Journal of Archaeological Science (1999) 26, 797 808
Article No. jasc.1998.0348, available online at http://www.idealibrary.com on
The Origins of Metallurgy: Distinguishing Stone from Metal
Cut-marks on Bones from Archaeological Sites
Haskel J. Greenfield*
Department of Anthropology, University of Manitoba, Fletcher Argue 435, Winnipeg, MB, R3T 5V5, Canada
(Received 12 May 1998, revised manuscript accepted 1 September 1998)
This paper presents an analytical procedure for identifying and mapping the introduction and spread of metallurgy to
regions based upon the relative frequency of metal versus stone tool slicing cut-marks in butchered animal bone
assemblages. The author conducted experiments to establish the relationship between the edge characteristics of metal
and stone tools that create slicing cut-marks and the marks they produce when applied to bone. The type of tool used
to produce such cut-marks on bone can be identified by taking silicone moulds of slicing cut-marks and analysing them
in a scanning electron microscope. Quantifying the distribution of metal versus stone tool types over time and space
provides insight into the processes underlying the introduction and diffusion of a functional metallurgical technology
for subsistence activities. Prehistoric data from the central Balkans of southeast Europe are presented to illustrate the
utility of the procedure. These data are used to calculate the frequency of use and relative importance of stone and metal
implements over time in the central Balkans, from the introduction of metallurgy during the Late Neolithic
(c. 3900 3300 bc) through the end of the Bronze Age (c. 1000 bc). 1999 Academic Press
Keywords: METALLURGY, ZOOARCHAEOLOGY, SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPY,
CUT-MARKS, EXPERIMENTAL ARCHAEOLOGY.
introduction and use of metal tools on the societies
Introduction
that adopted them, a more direct source of data must
he origins of metallurgy have long intrigued
be sought. It is only when such data are assembled can
archaeologists (e.g., Branigan, 1974; Levy &
hypotheses truly be suggested and tested about the
Shalev, 1989; Muhly, 1985; Renfrew, 1969;
T
effects of the introduction and use of metal tools upon
Rosen, 1984; Tylecote, 1986, 1987, 1992; Wertheim &
cultures.
Muhly, 1980). However, relatively little is known about
Most research concerned with the origins of metal-
the use of early metal tools or their rate of adoption.
lurgy has relied upon the analysis of metal artefacts
Metal tools begin to appear toward the close of the
(e.g., Branigan, 1974; Chernykh, 1992; Levy & Shalev,
Neolithic period in the Old World (Shephard, 1980;
1989; Shephard, 1980; Tripathi, 1988; Tylecote, 1986,
Tylecote, 1986, 1987, 1992). During the subsequent
1992). This approach, however, is fraught with a major
Eneolithic, Bronze and Iron Ages, stone tools dramati-
problem. The number and types of metal tools from
cally decline in frequency. It has been commonly
the earliest metal-using prehistoric periods (Neolithic,
assumed that metal tools take their place. However,
Eneolithic, and Bronze Ages) is quite small (Rosen,
metal tools are relatively rare finds in sites because they
1984, 1993, 1997, in press) and almost certainly does
were either recycled by their users, or they deteriorated
not reflect the full range then available (Olsen, 1988:
in their post-depositional context. Thus, monitoring
337). One possible interpretation for the archaeological
the importance of metal tools has heretofore been
rarity of metal tools is that it reflects the actual
restricted to inferential suppositions based on the dis-
prehistoric rarity of metal tools. Another possible
appearance of stone tools (Rosen, 1984, 1993, 1997, in
explanation was that metal was such a precious com-
press) or the occasional metal find. In order to make
modity in antiquity that it was not discarded, but used
more substantive statements about the effect of the
and reused. In such a scenario, metal would typically
be discarded only when there was too little to salvage,
*For correspondence. Tel: 204 474 6332; Fax: 1 204 474 7600;
a condition that would be relatively infrequent, and
E-mail: [e-mail]
To some extent, the decline of flint is probably a function of the
most metal would be recycled. This interpretation is
differential recovery procedures conducted by Neolithic versus post-
supported by the paucity of discarded broken or worn
Neolithic prehistorians (cf. Greenfield, 1986a, 1991, 1993). In gen-
tools. Of the metal objects that are found, most are
eral, the former have generally used sieves longer and traditionally
worn, broken, or finished tools and weapons that were
pay more attention to chipped stone remains during recovery,
analysis, and publication. lost, ritually deposited, or hidden and forgotten. A
797
0305 4403/99/070797+12 $30.00/0 1999 Academic Press
798 H. J. Greenfield
third possible reason for the paucity of archaeological
Previous Research on Later Prehistoric Metal
metal finds is that early metals were chemically un-
Versus Stone Tool Cut-marks
stable and decomposed relatively rapidly under most
There has been a great deal of research over the last 20
conditions. Considering any or all of these reasons,
years in distinguishing chipped stone tool cut-marks on
little direct metallic evidence exists to show the range
bones from other kinds of marks on bones (teeth,
of all types of early metal tools (Olsen, 1988: 337;
trampling, vascular grooves, roots, preparator-marks,
Shephard, 1980; Tylecote, 1992) and to determine
etc. e.g., Blumenschine, Marean & Capaldo, 1996;
exactly when the change-over from a stone- to a
Olsen & Shipman, 1988; Potts & Shipman, 1981;
metal-oriented technology took place. Did this tran-
Shipman & Rose, 1983; White & Toth, 1989). In later
sition take place slowly or rapidly? Was the spread of
prehistoric/early historic faunal assemblages, slicing
metallurgy a relatively uniform process? These are vital
cut-marks are not easily confused with other kinds of
questions which must be answered before one can
marks commonly studies (e.g., tooth and preparator-
address the question of causal priority in the adoption
marks). There has been little attention directed at
of metallurgy.
distinguishing cut-marks made by prehistoric or
This paper will present the results of new research
historic stone from metal butchering implements.
into the origins and spread of metallurgy from a new
Walker & Long (1977) conducted a series of exper-
perspective the analysis of cut-marks on the bone
iments that initially established the relationship
remains of animals slaughtered and butchered by metal
between the edge characteristics of a series of stone and
and stone implements. It will be shown that cut-marks
metal cutting tools and the marks they produce when
on bones made by chipped stone tools during the
applied to bone. Their experiments were the first to
butchering of animals can be distinguished from those
indicate that clearly recognizable morphological differ-
made by metal tools. By examining the differences in
ences existed between the cut-marks of metal and stone
cut-marks, it should also be possible (1) to expand our
knives. The results of their research are supported by
understanding of the types of butchering tools in each
this study.
of the prehistoric periods and (2) to more accurately
The most extensive replication study of metal versus
calculate the relative importance of stone versus metal
stone-cut tool marks was conducted by Olsen (1988) in
in the subsistence technology. Thus, cut-marks can be
a seminal, but relatively unnoticed study. She was the
used, in the absence of metal tools, to study the
first to examine the relative abundance of metal versus
introduction and spread of metallurgy both within and
stone tool slicing cut-marks on bone, to do so through
between regions (and potentially even within complex
the experimental replication of cut-marks on bone by
societies) through time.
a variety of metal and stone tools, and was the first
This investigation was accomplished in two steps:
to utilize a scanning electron microscope (SEM) to
first, through the analysis of modern experimental cut-
investigate stone and metal cut-marks in a later
marks made by the author with metal and stone tools
prehistoric context. She developed a series of morpho-
and, second, by the comparison of the results of the
logical criteria for distinguishing stone from metal
cut-mark experiments with cut-marks on bones from
tools and types of metal tools using a SEM. Olsen was
prehistoric sites spanning the introduction of metal
mainly concerned with the analysis of bone and antler
tools in the central Balkans. The central Balkans of
artefacts from the British Bronze and Iron Ages, and
southeastern Europe were chosen to supply the com-
was attempting to understand the production tech-
parative archaeological material because this is one of
niques for such tools. The results of her study are
the Old World regions which experienced the auton-
corroborated and enhanced by the data presented here.
omous development of metallurgy (Jovanović, 1980;
Renfrew, 1969). The zooarchaeological remains with
cut-marks used in this study come from two prehistoric
Differences Between Stone and Metal Tools
sites: Petnica and Ljuljaci (Greenfield, 1986a, b, 1991),
both located in central Serbia. Their data will be used There are some fundamental differences between stone
to demonstrate the utility of the method. and metal tools that are relevant to the analysis at
The slicing cut-marks examined in this study are the hand. First, experiments with steel knives have shown
residual remains of slaughtering, butchering and skin- them to be superior to stone flake tools in a number of
ning activities. A cut-mark is functionally equivalent to ways. They are stronger, have greater longevity, retain
a slice on the bone created by the drawing of a knife (or their cutting edge longer, are generally sharper, can be
dagger) blade across the surface of the bone. It is this more frequently and extensively sharpened, and re-
type of cut-mark that is being studied here. A slicing quire less energy to cut through greater amounts of
cut-mark is not to be confused with a chop-mark, tissue with fewer strokes (Walker, 1978).
which is created by the impact of a knife, sword, or Second, as a result of the heavy investment in raw
axe-like blade. It is also not to be confused with the material procurement and manufacture, metal tools
slicing-like activity of a saw. The marks produced by are kept and used for long periods of time and not
chopping and sawing are easily distinguished from quickly discarded. In contrast, chipped stone tools
those of slicing cut-marks (Olsen, 1988). have a shorter functional life (Brose, 1975). Stone tools
The Origins of Metallurgy 799
have the advantage that their raw material is often The morphology of the cut-mark was obscured if
much more readily available and their production the magnification was too high. In general, lower
requires less energy and specialized manufacturing magnifications (30 100 power) were sufficient for
technology. This implies that they can be more easily observing the diagnostic criteria. Higher power obser-
produced and were probably more frequently vations served to confirm what was already visible at
discarded. the lower levels. The magnification used was, to some
Third, the relative efficiency of stone and metal tools extent, dependent on the size of the object under
seems to vary by function. For example, Steensberg s observation and the range in sample size was a func-
(1943) experiments on flint, bronze, and iron sickles tion of the cut-mark itself. The larger the cut-mark
indicate virtually no difference in efficiency between (width, not length), the lower the power that could be
sickles of bronze and flint. In contrast, Mathieu & used.
Meyer s (1997) experiments with stone, bronze, and The angle of observation was also important for the
steel axes show that bronze is as efficient as steel for accurate identification of slicing cut-marks. When
felling trees, and that both types of metal axes are more viewed from directly overhead (90 angle), cut-marks
efficient than stone axes. lose their shape and depth. In general, an angle of
75 90 was preferred because it enhanced rather than
obscured the morphological characteristics of slicing
The Experiment: Methodology cut-marks. The best perspectives were generally from
the side of the specimen where the edge of the mould
A series of experiments comparing metal and stone
was cut and the profile could be brought into view with
tool cut-marks was conducted by the author. The
the ridge behind it. This allowed the profile to be
resultant marks were examined under various levels of
accurately drawn. However, the shape of the ridge and
power using a SEM. The SEM offers high resolution
any evidence for ancillary striations were also crucial,
images, with a great depth of field and a wide range of
and the SEM often had to be moved to a different
magnifications. Most or all of the surface of the object
position for their viewing.
can be brought into focus at once with the SEM
(Olsen, 1988: 341). This contrasts with the use of
photomicrographs from an optical microscope where
Results of the Experiment
the curvature of the bone and the depth of many of the
cut-marks inhibit high quality photomicrographs. A
Steel knife-marks
variety of shapes of steel knives and chipped stone
Twelve different metal steel knives were used during
tools were chosen to try to account for the source of
the experiment (Table 1). These knives were chosen to
variability in the analysis. Each blade was drawn
reflect a variety of blade shapes, some of which were
across a soft wooden board (pine) in the same direc-
similar to metal blade shapes from prehistoric assem-
tion, and with the same angle and hand-held pressure.
blages. In general, the metal knife-marks can be
A soft wood was chosen as the medium, rather than
grouped into two categories: flat-edged and serrated-
bone, because it is softer and more likely to accurately
edged blades. Two significant differences exist between
record details of the imprint of the blade during the
the modern sample (used in this study) and prehistoric
cutting process. The problem with conducting the
assemblages (not used in this study). First, the blades
exercise on bone is that different parts of each bone
tend to be narrower in the modern assemblage.
have varying degrees of hardness and angle (Lyman,
Second, serrated-edged metal blades are absent from
1994: 238 252).
prehistoric assemblages in the central Balkans.
In order to analyse the cut-marks in a SEM, small
Serrated-blades were included in the study to deter-
moulds of the cut-marks were made.! A variety of
mine if they would have a different morphology than
magnifications were used for viewing the specimens.
smooth blades. The results from each type were quite
Whether iron sickles were more efficient than bronze or flint sickles
different and are described below.
remains to be determined from experimental studies.
! The SEM chamber accepts relatively small-sized samples (2 3 cm).
Serrated-edged blades
Small silicone rubber moulds of each of the experimental cut-marks
Knives with serrated-edged blades could be divided
were made using Dow Corning Silastic 9161 molding compound and
Cutter Perfourm Light Vinyl Polysiloxane Impression Material (type into two types: those with high and widely spaced
I, low viscosity) dental impression compounds. These are extremely
serration (such as steak and bread cutting knives) and
sensitive media for replicating microscopic morphology (Rose,
knives with a low and tightly spaced serration (which
1983). The shape of the mould is the reverse of the original
are very saw-like in function). The characteristics of
specimen it is everted rather than inverted. After curing, the mould
the high and widely spaced serrated knives (Figure
was peeled off, attached to an aluminum stub with an epoxy
adhesive, and sputter-coated with gold palladium. Gold palladium
1) include a wide and shallow cut-mark, with poor
(often mistaken as silver because of its greyish colouration) yields a
definition of the edges and bottom of the groove.
better image in the SEM because its grain size is much smaller than
The edges slope very gradually and unevenly, while the
any other metal (Sergio Mejia, University of Manitoba, Faculty of
apex seems to have a wave that weaves across the
Geology, Computer Imaging Laboratory pers. comm., November
1, 1996). surface.
Table 1. Summary of results of experimental tests of stone and metal blades on a soft wooden board
Raw Sample
material # Type of instrument Edge Angle of V Comments on knife Quality of mould Petnica Inventory #
Steel 1 Scalpel/razor for paper cutting Flat-sided Even V-shape Did not take
groove too narrow
Steel 2 Medical scalpel Flat-sided Even V-shape Not very sharp-used Did not take,
groove too narrow
Steel 3 Medical scalpel Flat-sided Even V-shape Not very sharp-used; broken tip Did not take,
groove too narrow
Steel 4 Eating (table) knife Flat-sided Uneven V-shape Good
Steel 5 Eating (table) knife Shallow, tightly Good
spaced serration
Steel 6 Serrated steak knife Deep and widely Good
spaced serration
Steel 7 Bread cutting knife Deep and widely Bread cutting side Good
spaced serration
Steel 8 Bread cutting knife Small, tightly spaced Bone cutting side Good
serration
Steel 9 Kitchen knife with wooden handle Flat-sided Uneven V-shape Good
Steel 10 Kitchen knife with plastic handle Flat-sided Uneven V-shape Good
Steel 11 Pocket (folding) knife Flat-sided Even V-shape Large Good
Steel 12 Pocket (folding) knife Flat-sided Even V-shape Small Good
Stone 1 Backed short blade Retouched on one Uneven on one side Good 6762
side and smooth on other
Stone 2 Triple backed short blade Without retouch Uneven on one side Good 6056
and smooth on other
Stone 3 Curved single backed short blade Without retouch Uneven on one side Good 5099
and smooth on other
Stone 4 Triple backed short blade Without retouch Uneven on one side Good 5613, 5013 or 58
and smooth on other
Stone 5 Scraper Without retouch Uneven on one side Good 6118
and smooth on other
Stone 6 Short blade Without retouch Uneven on one side Good 4976
and smooth on other
Stone 7 Long blade Without retouch Uneven on one side Good 8389
and smooth on other
Stone 8 Long blade Without retouch Uneven on one side Good 5635
and smooth on other
Stone 9 Curved short blade Without retouch Uneven on one side Good 5166
and smooth on other
Stone 10 Large scraper Without retouch Uneven on one side Good 80
and smooth on other
Stone 11 Small scraper Without retouch Uneven on one side Good 94
and smooth on other
Stone 12 Long blade fragment Without retouch Uneven on one side Good 5
and smooth on other
800
H. J. Greenfield
The Origins of Metallurgy 801
Figure 1. SEM photograph of the groove from modern metal knife
Figure 3. SEM photograph of the groove from modern metal knife
8, 25 magnification, 80 .
9, 200 magnification, 80 .
Flat-edged blades
This type includes modern scalpels, razors, typical
carbon steel kitchen knives, and most pocket knives.
The cutting edges are sharpened on both sides in order
to maintain their sharpness. Both sides steeply angle at
the same degree toward the cutting edge to form a
V-shape profile (Figure 3). The bottom of the cut-mark
by metal blades is often slightly flattened. Only in
razor-edged blades is the bottom of the blade a sharp
V-shape.
Stone blade-marks
Twelve different sharp-edged chipped stone tool
types were initially selected for the analysis from the
prehistoric assemblage at Petnica (Table 1; Greenfield,
1986a; Greenfield, Je~
& Starović, n.d.; Je~
, 1985;
Starović, 1993). The stone tools can be typologically
divided into three groups. These are common lithic
types found on Neolithic and post-Neolithic sites in
the central Balkans. There were six short blades
Figure 2. SEM photograph of the groove from modern metal knife
The artefacts from the Petnica assemblage were representative of
7, 206 magnification, 75 .
the prevalent chipped stone types that morphologically could have
been used for butchering activities. No alternative slicing tool types
The low and tightly spaced serrated knives (Figure 2) have
were found in the assemblage. It is unlikely that part of the
adifferent pattern. The blade is flat on one side and scalloped assemblage is not represented owing to the extensive nature of the
excavations and that the site is a sedentary settlement (Greenfield,
on the other. It makes a broad and relatively shallow
1986a ). The names of the tools are based upon the formal typology
groove, with sides that gradually slope downwards until
used by local prehistorians. The local lithic typology system is based
half the depth is reached and then slope at a steeper angle.
upon formal morphology rather than use-wear. For example, the
The slope is much more gradual on the left side of the difference between short-and long-blades is probably an artificial
difference as a result of breakage during use. The tools selected for
groove than on the right side. This pattern is found on all
this analysis appear to still be functional for butchering activities
serrated knives, but is accentuated on the tightly serrated
since there is no evidence of damage to the slicing edge and they still
knife edges. This pattern would be difficult to distinguish
possessed sharp edges. They may have been used originally for a
from that of some of the stone tool cut-marks because
variety of activities but this cannot be determined without extensive
both sides of the blade do not have the same shape. edge-wear analysis.
802 H. J. Greenfield
Figure 5. SEM photograph of the groove from Petnica stone tool 1,
Figure 4. SEM photograph of the groove from Petnica stone tool
47 magnification, 75 .
12, 139 magnification, 80 .
(lamella Serbian) (Stone 1 4, 6, & 9), three long
The cross-section of long blades (Figure 4) was steeply
blades (no~
) (Stone 7, 8, & 12), and three scrapers
sided on one side, and more gradually sloping in a
(strugac) (Stone 5, 10, & 11). The blades included single
series of parallel ridges on the other. The apex was
(Stone 1 &3) and triple backed or platformed blades
relatively narrow, but not razor sharp or flat.
(Stone 2 & 4), and curved blades (Stone 3 & 9). The
scrapers included a large (Stone 10) and a small
Short blade
example (Stone 11). One blade (Stone 1) had retouch
The pattern of the short blades (Figure 5) is similar to
on its cutting edge, and this was the side used in the
that of the long blades. No distinguishing diagnostic
experiment. All of the other stone samples lacked any
criteria could be identified that would allow them to be
obvious evidence of retouch. It was anticipated that
differentiated from long blades. The cut-mark of one of
different types of chipped stone tools would yield
the blades (Stone 2 a triple-backed blade) resembled
characteristic cut-marks.
that of a scraper at the terminating end of the cut-
Tools from Petnica were used in the study since most
mark. This illustrates the danger of relying only
of the faunal remains with cut-marks are derived from
upon different ends of the cut-marks for the analysis.
that site. Using tools from the same site as the faunal
Each identification should be based upon the
remains arguably minimizes the morphological vari-
same (initiating) end of the cut-mark to ensure
ability in cut-mark shape and some of the difficulties in
comparability.
associating cut-marks with particular types of stone
At lower magnifications (50 ), one of the short
tools. The tools were in extremely good shape, did not
blade cut-marks is similar to that made by a metal tool.
have any evidence of differential wear or patina, and
It has sharply angled sides that rise steeply from the
were still sharp. The same procedure for making cuts
base of the mould. At higher magnifications (100 and
on wood, making the mould, and observing it under an
above), it does not resemble metal knives. It has typical
SEM was carried out with the chipped stone tools.
characteristics of stone tool cut-marks. Here, the two
Each tool was hand-held and sliced across the wooden
ridges along the apex are visible and the left ridge is
board the same as for the metal tools, but on the
lower than the right. The left side descends more
opposite side of the board.!
gradually than the right side, which is steeply sloping.
Long blade
Scraper
The cut-mark of scrapers (Figure 6) resembles that of
It could not be determined whether the retouch was the result of
sharpening or caused by use.
the scallop-edged metal knives. It is very shallow, with
! This experiment is only the first step in a more extensive study. The
slowly sloping edges, and the appearance of a wave-
experiment will be replicated in the future with modern fresh stone
like pattern along one side. The other side tends to be
blades, with different types of metals, and on bone and wood. A
smoother. The bottom of the groove tends to be
preliminary comparison of the cut-marks made on wood and bone
with fresh tools indicates no major difference between them. relatively horizontal, with only a slight slope to the side
The Origins of Metallurgy 803
Figure 6. SEM photograph of the groove from Petnica stone tool
10, 50 magnification, 75 .
Figure 8. Profile of characteristic metal and stone tool cut-marks.
(a) Profile of sharp metal blades in Figure 3; (b) profile of dulled
metal blades; (c) profile of metal blades in Figures 1 & 2; (d) profile
of stone blades in Figures 4, 6, & 7; (e) profile of stone blade in
Figure 5.
former are more sharply defined, with higher sides,
Figure 7. SEM photograph of the groove from Petnica stone tool 5,
narrower cross-sections, and well-defined ancillary
60 magnification, 75 .
ridging, while the latter lack these characteristics. In
contrast, long blades were not distinguishable from
where it rapidly descends. One scraper (Figure 7)
short blades.
exhibits a very different pattern. It is also low and
broad, but rises quickly on the left side and descends
more slowly to the right, in a series of parallel ridges.
Distinguishing Stone from Metal Cut-marks
This example exhibits a pattern common to scrapers. It
can be expected that because of the variability in edge Based upon the above experiment and previous studies,
morphology of scrapers that there will be substantial it is possible to identify a readily observable set of
degree of variability in scraper cut-mark patterns. diagnostic criteria for distinguishing stone from metal
The cut-marks of the long and short blades, as a slicing cut-marks (Figure 8). This study confirmed
whole, can be distinguished from those of scrapers. The some of what has already been observed by others
804 H. J. Greenfield
(e.g., Blumenschine, Marean & Capaldo, 1996; Olsen, gical technology (Jovanović, 1980; Renfrew, 1969).
1988; Shipman, 1981; Walker & Long, 1977), but From the Balkans, this technology spread to the rest of
allowed the first comprehensive identification of stone Europe. In the central Balkans (the location of the case
and metal tool cut-mark features. study), it is frequently assumed that the transition from
Metal knife-marks are deep and steeply sided, cul- a stone- to a metal-oriented subsistence technology
minating in an apex that has a sharp point or a occurred by 3300 bc, at the advent of the Eneolithic.
horizontal platform. They will have a smooth-sided, However, this transition is not so simple. In Neolithic
and uniform or slightly off-angle V-shaped profile, (6100 3300 bc ) deposits, stone implements and
depending on the angle of the cut. The cut can be deep waste are very common, while metal objects are
and narrow or deep and wide depending upon the extremely rare and presumed to be limited to ritual or
nature of the blade. Iron and steel metal knives often social functions. During the subsequent Eneolithic
create a flat-bottomed _ -shaped profile when they (3300 2500 bc) and Bronze Ages (2500 1000 bc),
have dulled or were not sharpened properly. In con- metal objects became more common and functional,
trast, high scalloped cutting edges yield cut-marks that while stone implements became relatively scarce. The
are very uncharacteristic of metal knife-marks. They declining frequencies of stone tools during the Copper
are broad and poorly defined, and somewhat similar to and Bronze Age have been the major indicator of the
a saw (described in Olsen, 1988). These criteria can be importance of metallurgy since significant quantities of
summarized as follows: metal tools do not appear in the archaeological record
until the Late Bronze Age (1300 1000 bc).
(a) metal knives produce either a narrow V-shaped
Generally, it is assumed that there was an increase in
groove with a distinct apex at the bottom or a
the use of metal tools for slaughtering and butchering
broader _ shaped groove with a flat bottom;
of animals through time. If this hypothesis is valid,
(b) metal knives make more uniform patterns on the
there should be an increasing frequency of metal tool
bone, often removing material in the groove more
cut-marks on animal bones over time. To test this
effectively. They leave either no striations or
hypothesis, a prehistoric sample that cross-cuts the
striations of a more uniform depth and spacing
Neolithic Bronze Age divide was sought. As a result,
than when stone tools are used;
data from two sites in the central Balkans are presented
(c) in general, metal knives produce a cleaner and
here Petnica and Ljuljaci. The sequences from the
more even slicing cut (except for scalloped-edge
two sites encompass the Neolithic Bronze Age divide.
knives and saw-like blades).
The prehistoric site at Petnica is located near the
Chipped stone tools produce a shallower, less even cut,
town of Valjevo (in central Serbia, Yugoslavia), in a
and tend to exhibit considerably more variability in
valley in the Serbian foothills about 90 km SW of
shape (Walker & Long, 1977:608). The cut appears
Belgrade. The faunal assemblage was excavated by
dirty (full of debris), with the apex weaving back and
Zeljko Je~
from 1980 1986. It is a small (c. 3 ha in
{
forth. Because of the sinuosity of their cutting edges,
area) open-air site, at the base of a steep escarpment,
chipped stone tools tend to produce wide and irregular
with a view all the way down the stream valley to the
grooves (Walker & Long, 1977:608, Figure 4). These
Kolubara river. It represents the remains of a small
grooves appear as a series of ancillary parallel
agricultural village, without any evidence for special
striations, lateral to the apex of the cut, and are of
function or high status. It has a well-preserved and
uneven length and thickness. The lateral striations
continuous occupational sequence from the Middle
appear as ridging along one side of the apex of the
Neolithic (Vin%0Å„a B culture), Late Neolithic (Vin%0Å„a C D
ridge in SEM photos of moulds. The striations reflect
cultures), and Eneolithic (Baden-Kostolac culture;
the uneven (and often retouched) dorsal surface of the
3300 2500 bc), followed by a break until the Late
stone blade. The smooth side reflects the smooth
Bronze Age and Early Iron Age (Halstatt A B culture;
bulbous ventral surface of the blade. The cut-marks
1300 800 bc), with another break until the Roman
are always uneven in cross-section, with one side
period (Greenfield, 1986a; Greenfield, Je~
& Starović,
rising relatively steeply to the apex, then descending
n.d.; Starović, (1993). Unfortunately, Petnica is miss-
gradually or in a series of ancillary ridges.
ing a crucial phase of the regional culture history the
These results can be summarized as follows: metal
Early and Middle Bronze. This gap is filled by the data
tools have steep and smooth V-shaped profiles, while
from Ljuljaci.
stone tools have two distinctly different sides a
Ljuljaci (Milica Brdo) is located near the town of
smooth and a rough side. The smooth side rises steeply
Kragujevac (in central Serbia, Yugoslavia), among the
and smoothly; the rough side rises more gradually,
foothills of mount Rudnik. It lies on a small raised
with multiple striae from the various facets left over
plateau, is difficult to access, and commands a good
from production.
view of the surrounding countryside. The site has
been excavated on and off since the 1930s. The data
A Case Study: Petnica and Ljuljaci
presented here derive from 1976 1979 excavations
The Balkans of southeast Europe is one of the
All dates are based upon calibrated radiocarbon dates (Chapman,
independent centres for the development of a metallur- 1981; Ehrich & Bankoff, 1990; Garaa
anin, 1983).
The Origins of Metallurgy 805
Table 2. Summary of results of optical microscope cut-mark analysis on prehistoric faunal remains from Petnica
(1980 1986 excavations) and Ljuljaci
Stone Metal
Date
Stratum (culture) (cal.) N % N %
Middle Neolithic (Vin%0Å„a B) 4500 4200 bc 16 94·12 1 5·88
Late Neolithic (Vin%0Å„a C) 4200 3800 bc 20 90·91 2 9·09
Late Neolithic (Vin%0Å„a D) 3800 3300 bc 36 83·72 7 16·28
Eneolithic (Baden-Kostolac) 3300 2500 bc 19 86·36 3 13·64
Early-Middle Bronze Age (Vatin) 2500 1500 bc 2 15·38 11 84·62
Late Bronze-Early Iron Age (Halstatt A B) 1000 800 bc 24 58·54 17 41·46
Roman* ad 100 300 33 91·67 3 8·33
Total 150 44
* Roman pits, filled with animal bones, intrusive into Vin%0Å„a C horizon 94% Vin%0Å„a ceramics.
conducted by Dragoslav Srejović (University of Almost one-quarter of the Petnica cut-mark assem-
Belgrade) and Milenko Bogdanović (National blage was examined in the SEM (23·2%; N=45 of 194)
Museum, Kragujevac). Three phases of occupation by to check the accuracy of observations made with a
the Vatin culture were identified at the site: Ljuljaci low-power optical microscope. They were chosen to be
I Early Bronze Age; Ljuljaci II III Middle Bronze representative of each period and cut-mark type.
Age. The site was a small fortified village, which was Third, since most pieces of bone are too large to be
probably the residence of relatively high status individ- placed into and studied directly in the SEM chamber,
uals. Ljuljaci is argued to be a high status settlement small silicone rubber moulds of the cut-marks were
based on a number of anomalies when compared to made of the same material as the experimental moulds
other contemporary sites in the area e.g., the presence (above).
of metal artefacts, substantial structures, a large All of the bones in the Petnica assemblage were
quantity of fine wares, and a faunal assemblage examined for cut-marks. Over 300 temporally-
containing an unusually large number of wild animals provenienced animal bones with slicing cut-marks were
(boars) and domestic horses (Bogdanović, 1986; originally identified from the various strata. A substan-
Greenfield, 1986a, b). tial proportion of this sample, however, was not
included in the final analysis because of evidence of
erosion on the bone surface which damaged the fine
Methodology
characteristics necessary to discriminate between stone
Two methods were employed in the following analysis and metal tools. In the end, only 194 bones with
in order to determine the temporal distribution of cut-marks were used in this analysis.
stone versus metal cut-marks: (1) observation of the Far fewer (N=26) bones were identified as having
original bone cut-marks at low power with a reflecting cut-marks from Ljuljaci, but the overall sample size is
light microscope (data summarized here), and (2) ob- also much lower. Only 13, however, were well-enough
servations using silicone moulds made of some of the preserved to permit identification of the type of instru-
cut-marks, which have been examined with a SEM. ment used to make the cut-marks. Owing to the small
The procedure described below follows that sug- sample size of identifiable remains from this site, the
gested by Olsen (1988: 341). First, the bones were data from all three horizons at Ljuljaci were lumped
examined for macroscopic traces of tool cut-marks. together for the purposes of this analysis. No valid
Tooth-marks on bones (dogs, pigs, rodents, etc. temporal trends were perceptible from the data when
Greenfield, 1988; Lyman, 1994) are easily distinguish- separated by horizon.
able from cut-marks and must be removed from the
sample beforehand. Since the prehistoric sample of
Results and discussion
bones from Petnica and Ljuljaci examined in this study
had a substantial fraction of canid gnawed bones The results of the optical microscope are summarized
(Greenfield, 1986a, b), such bones were identified and in Table 2. Stone tool cut-marks appear in each of
removed from the sample prior to this study. All of the the periods. Their percentage declines over time (the
bones were initially examined for cut-marks that were unusual metal frequencies in the later phases will be
generally visible to the naked eye during the initial discussed later). Metal cut-marks have a very different
analysis of the zooarchaeological assemblage from the distribution. In general, the data demonstrate that the
site (Greenfield, 1986a, 1991). Bones with identifiable incidence of metal cutting implements is minimal prior
cut-marks were set aside for further analysis. Second, to the Bronze Age. In the Middle Neolithic levels, they
samples were selected for study through the SEM. are found in such small numbers (5·8%; N=1) that they
806 H. J. Greenfield
can probably be attributed to the occasional mis- Neolithic strata). Since most of the ceramics in the
identification owing to the use of an optical micro- Roman pits were from the Late Neolithic (90%), it is
scope. Metal tools begin to appear in some quantity not surprising that the high stone percentage of cut-
during the Late Neolithic (Vin%0Å„a D culture) at the site marks on bones in the Roman pits reflects a more
(16%). This is the period of earliest metallurgy in the Neolithic frequency pattern. In other words, these data
Balkans. Large copper veins were mined in nearby should be ignored.
eastern Serbia and metal axes and other implements In conclusion, the hypotheses that there should be
appeared in sites throughout the region (Jovanović, an increasing frequency of metal tool cut-marks on
1980). animal bones over time has not been falsified. As a
During the Eneolithic, the frequencies of metal tools result, it can be concluded that it is supported by the
remain low (13%) attesting to their continued but low data, although differential access by status is a
representation. The quality of metal tools for slicing is complicating factor.
probably minimal ultimately resulting in their low
numbers. The presence of substantial frequencies
of metal cut-marks during the Late Neolithic and
Conclusion
Eneolithic (13 16%) is quite surprising since early
copper tools would probably not have been very While most research concerned with the origins of
efficient for cutting (Greenfield, forthcoming). The metallurgy has relied upon the metal artefacts, this
cut-mark analysis indicates that early metal tools are approach is confounded by a major problem: the
being used for cutting despite their supposed in- number of early metal tools from the earliest pre-
efficiency. This could imply that copper is somehow historic periods (Neolithic, Eneolithic, and Bronze
being hardened. Even pure copper, when cold-worked, Ages) is small, and almost certainly, does not reflect the
can be hardened to the level of tin bronze before full range of metal tools then available.
cold-working (Brinnel value of 100 Shephard, 1980: The research presented here provides the means to
165). This has implications for the assumption that investigate the origins and spread of metallurgy in the
early copper tools were not utilitarian. absence of metal artefacts. This was accomplished first
The numbers of metal cut-marks dramatically through the analysis of modern experimental cut-
increases during the E-MBA at Ljuljaci. There is a marks made with metal and stone tools and second by
substantial increase in the proportion of metal cut- the comparison of the results of the cut-mark exper-
marks (84%) that coincides with the appearance iments with cut-marks on bones from the prehistoric
of high tin bronze tools (Branigan, 1974; Coles & sequence of the central Balkans. The zooarchaeological
Harding, 1979: Tylecote, 1986, 1987, 1992). This would remains with cut-marks from the prehistoric site at
indicate that bronze tools are effective for butchering Petnica and Ljuljaci (Greenfield, 1986a, b, 1991),
from early on in the Bronze Age, contrary to the belief both located in central Serbia, were presented to
that metal tools would only become effective butcher- demonstrate the utility of the method.
ing implements when high tin bronzes are developed Experimental replication of cut-marks using chipped
(e.g., Champion et al., 1984: 163). The dramatic stone tools and steel knives yielded consistent differ-
increase in metal cut-marks between the previous ences in morphology which allowed their cut-marks to
Neolithic periods and this period may be a result of the be distinguished under high magnifications. Metal
different types of sites being studies (see later). knives produced cuts with either a sharp V- or a broad
The number of cut-marks from Petnica during the _ -shaped profile, and which lacked any parallel ancil-
Late Bronze and transition to the Early Iron Age is lary striations. In contrast, stone knives produced cuts
dramatically lower than at E-MBA Ljuljaci (41%). It is with more irregularly shaped profiles, with a deep
interesting that even though high tin bronze knives are groove at the bottom of a steeply angled side, and then
typical of this period and are effective cutting tools, a gradual rising of the slope with one or more parallel
stone tools remain important at Petnica. Part of the ancillary striations.
reason that the proportion of cut-marks in the two sites When the knowledge gained from the experimental
do not follow the same temporal pattern may be their results was applied to the faunal remains of the two
relative position within the regional settlement system. central Balkans sites, little evidence for metal tool use
Ljuljaci is a regional centre, with dramatic evidence for for butchering was found during the Late Neolithic
high status residences. Petnica is a small undistin- and Eneolithic periods. Metal tool cut-marks appeared
guished farming settlement. Therefore, it is not surpris- in substantial numbers during the Bronze Age, and
ing that access to high tin bronze bronze metal cutting continued into the Early Iron Age. The presence of
implements was greater and earlier at Ljuljaci than at much higher metal cut-mark frequencies at Early
Petnica. Middle Bronze Age site of Ljuljaci, in comparison to
The proportions of cut-marks at Petnica during the the Late Bronze Age site of Petnica, was interpreted
Roman period are difficult to determine since the as evidence of differential availability of high quality
Roman deposits were pits that cut into and were mixed metal cutting implements between settlements. It was
with material from the underlying layers (i.e., Late somewhat surprising to observe the relatively high
The Origins of Metallurgy 807
frequency of metal cut-marks so early in the Bronze The method of analysis proposed here opens up new
Age at Ljuljaci. This pattern somewhat contradicts the and exciting arenas for the investigation of some of the
belief that bronze tools would not have been effective oldest and still most important questions in archaeo-
butchering tools until the end of the Bronze Age. The logical studies the introduction and spread of new
opposite seems to have been the case. Stone tools, technologies, and their effects upon the social and
however, continued in popularity for butchering economic structure of society. Until now, archaeolo-
throughout the Bronze Age, especially at low level sites gists have been limited to tracing such changes largely
in a regional settlement hierarchy (Petnica). with the evidence from non-perishable technologies.
The patterns observed for the central Balkans Now, the introduction and spread of a more perishable
parallel those documented in the Levant (Rosen, 1984: technology, metal, may also be monitored through a
504) and Britain (Olsen, 1988). Functional chipped proxy element (i.e., cut-marks on bone). This method
stone tool types gradually disappear between the end is not necessarily limited only to situations of early
of the Chalcolithic and Iron Age. The first stage in the metallurgy. It also has utility monitoring the nature
adoption of metallurgy did not involve the wholesale and extent of trade between cultures, particularly in
replacement of flint tools (as is commonly assumed). cases where metallurgy is initially absent in one culture
Rosen (1984: 504) has suggested that until a clear (such as the beginning of the fur trade or trade between
improvement in efficiency emerges, the economy would Europeans and the indigenous peoples of the New
perpetuate the use of the traditional material. Thus, World).
one would not expect the replacement of flint sickles In conclusion, by distinguishing whether cut-marks
until iron became readily available and cheap enough on animal bones are made by metal or stone tools, an
to supplant them in the Levant. Similarly, one would independent measure of the relative importance of
not expect the replacement of bronze axes with iron or the different raw materials used for cutting can be
steel axes until some factor besides relative efficiency generated, and the nature and rate of the spread of
intervened (Meyer & Mathieu, in press). metallurgy, as a result, can be monitored. This is a
The development and adoption of metallurgy by the unique perspective to bring to the study of the origins
cultures of southeast Europe had a ramifying influence and spread of metallurgy, which has been typically
upon the prehistoric cultures of the rest of Europe. limited to metallurgists or archaeologists studying
Contemporary with the adoption of metallurgy there metal artefacts or related production facilities.
appear changes in the archaeological record of south-
east Europe which may signal shifts in economic,
social, and political systems (e.g., hereditary elites
Acknowledgements
begin to dominate the landscape, controlling the
I would like to gratefully acknowledge the Petnica
production and distribution of goods). The introduc-
Science Station (Valjevo, Yugoslavia), International
tion of metal also encouraged one of the greatest
Research and Exchanges Board (Washington, D.C.),
post-Glacial ecological changes a dramatic increase
Russian/East European Institute of Indiana University
in the tempo of the cutting down of forests and
(Bloomington, IN, USA), Social Science and
spread of tilled land and pastures (Branigan, 1974:
Humanities Research Council (Ottawa, Canada), and
140; Greenfield, 1986a: chapter 1; Sherratt, 1981,
the University of Manitoba for their financial and
1983).
administrative support while I conducted this research.
By being able to map out the introduction and
I would like to acknowledge my debt to my colleague,
spread of metallurgy, it will become possible to begin
Zeljko Je~
, with whom the initial phase of this research
{
to understand the dynamic relationship between
was carried out and without whose encouragement this
metallurgy and the origins of complex societies. In the
research would never have been completed. I would
Near East, it would seem that early complex societies
also like to thank Kent Fowler, Tina Jongsma,
did not arise to control the functional metal trade.
Richard Klein, Jim Mathieu, Valerie McKinley, and
Rosen (1984, 1993) has amply demonstrated that the
the anonymous reviewers (for taking time out from
spread and acceptance of a functional metallurgy was a
their busy schedules to read and comment on the
long-term process, more or less completed in the Near
manuscript and whose comments served to improve
East only by the end of the Bronze Age. The same can
the quality of this paper), and to Steve Rosen (for his
be said to be true for the Balkans (above) and for
continued encouragement throughout the research).
England (Olsen, 1988). Early complex societies arose in
Any errors in this analysis are, however, my fault.
these areas in the absence of widespread use of metal
tools in daily life. They were limited to a few social and
economic spheres of life, often far removed from the
mundane tasks of daily life (e.g., butchering). As this
References
study suggests metal tools were differentially available
Blumenschine, R., Marean, C. W. & Capaldo, S. D. (1996). Blind
within regional societies and were probably valuable in
tests of inter-analyst correspondence and accuracy in the identifi-
demonstrating social and economic differences within a
cation of cut-marks, percussion marks, and carnivore tooth marks
society. on bone surfaces. Journal of Archaeological Science 23, 493 507.
808 H. J. Greenfield
Bogdanović, M. (1986). Ljuljaci: Naselje Protovatincke i Vatincke the 27th Annual Chacmool Conference. Calgary: The Archaeologi-
Kulture. Kragujevac, Yugoslavia: Narodni Muzej. cal Association of the University of Calgary.
Branigan, K. (1974). Aegean metalwork of the Early and Middle Muhly, J. (1985). Sources of tin and the beginnings of Bronze Age
Bronze Age. Oxford: Clarendon Press. metallurgy. American Journal of Archaeology 89(2), 275 291.
Brose, D. S. (1975). Functional analysis of stone tools: a cautionary Olsen, S. L. (1988). The identification of stone and metal tool marks
note on the role of animal fats. American Antiquity 48, 86 103. on bone artifacts. In (S. L. Olsen, Ed.) Scanning Electron Mi-
Champion, T., Gamble, C., Shennan, S. & Whittle, A. (1984). croscopy in Archaeology. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports,
Prehistoric Europe. Orlando, FL: Academic Press. I.S.S. 452, pp. 337 360.
Chapman, J. C. (1981). The Vin%0Å„a Culture of South-East Europe: Olsen, S. L. & Shipman, P. (1988). Surface modification on bone:
Studies in Chronology, Economy and Society. Oxford: British trampling versus butchery. Journal of Archaeological Science 15,
Archaeological Reports, I.S.S. 117. 535 553.
Chernykh, E. N. (1992). Ancient Metallurgy in the USSR: The Early Potts, R. & Shipman, P. (1981). Cutmarks made by stone tools on
Metal Age Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. bones from Olduvai Gorge, Tanzania. Science 291, 577 580.
Coles, J. M. & Harding, A. F. H. (1979). The Bronze Age in Europe. Renfrew, C. (1969). The autonomy of the southeast European
New York: St. Martins Press. Copper Age. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 35, 12 47.
Ehrich, R. W. & Bankoff, A. H. (1990). Absolute chronology of Rose, J. J. (1983). A replication technique for Scanning
the Neolithic in southeastern Europe. In (R. Ehrich, Ed.) Chron- Electron Microscopy: applications for Anthropologists. American
ologies in Old World Archaeology. 3rd Edn. Chicago: University of Journal of Physical Anthropology 62, 255 261.
Chicago Press, pp. 375 394. Rosen, S. A. (1984). The adoption of metallurgy in the Levant: a
Garaa
anin, M. (1983). The Stone Age in the central Balkans; The lithic perspective. Current Anthropology 25, 504 505.
Bronze Age in the central Balkans. In Cambridge Ancient History. Rosen, S. A. (1993). Metals, rocks, specialization, and the beginning
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Vol. 3, Part 1, pp. of urbanism in the northern Negev. In (A. Biran & J. Aviram, Eds)
75 135, 163 186. Biblical Archaeology Today 1990: Pre-Congress Symposium
Greenfield, H. J. (1986a). The Paleoeconomy of the Central Balkans Supplement Population, Production, and Power. Jerusalem: Israel
(Serbia): A Zooarchaeological Perspective on the Late Neolithic Exploration Society, pp. 41 56.
and Bronze Age (c. 4500 1000 bc). Oxford: British Archaeological Rosen, S. A. (1997). Lithics after the Stone Age: A Handbook of
Reports, International Series 304 Vol. 1 &2. Stone Tools from the Levant. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press.
Greenfield, H. J. (1986b). Fauna: Ki%0ńmenjaci. In (M. Boganović, Rosen, S. A. (in press). The decline and fall of flint. In (G. Odell, Ed.)
Ed.) Ljuljaci: Naselje Protovatincke i Vatincke Kulture, Kraguje- Theory and Practice in Lithic Analysis. New York: Plenum Press.
vac, Yugoslavia: Narodni Muzej, pp. 75 78. Shephard, R. (1980). Prehistoric Mining and Allied Industries.
Greenfield, H. J. (1988). Bone consumption by pigs in a contem- London: Academic Press.
porary Serbian village: implications for the interpretation of Sherratt, A. G. (1981). Plough and pastoralism: aspects of the
prehistoric faunal assemblages. Journal of Field Archaeology 15,(3) secondary products revolution. In (I. Hodder, G. Isaac & N.
473 479. Hammond, Eds) Pattern of the Past. Cambridge: Cambridge
Greenfield, H. J. (1991). Fauna from the Late Neolithic of the University Press, pp. 261 306.
Central Balkans: issues in subsistence and land use. Journal of Sherratt, A. G. (1983). The Secondary Products Revolution of
Field Archaeology 18, 161 186. animals in the Old World. World Archaeology 15(1), 90 104.
Greenfield, H. J. (1993). Zooarchaeology, taphonomy, and the Shipman, P. (1981). Applications of Scanning Electron Microscopy
origins of food production in the Central Balkans. In (R. W. to taphonomic problems. Annals of the New York Academy of
Jamieson, S. Abonyi & N. A. Alberta: Mirau, Eds) Culture and Sciences 376, 357 386.
Environment: A Fragile Co-Existence. Proceedings of the 24th Shipman, P. & Rose, J. (1983). Early hominid hunting,
Chacmool Conference. Alberta: The Archaeological Association of butchering and carcass-processing behaviors: approaches to the
the University of Calgary, pp. 111 117. fossil record. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 2, 57 98.
Greenfield, H. (forthcoming). Experimental cut-marks made with Starović, A. (1993). Petnica. Diplomski Rad, University of Belgrade.
stone, copper, and bronze tools. Manuscript in preparation. Steensburg, A. (1943). Ancient Harvesting Implements. Copenhagen.
Greenfield, H. J., Je~
, Z. & Starović, A. (n.d.). Preliminary report on Tripathi, D. N. (1988). Bronze Work of Mainland Greece from circa
{
the 1980 1986 excavations at Petnica. Unpublished manuscript. 2600 1400 bc. Studies in Mediterranean Archaeology, pocket
Je~
, Z. (1985). Pregled neolitskih i eneolitskih kultura Gornje book series 69, Gotteburg.
{
Kolubare. Istra~
ivanja (Saopa
tenja ca 6. Skupa Areheologa Srbije, Tylecote, R. F. (1986). The Prehistory of Metallurgy in the British
Valjevo, 6 8 Maj 1984) 2, 43 57. Valjevo, Yugoslavia: Narodni Isles. London: The Institute of Metals.
Muzej Valjevo. Tylecote, R. F. (1986). The Early History of the Metallurgy in
Jovanović, B. (1980). The origins of copper mining in Europe. Europe. London: Longman.
Scientific American 242(5), 152 167. Tylecote, R. F. (1992). A History of Metallurgy. 2nd Edn. London:
Levy, T. E. & Shaley, S. (1989). Prehistoric metalworking in the The Institute of Metals.
southern Levant: archaeometallurgical and social perspectives. Walker, P. L. (1978). Butchering and stone tool function. American
World Archaeology 20(3), 353 372. Antiquity 43(4), 710 715.
Lyman, R. L. (1994). Vertebrate Taphonomy. Cambridge: Walker, P. L. & Long, J. C. (1977). An experimental study of the
Cambridge University Press. morphological characteristics of tool marks. American Antiquity
Mathieu, J. R. & Meyer, D. A. (1997). Comparing axe heads of 42, 605 616.
stone, bronze, and steel: studies in experimental archaeology. Wertheim, T. A. & Muhly, J. D. (Eds) (1980). The coming of the Age
Journal of Field Archaeology 24, 333 351. of Iron. New Haven: Yale University Press,
Meyer, D. A. & Mathieu, J. R. (in press). Situating innovation: White, T. D. & Toth, N. (1989). Engis: preparation damage, not
experiments with stone, bronze and steel axes. In (R. Harrison & ancient cut-marks. American Journal of Physical Anthropology
M. Gillespie, Eds) The Archaeology of Innovation. Proceedings of 78(3), 361 369.