[Bonetools] RE : Fwd: Re: Mammoth tusk as raw material in Roman times?

Mon Apr 22 12:41:28 CEST 2013

Dear colleagues, last year, on the advice of F. Poplin, a very similar problem (merovingian ivory, see attachments) has been simply resolved by a 14C dating.
The questions were 1°) first mineral (ie. jurassic sea fossil (rudists) versus ivory, and then 2°) elephant versus mammoth.

And the winner is… elephant (see calibration in attachment, thanks to Sarl Antea Archéologie).

Best regards, Olivier.

Olivier PUTELAT
POLE D'ARCHEOLOGIE INTERDEPARTEMENTAL RHENAN (PAIR)
Service d'Archéologie et Recherches Scientifiques - Laboratoire mixte d'ostéo-archéologie - Archéozoologue

Tél 07 60 20 24 02

2, allée Thomas Edison

ZA Sud - CIRSUD

F-67600 SELESTAT

FRANCE

________________________________
De : bonetools-bounces at listserv.niif.hu [bonetools-bounces at listserv.niif.hu] de la part de François Poplin [poplin at mnhn.fr]
Date d'envoi : lundi 22 avril 2013 11:53
À : Mailing list for archaeologists of the research group for the study of object and waste of bone, antler. ivory and horn.
Objet : [Bonetools] Fwd: Re: Mammoth tusk as raw material in Roman times?

Bonjour,
je viens donc donner la solution à la question précise : comment distinguer, dans un matériel d'époque antique/romaine d'Europe moyenne (entre Ouest et Est), plutôt méditerranéen en latitude, s'agissant de la Serbie, l'éléphant et le mammouth sur une portion de défense (dont la forme n'est pas divulguée)  ?

La réponse est : par le C14, qui donnera 2 000 ans ou moins - ou bien 10 000 ans ou plus.

Distinction nette, tranchée ("clear-cut"), beaucoup plus que d'autres. C'est un critère hiérarchiquement supérieur. Il est impérial.
En bonne méthode expérimentale, c'est un moyen de contrôle indispensable, ayant pour bon effet aussi bien d'asseoir éventuellement le mammouth que de le rejeter.

En élargissant la question aux proboscidiens plus en général, dans l'Ancien Monde, on obtient aussi l'indication des vieux éléphants, comme meridionalis, et des mastodontes (fournisseurs, dans le Sud-Ouest de la France, de matière pour les turquoises osseuses) : ils sont tous "hors d'âge C14".

Il est fait recours en cela à la Biochronologie : la loi paléontologique que l'espèce fossile donne l'âge implique la réciproque que l'âge indique le taxon.

Je suis informé du cas de Francfort. C'est à son propos que j'ai demandé à Olivier Putelat de faire dater des objets qu'il a trouvés en fouille dans des sépulture mérovingiennes de la vallée du Rhin. Je le laisse maintenant dire la suite.

Je voudrais profiter de cette occasion pour indiquer que je ne peux pas divulguer tout ce que je sais des ivoires, pour ne pas donner des armes aux faussaires. J'indiquerai simplement que ce savoir couvre aussi bien la gravure de mammouth sur éclat de défense de mammouth de la Madeleine que le matériel osseux de Glozel, que j'ai eu la chance de pouvoir examiner, que la Vierge à l'Enfant gothique de la Sainte Chapelle à Paris et qu'une mâchoire d'éléphant actuel trouvée en Nouvelle-Calédonie.
PS : excusez-moi de m'exprimer dans ma langue maternelle, c'est celle où je puis être le plus précis.

Avec mes meilleures, pensées.

-------- Message original --------
Sujet:  Re: [Bonetools] Mammoth tusk as raw material in Roman times?
Date :  Thu, 18 Apr 2013 09:44:42 +0200
De :    François Poplin <poplin at mnhn.fr><mailto:poplin at mnhn.fr>
Pour :  Mailing list for archaeologists of the research group for the study of object and waste of bone, antler. ivory and horn. <bonetools at listserv.niif.hu><mailto:bonetools at listserv.niif.hu>

Le 18/04/2013 00:35, Sonja Vukovic a écrit :
Dear all,

thank you for the responses.. As Selena told you, it was found within the secure context and there is no doubt in it. As for the identification, I am not versed in it, but I am sure that it was identified professionaly. I will ask Sofija about the photos, but as it will be published soon, we can forward you the paper..

But no one answered our original question: Has anyone ever identified a mammoth tusk as raw material in Roman period?
I shall come back to this matter in a couple of days. And I observe too that nobody answered my remark/question : there is a mighty, excellent way to know. Who can tell?

Sincerely.

Thank you,
greetings from Belgrade,

Sonja

On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 7:36 PM, S O'Connor <S.Oconnor at bradford.ac.uk<mailto:S.Oconnor at bradford.ac.uk>> wrote:
That is the other Banerjee paper I was asking about.  If anyone has got them I would be really grateful for a copy............

Sonia

Dr Sonia O'Connor PhD FSA FIIC ACR Honorary Visiting Fellow, University of York
Post-doctoral Research Fellow
Archaeological Sciences
Division of AGES,
University of Bradford
Bradford, West Yorkshire, BD7 1DP, UK

tel 01274 23 6498<tel:01274%2023%206498> (office) 5210 (lab)
fax 01274 23 5210<tel:01274%2023%205210>

-----Original Message-----
From: bonetools-bounces at listserv.niif.hu<mailto:bonetools-bounces at listserv.niif.hu> [mailto:bonetools-bounces at listserv.niif.hu<mailto:bonetools-bounces at listserv.niif.hu>] On Behalf Of trzaska at lineone.net<mailto:trzaska at lineone.net>
Sent: 17 April 2013 13:15
To: bonetools at listserv.niif.hu<mailto:bonetools at listserv.niif.hu>
Subject: Re: [Bonetools] Mammoth tusk as raw material in Roman times?

This would need to be checked but I think I am right in believing that a merovingian object from Frankfurt Dom was also thought to be mammoth ivory:

Hampel, A. and Bannerjee, A., 1995
Identifizierung und Differenzierung von Elfenbein am Bespiel des merowingerzeitlichen Grabfundes aus dem Frankfurter Dom, Archäologisches Korrespondenzblatt 25, 143-7

>From a secure context as well I think, but is it mammoth ?

Ian Riddler

>----Original Message----

>From: selenavitezovic at gmail.com<mailto:selenavitezovic at gmail.com>

>Date: 17/04/2013 12:42

>To: "Mailing list for archaeologists of the research group for the study of

>       object and waste of bone,

>       antler. ivory and horn."<bonetools at listserv.niif.hu<mailto:bonetools at listserv.niif.hu>>

>Subj: Re: [Bonetools] Mammoth tusk as raw material in Roman times?

>

>Hello, everyone,

>

>The item is from the secured context, it was discovered during the

>excavations conducted by Sofija Petković herself.

>As to the photos, it must be checked with Sofija first.

>L'objet était trouvé pendant les fouilles qui était menée par Sofija

>Petković. Il faut verifié avec Sofija pour les photos.

>

>best regards, Selena

>

>

>On 17 April 2013 12:31, S O'Connor <S.Oconnor at bradford.ac.uk<mailto:S.Oconnor at bradford.ac.uk>> wrote:

>

>> Dear Sonja,

>>

>> As François says, it would be useful to know the context for the object. Is

>> it possible for us to see some photographs of the fragment?

>>

>> Thanks,

>>

>> Sonia

>>

>> Dr Sonia O'Connor PhD FSA FIIC ACR Honorary Visiting Fellow, University of

>> York

>> Post-doctoral Research Fellow

>> Archaeological Sciences

>> Division of AGES,

>> University of Bradford

>> Bradford, West Yorkshire, BD7 1DP, UK

>>

>> tel 01274 23 6498<tel:01274%2023%206498> (office) 5210 (lab)

>> fax 01274 23 5210<tel:01274%2023%205210>

>>

>>

>> -----Original Message-----

>> From: bonetools-bounces at listserv.niif.hu<mailto:bonetools-bounces at listserv.niif.hu>

>> [mailto:bonetools-bounces at listserv.niif.hu<mailto:bonetools-bounces at listserv.niif.hu>] On Behalf Of François Poplin

>> Sent: 17 April 2013 09:11

>> To: bonetools at listserv.niif.hu<mailto:bonetools at listserv.niif.hu>

>> Subject: Re: [Bonetools] Mammoth tusk as raw material in Roman times?

>>

>> Dear SA O'Connor

>>

>> 1°) I am affraid, but the fact that has not been answered my question "Has

>> it been found in a genuine and secure archaelogical excavation ?"

>> sounds bad,

>>

>> 2°) in that very case, there is a mighty, excellent way to know. Who can

>> tell ? (Olivier please, keep quite for some days).

>>

>> Your's.

>>

>> Le 16/04/2013 14:32, SA O'Connor a écrit :

>> > Dear Sonja,

>> >

>> > I would be really interested in knowing the basis of this

>> > identification. If this is based on Schreger angle measurements, it

>> > may not be possible to differentiate mammoth from extant elephant with

>> > any confidence from a fragment.

>> >

>> > Only the outer Schreger angles are diagnostic, i.e. those in the

>> > outermost layers of the dentine, close to the cementum covering of the

>> > tusk. Towards the centre of a tusk the angles become progressively

>> > smaller and similar in character whether the tusk is from an extant

>> > and extinct proboscidean species. So, even if the Schreger angles

>> > average less than 100 or even 90 degrees, unless traces of the

>> > cementum are visible the fragment might come from any position in the

>> > tusk and could be elephant or mammoth.

>> >

>> > All the best,

>> >

>> > Sonia

>> >

>> >

>> > kQuoting Sonja Vukovic <sonja.vukovic at gmail.com<mailto:sonja.vukovic at gmail.com>>:

>> >

>> >> Dear colleagues,

>> >>

>> >> I am forwarding you a query from our colleague, Dr Sofija Petkovic

>> >> from the Institute of Archaeology in Belgrade. She is analysing an

>> >> object made of the mammoth tusk, found in Romuliana (Serbia), that

>> >> dates back to the Roman period. The object is fragmented and it

>> >> represents an elephant's head done in a relief. The function of this

>> >> item is unclear, but it was probably an application for some kind of

>> >> furniture or sarcophagi, etc..

>> >>

>> >> She is wondering weather anyone has ever identified a mammoth tusk as

>> >> raw material in Roman period?!

>> >>

>> >> Anyway, she is going to publish this object soon!

>> >>

>> >> Thank you very much,

>> >> best wishes,

>> >>

>> >> Sonja

>> >>

>> >> --

>> >> Sonja Vukovic

>> >> Laboratory for bioarchaeology

>> >> Faculty of Philosophy

>> >> University of Belgrade

>> >> Serbia

>> >>

>> >

>> >

>> > ----------------------------------------------------------------

>> > This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

>> >

>> >

>> >

>> > _______________________________________________

>> > Bonetools mailing list

>> > Bonetools at listserv.niif.hu<mailto:Bonetools at listserv.niif.hu>

>> > https://listserv.niif.hu/mailman/listinfo/bonetools
>> >

>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> François POPLIN
>>
>> Directeur honoraire de l’UMR 7209 Archéozoologie, Archébotanique :
>> sociétés,
>> pratiques et environnements
>>
>> Responsable du Séminaire d'Anthropozoologie
>>
>> Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle
>> CP 56
>> Ancien Laboratoire d’Anatomie comparée
>> 55, rue de Buffon
>> 75005 Paris
>> 01 40 79 33 11
>> fax ------ 33 14
>>
>> francoispoplin.blogspot.com<http://francoispoplin.blogspot.com>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bonetools mailing list
>> Bonetools at listserv.niif.hu<mailto:Bonetools at listserv.niif.hu>
>> https://listserv.niif.hu/mailman/listinfo/bonetools
>>

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

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

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

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

--
Sonja Vukovic
Laboratory for bioarchaeology
Faculty of Philosophy
University of Belgrade
Serbia

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

--
François POPLIN

Directeur honoraire de l’UMR 7209 Archéozoologie, Archébotanique : sociétés, pratiques et environnements

Responsable du Séminaire d'Anthropozoologie

Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle
CP 56
Ancien Laboratoire d’Anatomie comparée
55, rue de Buffon
75005 Paris
01 40 79 33 11
fax ------ 33 14

francoispoplin.blogspot.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://listserv.niif.hu/pipermail/bonetools/attachments/20130422/536ce8ef/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Objets.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 4333057 bytes
Desc: Objets.jpg
URL: <https://listserv.niif.hu/pipermail/bonetools/attachments/20130422/536ce8ef/attachment-0001.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: cal_6505_12.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 394999 bytes
Desc: cal_6505_12.pdf
URL: <https://listserv.niif.hu/pipermail/bonetools/attachments/20130422/536ce8ef/attachment-0001.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Re   Bonetools  ivory  .msg
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 47616 bytes
Desc: Re   Bonetools  ivory  .msg
URL: <https://listserv.niif.hu/pipermail/bonetools/attachments/20130422/536ce8ef/attachment-0001.obj>