[Bonetools] Drilled red deer antlers

[Noelle Provenzano]

Dear Alice,

These objects come all from habitat context : two were found in the same
house-yard (court ?) (but not together) and the others inside various
houses. But the excavations are not very extended at the moment.

Except usual taphonomics actions, surfaces suggest that they were buried
rather quickly.

I also think that they were common objects very adapted to their function
because during two centuries (IV and Ve) they have exactly the same
anatomical origin, the same manufacturing methods and the same traces of
use. All that in context where antlers are very very little exploited. So,
that shows us a true choice.

According to what I know, one doesn’t know any other specimen outside from
this site or this period
.


.. Until now  !

 

 

_______________________________________________________
Noëlle Provenzano
CNRS - Université de Montpellier III
UMR 5140 - Archéologie des Sociétés Méditerranéennes
390 avenue de Pérols
34970 - Lattes
France

Tél. 33 (0) 467 156 139
Fax 33 (0) 467 225 515
 <mailto:noprovenzano at interfree.it> noprovenzano at interfree.it

  _____  

De : bonetools-bounces at listserv.niif.hu
[mailto:bonetools-bounces at listserv.niif.hu] De la part de Alice Choyke
Envoyé : jeudi 13 mai 2010 09:15
À : Mailing list for archaeologists of the research group for the study
ofobject and waste of bone,antler. ivory and horn.
Objet : Re: [Bonetools] Drilled red deer antlers

 

Dear Noelle,
   what kind of contexts were these objects found in: in houses,
outbuildings pits etc. Does their surface suggest they fell off something
after site abandonment or were they buried quickly. That might give a hint
about how they were used. They must be very frustating objects to study
because they look like they were very useful, common and obvious things.Any
people out there with Celtic or early medieval analogies out there?

Alice

On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 8:24 AM, Noelle Provenzano
<noprovenzano at interfree.it> wrote:

Hi everyone,

 

I would really appreciate if anyone could point me to some analogies about
these objects :

 

They are made with a central beam longitudinally bipartited (splited) and
come from Second Iron Age of South of France. 

The lower side is just regularized and doesn’t show any other usewear
traces. The superior side is natural. The two laterals holes present strong
deformations (but irregularly distributed and directed) due to the cross of
a flexible bond, the central perforation doesn’t show always so many usewear
traces.

If someone has an idea
. Thanks a lot !

 

Noelle

 

 

_______________________________________________________
Noëlle Provenzano
CNRS - Université de Montpellier III
UMR 5140 - Archéologie des Sociétés Méditerranéennes
390 avenue de Pérols
34970 - Lattes
France

Tél. 33 (0) 467 156 139
Fax 33 (0) 467 225 515
 <mailto:noprovenzano at interfree.it> noprovenzano at interfree.it

 


_______________________________________________
Bonetools mailing list
Bonetools at listserv.niif.hu
https://listserv.niif.hu/mailman/listinfo/bonetools

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://listserv.niif.hu/pipermail/bonetools/attachments/20100513/dc43215d/attachment.htm>