Filling the gap: A microscopic zooarchaeological approach to changes in butchering technology during the Early and Middle Bronze periods at Tall Zirā´a, Jordan
“…The present study adds to the work performed by other authors on the evaluation of the origins of metallurgy through the analysis of bone surface modifications, particularly of slice (Greenfield, 1999, 2000, 2006, 2013, 2021; Greenfield & Brown, 2016; Greenfield et al, 2018, 2021) and chop marks (Okaluk & Greenfield, 2022). The use of metal tools in domestic contexts in the initial periods of the Chalcolithic is not very well known yet.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 52%
“…Only some evidence suggests the incorporation of metal tools in domestic areas in more recent periods, for example, the Bell‐Beaker culture (Nuñez Moro et al, 2019). To date, no slicing marks have been observed in pre‐Bronze Age contexts (Greenfield, 1999, 2000, 2006, 2013, 2021; Greenfield & Brown, 2016; Greenfield et al, 2018, 2021); however, this does not exclude the possibility of finding metal‐inflicted butchering marks in the Chalcolithic–Iron Age record. Therefore, we believe that it is convenient to carry out analyses such as the one presented here in order to determine the raw material used to generate the slice marks observed in pre‐Bronze sites.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this line of work, some authors have managed to identify the use of metal tools through the analysis of slice marks from different sites ranging from the Bronze to the Iron Age (Greenfield, 1999, 2000, 2006; Greenfield & Brown, 2016; Greenfield et al, 2018, 2021; Liesau, 1998, 2002; Okaluk & Greenfield, 2022; Yravedra et al, 2009). Moreover, Greenfield (1999, 2000, 2013) was able to verify through microscopic butchering mark analysis the progressive incorporation of metal slicing tools into domestic activity areas (e.g., animal carcass exploitation) over time.…”
Although the discovery of metal objects is not common in Chalcolithic or Bronze Age sites, the study of bone surface microscopic grooves from animal butchering can yield evidence of the use of metal artefacts in these contexts. Additionally, the presence of slice marks made with metal objects in Chalcolithic and Bronze Age sites has highlighted the use of metal in common practices beyond their ornamental application, as usually expected at the early stages of metallurgy. Here, we present the study of the slice marks found at the Chalcolithic site of Zanjillas, using geometric morphometrics and machine learning algorithms, with the aim of identifying the nature of the tools used for carcass processing at the site. For this purpose, we replicate previous analyses considering slice marks produced with lint flakes and metal tools to generate a referential framework that serves as comparative to the Zanjillas sample. Our results suggest that most of the domestic activities related to carcass skinning, defleshing, or evisceration in Zanjillas were still performed with flint artefacts.
“…The present study adds to the work performed by other authors on the evaluation of the origins of metallurgy through the analysis of bone surface modifications, particularly of slice (Greenfield, 1999, 2000, 2006, 2013, 2021; Greenfield & Brown, 2016; Greenfield et al, 2018, 2021) and chop marks (Okaluk & Greenfield, 2022). The use of metal tools in domestic contexts in the initial periods of the Chalcolithic is not very well known yet.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 52%
“…Only some evidence suggests the incorporation of metal tools in domestic areas in more recent periods, for example, the Bell‐Beaker culture (Nuñez Moro et al, 2019). To date, no slicing marks have been observed in pre‐Bronze Age contexts (Greenfield, 1999, 2000, 2006, 2013, 2021; Greenfield & Brown, 2016; Greenfield et al, 2018, 2021); however, this does not exclude the possibility of finding metal‐inflicted butchering marks in the Chalcolithic–Iron Age record. Therefore, we believe that it is convenient to carry out analyses such as the one presented here in order to determine the raw material used to generate the slice marks observed in pre‐Bronze sites.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this line of work, some authors have managed to identify the use of metal tools through the analysis of slice marks from different sites ranging from the Bronze to the Iron Age (Greenfield, 1999, 2000, 2006; Greenfield & Brown, 2016; Greenfield et al, 2018, 2021; Liesau, 1998, 2002; Okaluk & Greenfield, 2022; Yravedra et al, 2009). Moreover, Greenfield (1999, 2000, 2013) was able to verify through microscopic butchering mark analysis the progressive incorporation of metal slicing tools into domestic activity areas (e.g., animal carcass exploitation) over time.…”
Although the discovery of metal objects is not common in Chalcolithic or Bronze Age sites, the study of bone surface microscopic grooves from animal butchering can yield evidence of the use of metal artefacts in these contexts. Additionally, the presence of slice marks made with metal objects in Chalcolithic and Bronze Age sites has highlighted the use of metal in common practices beyond their ornamental application, as usually expected at the early stages of metallurgy. Here, we present the study of the slice marks found at the Chalcolithic site of Zanjillas, using geometric morphometrics and machine learning algorithms, with the aim of identifying the nature of the tools used for carcass processing at the site. For this purpose, we replicate previous analyses considering slice marks produced with lint flakes and metal tools to generate a referential framework that serves as comparative to the Zanjillas sample. Our results suggest that most of the domestic activities related to carcass skinning, defleshing, or evisceration in Zanjillas were still performed with flint artefacts.
“…The present study adds to the works previously performed by other authors on the origins of metallurgy through the study of bone surface modifications with lithic or metal industry [38,39,[77][78][79][80][81][82], though, in this case, we analyse a site from the Iron Age instead of from the Bronze Age or the Chalcolithic period.…”
Recently the incorporation of artificial intelligence has allowed the development of valuable methodological advances in taphonomy. Some studies have achieved great precision in identifying the carnivore that produced tooth marks. Additionally, other works focused on human activity have managed to specify what type of tool or raw material was used in the filleting processes identified at the sites. Through the use of geometric morphometrics and machine learning techniques, the present study intends to analyze the cut marks of the Ulaca oppidum (Solosancho, Ávila, Spain) in order to identify the type of tools used during carcass modification. Although the Ulaca oppidum is an Iron Age site, the results suggest that most of the cut marks were produced with flint tools.
It has been argued that the increase in the consumption of dogs in the southern Levant during the Iron Age was due to the advent of the Philistines/“Sea Peoples” into the region. In this study, we test this proposal through the presentation of new information on dog consumption and its depositional context in Bronze and Iron Age strata from the archaeological site of Tell Zirāʿa (Jordan), and we compare the results to other sites in the region. Our study does not support that such behaviour is a signal of ethnic identity.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.