae; vol. 12: 125135. Nandris, J. 1972 Bos primigenius and the Bone Spoon. Bulletin No. 10. London: Institute of Archaeology, University of London. Noss, A. 1976 Fr Strykejernet, Slikjejake og Mangletre. Oslo: Norsk Folkemuseum.

Novki G. 1952 Fjr megye oskori fldvrai. Archaeolgiai rtesto; vol. 79: 317. Perii, S. 1984 Predmeti od Kosti, Roga i Kamena. Katalog XIII. Beograd: Muzej Grada Beograda. Poplin, F. 1974 Deux cas particuliers de dbitage par usure. In Premier colloque international sur lindustrie de los dans la Prhistoire, ed. H. Camps-Fabrer, 85-92. Aix-en-Provence: ditions de lUniversit de Provence.

64

PREHISTORIC BONE TOOLS AND THE ARCHAEOZOOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE: RESEARCH IN CENTRAL EUROPE CHOYKE AND SCHIBLER

Ramseyer, D. 1987 Delley-Portalban II. Contribution ltude du Nolithique en Suisse occidentale. Archologie fribourgeoise 3. Fribourg: ditions Universitaires. Semenov, S. A. 1964 Prehistoric Technology: An Experimental Study of the Oldest Tools and Artefacts from Traces of Manufacture and Wear. (Translated, and with a Preface by M. W. Thompson). London: Cory, Adams and Mackay. Schibler, J. 1980 Osteologische Untersuchung der cortaillodzeitlichen Knochenartefakte. Die neolithischen Uferseidlungen von Twann Band 8. Bern: Schriftenreihe der Erziehungsdirektion des Kantons Bern, herausgegeben vom Archologischen Dienst des Kantons Bern, Staatlicher Lehrmittelverlag. 1981 Typologische Untersuchungen der cortaillodzeitlichen Knochenartefakte. Die neolithischen Ufersiedlungen von Twann, Band 17. Bern: Schriftenreihe der Erziehungsdirektion des Kantons Bern, herausgegeben vom Archologischen Dienst des Kantons Bern, Staatlicher Lehrmittelverlag. 1987a Osteoarchologische Untersuchenen der neolithischen Knochenkomplexe. In Zrich Kleiner Hafner: Tauschgrabungen 1981-1984, ed. P. Suter, 167-179. Monographien 3. Zrich: Berichte der Zricher Denkmalpflege. 1987b Die Knochenartefakte. In Zrich Mozartstrasse, ed. E. Gross, E. Bleuer and B. Hardmeyer, 167176. Neolithische und bronzezeitliche Ufersiedlungen, Bnde 1-3 . Zrich: Orell Fssli Verlag. 1987c Die Hirschgeweihartefakte. In Z r i c h Mozartstrasse, ed. E. Gross, E. Bleuer and B. Hardmeyer, 156-166. Neolithische und bronzezeitliche Ufersiedlungen, Bnde 1-3. Zrich: Orell Fssli Verlag. 1997 Knochen und Geweihartefakte. In konomie und kologie neolithischer und bronzezeitlicher Ufersiedlungen am Zrichsee, ed. J. Schibler et a l ., 122-219. Monographien der Kantonsarchologie Zrich 20, Zrich und Egg. 1998 Knochen- und geweiartefakete. In Die Schweiz vom Pallithikum bis zum frhen Mittelalter, SPM II Neolithikumt, W. E. Stckli et al., 142-151. Basel: Schweizerische Gesellshaft fr Ur- und Frhgeschichte Verlag. 2001 Experimental Production of Neolithic Bone and 2002

Antler Tools. In Crafting Bone: Skeletal Technologies Through Time and Space, ed. A. M. Choyke and L. Bartosiewicz, 49-60. BAR International Series No 937. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports. Red Deer Antler Exploitation and Raw Material Management in Neolithic Lake Dwelling Sites from Zrich, Switzerland. In Animals and Man in the Past, ed. H. Buitenhuis and W. Prummel, 8294. Groningen: ARC-Publicatie 41.

Schibler, J., S. Jacomet, H. Hster-Plogmann, C. Brombacher 1997 Economic Crash in the 37th and 36th Century BC cal. in Neolithic Lake Shore Sites in Switzerland. Anthropozoologica; Nos 25-26: 553-570. Stark, M. 1999 Social Dimensions of Technical Choice in Kalinga Ceramic Traditions. In Material Meanings: Critical Approaches to the Interpretation of Material Culture, ed. E. Chilton, 24-43. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press. Suter, P. 1981 Die Hirschgeweihartefakte der CortaillodSchichten. Die neolithischen Ufersiedlungen von Twann: Band 15. Bern: Staatlicher Lehrmittelverlag. Uzelac, J. 1975 Objets en os et en corne de vatin dans la collection du Muse de Vrsac. Revue de lInstitut Archologique; Nouvelle Srie 26. Wiessner, P. 1984 Reconsidering the Behavioral Basis for Style: A Case Study among the Kalahari San. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology; vol. 3, No 3: 190234. Wobst, M. H. 1977 Stylistic Behavior and Information Exchange. In For the Director: Research Essays in Honor of James B. Griffin, ed. C. E. Cleland, 317-342. Anthropological Papers No 61. Ann Arbor: Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan. 1999 Style in Archaeology or Archaeologists in Style. In Material Meanings: Critical Approaches to the Interpretation of Material Culture, ed. E. S. Chilton, 118-132. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.

65