Stone Tool Use at Cerros: The Ethnoarchaeological and Use-Wear Evidence 9780292749764

Citation preview

STONE TOOL USE AT CERROS

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

STONE TOOL USE AT CERROS The Ethnoarchaeological and Use-Wear Evidence

by Suzanne M. Lewenstein

University of Texas Press, Austin

Copyright © 1987 by the University of Texas Press All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America First edition, 1987 Requests for permission to reproduce material from this work should be sent to: Permissions University of Texas Press Box 7819 Austin, Texas 78713-7819 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Lewenstein, Suzanne M., 1942Stone tool use at Cerros. Bibliography: p. Includes index. 1. Cerros Site (Belize). 2. Mayas—Implements. 3. Mayas— Industries. 4. Ethnoarchaeology. 5. Indians of Central America— Belize—Implements. 6. Indians of Central America—Belize— Industries. I. Title. F1435.1.C43149 1987 ISBN 0-292-77590-3

972.82'01

86-24910

CONTENTS

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Preface Introduction Stone Tool Variability and the Reconstruction of Prehistoric Activities Experimental Use of Stone Tools The Experimental Use Wear Stone Tool Use at Cerros Concluding Remarks References Author Index Subject Index

vii 1 17 32 76 137 196 205 221 225

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

PREFACE

My interest in determining the Precolumbian functions of stone tools began during a graduate course in lithic technology at Arizona State University. Later, the idea for this study took form while I was excavating in Belize as a member of the Cerros Project staff from 1977 through 1981. The large chipped stone collections recovered at this site stimulated my curiosity, and the isolation of the Cerros field camp provided an ideal natural laboratory for ethnoarchaeological research and experimentation with stone implements. My purpose always has been to use the lithic data to address some broader issues, in this case the economic makeup and development of Mayan society at Cerros. A number of people were particularly helpful to me in this endeavor. I benefitted from the friendship and support of colleagues at Arizona State University: in particular, Barbara Stark, Sylvia Gaines, A. E. Dittert, and Geoffrey Clark. Fieldwork in Belize took place under the direction of David Freidel, principal investigator of the Cerros Project. At Cerros Vernon Scarborough, Robin Robertson, Maynard Cliff, Jim Garber, Beverly Mitchum, Sorayya Carr, and Cathy Crane were enthusiastic and dedicated colleagues whose camaraderie made enjoyable our long field seasons in the bush. Sorayya's zooarchaeological knowledge and cooperation in the butchering and hide-working experiments were indispensable. Over the years many Mayans from Chunox village worked with us at Cerros. They proved to be excellent archaeologists, as well as invaluable informants regarding the local environment and its exploitation by the indigenous population. Dalia Rangel, Eduardo Montalva, and Romeo Pat were especially helpful with my in-the-field experiments. I am very grateful for the wealth of experience they so generously shared. Thanks are also due master flintknapper Jeff Flenniken, director of the Lithics Laboratory at Washington State University, who manu-

viii

Preface

factured my sample of chert formal tool replicas and obsidian blades, and to Fred Nelson of Brigham Young University for analyzing a sample of obsidian from Cerros and providing sourcing data. Funding for my research was provided through fellowships from the Social Science Research Council and the ARCS Foundation of Arizona. Additional aid came from research incentive awards from the Department of Anthropology at ASU. In sum, I was fortunate to receive financial backing from many sources; I thank them all for their support.

STONE TOOL USE AT CERROS

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

This study evolved out of a growing curiosity concerning the functions of chipped stone tools and the clues they might provide for the reconstruction of past societies. Ideally, knowledge of the significance of these commonplace and nonperishable artifacts should provide insights into past economic systems, as well as information on exchange and on social and political realities in the study area, which in this case is the Mayan site of Cerros, situated on the coast of northern Belize (Figure 1). Settled village life began in this part of the world around 2500 B.C. The earliest known Mesoamerican ceramics date from this period, which marks the beginning of the Early Preclassic. Pottery occurs first at the site of Cuello, in northern Belize (Hammond 1982: 115-116). Evidence of maize and manioc cultivation, as well as hunting, are present at Cuello, located approximately 25 kilometers south of Cerros. Imported goods such as sandstone metates and jade beads also were recovered from Early Preclassic deposits at Cuello. By the Middle Preclassic period (1200-500 B.C.) there were farming settlements throughout the lowland Maya area, from northern Yucatán to the western lowlands of Chiapas, south to El Salvador (Hammond 1982:117). Eventual population growth and increasingly larger spheres of interaction culminated in the rise of local aristocracies and settlement hierarchies during Late Preclassic times (500 B.c.-A.D. 250; Henderson 1981:119). There was widespread ceramic standardization, which Norman Hammond (1982:123) attributes to increased interaction between larger and more closely spaced settlements. Mayan society became more differentiated and complex during this period, as evidenced by the construction of public architecture, differential treatment of the dead according to social status, community planning, and at least some degree of occupational specialization. In sum, by the end of the Late Preclassic period the lowland Maya had attained most of the elements of the "civilized"

2

Introduction

Figure 1. Distribution of Late Preclassic communities in southern Mesoamerica: 1, Cerros; 2, Tikal; 3, Kaminaljuyú; 4, Chiapa de Corzo; 5, Izapa; 6, Komchen; 7, Mirador; 8, Becan; 9, Copán. After Henderson 1981:122.

Introduction

3

way of life that has been documented for this region during the subsequent Classic period. The earliest occupation of Cerros occurred during Late Preclassic times. From 200 B.C. to A.D. 200 Cerros was the largest and most architecturally prominent community in northern Belize (see Figure 2). Its strategic location at the southern end of Chetumal Bay, near the mouth of the New River, was ideally suited to play an important role in long-distance coastal exchange between the salt-producing areas of northern Yucatán (Andrews 1983:123) and the Motagua River Valley to the south. From this latter zone jade and obsidian from nearby highland Guatemalan and El Salvadoran sources entered the long-distance coastal exchange network (Hammond 1972). In addition, Cerros' position near the mouth of the New River was optimal for the upriver transshipment into the interior of the Guatemalan Petán region of goods procured as part of the maritime trade (Freidel 1981). The role of Cerros in Late Preclassic coastal and riverine exchange is of special interest because long-distance exchange is one of several factors that are believed to have played a key role in the evolution of stratified society in the Mayan lowlands where Cerros is located, and in Mesoamerica in general. (Other factors include population increase [Sanders and Price 1968], agricultural intensification [Sanders, Parsons, and Santley 1979], external influences [Webb 1973], and ideology and control of ritual knowledge [Freidel 1978; 1979].) It is especially relevant to study the fabric of exchange at Cerros because the site rose to prominence during Late Preclassic times, just at the beginning of the 600-year period of cultural florescence that appears to correspond to state-level society (Hammond 1972; Willey 1977). Here we are in the unique position of being able to observe one of the "prime movers'7 in the rise of hierarchical society just at the point in time where we note a transition from egalitarian village life (Cliff 1982) to a stratified community (Freidel 1979; Scarborough 1983). While all agree that the size and geographical placement of Cerros indicate its importance in Late Preclassic maritime and riverine trade, the exact nature of Cerros' participation is not well understood. It may be that in exchange for imported goods the inhabitants of Cerros contributed to the exchange system in the form of local produce (agricultural, wild fruits, animal hides, feathers, hardwood lumber) or locally crafted items such as worked shell, pottery, and carved wooden bowls. Alternatively, Cerros may not have contributed goods to the exchange network but, instead, served as a transshipment node which monitored and assisted in the logistics of the

4

Introduction

Figure 2. Mayan sites in northern Belize.

Goals of Functional Analysis transport and distribution of salt, jade, groundstone implements, and other trade items along the coast and into the Belizean and Guatemalan interior. In fact, Cerros residents may have been intermediaries who provided the actual canoe transport of long-distance imports into the interior. The main plaza of the site may also have served as a locus for the redistribution of salt, obsidian, and other imports to neighboring villagers who arrived at the market on foot or by boat. Unfortunately, much of the salient evidence in regard to what was produced at Cerros, either for internal consumption or for exchange, is not available in the archaeological record. Many substances are perishable; for example, wood, hides, feathers, and plant materials. At Cerros we recovered a small sample of shell and bone; however, due to variable conditions of preservation, these items showed up at only one locus of excavation—the coastal midden. Ceramic and chipped stone artifacts were by far the most numerous and best preserved. It is not presently known if any pottery manufactured at Cerros was traded to other areas. Lithic analysis indicates that stone tool production was not important at Cerros: most tools were imported from the Colha chert factory in central Belize (Mitchum 1983), and obsidian blades arrived from highland Guatemala (Fred W. Nelson, personal communication, 1981). Although Cerros was not a manufacturer of lithic implements, thousands of chipped stone artifacts were recovered at the site. Many of these had been utilized prehistorically, presumably to carry out subsistence, household maintenance, and craft activities. In the absence of more direct evidence the use traces on stone tools from Cerros may indicate many of the activities that took place at the site. Hopefully, these functional data will provide clues to the types of production carried out at the site and to the importance of these goods within the regional exchange sphere in which Cerros participated. Goals of Functional Analysis Previous attempts in the Maya area to explore issues of social complexity, long-distance exchange, and economy by means of interpretation of lithic data have focused on the occurrence and frequency of different lithic raw materials, the locations of lithic sources, the morphologies of formal tool "types," and lithic reduction sequences used to manufacture stone implements (Nelson 1981; Rovner 1975; 1976; Shafer 1976; Sheets 1978; Sidrys 1976). The general lack of functional studies has been recognized (Sheets 1976a). Optimally, the determination of chipped stone tool function may expand the

5

6

Introduction

scope of lithic analysis: it should enable the analyst not only to infer the tasks performed by individual tool specimens but also to recognize a wide variety of activities in the past for which stone tools were used. Some of these activities may leave no other trace. Because of this potential of functional analysis I undertook a program of modern experimentation with replicas of chipped stone at Cerros: its purpose was to produce a set of lithic use-wear standards (whose functions were known) with which the archaeological counterparts could then be compared (see Chapters 3 and 4). Subsequent to evaluation of my experimental use damage, microscopic observation of archaeological tools from Cerros led in some cases to specific conclusions regarding the mode of use and contact material (e.g., scraping and planing wood). In other cases, however, functional determination was more general: for example, the contact substance was specified as one of two materials (e.g., wood or bone), or in even less specific terms (e.g., cutting soft substances). These functional assessments of prehistoric tools and their archaeological contexts at Cerros make up the data base that is used here for the examination of a number of issues, some specific to this site and others of more general import in the development of complex societies in the region. With regard to the role of economic differentiation in the evolution of hierarchical social and political systems, the lithic data may be enlightening in several ways: ( 1 ) What was the nature of the original coastal settlement at Cerros? Was this a completely egalitarian society, or were the seeds of economic and social differentiation present from the start? What can the lithic wear patterns on the tools from this early period tell us about how these people made their living and how they related to each other? (2) If specific tool-using activities can be identified, how did these vary over time from the Late Preclassic to Postclassic periods? Was there a change in the relative importance of one or more activities through time? ( 3 ) Were some activities spatially isolated; that is, did they occur in association with a certain type of mound or in only one part of the community? The functional data may be helpful in the resolution of the obsidian significance question: that is, in this area of the Maya lowlands far from sources of volcanic materials, did obsidian represent an exotic import brought in over long distances for nonutilitarian purposes, such as ritual blood letting (Sidrys 1976), or was this material routinely utilized in domestic tasks, as were manos and metates of imported igneous rock? Alternatively, was obsidian available in low frequencies to all residential loci, but reserved for family rituals (as Prudence M. Rice [1984] has suggested was the case in the central Petán Lakes region), rather than for household tasks and for use by

The Site: Cerros

7

artisans? If the functional data indicate nonritual use, were obsidian and chert used for the same tasks, or was obsidian reserved for one or more specific functions for which it may be particularly suited? In order to succeed this project must meet a series of methodological challenges: (1) to identify and characterize a range of activities on the basis of the use traces observed on those lithic artifacts that have not been removed from the mound group where they were once used; (2) to separate routine subsistence and maintenance behavior from other activities such as the large-scale processing of forest resources and/or the manufacture of craft items for exchange with other communities; and (3) to identify specialized activities at Cerros, to relate these to prehistoric commerce in the region, and, perhaps, to contribute to an explanation of the site's rise in prominence and eventual decline. The Site: Cerros Data were recovered from Cerros during seven excavation seasons (1974-1981) under the direction of David A. Freidel, principal investigator of the Cerros Project. Field investigations have established that the initial occupation of the site consisted of a small coastal village from 300 to 200 B.C. (Ixtabai phase). The settlement expanded inland during the C'oh phase (200-50 B.C.): it was during the latter portion of this time that a large drainage canal was dug which circumscribed the site (Freidel and Scarborough 1982; Scarborough 1983). The community reached its greatest size and prominence between 50 B.C. and A.D. 200 (Tulix phase) with a maximum areal extent of 0.5 square kilometer, which included 5 hectares of impressive monumental architecture located directly on the coast. At the end of the Late Preclassic period Cerros suffered a decline in the utilization of both residential and public buildings. Cerros during the Classic period was no longer a "major ceremonial center" (Freidel 1979); it was reduced to a mere shadow of its former grandeur. Surface evidence suggests that the Classic period occupation was concentrated southwest of the Late Preclassic center, outside the confines of the canal. There is no evidence of activity at the site from the end of the Classic period until the thirteenth century, when Late Postclassic folk moved in, reoccupied some of the longabandoned Preclassic residences, and refurbished a few of the major temples for ritual purposes.

8

Introduction

The Significance of Cerros The role of Cerros as a major Late Preclassic site in northern Belize is linked to the site's location near the mouth of the New River, from which Cerros was in a position to control riverine commerce into the interior (i.e., the New River and Belize River valleys and the Petén centers). From artifactual evidence we know that Cerros also participated in sea trade at least as far as Komchen on the north coast of Yucatán (Robertson-Freidel 1980). To the south, coastal trade extended at least down to Honduras, judging from the presence at Cerros of numerous jade and other greenstone artifacts (Garber 1980; 1983) which probably originated in the Motagua River Valley (Feldman et al. 1975; Hammond et al. 1977; Smith and Kidder 1943; Walters 1980). Over the years the Cerros Project, which consisted of Freidel and a group of graduate students in anthropology, including myself, carried out research designed to increase our understanding of ( 1 ) the prehistoric community itself: that is, how it was organized, how it functioned, and how it changed through time; (2) Cerros 7 interaction and relationships with other contemporaneous sites; and (3) the role of Cerros in the development of complex society in the Maya lowlands. Individual studies have focused on chronological, social, and functional aspects of the ceramic inventory (Robertson-Freidel 1980); interpretations of the architectural and iconographic sequence at Cerros (Freidel 1981; 1986); the importation, utilization, and disposal of nonperishable material culture (Garber 1980); patterns of settlement and status differentiation in the initial nucleated village and its subsequent growth to include the larger, dispersed settlement and hydraulic works (Cliff 1982; Scarborough 1980; 1983); the utilization of plants (Crane 1986) and the role of animals at Cerros (S. Carr 1980; 1983); and the technological and taxonomic aspects of chipped stone artifacts recovered at the site (Mitchum 1983). The Determination of Tool Function at Cerros My interest in the functional analysis of the lithic artifacts from Cerros developed into a project aimed at the economic reconstruction of the prehistoric community, from the time of the initial settlement to its final abandonment at the end of the fifteenth century A.D. While it may not be possible to detect every kind of economic activity with lithic data (for example, ceramic production), many types of manufacturing, as well as tool maintenance, and some kinds of artisanry made use of large numbers of chipped stone tools

The Determination of Tool Function

9

and left distinctive use traces on these implements. To the extent that the goal of economic reconstruction is realizable it is due to the quantity of artifacts recovered and the wide variety of horizontal and vertical contexts sampled during the course of the excavations. The field crews screened all materials. For the most part 1/2-inch mesh was used, but some of the midden soil was water-screened through fine mesh for better recovery of small items. Excavations at Cerros did not yield a data base optimally suited for the identification of production or other activity loci. Research at the site was designed to map the civic-religious architecture of the center, to survey and test the surrounding settlement, and to date the major periods of construction and occupation through limited test excavations (Freidel 1976). This plan resulted in small counts of chipped stone artifacts from many isolated test pits, as well as large

Figure 3. Cerros, northern Belize. Numbers indicate features. Feature 1a is the coastal midden, underlying the indicated section of coastline at the edge of the zone of monumental architecture. The dispersed settlement includes all the site outside the monumental zone and coastal midden.

10

Introduction

samples from intensive lateral exposures in the early nucleated coastal village and from two features in the dispersed settlement. In order to achieve a representative sample of cultural remains from Cerros, the project tested all areas of the site. However, we have no way of estimating the number, if any, of ground-level structures and activity loci that went undetected due to the absence of test probes at nonmounded locations. Any significant number of these "invisible" archaeological features would have implications for the estimated population and density of habitation at the site (Scarborough 1980). Despite some limitations in the data base, the archaeologists of the Cerros Project recovered two important subsets of lithic artifacts: (1) from the intensive excavations in the coastal midden zone, which disclosed the remains of several households with long occupations and multiple episodes of architectural refurbishing; and (2) from the extensive testing throughout the dispersed settlement zone. The latter was concentrated within that area of the site bounded by the Cerros canal. A sample of all types of mounded features in the dispersed zone was tested: two extensive lateral exposures were achieved, at Features n and 50. At both of these mound groups we found evidence of domiciliary and other activities. Contexts of Recovery At Cerros lithic artifacts were recovered from a number of different contexts. During the course of the ceramic analysis Robin A. Robertson-Freidel distinguished six contextual categories, which have been used subsequently by others in order to clarify and distinguish the relative importance of specific subsamples of cultural material (see Garber 1980; Scarborough 1980; Cliff 1982). These are: (1) Caches and burials. The former are found primarily in the monumental architecture of the center. (2) Primary habitation debris; that is, trash deposited by the residents of Cerros either inside or outside their houses and not moved subsequently. (3) Secondary habitation debris, such as that found in the corners of structures and in trash accumulations that resulted from house and patio sweepings. (4) Ritual interment of monumental architecture, identified on the basis of apparently deliberately smashed ceremonial artifacts which have been burned in situ. Robertson-Freidel (1980: n ) believes this phenomenon to have been associated with the ritual interment and renewal of monumental architecture at Cerros.

Contexts of Recovery

11

(5) Construction fill, generally sampled during test pitting and trenching operations in house mounds and in monumental architecture. (6) Surface material (Robertson-Freidel 1980:10). In order to incorporate the results of functional lithic analysis into a reconstruction of the prehistoric way of life at Cerros, an understanding of the contexts of the archaeological deposits is necessary, not just for the establishment of chronological relationships among provenience units, but also (1) for identifying temporally mixed and pure deposits, (2) for establishing contemporaneity and association between lithic (and nonlithic) artifacts, and (3) in order to assess the validity of comparisons of counts, forms, raw materials, etc., between artifact samples recovered from different loci at the site. I found it useful to consider the provenience and associations of lithic artifacts within the framework of Michael E. Schiffer's four types of cultural transformation processes (Schiffer 1976; 1977): (1) systemic-to-archaeological transformations, (2) archaeological-tosystemic transformations, (3) transformations within the archaeological context, and (4) transformations within the systemic context. Systemic-to-archaeological transformations include the cultural deposition of artifacts through discard, abandonment, loss, disposal of the dead, or the deliberate deposition of cultural items. At Cerros there is evidence for several kinds of intentional deposition: for example, (a) in a dedicatory cache in honor of the construction of a monument, (b) as grave goods with a burial, or (c) in the ritual interment of architecture. During termination rituals at the site, the Late Preclassic Maya intentionally scattered or sprinkled a layer of decomposed limestone marl over a building that was about to be abandoned. This white marl deposit often contained charcoal lenses as well as pieces of polished jade, hematite, worked limestone, and ceramics, all of which had been intentionally smashed (Garber 1980:25-26). Most often, however, discard, abandonment, and loss resulted in the deposition of utilitarian items as primary or secondary refuse. Primary refuse at Cerros occurred as artifacts (a) lying in situ on a living floor, (b) lost or discarded at their locus of use, somewhere out-of-doors, (c) lost in transit along an ancient path, or (d) abandoned in a storage locus away from a residential structure. Secondary refuse, or midden, was the result of the removal to a dumping area of broken or no-longer-wanted items. This often resulted from periodic sweeping of a patio or work area or from the disposal of domestic trash over the downwind side of a residential mound platform (see Schiffer 1975 :64; 1983 :679).

12

Introduction

Archaeological-to-systemic transformations are equivalent to the reentry of deposited items into the cultural system, as through collecting and scavenging. Fortunately, the Cerros features that were important in this study had not been subjected to modern pothunting. However, there is evidence that during the long occupational history of the site it was not unusual for Classic and Postclassic occupants to resurrect and use structures and portable artifacts that had previously been abandoned and had formed part of the archaeological record. For all but the initial period of occupation along the coast there is the possibility that some chipped stone tools and associated artifacts had been recovered from earlier ruins and subsequently used with or without modification (see Collins 1975:19). This activity resulted in the removal of some materials from their original contexts, and it may have introduced nonrepresentative artifact types into the assemblages corresponding to the later phases in the chronological sequence. It has been my assumption that wellshaped, "formal" tools and implements made of exotic raw materials were more likely to be brought back to life in this way than would, for example, local chert debitage. Transformations within the archaeological context are those in which deposited artifacts are disturbed, but not reintroduced into a behavioral system. Some pertinent examples of this phenomenon include the disturbance by a prehistoric group of earlier cultural materials during the course of digging pits, canals, and the transport of accumulated domestic trash for use as construction fill in another part of the site. Another type of archaeological transformation is the tendency for repeated human foot traffic to dislodge large objects, like celts, and force their upward migration, while at the same time downwardly displacing small artifacts within archaeological deposits (Stockton 1973; Wilk and Schiffer 1979). For unsealed strata there is always the possibility of mixing due to natural and cultural causes such as these. Because of the unknown origins of the materials used for construction fill, my analysis and interpretations will not be based on artifacts excavated from the zone of public architecture (that is, from Features 2-8), where most of the artifacts collected consisted of mixed construction fill from the large mounds. Transformations within the systemic context include changes in the form, function, or ownership of artifacts. Recycling was often involved; many of the Cerros chipped stone tools that were broken and worn appear to have been reworked into other tools which often were different in form from the original. For example, large chert bifaces at Cerros were frequently modified for use as thick scrapers, notches, and scraper/planes (see Chapter 5). In other cases, lithic ar-

Contexts of Recovery

13

tifacts were subjected to secondary uses without modification, as in the case of chert cores being reused as hammerstones or abrading implements. Lateral recycling, or change in ownership, is more difficult to establish archaeologically, except in the case of a lithic artisan who manufactured tools for the entire community in exchange for the goods or services of others. The manufacturing debitage will identify the residue or workshop of the knapper; the customers' homes will not contain lithic debris that corresponds to the manufacture of the particular artifact types in question. This phenomenon is not expected to occur at Cerros, because most of the chipped stone formal tools were manufactured elsewhere and imported for use at the site (Mitchum 1983). Because my goal was to reconstruct the Cerros economy insofar as possible, rather than just identify the function(s) of individual lithic implements, I used low mound groups and the nonmounded residential loci as my unit of analysis. In addition to the materials from the dispersed settlement, my sample includes all of the chipped stone from Feature Ia-Operation 34, part of the subplaza midden also referred to as the early nucleated village (Cliff 1982). The cultural materials recovered from each feature were partitioned into chronological segments. Some mounds were occupied during only one temporal phase (approximately a 100-250-year interval). Others were refurbished and reused over a longer period of time, usually lasting two to three phases. Some provenience units (lots) could be designated only as mixtures of materials from two phases, for example, C'oh/Tulix. Once the chipped stone artifacts from a structure group were separated into subassemblages according to time, a set of five propositions, discussed below, was applied to guide in the interpretation of the functional data. ( 1 ) The cultural materials recovered during the excavation of a low mound or ground-level structure correspond to activities and deposition that took place at that locus. This is true for primary refuse, secondary refuse, and artifacts found in house mound construction fill, which probably consisted of trash collected in the immediate vicinity of the building site. (2) Unenclosed activity loci, for example patio work areas, are not likely to have been swept clean of debris as often as indoor areas (Murray 1980:497). Trash accumulations periodically were swept off the edges of the patio (Hayden and Cannon 1983 :130). Thus we may sometimes discover traces of workshop activity adjacent to patios, not far from their original outdoor location. (3) Obviously, very few of the total number of nonperishable artifacts that were made, used, and/or disposed of at one of the small

14

Introduction

structures were recovered during its excavation. In the first place, the horizontal extent and depth of the deposits made it impossible to completely excavate either the plazuela groups, which consist of several structures arranged around a small interior plaza (Thompson 1931:233), or the ground-level structures and their surrounding activity areas. In seven field seasons we have explored only a fraction of each small structure chosen for testing, with the exception of Feature 50. (Extensive excavations were carried out on Feature 11 also, but these were confined to Structure 11B and the patio area to the south.) Structures 11C, 11D, and most of the raised plazuela were only minimally tested (Lewenstein 1980). Even if we had been able to completely excavate each small feature and its surroundings, the data would be incomplete due to the fact that many of the artifacts used by the residents of these mounds have been broken, lost, traded, or disposed of away from the residences, as discussed above. (4) The offensiveness or messiness of trash no doubt influenced its place of disposal (Murray 1980:497). For example, food remains probably were deposited at some distance from residences because of their odors; if not, dogs and other scavengers certainly scattered these materials. Some nonperishable articles, however, may have been discarded close at hand because of the possibility of reuse. Examples might be sherds which could be made into net weights, gaming pieces, or spindle whorls; broken flakes or retouched tools that might be set aside for some future task; or broken exotic items, such as jade or hematite, that potentially could be used in termination rituals. (5) Large, finely chipped "formal" tools and artifacts made of exotic stone, such as jade or obsidian, are unlikely to be recovered in situ, that is, in primary or even secondary refuse. However, lithic debitage, especially small flakes, and scraps from the manufacture of shell, stone, and bone artifacts often will become deposited as primary refuse. That pattern occurs because small items easily become embedded in patio and house floors, and are hard to sweep away. Many other small flakes likely ended up against the walls or in the corners of rooms and patios as a result of periodic cleanups (Cannon and Hayden 1981). This is fortunate for the lithic analyst, who seeks to find artifacts in interpretable contexts. At most archaeological sites where excavated soil is routinely screened, the overwhelming majority of all lithic artifacts collected are small flakes. This is true even at a site such as Cerros, where the formal lithic tool types were imported, rather than produced locally, and where we did not find large quantities of lithic manufacturing debris. These flakes result from formal chipped stone tool maintenance and recycling, and also

Previous Work

15

from casual flake production using small, locally available chert nodules. Previous Work This study is not the first of its kind in Mesoamerican archaeology. The idea of integrating the results of functional lithic analysis into a holistic interpretation of a site's economic and exchange system recently has been attempted by Conran A. Hay (1978) at Kaminaljuyú in the Guatemalan highlands. The Kaminaljuyú lithic assemblage consisted entirely of obsidian blades and associated debitage. The functions of the utilized blades from Kaminaljuyú were inferred from microscopically observed wear patterns which were compared with experimental use damage generated by Hay on a set of modern obsidian flake tools. Perhaps the most significant aspect of this study was not the determination of prehistoric stone tool function, but the attempt to use these data to reconstruct the Kaminaljuyú economy over time, especially in regard to the identification of artisan-related crafts at some of the households at the site (see also Michels 1979). Subsequent to Hay's study, John K. Mallory (1984) has carried out research along similar lines at the Late Classic site of Copán in Honduras. Mallory used a condensed and very generalized set of wear pattern categories. Unfortunately, chert implements were not included in this analysis, which was designed to detect economic specialization at Copán. The study found little evidence for specialized processing or manufacturing with obsidian tools. It is the economic and political interpretation by the lithic specialist that sets Hay's and Mallory's work apart from other functional studies, such as those conducted recently by Thomas R. Hester (1975), Thomas R. Hester and Robert F. Heizer (1971), Harry J. Shafer (1976), and Richard Wilk (1978a; 1978b), all of which contribute to an understanding of chipped stone tool use in the past but stop short of using these data to formulate a model of community behavior. Hay's work also differs from that of Robert S. Santley (1977), who has incorporated the results of lithic analysis at Loma Torremote, Cuautitlán, in the central Mexican highlands into his reconstruction of past lifeways at that site. Santley determined lithic function on the basis of tool morphology and speculations concerning raw material suitability for certain tasks. The strength of this,study lies in its attempt to quantify prehistoric consumption rates for stone tools in highland Mexico, and thus to be able to estimate raw material and tool requirements, and the number of craftspeople required to manufacture the needed tools (Santley 1980; 1984; see also Mal-

16

Introduction

lory 1984). Unfortunately, Santley's lack of direct lithic experimentation resulted in an overconfidence in the relationship between form and function (see Lewenstein 1982a; Odell 1981b), as well as serious overestimation of the use-lives of chipped stone tools (especially those made of obsidian). (See also Hayden 1977: Table 1 for another approach to estimating stone tool consumption rates.) Santley's study also is flawed in that he fails to consider the consequences of various tool disposal patterns in his estimated tool consumption rates. Broad-scale interpretations of lithic data are carried out most successfully by the lithic specialist, who best understands the potential and the limitations of these materials (Clark 1983; Shafer and Hester 1986). This book describes the results of an extensive program of experimental chipped stone tool use (Chapter 3) and the experimental tools' subsequent functional analysis (Chapter 4) in an attempt to determine the prehistoric function(s) of the utilized lithic tools recovered from Cerros. Chapter 5 presents the results of the microscopic use-wear analysis of the archaeological tools and in Chapter 6 these data are used to reconstruct the prehistoric economy at Cerros. This is accomplished, in part, by comparing and contrasting the Cerros data with the expectations corresponding to a series of heuristic models of prehistoric economy based on examples from the social anthropological and archaeological literature. These economic models and their archaeological implications are introduced in Chapter 2.

CHAPTER 2

STONE TOOL VARIABILITY AND THE RECONSTRUCTION OF PREHISTORIC ACTIVITIES

The Tulix phase (50 B.C.-A.D. 200) investment in a massive program of monumental architecture at Cerros suggests increased social differentiation during the Late Preclassic, compared to the two prior phases. This increase in social complexity may be reflected in the archaeological record of chipped stone tool use at Cerros. By means of diversity in functional lithic data we may be able to detect the development of some types of specialized production and artisanry at the site and relate these processes to the role of Cerros in littoral and inland exchange networks. From nonperishable artifactual evidence we have been able to establish some of the items, such as jade, shell, obsidian, ceramics, and pyrite, that were imported by the inhabitants of Cerros (Garber 1983). However, we have few clues as to which, if any products (agricultural, manufactured, or collected from the natural environment) Cerros supplied to other contemporary sites. A note on the detection of commodity production in the archaeological record: this phenomenon customarily is identified on the basis of (1) an abundance of some nonperishable product, for example, ceramics, limestone spheres, chipped stone bifaces, or shell ornaments; (2) product standardization; or (3) the debris from the manufacturing process, including broken or unfinished items and tiny fragments of scrap. Many products of skilled manufacture are made of impermanent substances such as gourds, wood, bone, salt, textiles, bark paper, hide, or feathers. The manufacture of such products must be discerned indirectly, as, for example, by the identification of nonperishable implements or facilities used to work these substances. For instance, the presence of large numbers of ceramic spindle whorls or groundstone barkbeaters may imply textile spinning or the processing of bark paper, respectively. Shell scrapers (Eaton 1974; J. A. Hester 1953 :292), raised storage platforms near inundated zones, and ceramic vessels with salt incrustations are evi-

18

Tool Variability and Reconstruction of Activities

dence of salt production along the coasts of northern Yucatán and southern Chiapas. At Kaminaljuyú Hay (1978) identified a large concentration of use traces on obsidian tools that he attributes to largescale processing of gourds (or alternatively, to cacao processing). The indirect approach to the determination of activity areas and workshops is especially critical at Cerros because there is so little direct corroboration of these activities. Neither obsidian nor flintknapping was important at this site, nor have we uncovered any direct evidence of jade working, bone working, or the manufacture of groundstone artifacts. As expected, we recovered no manufactured artifacts made from organic substances such as wood, hides, gourds, or feathers. There is, however, a small amount of shell debitage, and a few worked bone implements were collected from the early nucleated village (S. Carr 1980; Garber 1980). In light of this dearth of clues to the nature and relative importance of manufactured and processed substances at Cerros, the lithic use damage offers the potential of fleshing out some of these lacunae. Loci of production may represent the remains of activity areas, where artisans manufactured items for personal or household use only. Alternatively, they may correspond to workshops, where fullor part-time craft specialists regularly produced goods that were destined for intracommunity or intersite exchange (Clark 1983). Of equal import is the nature of the exchange system by which any surplus goods produced at Cerros were traded in return for exotics and other products. The appearance of regional standardization in Late Preclassic-Protoclassic Chicanei sphere ceramics throughout the Maya area has prompted the hypothesis that the fundamental integration of Maya society was based not on the fragile (i.e., unstable) political formations in the region, but rather on basic commodity production and exchange on local and regional scales (Blanton et al. 1981:189-191). To some extent this area-wide standardization also is manifest in formal chipped stone tool morphology during the Late Preclassic, notably in the wide distribution of plano-convex chert macroblades, "standard" chert bifaces, and unmodified platforms on obsidian blades (Rovner 1975; Shafer and Hester 1986; Sheets 1976b : 64). Even after more than a century of archaeological research (Hammond 1983), relatively little is known about the structure and functioning of nonsubsistence production and distribution in the Maya area (Sabloff 1983 1415). I realize that the functional lithic data from Cerros do not enable me to determine in great detail the workings of the distribution system in which Cerros participated. However, I think my data do lead to insights regarding the broad question of whether social stratifica-

Four Models of Nonsubsistence Production

19

tion at Cerros was stimulated from the bottom up, by economic differentiation (in production and exchange), rather than from the top down; that is, by the ability of a small emergent elite to enhance its prestige by means of esoteric knowledge and ideology, as suggested by Freidel (1981; see also Friedman and Rowlands 1978:211). To this end I have attempted to determine ( 1 ) the extent of nonsubsistence production and/or processing at Cerros and (2) how such goods were consumed and/or exchanged. For comparative purposes, I have put together four heuristic economic models. In Chapter 6 I evaluate the lithic use-wear data from Cerros in light of these models and their test implications in regard to nonsubsistence production. The models are not meant to be all-inclusive, nor is the Cerros economy expected to match any particular model completely. Rather, these models are loose hypothetical constructs fashioned from many disparate sources, and represent village economies with (1) welldeveloped, full-time craft specialization oriented toward export; (2) specialization on the village level, either full or part time; (3) a low frequency of artisans or processors of nonsubsistence materials; or (4) total lack of any specialized production. (Elsewhere similar "stage typologies" have served as models for the examination of changes in ceramic production [Rice 1981; Van Der Leeuw 1977].) I believe that it is useful to think in terms of these four hypothetical economies while interpreting the Cerros data because each model is distinctive, and (at least theoretically) each is verifiable in the archaeological record. Four Models of Nonsubsistence Production Model 1: Full-Time Craft Specialization. Full-time specialization is a phenomenon associated with large, densely populated areas and with state-level societies (Arnold 1985; Rice 1981). The artisan is not an itinerant; he or she produces goods on a full-time year-round basis and does not engage in agricultural labor as well (Van Der Leeuw 1977). Also, specialists may be subject to a centralized authority which extracts tribute in manufactured goods (Feinman, Kowalewski, and Blanton 1984). Some effects of administrative control of nonsubsistence production include (a) mass production and economies of scale, (b) increasingly standardized products which may be exchanged over long distances, and (c) the concentration of artisans' workshops in distinct neighborhoods or barrios. Apparently, Classic period specialized craft production at the major lowland Mayan centers, such as Tikal and Copán, was not spatially centralized or oriented toward organized long-distance com-

20

Tool Variability and Reconstruction of Activities

merce, as was the case at Teotihuacan in the central Mexican highlands (Becker 1973; Fry 1979; Mallory 1984; Marcus 1983 1219; Santley 1983; Spence 1981). There do not appear to have been craft barrios at the largest Maya centers (Becker 1973 :404); in fact, there is very little evidence for any production or workshop areas at these sites (Mallory 1984:258). One exception is Kaminaljuyú in the central highlands of Guatemala, where numerous obsidian tool and other specialized production loci have been identified (Hay 1978; Michels 1976). Joyce Marcus (1983) believes that the small number of ceramic, lithic, and lapidary craftspeople identified at Tikal specialized in production to meet the needs of the city, not to serve outside markets. If it is true that no state-supported (Teotihuacan-like) production system for nonsubsistence goods existed, then how were the needs of the overall Maya populace served in regard to the manufacture and distribution of ceramics, chipped stone and groundstone tools, clothing and other textiles, basketry, leather goods, wooden articles, rope, and items for ritual and personal adornment (shell, jade, etc.)? To date, archaeologists have not resolved this issue; however, there is some degree of consensus that the Classic period economies of the large lowland Maya centers may have functioned very differently from that of Teotihuacan. Model 2: Village-wide Specialization. Sometimes, but not always, specialized manufacture at the village level is prompted by the nonuniform distribution of exploitable natural resources (see Charlton 1984; Sanders and Price 1968; Voorhies 1973). The advantageous concentration of a valuable resource (for example, clay, pigment material, stone) may give rise to part-time or full-time craft production by non-itinerant artisans (Van Der Leeuw 1977). Their manufactured goods tend to be more efficiently produced, more standardized in form, and more skillfully made than craft goods produced by individual households for their own use (Feinman, Kowalewski, and Blanton 1984; Rice 1981; Shafer and Hester 1986; in press). A community may produce distinctive goods that are traded over long distances. When village artisans are dependent on intermediaries or outside merchants for access to markets, this contributes to increased competition among producers and to the relatively low economic status of craftspeople within that area. The tropical lowlands of South America provide good examples of twentieth-century peoples who produce and circulate distinctive items, village by village. For example, Everard F. Im Thurn (1967:

Four Models of Nonsubsistence Production

21

271-273) reports that many villages in British Guiana had some manufacture peculiar to themselves, and craftspersons constantly visited other groups, often hostile, for the purpose of exchanging the products of their own labor for those fabricated by other communities. These specialties included canoes, cotton balls, blow-pipes, hammocks, poison for darts, spun cotton, cassava grater boards, hallucinogenic drugs, hunting dogs, and pottery (see also Napoleon Chagnon's 1968 characterization of the Yanomamo). From the archaeological record several examples of village specialization come to mind. For example, in the prehistoric Valley of Oaxaca, few craftspeople were located at Monte Albán, the administrative capital (Blanton 1978:86-96). Instead, specialized manufacture at the village level during some periods provided a wide variety of ceramic and other goods for local and regional exchange. Another case of Preclassic period village specialization comes from Paul Tolstoy et al. (1977:102), who found evidence of the manufacture of manos and metates from local materials at Coapexco and Atoto in the southern Basin of Mexico. Village specialization for exchange may also have been characteristic of the Maya area, especially where it was facilitated by the geographic concentration of a valuable resource. For example, the lowland community of Colha (Belize) and certain areas in the middle Motagua Valley in Guatemala appear to have specialized in the manufacture of chert and jade items, respectively (Feldman et al. 1975; Shafer and Hester 1983; Walters 1980). Close proximity to the highland Guatemalan obsidian source known as El Chayal undoubtedly was responsible for the development of the obsidian knapping specialization at Kaminaljuyú. Also, salt collection and processing was an important dry season specialization in many Preclassic Mesoamerican communities, especially on the north coast of the Yucatán peninsula, at sites like Paso del Cerro (Andrews 1983 :28, 30). Model 3: Low Level of Specialization. A third scenario for satisfying the regional demand for manufactured products includes a low frequency of artisans and other specialists located throughout the Maya region, generally distributed in proportion to site size and demand for their services. One important stimulus to specialized production is the emergence of local elites, with the corresponding increase in demand for monumental construction, personal ornamentation, ritual items, and mortuary goods (Rice 1981:223). Skilled Mayan sculptors, building engineers, and artists would most frequently inhabit those centers with the greatest investment in

22

Tool Variability and Reconstruction of Activities

monumental art and architecture, such as Tikal, Mirador, Copán, Quiriguá, and Palenque. Even at these spectacular cities, the number of skilled artisans was probably very low. Eliot M. Abrams (1984) estimates that a maximum of ten sculptors (out of a total population of fifteen thousand) was needed to produce all the masonry blocks and to sculpt all of the Late Classic stelae, altars, and façades, as well as the hieroglyphic stairway, at Copán. Because Copán is comparable in its ratio of monuments/hectare with other large Mayan sites (Abrams 1984:40), the extremely low ratio of resident sculptors hypothesized for Copán is probably the maximum for any Maya center. Modern Lacandon Maya flintknappers provide a further example of low-intensity specialization (Nations and Clark 1983; see also Mallory 1984: 52-53). Today the few remaining Lacandon who retain knapping skills supply chipped stone items to their fellow villagers; they work at their craft on a very part-time basis, when the need arises. Such a low frequency of productive specialists does not call for highly complex institutions of economic regulation. In fact, many kinds of artisanry could have been carried out on a part-time basis, scheduled during the "slow" periods in the agricultural cycle, when activities such as hunting and fishing were known to be unproductive (see Evans 1978). Unfortunately, such low-level specialization may be difficult to distinguish from a nonspecialized domestic locus, or activity area. Robert D. Drennan (1976:135-136, 140) reports an example of this phenomenon from a Formative period site in the Valley of Oaxaca. At Fábrica San José excavations have recovered evidence of the manufacture of stone ornaments at one household, located near a deposit of high-grade travertine, the raw material used to make earspools and other polished objects. At Tikal, a Classic period production area has been identified on the basis of a "specialized chert toolkit." The tiny gravers, burins, and perforators appear to represent the remains of a Mayan woodworking locus (Puleston 1969). This system of a few specialists, most of whom were also engaged in subsistence activities, would have been sufficient to supply ceramics, textiles, rope, tools, etc., within the community and perhaps also yield a limited surplus for exchange. Some mechanisms for distributing these items outside of Cerros include (a) trading them to itinerant merchants for distribution in neighboring settlements; (b) bartering with other (nonresident) groups at periodic feasts, pilgrimages, and other gatherings; (c) participating in established trade partnerships; and (d) direct exchange of ceremonial goods between communities (Charlton 1984; Ford 1972). It is likely that items in daily usage were distributed through different mechanisms than

Four Models of Nonsubsistence Production

23

were sumptuary goods. This further reinforced social distances and ranking (Rice 1981). Model 4: No Specialized Production. In many egalitarian farming societies there is little or no specialized production and no evidence of elite goods. Each household takes care of its own basic needs, often manufacturing pottery and other necessary items during lulls in the agricultural cycle (Van Der Leeuw 1977). The economy is organized exclusively around subsistence activities such as arboriculture, fishing, agriculture, hunting, and gathering wild resources. In this case no individual would be classified as an artisan. Farming communities of this general size and economic structure need not have been isolated or uninvolved in exchange. Trading on a limited basis can occur via the intervillage social event, such as described by Chagnon (1968) for the Yanomamo, or the occasional visit by an itinerant merchant who might arrive at Cerros with an assortment of produce or raw materials not available locally. One such individual found his way into the Cerros field camp during the 1979 season, selling tortoise and conch shells collected from the offshore Belizean cays. Alternatively, an itinerant might offer some specialized service, such as dentistry or the manufacture of prismatic blades from a prepared obsidian core which he carried about with him. In return for his goods or services, the visitor might receive surplus foodstuffs, medicinal plants, or fibers which were readily at hand in the swampy coastal environment, but not available in other ecological zones (see Parsons 1936 for a discussion of itinerant traders operating out of Mitla, Oaxaca, and exchanging highland products for lowland coastal produce on a small scale). Thomas H. Charlton (1984:26-28) has suggested that Preclassic exchange in Mesoamerica may have been analogous to the network of personal trading partners studied by Ian Hughes (1973:121) in New Guinea. This complex system of overlapping exchange relationships can effectively supply an area far greater than the distribution of the most widely traded good. Such a model does not appear to apply at Cerros, where the presence of Tulix phase monumental architecture and sumptuary goods indicates a hierarchical society during Late Preclassic times. The civic monuments required engineers, artistic talent, sculptors, and persons of iconographic literacy for their construction and upkeep (David A. Freidel, personal communication, 1985). Labor could have been supplied by corvée, performed part-time by inhabitants of Cerros, assisted by a rural sustaining population from the surrounding

24

Tool Variability and Reconstruction of Activities

area. Vernon L. Scarborough (1980) conservatively estimated a maximum population of 1,500 residents for Cerros and an additional 1,100 persons as the population of its 10-square-kilometer hinterland. Because of Cerros7 location along both maritime and riverine transportation routes, it is possible that the site functioned as a receiving or transshipment node (rather than a contributor of goods) in an exchange network which supplied a large area, extending from the interior of the Petén to the north and south coasts of the Yucatán peninsula (Charlton 1984:21). Instead of supplying manufactured items for exchange, Cerros inhabitants may have temporarily warehoused trade goods, or shipped them up the New River by canoe and possibly, after a short portage south to the Belize River, west into the Petén. Before discussion of the archaeological implications of these four heuristic models with reference to the Cerros data, a comment on the nature of the artifacts and their contexts of recovery is in order. The collection of utilized chipped stone tools from Cerros is well suited to functional analysis. However, the potential for spatially analyzing these data in order to identify specialized production and intrasite functional variability is hampered by the dearth of lateral exposures and the general absence of artifactual material left in situ on living surfaces. This is in contrast to the practice at sites in the American Southwest of excavating entire structures. For example, Hohokam house floors generally are not well preserved, but diagnostic features such as entryways, hearths, postholes, and in situ artifacts often are identified in association with these packed dirt living surfaces (Haury 1978:47-75; Wilcox, McGuire, and Sternberg 1981:151-155). For the pursuit of my research goals the largescale lateral exposures excavated in Feature Ia and at Features 11 and 50 were especially informative. Additional excavations of complete structures or plazuela groups at Cerros would have allowed for considerably more detail in behavioral interpretation. In spite of these limitations, detailed analysis of the chipped stone tool collection from Cerros should be able to ( 1 ) detect the degree of functional heterogeneity present in the sample, and (2) evaluate this patterning in terms of the four economic models discussed above. Predictions Relevant to the Models Model 1: Full-time Craft Specialization. The distribution of chipped stone tools predicted under the model of full-time specialization is quite different from that expected for the other three scenarios to be described. Full-time specialists in a number of differ-

Predictions Relevant to the Models

25

ent occupations appear to occur only in highly complex social and political organizations; that is, state-level societies (R. McC. Adams 1966; Flannery 1973; Fried 1967; Redman 1978). One clue to the fulltime nature of craft production lies in the distribution of subsistenceoriented tools. These will not turn up in every residential locus, since a significant segment of the residents of the community is not involved in agriculture or in other food-gathering endeavors. Concentrations of tools specific to the manufacture of several different craft goods are predicted within a single settlement: however, no two of these "tool kits" will ever co-occur at the same locus; nor will every locus contain evidence of a resident craftsperson. Stone tool assemblages for each occupational specialization represented may be spatially clustered within the community, each corresponding to a neighborhood or barrio of related individuals who worked within the same craft tradition (Spence 1967; 1981). Due to the possibility within complex societies of administrative involvement in the organization of craft production (Irwin 1978; Morris 1978), specialized tool kits (and manufacturing debitage) pertaining to important ritual or commercial products may be spatially grouped in close proximity to an administrative center, that is, associated with public architecture such as a mounded temple structure or a central marketplace (Feinman 1982; Spence 1981). This administrative interference in specialized production tends to result in economies of scale in the production process and in the standardization of the craft items themselves (Irwin 1978). If this is the case, then one might also expect a standardization of the stone implements used to produce these crafts. If it is possible to determine tool function (and that is the purpose of lithic use-wear analysis), then tool kit standardization may be detectable by means of a comparison of measures of similarity and distance between (a) tools suspected of belonging to artisans affected by administrative control, and (b) tools used for the same activity but less likely to be subject to centralized control of this type, such as the nonsupervised manufacture of utilitarian goods, as opposed to others made for ritual or exchange. This model describes a level of social and economic organization that probably is more complex than that which obtained at Late Preclassic Cerros. Nevertheless, I have included it here because it represents the culmination of the evolutionary processes of social complexity that are present in earlier stages in the other three models outlined (see Table 1 for a summary of these models and their archaeological manifestations).

Table 1. Summary of four models of community production, arranged from simple to complex Model

Examples

Archaeological Predictions

1. Full-time specialization in a variety of commodities

Teotihuacan craft production (Spence 1967; 1981; Millon 1973; 1976) Inca craft barrios (Morris 1978)

2. Village-wide specialization in a product for exchange

Colha chert tool manufacture (Shafer and Hester 1983) Motagua Valley jade working (Feldman et al. 1975; Walters 1980) Pottery production in Guatemalan villages (Reina and Hill 1978:274)

Not all loci will yield tools necessary for subsistence tasks (fishing, agriculture, hunting). Spatial clusters of specialized tools corresponding to many different craft activities will be represented. Not every locus will have tools appropriate for more than one specialized processing or manufacturing task. Tool kits for each specialization may be spatially clustered into distinct neighborhoods or barrios. Loci of specialized tool kits (and production) may be associated with public architecture. Each locus is expected to have basic subsistence tools. Tools designed for one specialized product will be represented in most household loci; these tools will occur in numbers in excess of that necessary to supply household or local consumption.

3. Low-level specialization in processing and manufacture

4. Subsistence-oriented; no specialized production beyond the domestic unit

Formative period village flint and bone tool artisans, Tierras Largas, Valley of Oaxaca (Flannery and Winter 1976:38) Specialization in fabrication of travertine ornaments at Fábrica San José, Valley of Oaxaca (Drennan 1976) Modern Lacandon chert knappers (Nations and Clark 1983)

Each locus will have subsistence tools. Tool kits associated with nonsubsistence activities will be widespread; may occur at each locus. There will be clusters of nonsubsistence tools in one or more loci which are considerably larger than frequencies of these same tool kits in other households (ex., concentrations of woodworking tools at one locus). Little variability in distribution of subsistence-oriented tools between residential loci. Use-wear reflects complete range of village activities.

28

Tool Variability and Reconstruction of Activities

Model 2: Village-wide Specialization. Specialization on the local level in processing or in the manufacture of certain products—for direct exchange within neighboring communities, or for purposes of participation in a regional marketing system—may be difficult to detect in an archaeological context. Tools for agricultural and other commonplace activities will be widespread, distributed approximately evenly among all households. The chipped stone implements necessary for the production of the local specialty commodity also may be distributed widely and in a nonclustered pattern over the entire settlement. The difficulty, then, is in distinguishing between manufacture for household or local consumption on the one hand, and increased productivity for exchange with other groups. For example, in the case of sisal rope manufacture, estimates need to be made of the quantity of rope that the Cerros community would have used locally within a specified period of time. Experimental fiber processing must be performed in order to learn the life span (use-life) of the tools involved in production. Ultimately, it will be possible to estimate the quantity of these tools which would have been utilized in the satisfaction of local demands for this type of rope. Then, after taking into account patterns of deposition and other site formation processes applicable to these implements, the ratio of actual tool frequencies to that needed to maintain the local supply will give an indication of the scope of rope production for exchange at Cerros (see Santley 1984). This same principle of extrapolation can be applied also to the processing and fabrication of other wares at Cerros. Model 3: Low Level of Specialization. Low-level specialization in nonsubsistence activities, which may have been conducted on a part-time basis, should leave the following lines of distributional evidence, (a) Tools employed for subsistence tasks will be found at each residential locus. These include stone axes, adzes, and hoes with the appropriate wear patterns (Shafer 1983; Sonnenfeld 1962; Witthoft 1967). (b) Nonsubsistence activities, representing a variety of household tasks, such as rope making, weaving, and the manufacture of wooden implements and furniture needed by each family, will be represented among the chipped stone tools deposited at most domestic features, although there may be differences between residential loci in the types and amounts of implements used for these mundane tasks, (c) The discovery of an unusually high frequency of utilized tools bearing traces of wear from an identifiable activity may imply the presence of a locus of concentrated activity or produc-

Recognizing Heterogeneity in Tool Use

29

tion. When such a concentration occurs in addition to (a) and (b) above, part-time specialization is indicated. Specifically, this locus may represent the residence of a farmer/fisher who also engaged in some type of processing or manufacturing specialization. Fine woodworking, hide working, and bone working are examples of some parttime specializations that we hypothesized might have been present at Cerros. In all three cases, we could not expect to recover any of the manufactured wares; only the stone tools used to fashion them would be permanently recorded in the archaeological record. Model 4: No Specialized Production. If Cerros can best be described as a subsistence-oriented community of nonspecialized producers, little variation would be expected among residential loci in regard to the utilized stone tools. Deviations from the predicted uniform frequency distribution would be attributed primarily to differences in the amount of archaeological testing per structure and to small and variable tool sample sizes for many loci. The recovery techniques used at Cerros accentuate irregularities in tool discard behavior on the part of the Maya. They also make difficult the detection of natural processes, such as erosion or flooding, which disturb the primary associations and frequencies of artifacts (Schiffer 1976). Despite the very real problems of site formation processes which often mask or hinder the reconstruction of past behaviors, this model would predict that each excavated domicile would yield stone tools and sets of tools corresponding to the complete range of activities carried on in a Precolumbian coastal village; that is, implements needed for fishing, hunting, hide working, land clearing for agriculture, house building and maintenance, manufacture of cloth for garments, basketmaking, gathering of wild products, masonry, ornament making, food preparation, ceramic production, rope, cord, and mat making, and various woodworking activities. This scenario is one of lithic heterogeneity within each household assemblage, but little variability from one residential compound to the next.

Recognizing Heterogeneity in Chipped Stone Tool Use at Cerros In order to evaluate the Cerros lithic data in terms of the heuristic models of social and productive complexity described above, three goals had to be met. First, it was necessary to determine the prehistoric function of the utilized chipped stone tools. This was a

30

Tool Variability and Reconstruction of Activities

straightforward but time-consuming step, accomplished by comparison of use traces on Cerros implements with those on experimental lithic counterparts. A second important objective was to identify residential deposits and middens at the site. Architecture, stratigraphy, and the distribution of nonlithic artifacts were helpful here. Also, the multiplicity of everyday domestic activities represented at residential loci was reflected in lithic tool samples bearing traces of a great diversity of contact materials and functions, especially with regard to cutting/slicing implements (Hay 1978:28, 37). Then, on the household level it was necessary to differentiate tools employed in domestic production and maintenance from the remains of special activity loci where more intensive processing and manufacturing took place. Steps 2 and 3 depended upon the discernment and interpretation of heterogeneity in subsets of the artifactual assemblage. The recent archaeological literature abounds with suggestions on how to deal with the diversity, or heterogeneity, in artifactual distributions (Cannon 1983; C. Carr 1984; Conkey 1980; Ebert 1979; Fry 1979; Kintigh 1984; McGuire 1983; Rice 1981). As pointed out by Aubrey Cannon (1983:786), there are several basic quantification measures for looking at artifact distributions: (1) absolute frequencies, (2) diversity, or the number of different categories represented, and (3) proportional frequencies. For my analysis of the chipped stone tools from Cerros I have opted for interpretations based mainly on the first two of these measures; that is, on comparisons of artifact counts and on the relative diversity of functions noted between various loci at the site. Despite the availability of and precedence for performing more complex statistical manipulations, such as analysis of variance or multivariate clustering or principal components analysis (Aldenderfer 1982; Christenson and Read 1977; Close 1978; Cowgill 1968; Hodson 1969; Whallon 1973), I chose a more straightforward and intuitive approach for the chronological, spatial, and contextual interpretation of my functional data. I think this course is appropriate (and necessary) because of the nature of my sample, which is quite small for most features. Extreme variations in tool sample size between mound groups tend to magnify heterogeneity between features with only a few chipped stone tools. Further, at loci with moderate to large samples of lithic implements, sample size exaggerates homogeneity in the distribution of many tool functions. In addition, although the overall number of tools is large, many functional categories occur too infrequently to conform to the requirements of the multivariate techniques mentioned above. Because of the redun-

Recognizing Heterogeneity in Tool Use dancy of many stone tool functions over the entire site, care must be taken not to attribute undue significance to the distribution of a few use categories that occur in very low frequencies. For all of these reasons, I believe that these problems can best be dealt with by inspection of the data in tabular form.

31

CHAPTER 3

EXPERIMENTAL USE OF STONE TOOLS

Ethnography and direct experimentation were the methods employed to overcome limited familiarity with the lithic medium. Unfortunately, ethnohistory and social anthropology seldom furnish archaeologically relevant information concerning the functional and economic significance of stone tools. For example, what are the advantages of specific tool morphologies for performing various tasks? What accounts for the observed patterns of tool breakage? And what levels of skill and labor investment are represented in the manufacture of particular types of implements? Archaeologists interested in these issues have had to generate these data themselves, through direct observation of traditional societies (Gould 1980; Hayden 1978; Hayden and Deal 1981; Jones 1980; Nations and Clark 1983) and by means of experimentation in the manufacture and utilization of flaked stone implements (Abrams 1984; Clark 1982; Crabtree 1968; Hester et al. 1976; Keeley 1980; Semenov 1964; Shafer 1976). In order to maximize the relevancy of ethnoarchaeological and experimental data to archaeological interpretation, a well-thought-out research design is essential in order to avoid the improper use of analogy and so as to test as many alternative behavioral hypotheses as possible (Shafer 1979; Tringham 1978). Most ethnoarchaeologists agree that valid cultural analogies may be based on either ( 1 ) direct historical continuities, or (2) general comparisons between cultures that share similar ecological situations, subsistence strategies, and levels of technological development (Ascher 1961; Gould and Watson 1982). Experimentation with modern Mayan inhabitants in the vicinity of Cerros satisfies both of these requirements insofar as it is possible in the late twentieth century to find an analog for the Preclassic Maya of northern Belize. For this reason a series of lithic experiments designed to aid in understanding the functions of lowland Mayan stone tools and their role in the prehistoric economy at Cerros was conducted at the site

Experimental Use of Stone Tools

33

during the seventh and final field season, January through May 1981. With the aid of several Mayan workmen from the nearby village of Chunox, I set out to perform a wide range of subsistence and other tasks that I believe were routinely carried out during Precolumbian times at this swampy coastal site. We used modern replicas of the common lithic tool types recovered from Late Preclassic contexts at Cerros. These consist of "formal" tools of Colha chert, prismatic blades of obsidian from El Chayal, and "expedient" or informal flake tools made from Colha chert and local chalcedony flakes and from broken formal tools. The formal chert tools were resharpened as needed; all resharpening flakes were recovered. We worked as many local materials as possible. Time and circumstances did not allow for numerous replications of most of the tasks, with the exception of butchering and woodworking. In many cases we were able to use both chert and obsidian tools for the same task, thus affording the opportunity of comparing the use-life, resultant use wear, and its rate of formation on different raw material types. Throughout, our aim was to use the tools in purposeful or "taskoriented" ways, rather than in a mechanical fashion such as at a fixed angle, motion, or pressure (as per Tringham et al. 1974). As Lawrence H. Keeley has pointed out: "This [latter] method does not replicate aboriginal conditions.. . . The edge damage patterns which arise from mechanical experiments are likely to give a false and deceptively tidy picture of use alterations to edges" (Keeley 1980:15 ). I am convinced that only purposeful experimentation will result in comparative use-wear data that will correspond realistically to the use damage created on archaeological lithic implements. At the start of the experimental program none of the Belizean participants was accustomed to using stone tools. However, all are exceptionally knowledgeable in the use of modern tool counterparts in this environment for swidden agriculture, hunting, butchering, hide working, carpentry, etc. I concede that in some cases our method of tool use (for example, prehension or contact angle) may differ from prehistoric Mayan custom; but in all cases we were able, with practice, to use the lithic implements effectively to perform the tasks. The prime obstacle that we had to overcome during the course of our work was the propensity of some of the formal chert tools to slip in their hafts during use. This caused countless delays in the work and resulted in a good deal of experimentation with haft morphology and binding. Some of these variations will be discussed below, within the context of the experiment descriptions. The experiments to be discussed are the use of chipped stone tools for felling trees, manufacturing a wooden table, making bows and arrows, basketmaking,

34

Experimental Use of Stone Tools

Figure 4. Binding chert axe with Belizean vine. Figure 5. Chopping a chacah tree. Figure 6. (right) Chopping second growth, or monte chico.

Chopping and Land Clearance

35

butchering, shaping limestone and sherd artifacts, making gourd containers, and manufacturing a conch shell trumpet. Chopping and Land Clearance (Figures 4-6) Several recent studies in experimental archaeology have investigated functional aspects of stone axes, both in the New World and in the Old (e.g., Carneiro 1979; Coles 1979; Iverson 1956; Saraydar and Shimada 1971; 1973; Harding and Young 1979; Shafer 1979). With the exception of the last two cited, the emphasis of these works was on the hafting and use of groundstone implements, rather than the chert biface forms which are ubiquitous in Mayan archaeological contexts (W. R. Coe 1965; Kidder 1947; Shafer 1983; Wilk 1978b). The Cerros lithic collection contains both ground and chipped stone axe types, but the flaked chert variety, believed to originate at the Colha chert "factory," predominates (Garber 1980; Mitchum 1983; Shafer and Hester 1983). Many Mayanists hypothesize that these oval bifaces were used prehistorically for forest clearing associated with swidden agriculture and also for controlling weeds and clearing underbrush in planted fields and around residential zones (Bullard and Bullard 1965 :28; Stoltman 1978:21; Wilk 1978a: 139; Willey et al. 1965 '.426). With the chopping experiments at Cerros I

36

Experimental Use of Stone Tools

was interested in determining: (1) how well suited these chert bifaces were for chopping; (2) the resultant edge damage and other microscopic use traces (which then could be used to identify chopping tools among archaeological specimens from Cerros); (3) the effective use-life of the implements when employed in chopping; and (4) any distinctive patterns of tool breakage associated with hafting methods and/or with use of axes to clear primary forest or second growth. For the tree chopping and land clearance experiments I used four oval bifaces of chert. These were hafted in handles hewn from local hardwoods, secured in the haft with leather strips (to prevent the sharp flaked tool margins from fraying the binding), and bound with local vines, fibers, and henequen twine. At times cedar resin was employed as an adhesive. All of these materials were available to us at the site of Cerros. Table 2 gives the basic dimensions and summary data corresponding to the utilization of these specimens. There is good ethnographic, archaeological, and experimental evidence that stone axes were used in the manner of hatchets rather than like modern steel axes (Carneiro 1979; Dickson 1981; Palacio 1976; Schoen 1969; Shafer and Hester, in press); that is, they were hafted in short handles, approximately 30-40 centimeters long, the length of a human forearm. Handles of this length are appropriate for chipping at a tree with short, quick strokes, using mainly the elbow and wrist, so as not to shatter the stone blade (Iverson 1956: 37-38). Also, the short-handled axe is easily carried on the hip, tucked into its owner's belt or breechcloth (Dickson 1981:100). The vegetation in the vicinity of Cerros can best be described as between tropical and subtropical rain forest, subject to swamp conditions along the coast. Two levels of plant succession are at work: (1) The long-term primary succession, which climaxes in broadleaf dominants. Examples of mature hardwoods observed at Cerros include cedar (Cedrela mexicana), siricote [Cordia dodecandra), yaxnik (Vitex quameri), chacah [Bursera simaruba), sapote [Achias sapote), granadillo [Dalbergia cubiguitzensis), mahogany (Swietenia macrophylla), and ramón blanco [Trophis racemosa) (sources of floral identification: local informants and Standley and Record 1936). (2) The more rapid successional process associated with the return of subclimax vegetation following extensive disruption of primary vegetation (Lundell 1937; Scarborough 1980). This stage, also called cañada and huamil in its early years, is characterized by dense bush made up of young trees, vines, and thickets. One aim of the experiments was to see if the chopping use wear incurred on chert ovate bifaces while clearing mature trees (i.e., climax forest or monte alto) is distinguishable from that which results

Table 2. Chopping experiments Specimen No. 1 Maximum measurement (mm.) Length Width Thickness Bit angle (°) Contact material Length of use Number of resharpenings Number of breaks

Macroscopic use wear

2

3

4

132 63 17 55-65 Second growth 8hr.

144 67 21 56-68 Large hardwoods 1 hr.

160 63 19 50 Large hardwoods 7hr.

167 62 19 55-70 Second growth 1 hr. (is too short to rehaft and use)

3 1, in haft after 1 hr. use (end shock)

— 1, after 20 min. (in haft, end shock) 2, after 1 hr. (midsection snap) Yes, dorsal & ventral stacked step fractures, light polish on haft zone

1 1, first hr. (haft break, end shock) 2, after31/2hr. (midsection fracture) Abrasion of lateral margins, dorsal & ventral step flaking, dorsal &. ventral feather terminated flakes at bit

— 1, broke into three pieces, bending fractures at midsection

Yes, bilateral step flaking

Dorsal &. ventral stacked step fractures, slight polish on haft surface

38

Experimental Use of Stone Tools

when the same tool form is used to clear dense second growth (or monte chico) associated with the regeneration of milpa plots in the area. For this reason two axes were used to chop down large hardwood species, including a 20-year-old yaxnik and a 3 5 -year-old chacah. The other two elongate bifaces were used to clear second growth. Chert axe no. 1 was hafted in a pixoy handle and bound first with chich much vine (species uncertain; possibly Sicydium tamnifulium), then with henequen fiber rope. This specimen proved extremely effective at chopping second growth; the sole problem was keeping the biface secure in its haft. At one point during the clearing the blade flew out of the haft and was lost temporarily on the leafcovered forest floor. An error made repeatedly by us, and also frequently detectable in the archaeological record, was the failure to insert the axe head deeply enough into the handle. This resulted in a tremendous application of force at the tapered butt end, which caused a fracture within the haft. Over a 3-week period, specimen no. 1 performed 8 hours of actual chopping. During this time I resharpened the bit three times with an antler billet and a small limestone percussor. At the end of the experiment the biface was damaged but still serviceable. Use modification on the implement and sharpening flakes are described in Chapter 4. Axe no. 2 held up for only 1 hour chopping high bush. It was hafted in a granadillo shaft. After 20 minutes' use on a mature tree, a break occurred in the haft zone, 4 centimeters from the butt. We removed the broken butt, inserted a hardwood wedge to fill the empty space, drove the blade deeper into the haft, and rebound it with henequen fiber. Then it was used to fell a large yaxnik tree, with a diameter of 50-60 centimeters. By this time the axe was somewhat less effective; it had a tendency to slip within the haft, even though it was tightly bound. This problem might have been eliminated by removing the wedge and driving the blade deeper into the haft slit, but that would have shortened the protruding blade element to the point that it could not penetrate deeper into the tree. (A possible solution to this dilemma might be to increase the bit angle of the blade, thus making the contact area thicker. This would, I believe, strengthen the edge but make for slower progress in chopping.) After a 40minute assault on the yaxnik, the biface snapped at midsection, after penetrating one-third of the tree's diameter. No resharpening was necessary during this brief period of use. The third chert axe was used to chop monte alto and in the subsequent manufacture of a pixoy table (described in the following section). The implement was resharpened only once but had to be re-

Chopping and Land Clearance

39

peatedly rebound (seven times), first with chich much and mojaoa (balsa) fibers, later with henequen twine. This tool was hafted twice; first in a siricote handle that split, then in a pixoy handle. After 7 hours' service and two breaks, the implement was still usable, although it was considerably shorter (80 millimeters remained of the original 160-millimeter maximum length). Both fractures occurred while the axe was being used to fell monte alto. One of the trees chopped down was a large chacah, 95 centimeters in diameter, estimated at 35 years old. Two men took turns attacking the chacah with axe no. 3. It toppled after approximately 11/2hours of heavy toil. In addition to chopping large hardwoods, this specimen was employed intermittently to supply lumber for the manufacture of a rough pixoy table. Pixoy (Guazuma ulmifolia) is a moderately soft wood, much easier to fell than the larger hardwood trees of the high bush. Approximately 31/2hours were devoted to downing six stout pixoy trees, which then were measured and chopped to the correct lengths for four table legs and a frame. The legs had a diameter of approximately 28 centimeters each. Seven more pixoy logs were measured and cut to form the table top. All but the legs were split lengthwise, first by driving the axe blade and subrectangular biface chert tool no. 22 into the logs with a hardwood percussor, and then by inserting wooden wedges that were driven deeper until the log split lengthwise (see Figures 10-11). In 40 minutes nine lengths of pixoy were split to form the tabletop planks and the frame. Axe no. 4, the longest and narrowest of the four oval bifaces, fractured into three pieces after just 1 hour's work chopping second growth. Specifically, the tool was used to clear muc (Dalbergia glubra), julub (Bravaisia tubiflora), and vines, brush with less than 5 years' growth. There was no need to replace the sapote haft or to resharpen the implement during this time. The tool was retired from service when it broke at the midsection, rendering the blade too short to penetrate the vegetation if rehafted. Comments on Chopping Experiments (Figures 7-8). Obviously, I have not produced a large enough sample of chopping tools, nor used them long enough, to make statistically valid conclusions concerning their use-life, potential rate of work, etc. However, I believe that considerable information has been generated by these experiments, which I hope to expand upon in the future. ( 1 ) Chopping experiments with the chert bifaces resulted in a set of use-wear standards, both on the blades themselves and on their

Figure 7. Chert axes after use; also resharpening and

flakes with nos. 1 and 3.

Ch opping and Land Clearan ce

41

Figure 8. Broken chert axes. Left to right: no. 1, end shock, haft break; nos. 3 and 2, midsection bending fractures. resharpening flakes, which can be used to identify chopping tools among archaeological collections (see "Chopping Use Wear" section in Chapter 4). (2) It appears that frequent resharpening of stone axes is necessary; I estimate once every 3-4 hours of use. This is in general agreement with Robert L. Carneiro's comments regarding Amazonian practices and with those of William H. Townsend from New Guinea, both of whom refer to groundstone chopping tools (Carneiro 1979:41; Townsend 1969:201). Townsend reported that sharpening a groundstone blade takes about an hour. In my limited experience, only about 10-15 minutes were required to sharpen a bifacially chipped chert axe. (3) In regard to the relative advantages of chipped stone versus groundstone axe blades for felling trees: (a) Given a supply of the raw material, it takes considerably less time to produce a finished bifacially chipped axe blade than to peck and grind a stone axe of the same size. (b) Less time is needed to resharpen a chipped stone artifact, perhaps one-fourth as much time—although the flaked tool may require resharpening slightly more often. (c) The chipped stone axe may be more effective at penetrating a tree, because a sharper, more acute contact angle can be achieved

42

Experimental Use of Stone Tools

through controlled knapping; the working edge of a groundstone axe blade tends to be more rounded, less "pointed" than one of chipped stone. Therefore, each time a chipped stone axe contacts a tree, it penetrates deeper and does more damage than does a ground axe, which results in more crushing of the contact area. (d) For this reason, I predict that a sharp chipped axe will perform any given task in less time than a groundstone axe of an equivalent size and weight, provided neither specimen breaks. (e) I suspect that the breakage rate is much greater for flaked than ground axes. Even when expertly made (that is, to the most efficient ratio of length: width ¡thickness), well hafted, and used properly by experienced choppers, such as the Preclassic and Classic period lowland Maya, these oval bifaces suffered a high attrition rate. Archaeological collections from Belize and Mexico include numerous broken and reworked specimens of this form (Hernández and Jiménez 1983; McAnany 1982; Mitchum 1983; Stoltman 1978; Wilk 1976; Willey et al. 1965; Shafer 1983). On the other hand, groundstone axes with polished bits are particularly suited to absorbing stresses without fracturing. (4) Prehistorically, the cutting and fitting of axe handles and periodic tool-binding episodes must have been common tasks for an agricultural people such as the Maya. The preparation of a slit axe handle can occupy a person for an hour (see Keeley 1982:800). Careful insertion of the axe blade and subsequent binding may take 45 minutes longer. Tool bindings need to be checked daily; tightening or replacement of haft lashing is necessary whenever an axe blade begins to slip in its haft. At present I have no way to estimate the frequency of performance of this task in Late Preclassic agricultural contexts. Clearly we still have a lot to learn in future experiments about the best ways to bind an axe (see Dickson 1981:158-167). (5) During the course of our experiments I came across two types of fractures of stone axe heads when felling trees with chipped stone bifaces: (a) The distal break, which occurs within the haft zone and which usually reduces the blade length by 2 - 3 centimeters, results from insufficient support of the blade and is attributable to the hafting error of not inserting the blade deeply enough into the handle. Experimental axes 1-3 suffered distal breaks. (b) The midsection snap, a bending fracture, occurred during deployment of three of the four axes (nos. 2, 3, and 4; see Figure 8). At present I do not know if this type of break is distinctive to the chopping function, or if all oval bifaces, regardless of their manner of use, break in this fashion. The question can be resolved, I believe, by a

Making a Rough Wooden Work Table comparison of the breakage patterns of oval bifaces with chopping use wear and other oval bifaces whose use traces indicate different functions, such as adzing, canal or ridged-field excavation, or hoeing. The collection of chert bifaces recovered from Pulltrouser Swamp and from Cerros offers a potential data base for the investigation of this possibility (see Shafer 1983 and Chapter 4). (6) The effective use-life of a hafted chert oval biface used as a chopper is unknown at present. Elsewhere (Lewenstein 1983) I roughly estimated the use-life at a minimum of 40 hours' actual chopping time, but considerably less than the life expectancy of a groundstone axe (a year or more). A related question is the rate of clearing that can be performed with these stone axes: how much primary forest, second growth, etc., can be cleared per person per day with a chipped stone biface. These questions cannot be resolved on the basis of the limited experimentation carried out to date; but the data are within the grasp of ethnoarchaeologists willing to pursue more extensive chopping experiments. It is now possible to estimate reliably the rate of land clearance using steel axes and machetes. Further experimental use of chipped and groundstone chopping implements in a variety of environmental settings eventually will lead to accurate work conversion factors for comparing steel, groundstone, and flaked stone axes and for estimating the forest-clearing potential represented by Precolumbian stone axes. For this analysis I found especially relevant (a) the use-wear data which enabled me to identify chopping tools, and (b) the estimates I was able to make concerning the frequency of resharpening and tool use-life. This information helped determine the significance of the number and distribution of chopping tools recovered at Cerros. Making a Rough Wooden Work Table (Figures 9-11) Rarely are wooden artifacts preserved in archaeological contexts in the Mayan lowlands. Nothing resembling wooden furniture was recovered during excavations at Cerros. Nevertheless, I hypothesize that the Maya, from Late Preclassic times on, took advantage of the abundance of locally available timber to supply themselves with wooden articles, such as benches, stretching racks, tables, etc. In order to learn about the kinds of stone tools used in rough woodworking, I set out to make a table, using only native materials and several stone tool replicas. Three people made and assembled the table over the course of several days and concurrently with the performance of other tasks. We were not trying to determine how quickly we could make a table;

43

rather, we wanted to know which tools were most suitable for this task and how they could be used most effectively, and to generate a set of use-wear data, etc. We chose to make the table of pixoy, a moderately soft wood that is commonly associated with monte alto/huamil at Cerros. Six basic steps were involved: (1) Chopping the logs: four legs, two for the frame, and seven for the table top. This step has already been described above. Time chopping: 3 hours, 10 minutes. (2) Bark removal and smoothing. First, the logs were pounded with a limestone rock to loosen the bark, which was stripped off by hand or with an adzing motion by hafted chert specimen no. 11, a subrectangular biface. Next, any knobs or bumps were sliced off the logs, again with an adzing motion. This took slightly more than 2 hours. Next the logs were smoothed and planed with specimen no. 6, a bear-claw-shaped biface, operated hand-held for approximately 3 1/2 hours, and with specimen no. 9, an unhafted domed scraper/plane, used 2 hours, 45 minutes. (3) Splitting logs, lengthwise, to make a table frame and table top planks. A length of henequen twine was rolled in decomposed limestone until it was chalky, then stretched taut lengthwise along each log. When the string was plucked, it snapped back into place and marked a straight line lengthwise along the log. Stone and wooden

Making a Rough Wooden Work Table

45

Figure 9. (left) Removing bumps from pixoy table leg with chert adze no. 14. Figure 10. Splitting a pixoy log with hardwood wedges and billet. Figure 11. Smoothing a split pixoy log with chert adze no. 11.

Table 3. Table-making experiments Specimen No.

Chert

Raw Material

Length of Use

Resharpenings

Chop logs, wedge Scraper/ plane

3.5 hr.

0

4 hr.

1

No

Scraper/ plane

6.5 hr.

0

60-73

Yes

4 hr.

1

Tranchet adze

60

Yes

Strip bark, adze, split logs, wedge Shape table legs

Orange-peel tranchet adze Blade

51

Yes

Adze

1 hr.

26

No

Cut twine

10 min.

Description

Angle of Bit (V

Haft

Function

3

Oval biface

50

Yes

Chert

6

"Bear claw"

60-74

No

Chert

9

77-88

Chert

11

Tear-drop scraper/ plane Biface

Chert

14

Chert

15

Obsidian

44

Note: All tools were still serviceable after completion of this project.

3hr.

o,

but is dull 0 0

Use Wear Abrasion, dorsal & ventral step flaking Edge crushing, dorsal: multiple stacked step fractures Edge abrasion, dorsal: stacked step fracture Abraded bit, unifacial dorsal nibbling, step terminations Needs orange-peel removed; nibbling of bit Dorsal flaking, feather terminations Minimal

Making a Bow and Arrows

47

wedges were then driven into the wood along this line, with a dense hardwood percussor. Chert axe no. 3 and subrectangular biface no. 11, both hafted, were driven in along these lines in order to split logs for the four frame sections and the table-top planks. Once the log began to separate, the stone tools were replaced by wooden wedges, which were easily made and which were considered ad hoc, disposable tools. Splitting nine logs took about half an hour. (4) Planing the split logs for the frame and table top. Splitting pixoy lumber with stone and wooden implements results in the exposure of a rough surface. Initially we removed irregularities with a hafted adze, chert specimen no. n . This took approximately 20 minutes. Final planing was accomplished with two hand-held chert tools, specimen no. 6, the "bear claw," and specimen no. 9, a teardrop-shaped thick scraper/plane. We spent almost 6 person-hours smoothing the split logs. The teardrop scraper/plane (specimen no. 9) worked more effectively at this task than did specimen no. 6. ( 5 ) Shaping the table legs. A square section had to be removed from the top of each leg in order to accommodate the four-sided frame that supports the table top. We used three hafted adzes—nos. n , 14, and 15—to shape these joints. The subrectangular biface was used 20 minutes; we used the tranchet adzes (as described by Shafer 1976) for approximately 4 hours. (6) The final step was the assembly of the table. The only tool used was a hand-held obsidian blade, which cut several lengths of henequen twine used to lash the frame together and to secure the planks used as table top. Actual cutting time was about 10 minutes. The finished product was a rough wooden work table 90 centimeters wide by 118 centimeters long with a height of approximately 1 meter. The table was used to dry and work large animal hides. Table 3 summarizes the use of seven stone implements for making the table. Making a Bow and Arrows (Figures 12-17) Use of the bow and arrow did not spread evenly through the New World. It was not until Late Postclassic times that this weapon was brought into the Maya area. The bows and arrows reported for the Maya area by the early Spanish chroniclers are still being manufactured today by the Lacandon of the eastern Chiapas rain forest. These artifacts and the traditional methods of producing them have been described by Alfred M. Tozzer (1907) and more recently by James D. Nations (1981; also in Nations and Clark 1983). I set out to make a bow-and-arrow set, Lacandon style, in order to gain experience in the use of stone tools in fine woodworking and in

Figure 12. (top left) Shaving mahogany rod for bow with chert flake. Figure 13. (top right) Straightening mahogany bow after heating. Figure 14. (bottom left) Stretching and twisting extabentún fiber for bowstring. Figure 15. (bottom right) Peeling mojaoa bark for fiber. Figure 16. (facing page, left) Tying a bowstring of mojaoa fiber. Figure 17. (facing page, right) Arrow components. Left to right: woodpecker feathers for fletching, cane arrow shafts, hardwood foreshafts, obsidian arrow point, arrow nocks.

Making a Bow and Arrows

49

the fabrication of bark fiber. Although bows and arrows were not in use at Cerros until Late Postclassic times, the tool-using tasks involved in their manufacture (shaping, smoothing, and carving wooden shafts) are common to many other woodworking activities, including the manufacture of spear shafts, broom handles, stone and bone implement handles, and the carving of wooden figurines. The use damage incurred on the tools used to make the bows and arrows is applicable for comparisons with archaeological chipped stone from all chronological phases, not just with Postclassic tools. The use wear incurred on the twenty-one chert and obsidian tools used for this project will later be used as examples of damage from whittling, planing, grooving, and scraping several varieties of wood and fiber available to the prehistoric Mayan inhabitants of Cerros. Bow-and-arrow manufacture can be broken down into a series of consecutive steps: (a) shaping the bow; (b) fiber procurement and bow stringing; (c) making cane arrow shafts; (d) whittling foreshafts and arrow nocks; (e) fashioning stone or wooden points; (f ) assembling, fletching, and binding the arrows. The Bow. Lignum vitae ( Guaiacum sanctum), the hardwood traditionally selected by the Lacandon for bow making, is not available in

50

Experimental Use of Stone Tools

northern Belizean coastal areas. As a substitute, we chose lancewood (Malmea depressa) and mahogany (Swietenia macrophylla). Lancewood was selected on the advice of native informants, who describe it as hard but very flexible, even when dry. Mahogany was chosen for its great strength. The smaller of the two bows was shaped from a young lancewood tree; finished dimensions are 120 centimeters long and 3 centimeters in diameter. Over a period of 4 hours we used chert scraper/plane no. 10, hand-held, to remove bark and to shape and smooth the shaft. The implement worked well at stripping and planing, but it was not very effective at removing bumps from the shaft. For this purpose we employed three flakes made from chalcedony collected nearby at Saltillo. Sawing knobs from a young hardwood with stone flakes was arduous and time-consuming; it took three flakes and several hours to remove all irregularities in the bow. None of the flakes was retouched or resharpened during the sawing operations. Similar implements were in use until recently for bow-and-arrow making by New Guinea highland hunters (see White 1968). Upon completion, the bow was arched and strung with a local vine called extabentún. The second bow, crafted from a length of mahogany, conforms to traditional Lacandon specifications, that is, a finished length of 1.65 meter and .03 meter diameter (Nations 1981). Chert scraper/ plane no. 9 was used to remove bark and initially smooth the shaft. We repeatedly heat-tempered the bow over a fire and then bent it to straighten any curves. When hot, the wood was quite pliable. Two hours were given over to final smoothing of the bow with an obsidian blade (specimen no. 37). To help secure the bowstring we used an obsidian blade (specimen no. 45) to cut shallow grooves in the shaft, one at each end. The Lacandon finish polishing their bows by rubbing t h e m back and forth across a whetstone, a step that we skipped because the bow already appeared perfectly straight and smooth. Like the Lacandon bow, our mahogany replica was smooth, symmetrical, extremely hard, and exceptionally stout. This is a "self bow" that is almost perfectly straight at rest position (Nations 1981). The Bowstring and Binding Fibers. The Lacandon make the cord for their bowstrings from henequen [Agave sisalana). Fibers of separate leaves are braided and rubbed with a mixture of wax from the wild stingless bee and soot from burned copal resin to create a good fiber bond (Nations 1981). For our bowstring, we also used a braided henequen cord rubbed with this sticky mixture. Both the resin and

Making a Bow and Arrows

51

the wax were available in the vicinity of Cerros. We obtained copal from the tree, Protium copal, and used sticks to extract wax from the hollow of an old pucté (Bucida buceras) inhabited by traditional Mayan bees, which we distracted temporarily with a guano fire. A special bark fiber that the Lacandon obtain from the balsacorkwood tree (Heliocarpus donnell smithii) is used to secure the bowstring and to bind each end of the bow. This same fiber is used in assembling arrows, to attach feather fletching and stone points, and to bind the juncture of the hardwood foreshafts with the cane shafts. In northern Belize the balsa tree is referred to as mojaoa and is common in fallowed milpas. We made mojaoa fiber according to the techniques reported by Nations and Tozzer for the Chiapas Lacandon Maya. With chert biface no. 11 we made incisions as high as we could reach in the balsa trees, usually about 2 meters above ground. The cuts were not deep, just sufficient to penetrate through the bark layer, which was then peeled downward in wide bands. The inner bark was soaked in water for at least a month. After this, the inner fibers were separated into 2-inch strips, dried, and pulled apart into long, thin ribbons. Before use, we rubbed these fiber strings with the copal resin/beeswax substance; then they were twisted to form the sticky black twine used for binding. Only two lithic implements were used in association with the fiber production: chert biface no. 11, used both hafted and hand-held for approximately 1 hour, and obsidian blade no. 44, for cutting the fibers, for a total of perhaps 5-10 minutes. (Chert biface no. 11 had been used previously as an adze during the manufacture of the wooden table. The use damage that resulted from these two activities will be discussed in Chapter 4.) Cane Arrow Shafts. An unretouched chert flake saw (specimen no. 19), used for 2 hours, was the only tool needed to produce an ample supply of cane shafts. Like the Lacandon, we used caña brava or carrizo (Phragmites australis), a plant which is found locally in fallowed milpas and kitchen gardens. As stipulated by Nations (1981), we cut our cane to the proper lengths: 2 feet, 9 inches, and 3 feet, 9 inches. Any curvatures were corrected by heating the cane over a fire and gently bending in the proper direction to produce a straight shaft. Hardwood Foreshafts and Nocks. Tozzer illustrated the typical Lacandon Maya bow and arrow (1907: 58). In addition to the bow,

52

Experimental Use of Stone Tools

string, and cane shafts already described, the set includes four varieties of foreshaft as well as reinforced nocks or plugs that are inserted into the distal end of the shafts to protect the fragile cane from being split as the arrows are drawn back and released. Each of the five arrows we produced has a hardwood foreshaft and nock made of either siricote or botoncillo. The set includes the following types of foreshaft: two diamond-shaped bird bolt arrows, one each of siricote and botoncillo) a sharp-pointed siricote fish arrow; a stone-tipped botoncillo foreshaft barbed along the lateral margins, used to kill monkeys; and a stone-tipped botoncillo specimen for game animals and for defense (see Figure 17). We used twelve stone tools to shape the foreshafts and nocks: one chert flake and eleven snapped obsidian blade segments. The chert flake was less effective than the blades for shaping arrows, but it had a longer use-life. Chert flake no. 37 was used 3 hours in whittling the siricote monkey barb, after having been used previously to smooth the mahogany bow. It lasted a total of 5 hours. The eleven obsidian blades had use-lives that ranged from 0.5 to 4 hours, with an average of 1.7 hours per blade. With the exception of the barbed monkey point, an average of slightly more than 1 hour was devoted to the production of each hardwood foreshaft. We used six tools for approximately 10 hours to whittle the monkey barb. Our specimen is far more elaborate than the Lacandon original. Over a period of several days enthusiasm prompted us to pick it up at free moments and to whittle or smooth it a bit more. Stone Points, Feathers, Assemblage of the Arrows, and Binding. The stone tips for the game arrow and monkey barb were pressure flaked from obsidian blade segments. Feathers of the lineated woodpecker [Dryocopus lineatus) were split lengthwise and attached as fletching to the base of each cane shaft in order to straighten the arrow's trajectory and allow for greater accuracy. Final assembly included fitting the stone points into slots on the wooden foreshafts; inserting the foreshafts and nocks into the pithy center of the cane shafts, at the proximal and distal ends, respectively; and binding these joints and the fletching with mojaoa string. Table 4 gives a brief summary of the stone tools used to make the experimental bows and arrows.

Table 4. Tools used for making bows and arrows Specimen No. Description

Edge Angle

n

Haftedl

Contact Material

Raw Material: Chert Mahogany Strip bark, smooth bow

9

Teardrop scraper/ plane

77-80

10

Teardrop scraper/ plane

72

11

63

19

Subrectangular biface Flake

49

Cane

20

Flake

45

Lancewood

26

Flake

29

—

27

Flake

35

—

37

Flake

27 42

—

28

Blade

25, 41

29

Blade

31,34

Function

Lancewood

Yes

Mojaoa

Lancewood

ReHours sharpening of Use

Still Usable?

Edge abrasion, ventral step terminated flakes Slight edge abrasion

Yes

0

Unifacial nibbling

Yes

2

0

No

2

0

1/2

0

Abraded margin, dorsal & ventral nibbling Bifacial nibbling, edge abrasion Abraded edge

Yes

1

0

Edge abrasion

No

2 3

0 0

1/6

0

Strip bark, remove bumps, smooth Chop through bark Saw

4

1

1

Cut knobs from bow

Cut bumps from bow Cut bumps Lancewood from bow Smooth bow Mahogany Whittle, Botoncillo smooth arrow foreshaft Raw Material: Obsidian Siricote, Whittle, scrape arrow botoncillo foreshaft Siricote, Whittle botoncillo arrow foreshafts

Macrowear

3

/4

3/4

0 0

Unifacial overlapping microflaking

Unifacial overlapping microflaking Unifacial overlapping microflakes

Yes

No

Yes No

No No

Table 4 . (continued) Specimen Description No.

Edge Angle (°) Hafted?

Contact Material

Function

ReHours sharpening of Use

30

Blade

25, 32

—

Siricote, botoncnlo

Whittle foreshafts

3/4

0

31

Blade

26, 55

—

Siricote, botoncillo

Whittle foreshafts

VA

0

32

Blade

29, 46

—

Siricote, botoncillo

Whittle foreshafts

1

0

33

Blade

29, 17

—

Botoncillo

3+

0

34

Blade

26, 27

—

Botoncillo

Whittle, make barbs in foreshaft Cut barbs in arrow foreshaft

3+

0

35

Blade

21-41, 31

—

Botoncillo

V/2

0

36

Blade

26, 27

—

Siricote

Cut barbs in arrow foreshaft Shape foreshaft

1/2

0

37

Blade

27, 42

—

Mahogany

Smooth bow

2

0

42

—

Botoncillo

Scrape arrow shaft

3

0

Whittle arrow foreshaft Cut fibers

4

0

1/6

0

Ve

0

41

Blade

28, 33

—

Botoncillo

44

Blade

26, 39

—

Mojaoa

45

Blade

34, 53

—

Mahogany

Groove bow for string

Macrowear Unifacial overlapping microflakes Unifacial overlapping microflakes Unifacial overlapping microflakes Unifacial overlapping microflakes Unifacial overlapping nibbling, continuous Noncontinuous nibbling, scalar scars Overlapping unifacial microflaking Unifacial overlapping microflakes Unifacial overlapping microflakes Unifacial overlapping microflakes Minute discontinuous nibbling Minute nibbling

Still Usable? No No No No No

No No No No No Yes Yes

Basketmaking

55

Basketmaking (Figures 18-19) Remains of ancient fibers, mats, and baskets seldom survive in archaeological contexts in the humid Mesoamerican lowlands. The production and use of these artifacts are hypothesized for the Preclassic Maya primarily on the basis of evidence recovered from highland areas throughout Mesoamerica, some dating back to the Archaic period. Fragments of early basketry have been reported from Tamaulipas (Johnson 1971:298) and from the Tehuacan Valley (MacNeish, Nelken-Turner, and Johnson 1967). Formative period mat and basket impressions have been found at several highland sites, among them Zacatenco (Vaillant 1935 :250, 271), San José Mogote (Flannery and Winter 1976:41), Tlapacoya (Barba de Piña Chan 1956:109-

Figure 18. Base of ak shush basket: cutting fiber end with obsidian blade. Figure 19. Wicker ak shush basket.

56

Experimental Use of Stone Tools

n o , 112, 131, Figure 3), and in the Guatemalan highlands (Woodbury 1965:178). Late Preclassic village contexts at Cerros have yielded clay textile impressions, which have not yet been analyzed (Crane 1986). I believe that the Preclassic inhabitants of Cerros were knowledgeable at basketmaking and that local vines and fibers were used to make these artifacts. It may be possible to identify these activities from the use wear left on stone tools excavated at Cerros as well as from clay impressions. Basketry is not a task that requires the extensive use of lithic implements. For the production of an experimental wicker basket of ak shush (genus and species unknown) we used three obsidian blade segments; however, it would have been possible for a single individual to cut all the fiber with one or two implements. My informant for the basketmaking endeavor was Eduardo Montalva of Chunox village, who learned as a child from his father. In order to produce a large wicker basket suitable for carrying corn and beans home from the milpa, we went into the huamil and gathered armloads of the long, slender ak shush vine and spread them out in a clearing to dry. After two days we collected the strands, which were flexible but no longer green, and cut twenty-four lengths, each approximately 1 meter long, to form the base and frame of the basket. For the sides we measured and cut forty-eight additional strips, each 40 centimeters long. Other vines were used in their entire lengths to weave around the frame. Before assembling the frame we had to saw or scrape off all the lumpy joints where the vines set out roots. Also, the long vines that were to be woven in and out between the upright stalks had to be cut diagonally at each end so that each new element would fit snugly against the previous fiber. Figures 18 and 19 illustrate the techniques of making a wicker basket. Three unhafted obsidian blades were used throughout, approximately 1 hour each. We leisurely worked on the basket for several days. It could have been completed in one evening, however. The dried vines must be used within a few days of gathering; otherwise they become too dry and break during weaving. By the time the basket was completed, the tools (obsidian specimens 1, 2, and 4) were noticeably dull, but microflaking was not extensive along the margins. Their use wear is discussed in detail in Chapter 4.

Butchering

57

Butchering (Figures 20-24) The faunal remains recovered from excavations at Cerros indicate that there was an abundance of fish and wild game available there in the past and that the Precolumbian inhabitants successfully exploited these resources. Many of the same wildlife species still inhabit the remote areas of northern Belize. During the 1981 field season Sorayya Carr, Cerros zooarchaeologist, undertook a program of animal procurement and butchering in order to set up a faunal collection for the area. I assisted in order to study the suitability and effects of stone tools for this work. The basic procedure that we used is similar to that described recently by Peter R. Jones (1980) in his discussion of goat butchering at Olduvai Gorge; that is, a vertical cut from the throat to the base of the tail, removal of the hide, removal of the internal organs and intestines, disarticulation, and defleshing. The principal difference between our methods and those learned by Jones from the Wakama of Olduvai is that in Belize it is not customary to hang the skinned and gutted carcass outdoors for 24 hours before removing the meat. We butchered seven animals with lithic tools: a 17-kilogram peccary (Tayassu sp.), a 34-kilogram jaguar (Felis onca), a white-tailed deer fawn (Odocoileus virginianus) that weighed just 5.5 kilograms, a 7.3-kilogram sea turtle or tortoise (Eretmochelys imbricata), a 2.5meter-long snake (Drymarchon corais), a woodpecker (Dryocopus lineatus), and a 28-kilogram puma (Felis concolor). All weights are approximate. (The only scale available was a 25-pound capacity "fisherman's model" of dubious precision.) Most animals were weighed piece by piece; for example, head, skin, entrails, limbs, etc. These numbers later were summed to get an estimated total body weight. The estimates are, in fact, low: during gutting we observed a rapid loss of body fluids, which consistently were not weighed. Following local custom, the butchering procedure varied somewhat in the case of the peccary and the tortoise. Peccaries are not skinned by the locals. Instead, the skin is tenderized and eaten along with the stewed meat. Before this can be done, however, it is necessary to remove the tough, bristly hair that covers the body of this pig-like creature. The slain peccary is placed on a bed of guano (Sabal mauritiiformis). More guano is piled atop the animal, and the heap is ignited. The flames are fanned until the bristles are well singed. Residual bristles then are removed by a thorough scraping, which also tenderizes the skin and renders it a delicacy. Traditionally, this scraping was performed with a piedra pom, or cylin-

58

Experimental Use of Stone Tools

Butchering

Figure 20. (facing page, top left) Removal of jaguar hide: initial slit, chest to chin, with obsidian blade in siricote handle. Figure 21. (facing page, top right) Removal of deer entrails by zooarchaeologist Sorayya Carr. Figure 22. (facing page, bottom) Jaguar hide. Figure 23. Deer and puma hides drying on dock. Figure 24. Scraping deer hide with chert flake.

59

60

Experimental Use of Stone Tools

drical piece of coral, according to native informants. In the absence of such an implement we used stout chert scrapers, which served well for bristle removal but less well for tenderizing—a task that calls for an abrasive surface. Aside from these variations, the peccary was prepared in a manner similar to the other animals. The shell of the sea tortoise also necessitated a slightly different butchering procedure. After the head was cut off, we sliced around the plastron, or lower portion of the shell, in order to sever the limbs and tail from the shell. This was somewhat difficult due to the creature's tough skin and the proclivity of its muscles to flex throughout the operation. The meat and organs were extracted from the shell with an obsidian implement hafted in a long handle. Twenty-six stone tools were used in the various butchering episodes, and also at times a steel knife or machete. Butchering in the humid tropics is not a leisurely paced activity, especially when more than one animal is bagged at a time. Ventral cavities must be opened quickly and entrails removed, or spoilage will occur. Butchery has been described as a social event, in which several individuals collaborate (Jones 1980:155). Our experiments also were communal events, partly to speed up the process. How long does it take to butcher an animal with stone tools? Jones estimated between 30 and 50 minutes for the Wakama to skin and gut a goat. Hester et al. (1976) worked 2.5 hours to completely butcher a young 18-kilogram doe—also a group effort. These figures do not differ markedly from our results. We found that skinning a large mammal can keep a butchering team occupied from 30 minutes to 1 hour. The upper limit applies if the hide is valuable (such as a jaguar pelt) and must not be damaged. The complete butchery usually was accomplished in 2 additional hours. The stone tools used in the butchering experiments consisted of obsidian blades and chert flakes, all without retouch. I did not find it necessary or desirable to resharpen any of the tools during their use ; however, they had to be rinsed frequently in water to prevent the buildup of fatty deposits along the cutting margins (see Brose 1975 for a discussion of this phenomenon and its role in the formation of lithic use wear). As for the suitability of flake tools to perform butchery, I agree with Hester et al. (1976: 52-53) that unretouched flakes (and blades) work better than bifacial tools for cutting, skinning, and defleshing. Jones, on the other hand, preferred larger, heavier, usually bifacially retouched tools for butchering. He found these more efficient because of their longer cutting edges, ease of prehension, and ability to withstand considerable pressure during use (Jones 1980:159-161).

Limestone Working

61

In my butchering experience I found the single most desirable attribute in a tool to be a sharp cutting edge. This was most easily achieved with an unretouched flake. It is true that such a small artifact can be tiring to grasp for an hour or more. This inconvenience can be resolved, however, by inserting the flake in a handle, which supports the tool and reduces the probability of breakage. Our data indicate that a stone flake used for butchering has a use-life that ranges from 20 minutes to the total period of time necessary for butchering an animal, depending on the amount of bone contact. Limestone Working (Figures 25-26) Evidence for shaping limestone at Cerros during the Late Preclassic includes the presence of formed limestone construction blocks and a number of artifact forms referred to as "hooters" (large elongate artifacts), donut stones, disks, and spheroids (see Garber 1980; Figures 8, 9, n - 1 3 for descriptions of Cerros materials; see also Willey 1972:128, 138; Willey, ed. 1978:91; Zier 1980:73). Some of these objects appear to have been pecked; others exhibit traces of score lines, along which they were to have been broken. In order to examine the possibility of producing these objects, as well as building blocks, with stone tools we used two experimental chert bifaces to shape limestone boulders that were found on the surface in the dispersed settlement. Approximately 2 hours were spent dressing stone blocks and molding disks and spheroids. We shaped the limestone boulders with chert tool specimens 5 and 12, hand-held. Both tools are subrectangular bifaces. Bit angles of 65o and 70o were driven into the limestone by indirect percussion: that is, the tools were used as chisels to chip away protrusions and to shape limestone artifacts. The tools were protected at their proximal ends by a leather pad, which minimized damage from the stone and hardwood percussors. Stoneworking rapidly consumed these two implements. As a result of their use as chisels, large and small flakes were driven off from both the proximal and distal extremities of the bifaces. The attrition rate was especially high at the proximal end, where it was battered by the percussor. After about 20 minutes' use the chert implements needed retouch and sometimes resharpening at the proximal, or striking, end. Each tool was used 1 hour. During this time we produced two disks, one spheroid, and several loaf-shaped limestone building blocks. At the end of the task neither tool was exhausted, but each had been reduced by attrition to about one-half its original length (from 100 and 122 millimeters to 60 and 66 millimeters maximum length, re-

62

Experimental Use of Stone Tools

Figure 25. Shaping limestone disk with chert biface, via bipolar technique. Figure 26. Three limestone disks, exhausted bifaces 5 and 12, leather pads, and antler billet.

Worked Sherds

63

spectively). Microscopic inspection was not needed to infer that these tools had been heavily worked. Apparent use wear includes bit crushing and the removal from dorsal and ventral aspects of large microflakes with step and hinge terminations. Two small bags of resharpening and use flakes were collected in the course of the stoneworking experiments. The use wear on these flakes and that suffered by the chert bifaces are discussed in Chapter 4. On the basis of limited experiments in stoneworking, I hypothesize that chipped stone implements may not have been ideal for working limestone. Even the relatively soft green volcanic tuff that was used for construction at Copán, which has a hardness of 3.5 when freshly quarried and 5.5 after exposure, is very resistant to shaping by chipped stone tools. In a recent experiment Eliot M. Abrams found an attrition rate of 3 0 - 6 5 percent in tool weight from shaping this soft, freshly quarried tuff into construction blocks. This destruction occurred on hafted bifacial choppers made of chert, basalt, and rhyolite after less than 3 hours' tool use (Abrams 1984:41). Alternatively, hardwood chisels made from local materials may have been equally effective as stoneworking instruments and more economical in terms of raw material transport and tool manufacture costs. In Chiapas Douglas D. Bryant (1982) experimented with the use of sapote colorado (Calocarpum sapota) branches to shape travertine construction blocks. Although his "slicing" method succeeded, he might have been able to achieve better results using short, fire-hardened wooden chisels and indirect percussion, as we have done. Worked Sherds (Figure 27) Elsewhere I have argued that unretouched chert flakes and obsidian blade segments were used by the Maya to recycle potsherds into net weights, or "mariposas," especially during the Late Postclassic (Lewenstein 1980). Hundreds of these casually shaped notched artifacts have been recovered at Cerros, along with a large number of perforated and unperforated sherd disks. The perforated sherds may have functioned as spindle whorls. Those without perforations are thought to have been gaming pieces or pot lids, depending on their size (Garber 1980:189-206). As an experiment, I made several ceramic objects from a selection of flat Preclassic potsherds collected on the beach at Cerros. I modified the sherds into one large pot lid, three gaming pieces, and thirteen notched "mariposas." The technique used to work sherds consisted of scoring a cutting line with an ad hoc implement (either a flake or a blade segment) and

64

Experimental Use of Stone Tools

Figure 27. Sherd artifacts: "mariposa" net weights, pot lids, and gaming pieces. At left, chert flake and two obsidian blade tools.

snapping the sherd along the line. With a sawing motion, notches are cut on two opposing sides in order to make a "mariposa" net weight. Final shaping consists of abrading the rough edges against a stone to effect a circular or other outline. It takes from 3 to 15 minutes to make a sherd disk or notched sherd, depending on the quality of work desired. These informal stone tools can cut sherds up to 1 hour before they must be discarded as no longer functional. An exhausted sherd-working tool is severely abraded along its margins (that is, the edges are broken off and very rounded) and also has prominent bifacial microflaking. Making Jicara Bowls (Figure 28) In the Maya area gourd containers traditionally have been used to carry water, as drinking cups, spoons, and ladles, and as eating bowls (Feldman 1971:145-150). During the spring of 1981, Eduardo Montalva demonstrated how to make a pair of gourd, or jicara, bowls. We obtained the jicaras from a Crescentia cujete tree growing in one of the kitchen gardens in Chunox village. The owner of the tree instructed me to select only a ripe specimen, because a green gourd has thin walls and will shrivel up when it is cut and hollowed out. Two informal stone tools were used, unhafted, to make the jicara bowls. First, Eduardo used an unmodified chert flake for 20 minutes to score a ring around the gourd, from top to bottom. Then he deep-

Making ficara Bowls

65

Figure 28. Making jicara (gourd) bowl: scouring line before cutting gourd in half with white chert flake. ened the score line with an obsidian blade until the gourd separated in halves. This took 30 minutes. Next he scooped out the seeds and pulp from each half, using the flake. A final 30 minutes was devoted to scraping the inner walls and rim of the gourd to remove any remaining pulp and to smooth the surface. The two jicara bowls, rounded side up, were then dried in the sun for several days. I estimate that the flake and blade were used about 1 hour each to make the two bowls. Both implements had dulled (abraded) margins by the end of the experiment. The microscopic use wear on gourdworking tools is potentially significant in light of Hay's hypothesis that gourd container production may have been an important industry during the Early Classic period at Kaminaljuyú in the Guatemalan highlands. This argument is based on Hay's interpretation of the use wear observed at high magnification on obsidian blades recovered at Kaminaljuyú (Hay 1978:29-37). My experimental gourdprocessing tools show less severe edge damage than reported by Hay, but my wear patterns are not inconsistent with those observed on Hay's "gourd container" manufacturing tools.

66

Experimental Use of Stone Tools

Making a Conch Trumpet (Figure 29) At Cerros there is abundant evidence of Precolumbian shell working, based on the number of shell artifacts and debitage recovered. The tools used in this industry probably were made of stone, wood, and/ or bone. Elsewhere in northern Belize retouched chert burin spalls may have been used for perforating shell, judging from their discovery in a shell bead manufacturing locus at Colha (Dreiss 1982:214215; Potter 1980:180). During 1981 I used ad hoc stone tools to experiment with several aspects of shell modification. The only case in which I attempted to replicate a specific artifact type was in the manufacture of a conch (Strombus sp.) trumpet similar to the two specimens recovered at Cerros (Garber 1980:182-183, Figure 23f). To make a shell trumpet I had only to saw off the tip of the column to form the mouthpiece, which was then abraded and smoothed (see Suárez Díez 1977:63-64 on the technique of shell trumpet manufacture). The column tip can be removed by ( 1 ) sawing only or (2) scoring a line at the point of the intended break and then hitting the tip against a rock—hopefully to effect a clean fracture along this line. My first intention was to saw off the column tip with four stonecutting implements; two chalcedony flakes, one chert flake, and one

Figure 29. Conch shell trumpet. At right of shell, sawed-off column tip. In foreground, obsidian blade and chert flake.

Miscellaneous Experiments

67

Table 5. Tools used to make conch trumpet Raw Material

Specimen Edge No. Angle (º)

Function Saw a score line

Chalcedony

24

30,46

Chert

25

43

Saw

Chalcedony

39

64

Obsidian

39

29, 26

Saw, scrape off exterior crust Saw

Hours of Use 3

/4

3

/4

1/2-3/4

1+

Final Condition Heavily abraded, still usable Abraded, need more pressure to be effective Still functional Exhausted

obsidian blade section. Soon I found out that the tip of the column is solid, not hollow as I had anticipated. Progress was slow: even with sharp flakes it would have taken at least 10 hours to sever the 25millimeter-diameter tip. Rather than proceed at this slow rate, I removed it by indirect percussion after scoring a deep line at the point of intended fracture. This took more than 2 hours. The tip was removed by inserting an angular rock at the score line and repeatedly striking this rock with a large chert cobble. By this means the column tip was quickly dispatched, although not with a clean break. It would have been more effective, I believe, had I scored a deeper ring and then whacked the tip against a dense rock. Final finishing included grinding the trumpet mouthpiece and scraping marine deposits from the exterior of the trumpet. Table 5 summarizes the lithic data for this task. Use wear will be discussed in Chapter 4. Miscellaneous Experiments with Stone Tools (Figures 30-32) In addition to the experiments already described, I used many other stone tools to test their suitability for processing local materials. These experiments are described in less detail, not because they are of less potential utility, but because they did not result in the manu-

68

Experimental Use of Stone Tools

Figure 30. Chert adze no. 14 hollowing out siricote log; aided by watercontrolled fire. Figure 31. Chert hoe no. 13 used to excavate limestone soil. Figure 32. Ventral surface of chert tranchet adze no. 16, hafted in siricote, bound in chich much fiber, used as a hoe.

Miscellaneous Experiments

69

facture of a finished product. Perhaps the most significant of these was the excavation of soil (and at times, limestone) from the canal/ ridged field zone in the southwestern sector of Cerros. I used a large subrectangular chert biface and an "orange-peel" tranchet bit "adze," both hafted, to excavate several archaeological units in this area. My purpose, aside from the archaeological task of collecting data relative to the construction of the raised field system, was to simulate Late Preclassic Mayan digging practices. From this I hoped to (1) determine if these two formal tool types were suitable for the excavation of the ancient canals, (2) find out if the chert bifaces could have been used as hoes, for breaking up soil in connection with planting and tending cultigens, and (3) generate a sample of soil-working use traces on chert implements (see Table 6). Some miscellaneous experiments involved peeling and slicing two edible native roots—manioc (Manihot esculenta) and camote [Ipomoea batatas). In others, I scraped, drilled, sawed, incised, and made grooves in fresh animal bones. Still other experiments consisted of woodworking—adzing, drilling, incising, and grooving. I also cut and scraped several additional types of Belizean fibers, scraped and processed fresh hides and snakeskins, and cut and perforated tanned leather with stone tools. In a final set of experiments several varieties of marine shell were cut, drilled, and incised (see Table 7). In most cases these miscellaneous tests did not result in the manufacture of a finished product. However, until time is available for more extensive experimentation, these data may serve as useful estimations of the kinds of tools needed (as well as their use-life, breakage and resharpening rates, etc.) in Precolumbian times to complete certain tasks, such as canoe making, shell and woodworking, making leather clothing, food preparation, etc. Tables 6 and 7 summarize the nature of these miscellaneous experiments and present some preliminary results. My goal in manufacturing and utilizing chipped stone tools at Cerros was to process a wide variety of substances native to the north coast of Belize—and thereby generate a collection of chert and obsidian implements with use traces that can be used as standards for the determination of prehistoric lithic tool function, at Cerros and hopefully elsewhere, too. By means of experimentation I compiled a data base relevant to the reconstruction of aboriginal forest clearing, canal excavation, woodworking, butchering, and the processing of many other substances. In addition to the use traces, I was able to assess the relative suitability of chert and obsidian tools to

70

Experimental Use of Stone Tools

Table 6. Formal chert experimental tools used hafted to perform miscellaneous experiments 13

Specimen 16

No. 14

Description

Subrectangular biface

Tranchet adze

Tranchet adze

Max. length

117

116

100

Max. width

55

65

55

25

22

Max. thickness

20

Angle (°)

50-70

48

Haft

Elbow type, pixoy

Short haft

Contact material

Soil, limestone

Soil, limestone

Charred siricote; fire controlled with water

Use mode

Excavation

Excavation

Adze

60 siricote

Elbow type, pixoy

Hours of use

6

2

3+

No. of resharpenings

1

0

1

Final condition

Polish at bit, dor- Bit damaged, sal nibbling still works; dorsal scars, step termination

Dull bit; needs orange-peel removal

Work accomplished

2.5 m 3

A depression 25 cm. diameter, 1 5 - 2 0 cm. deep in very hard wood

0.6 m 3 (works slow due to short handle)

Table 7. Ad hoc tools used in miscellaneous experiments Raw Material

Specimen No.

Angle

0

Haft

Obsidian

46

24,36

—

—

Manioc

Peel, slice

Obsidian

47

25,36

—

—

Camote

Peel, slice

Chert

29

27

—

—

Ak shush vines

Chert

30

24

Chert

31

23

Chert

43

28

Chert

45

Chert

53

Obsidian

19

29, 28

Obsidian

20

22,31

Retouch

Contact Material

Use Mode

Hours of Use

Final

Condition

1/34 Slight

damage, half-moon termination

1.5 kg.

1

Minimal damage

1.6 kg.

Cut

1/2

Dull, minimal damage

Sos patch vines

Cut

1/2

Still cuts, but is less effective; minimal damage

Extabentún vines

Cut

3

/4

Almost exhausted; small microflake scars

Belizean vine

Cut

1/3

Half-moon scars

—

—

45

—

—

Henequen

Cut

1/2

Minute nibbling

35

—

—

Belizean vine

Cut

1/3

Nibbling, scalar termination

Extabentún vines

Cut, scrape knobs

1

Dull, bifacial nibbling

Sos patch vines

Cut

1

Half-moon and scalar nibbling

—

—

Work Accomplished

Table 7. (continued) Raw Material

Specimen No.

Angle

0

Haft

Obsidian

21

28,35

—

Obsidian

44

Chert

Retouch

Contact Material

Use Mode

Hours of Use

Final

Condition

Barracuta vines

Cut

1

Edge abrasion, nibbling

26, 39

Mojaoa fibers, henequén

Cut

VA

Tiny microflakes, dorsal & ventral

33

47,39

Deer long bone

Scrape

1/2

Still functions; straight unifacial microflaking

Chert

46

35

—

—

Deer tibia

Saw

1/4

Heavy edge abrasion; bifacial microflaking

Chert

47

77

—

Unifacial

Deer tibia

Scrape

Ve

Stacked step terminations

Chert

48

105

—

—

Deer tibia

Incise, groove

1/3

Nibbling at 1 projection

Chert

49

75

—

Unifacial

Deer bone

Alternating drill

1/2

Unifacial step scars on dorsal ridge & margins

Chert

51

40

—

—

Deer bone

Scrape

1/3

Unifacial microflaking

Chert

52

40

—

—

Deer bone

Scrape

1/2

Unifacial (dorsal) microflaking

—

Work Accomplished

Poor bone scraper; use discontinued

3 holes (diameter 6.7 mm.; depth 4.7 m m . each)

Chert

59

40

—

—

Deer bone

Saw

1/4

Heavy abrasion; snap fractures

Chert

60

36

—

—

Deer bone

Saw

1/4

Moderate abrasion, nibbling

Chert

17

28,33

Snakeskins

Scrape

12

Minimal wear

Cleaned11/2 skins. Boa constrictor & barba amarilla

Chert

18

46

—

—

Snake

Scrape

1 1/2

Unifacial nibbling

Cleaned 1/2 barba amarilla

Chert

34

80

—

Unifacial

Puma & deer hides

Scrape

1 1/2

Tiny stacked step terminated flakes, still functional

Specimens 34, 35, & 36 completely scraped clean 2 hides

Chert

35

67, 76

—

Unifacial

Deer & puma hides

Scrape

2 2/2

Still works, dorsal step fractures

Chert

36

64, 74

—

Unifacial

Deer & puma hides

Scrape

Chert

55

40, 70

—

—

Tanned leather

Perforate

3

/4

Unifacial nibbling

16 holes

Obsidian

28

25, 41

Yes

—

Tanned leather

Cut

1/4

Little damage, subsequently used to whittle

Cut leather strips for haft guards

Obsidian

42

22

Yes

—

Tanned leather

Cut

1 1/2

Slight bifacial nibbling

Cut leather strips for haft guards

Chert

54

36, 60

Seasoned mahogany

Drill

1/2

Unifacial (ventral) microflaking, scalar termination

6 holes (diameter 4 mm., depth 6 m m . each)

2

Still functional

Table 7. (continued) Raw Material

Specimen Angle No. 0

Haft Retouch

Contact Material

Use Mode

Hours of Use

Chert

58

31

—

—

Seasoned mahogany

Incise

Chert

32

25

—

—

Siricote

Chert

50

27

—

—

Pine

Groove axe handle Incise

Chert

42

40

—

—

Marine shell

Saw

Chert

56

51

—

—

Alternating drill

1/2

Chert

57

58

—

—

Shell [Muricanthus negritis) Marine shell

Incise

1/2

3

/4

1/4 3

/4

2

/3

Final Condition

Work Accomplished

Tip crushed, ventral nibbling, also unifacial nibbling on dorsal ridge Slight wear Projection worn, slight nibbling Heavy abrasion, bifacial microflaking, triangular-shaped, still functional Tip crushed, unifacial nibbling, still functional Tip & margins nibbled, still functional

7 cuts around perimeter; total penetration 30 mm. 2 holes 4 deep curvilinear lines; total length 153 mm., line width 1 mm.

Miscellaneous Experiments

75

perform the same task and to estimate the use-lives of chert and obsidian implements used for the same function. The experimentally induced wear patterns preserved on these tools are described in detail in the next chapter.

CHAPTER 4

THE EXPERIMENTAL USE WEAR

The "study of direct evidence for the functions of stone tools, in the form of use-wear, has had a very slow birth" (Hayden and Kamminga 1979: 3). Early functional interpretations were based on speculation and on analogies between formalized, recurring archaeological types and modern ethnographic parallels drawn from traditional societies throughout the world. Some of these analogies were appropriate, but many were not. During the nineteenth and twentieth centuries the typological approach to chipped stone analysis proliferated, especially in France. (See Moss 1983 :9-22 for an overview of the development of lithic functional analysis.) Formal tool classifications are based on size and morphological standardization; in addition, they often represent technological regularities, and they may reflect distinct functional groups as well. By the late nineteenth century dissatisfaction with untested assumptions behind typological categories such as "scraper" and "hand axe" led a few researchers to take note of edge damage as well as tool form. S. A. Semenov's (1964) usewear observations and interpretations were especially significant for future research because of his use of microscopy and photomicrography for detecting and reporting damage on utilized tools. A logical next step was experimentation with modern flaked stone tools in order to duplicate the use traces noted on archaeological counterparts. Some of the early experimental studies were surprisingly "modern" and relevant in terms of research design, experimental controls, and clarity in reporting results (Curwen 1930; Keller 1966; Sonnenfeld 1962; Witthoft 1955). Until 1974 almost all experimental studies concentrated on identifying the function) s) of a single tool type (e.g., Ahler 1971; Hester and Heizer 1971). Ruth Tringham et al. (1974) expanded the scope of use-wear studies through an extensive program of lithic experimentation and subsequent description of use damage corresponding to a large number of activities and contact ma-

Raw Material

77

terials, as well as trampling damage. Subsequent to Tringham's work, which emphasized the patterning of microflake scars, striations, and edge abrasion as relevant attributes, comprehensive experimentation and wear pattern descriptions have become increasingly frequent (Keeley 1980; Odell and Odell-Vereecken 1980; Ranere 1975). Today use-wear analysis is performed macroscopically (Clark 1979), with low-power magnification (Hayden 1979b; Odell and Odell-Vereecken 1980; Ranere 1975), with high-power magnification (Anderson-Gerfaud 1981; Keeley 1980; Moss 1983), and with the scanning electron microscope (Anderson 1980; Del Bene 1979; Hay 1977; Vaughan 1981). In 1977 Lawrence H. Keeley and M. Newcomer demonstrated that distinctive polishes form when fine-grained flint tools are used to process wood, bone, hides, meat, and plants. Keeley was able to differentiate these polish types at magnifications of 200 x. Although the specifics of polish formation are still under debate (see discussions in Hayden, ed. 1979; Moss 1983), there is no question of the potential contribution of polish identification to lithic studies and to archaeological interpretation. Since Keeley's 1977 coup, research on polish identification assisted by high magnification is the fastest-growing area of use-wear analysis (AndersonGerfaud 1981; Del Bene 1979; Diamond 1979; Lewenstein 1982b; Moss 1983; Vaughan 1981). My use-wear analysis of Cerros tools relies on polish identification wherever possible. Striations, edge abrasion, and microflake scar patterns also are considered important indicators of function, especially since many utilized implements have not developed use polish, either because they were not used long enough or because they were made of grainy chert or obsidian, which may not be suitable for its formation or detection. Raw Material Three types of stone were used for making experimental tools, roughly approximating the distribution of lithic raw materials in the Cerros archaeological collection. 1. A fine-grained tan chert collected from the Rancho Creek source at Colha, 50 kilometers south of Cerros, is identical to that used for most of the prehistoric "formal" tool types: oval bifaces, tranchet adzes, macroblade tools, etc. This raw material is extremely tough, which makes it ideally suited for heavy-duty tasks like chopping, adzing, and hoeing, wherein a great deal of force is applied through the implement. All of the formal experimental tools were manufac-

78

The Experimental Use Wear

tured from this chert, which I did not thermally alter because the Cerros tools do not show signs of having been heat-treated. Many of the ad hoc flake tools were also fashioned from this material. 2. The remainder of the ad hoc tools were made from a variety of light-colored, grainy cherts and chalcedony that originated in the vicinity of Saltillo, approximately 20 kilometers south of Cerros. These materials were either too grainy to be desirable for making fine bifaces or else occurred in small cobbles more adaptable for flake knives, scrapers, incising tools, etc. (See Shafer 1983 for a more complete description of northern Belizean cherts and chalcedonies.) Some of the casual flake tools excavated at Cerros were made of chalcedony and fine-grained cherts that varied in color from gold to red. The presence of remnant cortex on the platform and dorsal surface of these high-quality cherts suggests that these materials were available only in small nodules. 3. Prismatic obsidian blades make up a small portion (7 percent) of the Cerros lithic assemblage. Results of X-ray fluorescent spectroscopy analysis performed by Fred W. Nelson suggest that the El Chayal outcrop near present-day Guatemala City was the sole supplier of obsidian to Cerros during the Late Preclassic. Later, during the Classic and Postclassic periods, both El Chayal and Ixtepeque (in southern Guatemala) exported obsidian pressure blades to Cerros (Nelson, personal communication, 1981). All of the experimental obsidian blades were made of high-quality grey obsidian from El Chayal. They were produced by means of a pressure technique as described by Don E. Crabtree (1968). Because many of the experimental tasks were performed with more than one lithic raw material (for example, we employed both chert and obsidian implements for butchering and woodworking), the experiments afford a basis for comparisons between stone types in regard to: (1) raw material suitability for certain functions, (2) differential probability of detecting use damage, (3) rates of use-wear formation, and (4) vulnerability to accidental damage during manufacture and handling. Natural Laboratory Almost all of the lithic experimentation took place outdoors at the site of Cerros; when not in use, tools were cached either outdoors or inside a pole-and-thatch structure. In these ways I hoped to duplicate aboriginal conditions as much as possible with respect to the influence of grit in the natural environment and its possible influence on lithic use wear.

Control Sample

79

Control Sample In order to differentiate legitimate use wear from accidental predepositional damage, a number of control specimens were selected for non-use. These include two formal chert tools (a tranchet adze and a "teardrop" scraper/plane), two chert flakes, and an obsidian blade. These tools were handled, transported, cleaned, and observed for damage under the same conditions as the utilized experimental tools. (Figures 33 and 34 are examples of unused chert and obsidian tool surfaces.) At a complex village site like Cerros, with its long occupational sequence and propensity for incorporating trash in mound fill, the lithic analyst also must consider the effects of trampling, sweeping, displacement of refuse for construction fill, and general compaction of accumulated midden lenses. These extraneous processes can be grouped into two categories: soil movement and trampling. I did not attempt to reproduce these processes experimentally. Elsewhere Keeley (1980:30-35) has described the effects of these two classes of disturbance on chert implements excavated from Old World Palaeolithic contexts. Damage from soil movement includes microflake scars, crushing, dull polish, abrasion tracks on ridges, and "white scratches," especially on bulbar surfaces. Trampling can produce microflaking along margins, abrasion tracks on ridges, and very shallow striations. While it is true that these trampling and soildisturbance traces are roughly analogous to the major categories of use traces (see especially Flenniken and Haggarty 1979), Keeley believes that the experienced analyst can eliminate this "noise," especially if he or she is not overly dependent on interpreting microflake scar patterns. For example, (1) the white scratches are wider and deeper than most use striae; (2) the shallow trampling striations are located away from the tool edges where use damage forms; (3) dull rough polish caused by postdepositional friction against soil and its accompanying abrasion tracks may cover all ridges on a tool, unlike use and haft traces. Further, this dull polish does not resemble workinduced polishes such as those that form during the processing of wood, hide, plants, bone, or shell. (For a somewhat less optimistic view, see Vaughan 1985 :42-44.) I have tried to keep these phenomena in mind during my microscopic observations, in order not to confuse extraneous alterations with use traces.

80

The Experimental Use Wear

Figure 33. Non-utilized control sample: obsidian blade without use wear; 244 x. Figure 34. Unmodified control surface on chert blade, dorsal aspect; 244 x.

Cleaning

81

Cleaning As soon as possible after use, each experimental tool was soaked in water; a toothbrush helped remove loose dirt and organic material. Then each specimen was wrapped in cotton for transportation to the United States. Resharpening and use flakes were not individually wrapped. They were separated by type and packed in small plastic bags. Back in the U.S., the experimentally utilized tools were again rinsed in water and then subjected to a two-stage chemical cleaning, as advised by Keeley (1980:12-14). The first step involved a 15minute soak in a 10 percent solution of warm hydrochloric acid. This process removed any lime or other deposits. Next, a 15-minute bath in a 20 percent solution of warm sodium hydroxide eliminated most organic deposits. Finally, all rocks were rinsed again with warm water to remove all traces of the sodium hydroxide. Now the sample was ready for microscopic observation. None of the lithic specimens was metalized for viewing. There was no problem viewing obsidian. Chert, however, proved very difficult to study at high magnification. The only modification attempted on the experimental chert tools was the coating of the utilized margins of a few of the flake tools with India ink. This aided in the observation of microflakes but generally obscured striations and polish. When this became evident, all inked surfaces were rewashed in hot water in order to remove as much as possible of the ink; then each margin was restudied for previously undetected striations and polish. Microscopy The microscope used in this study is a Nikon Optiphot with lightfield/darkfield capabilities, attached 35-millimeter camera, and a range of magnification from 100× to 600 ×. Lightfield is a method of illumination wherein the objective lens of the microscope focuses light on the study area at an angle perpendicular to the focal plane. When used with an ND32 filter, it proved especially useful for viewing striations and abrasive polishes on tool surfaces. Microflake scars and edge abrasion, on the other hand, could be seen most clearly via darkfield illumination, in which light strikes the observed surface at a 45o angle from all sides (see Keeley 1980:13 for a sketch of lightfield and darkfield lighting arrangements on a Wild microscope). Most artifacts were scanned at 100× and 200×: above that range the artifact topography, especially in the case of the chert, seriously affected the ability to focus on an area large enough to interpret. For

82

The Experimental Use Wear

recording use wear photographically, 200× magnification supplied good detail. My aim was to document examples of use traces on dorsal and ventral surfaces and on edges of the experimental tools in each lithic material class, for each of the tasks, and for each contact material used. Whenever possible, I photographically recorded the occurrence of edge abrasion, microflake scars, striations, abrasive polish or gloss, and haft marks. Attribute Recording Two types of attributes were observed for each experimental specimen. 1. The independent variables recorded are measurements denoting general size and shape as well as information on the nature of the experiments performed with that tool. The independent variables chosen were: a. Maximum length along the long axis of the implement. b. Maximum width of the piece, perpendicular to the long axis. c. Maximum thickness, calculated at a right angle to the plane of percussion. d. Angle of the working edge(s). e. Any intentional retouch of the working edge(s). f. Use mode: chopping, whittling, planing, scraping, incising, boring, etc. g. Contact material: fresh hide, shell, fibers, etc. h. Length of experimental use, usually in hours, i. Prehension; i.e., hafted versus hand-held. Tables 2 - 7 list information on variables d-h for each experimental tool. Values for variables a-c are also indicated in the case of the formal chert tools. 2. Dependent variables include observations of the effects of utilization on the tool. They may occur on the dorsal, ventral, or working edge aspects, as well as in the haft zone. a. Abrasion, or rounding, of the utilized tool edge frequently takes place with extended use. (For examples of rounded tool bits, see Semenov 1964:91, Figure 2; Ahler 1971; Hayden 1979b: Figure 9.) In this study, the degree of edge abrasion has been classified judgmentally as "minimal," "light," "moderate," or "extreme." b. Microflake scars are an important clue to tool function, although it is generally acknowledged that edge damage may result also from technological effects such as intentional retouch or from accidental processes such as "simultaneous retouch" or trampling (Brink 1978; Flenniken and Haggarty 1979; Newcomer 1976). In order to interpret microflaking, it is advisable to look at various fea-

Accidental Damage on Control Samples

83

tures of this phenomenon and attempt to identify patterns that then can be attributed to specific causes. It is helpful to observe the dorsal/ventral symmetry of a microflake distribution, the shape and termination of the flake scars (see Cotterell and Kamminga 1979; Keeley 1980:241; Odell and Odell-Vereecken 1980; Tringham et al. 1974), as well as their size, number of superimposed tiers, and density along a utilized tool edge (Hayden 1979b). c. Use scratches or striations may be subdivided according to their orientation with respect to the tool margin (or to the long axis in the case of haft traces), their intermittency, length, width, and depth, as well as their extent (Hay 1977; Keeley 1980:123-124; Semenov 1964:16-21). In the case of striations parallel to the margin, the extent measures the maximum width of this feature and is a measure of the depth of tool penetration into the contacted substance (Hay 1978: Appendix 1). Perpendicular and diagonal striations may also be classified as to whether they are restricted to a narrow zone at the margin or extend far back from the tool edge. d. Abrasive polish, which may manifest itself as gloss or as a dull area, can be described in terms of its brightness, extent (as mentioned above for striations), and topographic features—pitted, bumpy, greasy, etc. (Del Bene 1979; Kamminga 1979; Keeley and Newcomer 1977; Vaughan 1985; Witthoft 1967). The following sections discuss the occurrence and patterning of these functional attributes on chipped stone tools used (as described in Chapter 3) as a control sample, as well as those used to process wood, soil, hide, animals, stone, shell, sherds, fibers, gourds, and edible roots. Accidental Damage on Control Samples The two formal tools used as controls incurred no use damage, perhaps due to their thickness and steep edge angles. The obsidian blade and chert flake controls did suffer some accidental edge damage, either during manufacture or from subsequent transport and handling (Figures 33 and 34). This consists principally of random microflake scars along the blade's and flake's acute lateral margins. No polish was observed on the control samples. The obsidian blade incurred only a few striations: these are long and narrow, randomly placed, but not distributed regularly with respect to the damaged edge of the blade. I doubt that any of my control samples would be misidentified as utilized implements.

84

The Experimental Use Wear

Use Traces from Woodworking Polish or abrasive wear occurred on most of the nineteen chert woodworking tools; it does not differ according to how the tool was used. Wood polish on chert is a bright smoothing of the normally rough surface. Keeley (1980: 35) described it as gently curved or domed on the high points of the microtopography. An incipient stage of this phenomenon may be seen in Figure 35, a chert scraper/plane used to plane fresh mahogany and pixoy. Keeley noted that as tool use continued, these domes enlarged and merged. Figure 36, the tip of a chert flake used to drill seasoned mahogany, illustrates this more advanced stage of wood polish. With continued use the abraded zone becomes very bright, smooth, and rounded, as in Figure 37. Patrick Vaughan (1981) also has noted surface alteration or roughening on some experimental obsidian tools used in contact with abrasive substances. Whether this phenomenon occurs on obsidian as a result of woodworking is highly speculative (Odell 1982:24). Figure 38 illustrates one such possible example from my experimental sample. The other use-trace categories, i.e., microflake scars, edge abrasion, and striations, vary according to the type of woodworking tasks for which the tool was employed. Striae shape and size were a partial exception. Keeley found that a distinctive form of striation—wide and shallow—correlated with his experimental woodworking tools (Keeley 1980: 35, Plate 20). Most of the Cerros experimental woodworking implements incurred striae, but striations (type 4) morphologically similar to that described by Keeley were noted on only two of the thirty-two specimens, both chert. These examples occur on tools used to work siricote, an extremely hard tropical wood. All of the other striations observed on my woodworking tools were of the long, narrow, and deep variety (type 1). Chopping Use Wear (Table 8). All five chopping tools are chert. Three of them were used on softwood or second growth, the remaining two on mature hardwood. The only difference noted between softwood and hardwood traces was the degree of rounding on the working margin. The three choppers used on softwoods showed minimal edge abrasion; tools used to chop hardwoods suffered slightly more abraded edges. Four of the five choppers have traces of wood polish, but striations were noted on only one specimen. These striae were oriented perpendicular to the edge. I attribute the paucity of use striae to frequent resharpenings during the chopping experi-

Use Traces from Woodworking

85

Figure 35. (top left) Wood polish on ventral side of chert specimen no. 9, used to scrape/plane mahogany and pixoy; 176×. Figure 36. (top right) Wood polish on chert specimen no. 54: dorsal aspect of drill tip used on mahogany; 176×. Figure 37. (bottom left) Wood polish and perpendicular striae on dorsal aspect of chert specimen no. 26, used to cut and smooth elemuy wood; 176×. Figure 38. (bottom right) Wood whittling wear: surface abrasion on dorsal side of obsidian specimen no. 33; 176×.

Table 8. Use wear from heavy

woodworking Dorsal Striations

Specimen No.

Angle (º)

Wood Type

EA SS

P

SO

Ventral Flake Scars

ST SE

FT

FD FS

Flake Scars

Striations

No. of Tiers

P

SO

ST SE

FT

FD FS

No. of Tiers

Chopping Ch 1 Ch 2 Ch3 Ch 4 Ch 11

+ + + +

2

2

1

+

2, 3

2

1

55-65 56-68 50 55-70 60-73

Soft Hard Hard Soft Soft

1 1 2 1 1

60-74 77-88 72

Soft Soft, hard Soft

2 1 1

60-73 60 51

Soft Hard Soft

1 2 2

— +

49

Soft

3

+

+ +

3 3 3,1 3

4 4 4 2

1 2 2.3 0.7

1-2 2 1+ 1+

3

4

0.8

1

1,3

4

5

2

1

4

3

1

— — — 1,3

4

1

1

7

?

?

?

3 3, 1 3 3

4 4 1 4

2.5 1.8 0.6 1.3

1-3 1+ 1-3 1

3 3 3

1 2 1

1-3 2.0 1.0

2-3 1-3 + + + 2

3 3 1

4 4 4

1.0 1.3 1.0

1 1-2 1

?

1

4

1.0

1

+

?

?

+

2

2

1

2 2, 3 2,3

1 1 1

1 1 1

Planing Ch 6 Ch 9 Ch 10 Adzing Ch 11 Ch 14 Ch 15

3

4

1

?

Sawing Ch 19 N= EA SS P SO ST SE FT

+

1, 3

1

1

12 Ch: chert Edge abrasion: 1, minimal; 2, light; 3, moderate; 4, extreme. Scar symmetry. Polish. Striation orientation: 1, parallel to margin; 2, perpendicular; 3, diagonal. Striation type: 1, long, narrow, deep; 2, short, wide, deep; 3, intermittent; 4, wide, shallow; 5, long, narrow, faint; 6, long, wide, deep. Striation extent: 1, close to margin; 2, far back from margin; 3, 1 cm. down from tip. Flake scar type: 1, scalar, feather termination; 2, half-moon, snap termination; 3, step termination; 4, deep scalar; 5, irregular; 6, triangular. FD Flake scar distribution: 1, continuous; 2, almost continuous; 3, clusters; 4, discontinuous; 5, continuous overlapping scars. FS Flake scar size (mm.).

Use Traces from Woodworking

87

ments. The resharpening flakes also showed few striations. The edge damage that resulted from chopping consisted of multiple tiers or "stacks" of microflakes with step fractures. The flaking pattern is discontinuous along the tool bit, with a slightly asymmetrical flake scar distribution on several pieces; that is, one of the surfaces has significantly more and larger flake removals than the opposing side. The band of stacked microflake scars extends back from the edge less than 1 millimeter on the less damaged side, and up to approximately 2.5 millimeters on the opposite, more microfractured side. Effects of Planing (Table 8). The three chert scraper/planes used to remove bark and smooth planks during the manufacture of a pixoy table and to smooth the mahogany bow exhibit wood polish (Figure 36) and edge attrition that varies from minimal to light. Striations are perpendicular to and diagonal to the bit on the ventral or contact surface of all three scraper/planes. One specimen suffered a few striations on the dorsal aspect as well. During planing, flake scars are removed primarily from the side of the tool not directly in contact with the wood; that is, from the dorsal surface. These stepterminated scars form a continuous or almost continuous row along the tool margin. One or more stacked tiers of scars is generally present, ranging from 1 to 3 millimeters out from the margin. Planes can be distinguished from other scrapers because they usually have very steep edge angles (sometimes greater than 90o) and incur a continuous row of dorsal step-terminated scars, as well as perpendicular and diagonal striations along the ventral aspect of the bit, but very little edge abrasion. Adze Traces (Table 8). The three chert adzes in the experimental sample used to hollow out a siricote log and to shape a pixoy table exhibit minimal to light edge abrasion and have a decidedly asymmetrical use-wear pattern, in agreement with Semenov's findings (1964:21). The convex dorsal aspect does not come in direct contact with the wood. It is this dorsal surface that incurs most of the microflaking. In the experimental sample, one adze also acquired wood polish and striations diagonal to the bit. All three suffered a discontinuous pattern of dorsal microflake removals, which extend approximately 1 millimeter back from the edge. The flat ventral surface of those tools can develop a small number of flake scars. These differ from dorsal scars in that they are scalar shaped with feather

88

The Experimental Use Wear

terminations and are not patterned as to size and shape. These shallow scars vary from tiny to 3 millimeters long. It is the asymmetrical patterning of the use damage that distinguishes adzes from chopping tools, whose microflake scars are distributed approximately equally along both opposing sides of the tool bit. Chert biface no. 11 was used for two separate tasks; first, for a short time as a chopper during the removal of bark for mojaoa production, and subsequently as an adze and wedge in the manufacture of the pixoy table. Thus, this tool incurred both chopping and adzing use damage. The specimen developed no striations and only incipient wood polish. The microflake scar pattern masks the chopping use wear and reflects the tool's longer use as an adze. This function is indicated by an asymmetrical distribution of microflake scars, which on the ventral surface are relatively large and have feather terminations. Effects of Wood Sawing (Table 8). A single chert flake was used to saw lengths of cane for arrow shafts. As expected, the use traces inflicted by this activity are symmetrically distributed on both dorsal and ventral surfaces. Since the flake was used a considerable length of time without retouch, a moderate degree of edge abrasion resulted. Wood polish can be detected on both dorsal and ventral sides. There are striations parallel to and diagonal to the dorsal margin. A single discontinuous row of scalar microflake scars with feather and step terminations characterizes the tool edge on both dorsal and ventral surfaces. In addition to the heavy-duty woodworking tasks described above, a number of experimental tools were used for fine woodworking such as whittling and graving (see Table 9). Traces from Cutting/Slicing Wood. Five flakes, three chert and two obsidian, were used to cut a variety of tropical softwoods. Cutting edge angles range from 26 o to 45 o. There appears to be a relationship between an acute edge angle and an extreme degree of edge abrasion, especially when length of utilization is taken into account. Also, it is evident that lithic raw material affects the rate of edge abrasion. Obsidian margins become dull and rounded much more quickly than do those of chert specimens with the same edge angle. All chert wood-cutting implements acquired abrasive polish, and four are striated (Figures 37 and 39). Striations include not only the

Table 9. Use wear from fine woodworking Dorsal Striations Angle

Ventral Striations

Flake Scars

Wood Type

EA SS

P

SO

ST

SE

FT

Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft

3 + 2 + 3 — 4 — 4 +

+ + + + +

3 1,2 — 2,3 1

1 1 — 1,3 1

1 1 — 1 1

2 2 1 1 1,6

2 4 4 5 2

4 0.5 1.2 2 0.1

1 1 1 1 1

+ + +

ting/whittling Soft 27, 29

3 —

+

1

1, 2

1

1, 6

5

1.5

— 1 1 — — 2 1 1 1 1

— 2 1 — — 1 2 1 1 2

2, 1

2

0.1

— 1 1 6,1 1 1,2 1 1,2

— — 5 4 5 1 4 1 5 1 5 1 5 2 1 0.2

Specimen No.

(V

FD FS

No. of Tiers P

Flake Scars No. of Tiers

SO

ST

SE

FT

+

3 1 — 2,3 1

1 1 — 1 1

1 — — 1 1

2 2 1 1 1, 2, 6

2 4 4 4 2

1 0.5 1 2 3

1 1 1 1 1

2

+

1

1

2

1

3

1

1

1

+

—

+ + —

— 2 1 2 2 3 1,2 — 1,2 —

— 1 1, 3 2, 3 1 1 1 — 1 —

— 1 2 1 1 2 1 — 1 —

2, 1 1 1 1, 6 1,6 1 1 1 1 1,2

4 5 5 4 4 5 3 4 4 4

0.1 1 1 1 1 1.4 0.2 1 1 0.2

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

FD FS

Cutting Ch Ch Ch Ch Ob

20 26 27 34 35

Cu t Ob 33

45 29 35 26 31, 21-41

?

Whittling Ch Ob Ob Ob Ob Ob Ob Ob Ob Ob

37 28 29 30 31 32 36 37 41 45

27, 42 25, 41 34, 31 25, 32 26, 55 29, 46 26 27, 42 28, 33 34, 53

Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Soft, hard Soft Hard

1 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 2

? + — — ? 1 — ? 2,3 — + — — + — — ? 3 — + 2 — + 1 — + 1 1 — —

1 1 1 1 1

? ?

2 1

+ + —

Table 9. (continued) Dorsal Striations Specimen No.

Angle (º)

Wood Type

EA SS

Ventral Flake Scars

P

SO

ST

SE

Striations

No. of FT FD FS Tiers P

Flake Scars

SO

ST

SE

No. of FT FD FS Tiers

Grooving Ch 32

25

Hard

1

+

+

1

4

1

1

4

0.1

1

+

1

4

1

1

4

0.1

1

27 31

Soft Hard

2 + 1 —

?

2,3 3

1 2

3 3

4 1

4 2

0.4 0.2

1 1

—

3

1

3

1

4

0.2

1

+

33-60

Hard

3 —

+

1

3

0.2

1-2

+

2

1

3

1

1

0.2

1

Incising Ch 50 Ch 58 Drilling Ch 54

N = 20 Ch: chert Ob: obsidian EA Edge abrasion: 1, minimal; 2, light; 3, moderate; 4, extreme. SS Scar symmetry. P Polish. The equivalent of polish on obsidian is a roughening of the otherwise smooth surface from contact with an abrasive substance, such as wood. SO Striation orientation: 1, parallel to margin; 2, perpendicular; 3, diagonal. ST Striation type: 1, long, narrow, deep; 2, short, wide, deep; 3, intermittent; 4, wide, shallow; 5, long, narrow, faint; 6, long, wide, deep. SE Striation extent: 1, close to margin; 2, far back from margin; 3, 1 cm. down from tip. FT Flake scar type: 1, scalar, feather termination; 2, half-moon, snap termination; 3, step termination; 4, deep scalar; 5, irregular; 6, triangular. FD Flake scar distribution: 1, continuous; 2, almost continuous; 3, clusters; 4, discontinuous; 5, continuous overlapping scars. FS Flake scar size (mm.).

Use Traces from Woodworking

91

Figure 39. Wood polish and striations (parallel and perpendicular) on dorsal aspect of chert specimen no. 26, used to cut and smooth soft wood; 176 ×. Figure 40. Parallel striations and use scars on dorsal aspect of obsidian specimen no. 30, used to whittle wood; 176×. expected orientation parallel to the margin (Figure 40) (Lewenstein 1981; Tringham et al. 1974), but also a few perpendicular and diagonal orientations. Variations in striation orientation and flake scars are in part due to the nature of the work performed with three tools. Although classified as cutting implements, they were not used in a mechanically restricted fashion. For example, one blade served to remove knobs from a wooden rod selected for an archer's bow. In order to remove the bumps and irregularities, a variety of motions were required, primarily, but not entirely, cutting. Striations are restricted to a narrow, bilateral band along the margin. A single tier of flake scars follows the margin on both dorsal and ventral sides. Scars are of scalar, half-moon (as described by Keeley 1980:24-25), and triangular shape. Flake scars are usually distrib-

92

The Experimental Use Wear

uted discontinuously; but in one case edge damage consists of a row of continuous, overlapping scars. Whittling Traces. Nine of the ten experimental whittling knives were made of obsidian. Their working edge angles range from 25o to 55 o. Most were used on hardwood during the manufacture of arrow foreshafts. Edge abrasion is extreme for most of them. The majority display a bilateral distribution of striations. The pattern of striation orientations is not simple: parallel, perpendicular, and diagonal striations are represented on both dorsal and ventral surfaces. Some of the striae extend far back from the working edge (Figure 41). The microflaking on all specimens can be described as asymmetrical. The dorsal surface usually is more prominently scarred (Figure 42), with a discontinuous to continuous distribution made up of one or more tiers of overlapping scars (Figure 43), most of which are of the shallow scalar variety with feather termination. A few half-moon scars with snap termination also occur, usually on a tool with a very acute edge angle. Whittling tools are not likely to be confused with any other tools. They are much smaller than adzes, and the microflake scar distribution is much more bilateral than that found on scrapers. The whittling knife is best identified by its abraded margin and its distinctive scar pattern, consisting of one or more continuous rows of overlapping scalar scars on the dorsal aspect as well as a few ventral scars, which tend to be long and shallow, as described above. Use Wear from Cutting, Then Whittling. One obsidian blade was used to cut wood and subsequently to whittle. The resultant use wear for the most part corresponds to that observed on the other whittling tools. This specimen suffered moderate edge rounding and developed a bilateral distribution of striae parallel to the edge. These striations match those found on other experimental knives used to cut soft substances, such as hide. The microflake scars are asymmetrically distributed and consist of scalar and triangular shapes. Most scars occur dorsally in a two-tiered, continuous, overlapping pattern. Ventral scars are smaller and form a single row of small clusters along the tool edge. Traces from Grooving. A single chert flake served to make grooves in an axe handle of siricote, an extremely hard wood. This task was

Use Traces from Woodworking

93

Figure 41. Diagonal striations on dorsal aspect of obsidian specimen no. 33, used to whittle wood; 178×. Figure 42. Microflake scars on dorsal surface of obsidian specimen no. 30, used to whittle wood; 178 ×. Figure 43. Multiple tiers of overlapping microflake scars on obsidian specimen no. 28, used to whittle wood; 178×.

94

The Experimental Use Wear

Figure 44. Parallel striations and wood polish on dorsal surface of chert flake no. 32, used to groove wood; 244×. accomplished in a short time, before more than minimal edge rounding occurred. Dorsal and ventral wood polish formed, along with parallel striations close to the margin (Figure 44). Microflaking consists of a single row of tiny scalar flakes with feather terminations that line both dorsal and ventral aspects of the tool.

Incising Damage. As part of the miscellaneous experiments, two chert flakes made incisions into soft and hard wood. These tools were not used for extensive lengths of time and did not suffer m u c h edge rounding. Wood polish was noted for one piece. Both flake gravers ended up with perpendicular striations approximately 1 centimeter back from the tip. A few diagonal striae also occur. A number of very minute microflake scars are distributed in varying densities along the graver projection. The scars themselves are scalar or deep scalar shapes (Figure 45). Traces from Perforating. A single chert flake used for drilling holes in seasoned mahogany developed a moderately rounded tip and margins. It also incurred wood polish (Figure 37) and a few striations perpendicular to the margin, down slightly from the tip. A continu-

Use Damage Caused by Contact with Soil

95

Figure 45. Microflake scars on dorsal side of chert specimen no. 50, used to incise pine; 244×. ous row of tiny scalar flake scars follows one of the margins leading to the drill tip. Often it is not possible to distinguish a perforator from an incising tool on the basis of morphology alone. A flake with a sturdy projection may serve either purpose. Fortunately for the lithic analyst, these two functions result in use traces that are dissimilar. Both gravers and perforators develop striations perpendicular to and diagonal to the edge, usually back 1 centimeter from the tip. Incising tools, however, incur abrasion, polish, and microflake scars along the side of the point, while perforators very often have abraded and polished tips, as well as a continuous row of tiny scars along both margins and on any ridges near the perforating tip. Use Damage Caused by Contact with Soil Two large chert bifaces were hafted and used at Cerros to excavate soil and underlying decomposed limestone. These experiments were performed in such a fashion that the resultant use wear should be comparable to that incurred by chipped stone implements used (1) for excavating prehistoric canals, (2) for building raised field systems, and (3) for hoeing agricultural plots. Both experimental tools suffered microflake damage along the

96

The Experimental Use Wear

Figure 46. Perpendicular striae on dorsal aspect of chert specimen no. 13, used to dig in soil; 244×.

margin, consisting of one to five tiers of scars, asymmetrically distributed. Scalar flake scars with feather and stepped terminations characterize the bit; they are the result of repeated striking against soil and limestone cobbles, respectively. The tool bits were not heavily abraded; instead, a slight rounding was noted. The specimen used longest for excavation (specimen no. 13) appears to have reached an incipient stage of polish on both dorsal and ventral surfaces, but primarily on the dorsal. The most distinctive effect observed on the tools used for digging in soil is a band of "scour grooves" or striations that originate at the margin and extend perpendicular to it along both faces (Figure 46). These delicate grooves are similar to those observed by J. Sonnenfeld (1962:Figure 2b-e) on experimental stone hoes. In fact, the overall wear pattern seen on my experimental digging implements conforms well to descriptions of wear traces on other lithic hoes and excavation tools (Semenov 1964:21,133; Shafer 1983; Sonnenfeld 1962). The only tool with which a chipped stone hoe could be confused is the hafted adze. However, hoe polish does not have the bright, fluid appearance of wood gloss.

Use Damage from Bone Working

97

Use Damage from Bone Working (Table 10) The eight chert tools used to work fresh animal bone were slow to develop polish, but they became heavily abraded along the utilized margin after as little as 15 minutes. Keeley has identified a distinctive "bone polish" that is bright, somewhat greasy, and may contain tiny pits (Keeley 1980:42-44). He also noted that this polish forms very slowly, is highly localized, and generally is concentrated on the high points of the flint or chert surface. On my sample the bone polish appears different from wood polish. It has a slightly greasy look but without circular pits. Five of the eight chert bone-working flakes developed a trace of polish (see Figure 47). Sawing Bone. Three unretouched chert flakes with ample edge angles (35°-40°) were used to saw a fresh deer tibia. As a result, the cutting edges quickly dulled. This heavy edge abrasion is easily discerned without optical magnification. Two of the knives developed a slight amount of greasy bone polish close to the margin. Striations appeared on all bone saws, oriented not only parallel to the margin, but also perpendicular and diagonal to it in a few cases. These striae are frequently shorter and wider than those from woodworking, and

Figure 47. Bone polish and perpendicular striae on dorsal surface of chert flake no. 48, used to incise bone; 244×.

Table 10. Use traces from bone

working Dorsal

Specimen No.

Angle (°)

Ventral Flake Scars

Striations

Flake Scars

Striations

No. of FD FS Tiers P

EA SS

P

SO

ST

SE

FT

+

+

1,3

1

1

2 4

4 4

0.5 0.1

1 1

4

4

0.1

2 4

No. of FD FS Tiers

ST

SE

FT

1 1

1, 4 2, 4

4 4

1.1 0.4

1 1

1

1 1,2 1,2, 1 3 1 — 2,3

1

2, 4

4

0.3

1

0.1 0.5 3

1 1

+ +

2 3 3

2 2 2

1 1 1, 2

1 1,4 4

4 4 1

0.1 0.8 0.2

1 1 1

SO

Sawing Ch 46 Ch 59

35 40

4 4

Ch 60

36

3

11 40 40

1 3 3

+ +

—

105

2

+

75

2

+

+

Scraping Ch 47 Ch 51 Ch 52

2

2

1

1 1

+

2

1

1

1

4

0.1

1

?

2

1

1

1, 2

4

0.1

1

—

3

2

1

4

4

0.1

1

+

2

2

3

—

—

—

—

Incising Ch 48 Drilling Ch 49 N= EA SS P SO ST SE FT

8 Ch: chert Edge abrasion: 1, minimal; 2, light; 3, moderate; 4, extreme. Scar symmetry. Polish. Striation orientation: 1, parallel to margin; 2, perpendicular; 3, diagonal. Striation type: 1, long, narrow, deep; 2, short, wide, deep; 3, intermittent; 4, wide, shallow; 5, long, narrow, faint; 6, long, wide, deep. Striation extent: 1, close to margin; 2, far back from margin; 3, 1 cm. down from tip. Flake scar type: 1, scalar, feather termination; 2, half-moon, snap termination; 3, step termination; 4, deep scalar; 5, irregular; 6, triangular. FD Flake scar distribution: 1, continuous; 2, almost continuous; 3, clusters; 4, discontinuous; 5, continuous overlapping scars. FS Flake scar size (mm.).

Use Damage from Bone Working

99

not bilateral. Two of the three tools had only ventral striae. Microflake scars, however, occur in a single tier on both opposing surfaces. They consist of scalar and deep scalar scars that are larger on the ventral side. A number of half-moon flake removals with snap terminations also occur as a result of the resistant nature of the contact material. Bone saws are more severely abraded than wood saws. They differ as well in the type of polish that forms along the blade: irregular and greasy from bone and smooth, bright, and fluid in appearance as a result of sawing wood. Also, bone polish is generally much less extensively developed than wood gloss. Bone Scraping. Another experiment consisted of the use of three chert flakes to remove flesh and sinew from deer bone. In the process, the steep angled flakes developed dull or rounded edges and an asymmetrical pattern of incipient polish on the ventral surface. Short striations perpendicular or diagonal to the edge were found in each case; these were restricted to a narrow zone close to the utilized margin. Scalar and deep scalar scars, some with step terminations, form a single discontinuous row along both opposing margins. Incising Bone. A single chert flake with a steep edge angle was used to make a number of deep incisions in fresh bone. During use the graver tip and margin became slightly rounded. In addition, a small area of polish formed along the incising margin (Figure 47). A few perpendicular and diagonal striae were also observed, as well as a symmetrical distribution of a few tiny scalar flakes scattered intermittently along the margin within 2 centimeters of the graver tip. Perforating Bone. A retouched chert flake was used as an alternating drill to bore several holes in fresh mimal long bone. A slight rounding resulted on the drill tip and along the lateral margins and dorsal ridge. A few small polished areas were seen, as well as short, wide striations perpendicular to the margin, approximately 1 centimeter from the tip. The single row of minute, deep, scalar flake scars extends for 1-1.5 centimeters along the margins from the tip, on the dorsal side.

100

The Experimental Use Wear

Figure 48. Hide polish and edge rounding on dorsal side of chert specimen no. 18, used to scrape snakeskin; 178×. Figure 49. Flake scar and surface abrasion from cutting hide on dorsal aspect of obsidian specimen no. 42; 178×. Figure 50. Dry hide surface abrasion on ventral side of obsidian specimen no. 42, used to cut dry hides; 356×.

Effects of Hide and Leather Working

101

Effects of Hide and Leather Working (Table 11) Three obsidian blades and six chert flakes were used to process fresh hides and dry tanned leather. These activities left distinctive polish, abrasion, and striation configurations on the working edges of the stone tools. As Brian Hayden has noted (1979b), hide-scraping implements develop a smooth, rounded edge; within my sample this phenomenon occurred on both chert and obsidian tools used for cutting, scraping, and perforating hides (see Figure 48). On obsidian, abrasion from hide looks slightly greasy and bumpy (Figure 49) and may be riddled with shallow circular pits (Figure 50). It tends to occur in flake scars along the utilized margin. Interestingly, this description coincides well with the hide polish on Keeley's experimental flint tools (Keeley 1980:49). It is also similar to that observed on some of my experimental obsidian butchering implements. Hide polish on chert varies from bumpy and greasy on tools used on fresh animal skins like deer or jaguar (Figure 51) to a smoother, nongreasy variety that resulted from contact with snakeskins (Figure 52). Only one of the chert hide-working tools developed striae; all three obsidian blades were striated after use. Striae were long and narrow. Although a few were of the deep variety (Figure 53), others were very shallow and faint (Figure 54); perhaps these are analogous to the "diffuse shallow linear features" noted by Keeley on flint tools used for hide working (Keeley 1980: 50). Cutting Leather. Two of the three obsidian blades used to cut leather developed surface abrasion (Figures 49 and 50) on both dorsal and ventral surfaces. All have striations parallel to the edge; some perpendicular striations were also noted on two blades. Each specimen in this subsample has at least some of the long, narrow, faint striae described above. Striations occur bilaterally on all leathercutting knives. Microfracturing also occurs on both opposing surfaces of the blades, not necessarily in a symmetrical distribution. A single row of scars, never longer than 1 millimeter, is arranged in small clusters or discontinuously along the margins. There does not seem to be any pattern to scar shape: scalar, deep scalar, half-moon, and irregular flakes were removed during hide cutting. Scraping Skins. The three chert flakes used to scrape puma and deer skins were unifacially retouched into steep-angled scrapers; un-

Table 11. Use damage from hide and leather working Dorsal Striations Angle (°)

Contact Material

Ob 28 a

25, 41

Ob 42

22

Ob 86

37

Tanned leather Tanned leather Tanned leather

Specimen No.

EA SS

Ventral Flake Scars

SO

ST

SE

FT

1

1

2

1

5

1

1

+

1

5

1

2,4

3

1

+

1,2

5

2

4

1

+ +

—

—

—

2, 1

4

P

Flak e Scars

Striations

No. of FD FS Tiers P

SO

ST

SE

FT

—

2

5

1

+

1

1

1

0.5

1

+

1, 2

5

1

5

1

1

—

—

—

—

+

2

1

FD FS

No. of Tiers

Cutting 2 2

+

1

1

4

1

1

1, 4 3

1

1

2

0.2

1

2 1

4 4

1 1

1 1

1

5

0.8

1

1

Scraping Ch 17 Ch 18 Ch 34 Ch 35 Ch 36

28, 33 Snakeskins 2 — Snakeskins 2 46 Fresh deer, 2 80 puma 67, 76 Fresh deer, 1 puma 64, 74 Fresh deer, 1 — puma

1 3 4

0 5

12

1,3

2

0.7

1 3

—

—

—

1

4

0.2

1

3 — — 2,3

1

3

4

4

0.2

1

+

Perforating Ch 55

40, 70

Tanned leather

+

3

N= EA SS P

9 Ch: chert Ob: obsidian Edge abrasion: 1, minimal; 2, light; 3, moderate,- 4, extreme. Scar symmetry. Polish. The equivalent of polish on obsidian is a roughening of the otherwise smooth surface from contact with an abrasive substance, such as hide. SO Striation orientation: 1, parallel to margin; 2, perpendicular; 3, diagonal. ST Striation type: 1, long, narrow, deep; 2, short, wide, deep; 3, intermittent; 4, wide, shallow; 5, long, narrow, faint; 6, long, wide, deep. SE Striation extent: 1, close to margin; 2, far back from margin; 3, 1 cm. down from tip. FT Flake scar type: 1, scalar, feather termination; 2, half-moon, snap termination; 3, step termination; 4, deep scalar; 5, irregular; 6, triangular. FD Flake scar distribution: 1, continuous; 2, almost continuous; 3, clusters; 4, discontinuous; 5, continuous overlapping scars. FS Flake scar size (mm.). a Used subsequently for whittling.

Figure 51. Greasy hide polish on dorsal aspect of chert flake no. 36, used to scrape fresh deer hide; 130×. Figure 52. Hide polish on dorsal side of chert specimen no. 17, used to scrape meat from snakeskin; 130×. Figure 53. Parallel striations on ventral surface of obsidian specimen no. 42, used to cut dry hide; 130×. Figure 54. Faint parallel striations on ventral side of obsidian specimen no. 42, used to cut dry hide; 130×.

Traces from Butchering and Meat Cutting

105

modified chert flakes were used to scrape tissue from the snakeskins. On these tools minimal to light abrasion occurs along the working edges. In this case the margins were not roughly eroded but lightly rounded (Figure 48). All but one scraper incurred hide polish, mostly on the dorsal surface. No distinct striations were observed on these tools. Hide scraping caused a noticeably asymmetrical microflake scar pattern, almost exclusively on the surface opposite the direction of movement, i.e., the dorsal aspect. Dorsal scars consist of scalar shapes with feather and step terminations. These microfeatures are quite small (none longer than 0.7 millimeter) and are scattered discontinuously along the dorsal margin, from one to three tiers deep (see also Odell 1981a). Scrapers are easily identified, despite the great range of variability within this functional class. They may be retouched carefully, minimally, or not at all. Edge angles can vary from acute to obtuse, and almost any kind of microflake scar may be present. Despite this diversity, scrapers are easily identifiable on the basis of their unifacial flake scar distribution. Abrasive polishes, edge rounding, and scar terminations are often, but not always, sufficient clues to the specific contact material (or at least its relative hardness). Hide scrapers used for long periods of time may have identifiable hide polish. Those used a short while may be classified simply as tools used to scrape a soft substance. Perforating Dry Tanned Hide. A single chert perforator developed a tiny patch of polish, rounding of the tip, lateral margins, and dorsal ridge, as well as a few striations perpendicular and diagonal to the margins, approximately 1 centimeter from the tip of the instrument. Scalar and deep scalar microflakes were removed during use. These form a single discontinuous layer of flake scars less than 0.2 millimeter long along one margin, and a single tier of continuousoverlapping scars, some as long as 0.8 millimeter, extending down the opposite lateral margin. Traces from Butchering and Meat Cutting (Table 12) The set of twenty-six experimental chert and obsidian butchering implements reflects variability in several respects. They were used on a wide range of tropical fauna: peccary, jaguar, white-tailed deer, sea turtle (tortoise), several varieties of snakes, woodpecker, and puma. Animals were butchered as soon as possible after the kill, but a few tools were also used to remove meat from cooked carcasses.

Table 12. Use wear from butchering Dorsal Striations Specimen No.

Angle (°)

Contact Material

Ch21 Ch22 Ch23 Ch28 Ch33 Ob 3 Ob 5 Ob 6 Ob 7 Ob 8 Ob 9 Ob 11 Ob 12 Ob 13 Ob 14

22 35 26, 39 28 47, 39 24 33, 35 29, 30 49, 41 50 28, 34 26, 49 28, 37 31 24, 30

Peccary 3 Peccary b Peccary b Jaguar 3 Deer c Turtle Snakes Snakes Peccary Jaguar Jaguar Turtle Turtle Turtle d Jaguar

1 1 2 1 1 3 4 3 1 2 2 2 2 2 2

Ob 15

35, 30

Jaguar

1

Ob 16 Ob 17 Ob 18

53, 33 25, 30 30

Jaguar e Jaguar 6 Jaguar6

1 2 1

Ob 10

36, 44

Woodpecker

2

EA SS

P

SO

ST

— + 3 — + 3 + + — — ? — — — 2,1 + + 1 — + 2 — + 1, 2 — + 1 + + 3 ? + 2, 1 — + 1,2 — ? — + + 1,2

1,3 1,3

SE

+ 2,1 2 + — 2,3

Striations

No. of FT FD FS Tiers P

SO

2 — 0.2 — — — 1 — — — 1 — 4 5 1 — 4 0.2 2 3 1 1 1 4 2 2 0.5 1 2 0.3 1 1, 2 1,4 1 0.3 1 1 3 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 3 0.5 1 2 i 1 — 3 1 1 1 1 3 1

][ ] ] ][ ][ ]i :I ] ]1 ] :1 ][ ][

— — — — — — ? 1 + 1 + 2,1 + 2 — — + 1,2 ? 1,2 + 1,2 ? — + 2

0.2, 1.5 1 1 0.5

]L

+

1, 3 3 1 3, 5 3, 1 1,3 3 3, 5 — 1,2, 3 1,2 1,3 1,2

+ + +

Ventral Flake Scars

3, 5 2 1

1 1 1

1,2 3, 5

2

1

3

1 1,2 1,2, 5

2 3 3

]L ] ]L _

? + ?

1

+ 1 — 2, 1 2 — +

2

ST

Flake Scars SE

No. of FT FD FS Tiers

— — 4 2 — — 4 2 — — 4 1 — — 4 1 2 4 1 1 2 1 4, 1 3 2 , 3 1, 2 1,4 1 2 1 1,2 3 — — 1 3 4 4 2 3 4,3 1 1 4 4 1 1 4,3 — — 4 1 3 1 2, 5 1,2

1 1 0.2 0.5 0.2 0.5 0.4 0.1 2.5 1 0.5 1 0.2 1

1 1 1 1-2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

3

1

1

4

0.2

1

3 1,2 1

1 2 1

1, 4 1 1

2 3 4

1 1 0.2

1 1 1

1

1

1,5

3

0.3

1

Ob 22

25, 23

Deer

1

+

+

Ob Ob Ob Ob Ob

26 36, 26 25, 29 43, 38 28, 35

Deer Puma Puma Puma Puma

3 + 1 — 3 + 1 + 1 —

+ + + + ?

N= EA SS P

23 24 25 26 27

1, 2, 1, 2 3 1, 2 2, 3 2 1 1, 2 3 1 3 1 3

1 1 1 1 2 2

1

3

1, 4 3 1 3 1 3 1 4 2 _

0.5

1

1 0.6

1 1 1 1

1.4 _

_

?

—

—

+ 1, 2 1, 5 + — — + 1 3 — 1 3 _ _ _ _

—

1

4

0.5

1

1 1, 4 3 1.5 — 1 4 0.2 1 1 , 2 3 1 2 4 2 1.7 _ _ _ _

1 1 1 1 _

26 Ch: chert Ob: obsidian Edge abrasion: 1, minimal; 2, light; 3, moderate; 4, extreme. Scar symmetry. Polish. The equivalent of polish on obsidian is a roughening of the otherwise smooth surface from contact with an abrasive substance, such as meat or bone. SO Striation orientation: 1, parallel to margin; 2, perpendicular; 3, diagonal. ST Striation type: 1, long, narrow, deep; 2, short, wide, deep; 3, intermittent; 4, wide, shallow; 5, long, narrow, faint; 6, long, wide, deep. SE Striation extent: 1, close to margin; 2, far back from margin; 3, 1 cm. down from tip. FT Flake scar type: 1, scalar, feather termination; 2, half-moon, snap termination; 3, step termination; 4, deep scalar; 5, irregular,6, triangular. FD Flake scar distribution: 1, continuous; 2, almost continuous; 3, clusters; 4, discontinuous; 5, continuous overlapping scars. FS Flake scar size (mm.). a Defleshing. b Scraping off bristles. c Scraping flesh and sinew from bones. d Scraping inner shell. e Removing meat from cooked carcass.

108

The Experimental Use Wear

The most important independent variable in terms of effecting use damage on butchering tools is the nature of animal processing. This activity involves cutting, sawing, slicing, and scraping motions, most of which are accomplished with a single implement. In the process of skinning and preparing an animal for consumption, a flake or blade is alternatively subjected to a variety of motions, during which time it may contact hide, fat, muscle, ligaments, and bone. It is not surprising, therefore, that there is some overlap between butchering use wear and the damage observed after hide and bone working. Most of the butchering tools developed at least some degree of abrasive polish during use. On eleven specimens, polish occurs bilaterally; eight additional pieces have a polished area on one surface. A number of these tools suffered abrasion very similar to bone polish. This is not unexpected since some of the tools came into repeated contact with the skeleton, especially during tendon cutting and disjointing. Other tools, notably obsidian blades, bear traces of a bumpy, pitted, and somewhat greasy zone that occurs close to the tool margin, sometimes in flake scars. (The significance of this surface alteration on obsidian is presently unknown. Therefore, this phenomenon should not be relied on as distinctive of butchering tools.) There is a good deal of variability within the butchering use wear observed on this sample. Edge attrition, for example, ranges from minimal in twelve cases to extreme on one obsidian blade. Most, however, suffered minimal or light edge rounding. Striation patterning is also complex. Only four of the butchering implements are without striae. Four have only striations oriented parallel to the margin, indicating that they were used exclusively for cutting/slicing. The perpendicular and diagonal striations on four tools imply a scraping motion. The remaining fourteen, or over 50 percent, have combinations of parallel, perpendicular, and diagonal striae along their margins. Striations occur with greater frequency on the dorsal aspects of these meat-processing tools. In every case, ventral striae have a dorsal counterpart; but some tools have only dorsal striae. There is also variability in striation type. The most commonly occurring variety is the long, narrow, deep type 1 (Figure 55). This form was observed on sixteen butchering tools. An intermittent type 3 is present on seventeen butchering implements (Figure 56). Long, narrow, and very faint (shallow) striations (type 5) developed on six specimens. These linear features are even fainter than those seen on tools used to work dry hides. They are probably attributable to the relative softness of grease-coated fresh hide and animal tissue.

Traces from Butchering and Meat Cutting

109

Figure 55. Perpendicular striations on ventral surface of obsidian specimen no. 14, used to butcher jaguar; 140×. Figure 56. Faint parallel and perpendicular striations and microflake scars on dorsal side of obsidian specimen no. 14, used to butcher jaguar; 140×.

Butchering generally left an asymmetrical pattern of microflake damage along tool margins. Scalar (Figure 57) and deep scalar (Figure 58) scars with invasive or feather terminations were most frequently associated with this activity. No step terminations were noted. Most dorsal and ventral microflake scars are tiny, less than 0.2 millimeter in length, although a few extend up to 1.5 millimeters back from the margin. The damaged butchering implement usually had a single tier of scars on the dorsal and ventral surfaces, often distributed as a series of small clusters of scars (see Figures 57-59). The butchering knives in m y sample are not hard to separate from the other experimental tools, principally because butchering activities left a delicate row of deep scalar scars along the blade near the ends of the implements. A flake or blade used for this purpose may have more than one use locus, each of which consists of clusters of tiny scars within 15 millimeters of a corner (on a blade segment) or end of the tool. This pattern differs from that on most tools (with the exception of gravers and perforators), where use wear tends to be located in the center of the blade or tool bit.

Figure 57. (top left) Scalar microflake scars on dorsal side of obsidian specimen no. 15, used to butcher jaguar; 164×. Figure 58. (bottom left) Deep scalar flake scars on ventral side of obsidian specimen no. 7, used to butcher peccary; 164×. Figure 59. (bottom right) Cluster of scalar microflake scars on dorsal aspect of obsidian specimen no. 22, used to butcher deer; 164×.

Stoneworking Traces Both of the formal chert bifaces used to shape limestone disks, "meatballs" (small stone spheres), etc., suffered extreme edge attrition and an asymmetrical scar pattern as a result of the removal of large step-terminated flakes, mostly from the more concave dorsal side. These flakes came off in continuous or almost continuous rows along the margins, three or more layers deep. The band of edge damage extends out from the tool bit 0.6 to 3.0 millimeters. The shaping of limestone artifacts caused striations perpendicular to the margin on the dorsal aspect of both specimens and on the ventral side of one tool as well. These striae are short, either narrow or wide, and shallow (Figures 60 and 61). The dorsal and ventral surfaces of both implements are lightly abraded. This polish is not well

Figure 6o. (bottom left) Perpendicular striations on ventral side of chert specimen no. 5, used to chisel limestone; 164×. Figure 61. (top right) Perpendicular striae on dorsal ridge of chert tool no. 12, used to chisel limestone; 164×. Figure 62. (bottom right) Stoneworking polish at bit on ventral surface of chert specimen no. 5, used to chisel limestone; 164X.

developed; it forms as a bright smoothing of high spots in the surface microtopography (see Figures 60-62). Stone polish probably is equivalent to "hammerstone smear" as described by Keeley (1980:28 and plates 7 and 8; see also Moss 1983 :102-104). None of the chipped stone tools from Cerros suffered the severe attrition that rapidly developed on the experimental stoneworking tools. Evidently the Precolumbian inhabitants of Cerros did not subject their imported formal chert implements to such abuse. Further experimental research is needed, with both chert and hardwood chisels, in light of the variability in hardness of freshly quarried limestone in the Maya area and the occurrence of chipped stone bifaces in possible quarrying and stoneworking contexts (for example, at Tikal [Haviland 1974]).

Table 13. Use damage from shell working Dorsal Striations Specimen No.

Angle (°)

Ventral Flake Scars

Striations

Flake Scars No. of FD FS Tiers P

EA SS

P

SO

ST

SE

FT

1,2 1 3

1/ 5 1 2

1 1 1

2 1

2 4

2 2.5

1 1

4

2

1

1, 2

5

1

2 5

2 3

3

1

1

5

3

No. of FD PS Tiers

SO

ST

SE

FT

1,2 1 1

1, 5 1 2

1 1

2, 1 1

2 4

1 1

1 1

1

+ + + +

2,4

2

0.5

1

1 1

1 1

+ +

1

1

1

2 5

2 4

1 0.8

1 1

2

1

2

1

3

1

1

1, (2 at tip)

Cutting Ob Ch Ch Ch

39 25 39 42

29, 26 43 29, 26 40

4 4 2 4

+ + +

+ + + +

30, 46 58

3 2

+ +

+ +

51

4

Incising Ch 24 Ch 57 Drilling Ch 56

N= EA SS P SO ST SE FT FD FS

1+

7 Ch: chert Ob: obsidian Edge abrasion: 1, minimal; 2, light; 3, moderate,- 4, extreme. Scar symmetry Polish. The equivalent of polish on obsidian is a roughening of the otherwise smooth surface from contact with an abrasive substance, such as shell. Striation orientation: 1, parallel to margin; 2, perpendicular; 3, diagonal. Striation type: 1, long, narrow, deep; 2, short, wide, deep; 3, intermittent; 4, wide, shallow; 5, long, narrow, faint; 6, long, wide, deep. Striation extent: 1, close to margin; 2, far back from margin; 3, 1 cm. down from tip. Flake scar type: 1, scalar, feather termination; 2, half-moon, snap termination; 3, step termination; 4, deep scalar; 5, irregular; 6, triangular. Flake scar distribution: 1, continuous; 2, almost continuous; 3, clusters; 4, discontinuous; 5, continuous overlapping scars. Flake scar size (mm.).

Damage from Shell Working

113

Damage from Shell Working (Table 13) Marine shell proved extremely destructive to both chert and obsidian tools, in terms of both edge attrition and surface abrasion. The shell-working implements include chert flake perforators, cutting and incising tools made from chert flakes, and an obsidian blade. The majority of this set of seven ad hoc implements have heavily eroded margins (Figures 63 and 64). Surface abrasion or polish affected all shell-working tools on both dorsal and ventral sides, with the exception of the chert flake perforator. On the obsidian blade saw, this abrasion took the form of coarse roughening along the margin, just in from the edge (Figure 63). Chert tools developed a bright non-smooth polish that starts on the high spots (Figure 65) and gradually enlarges, as in Figures 64 and 66. Elsewhere shell polish has been described as very bright and extensive with a pattern of cracking or crazing similar to egg white spread on a broken mirror (Yerkes 1983 : 504, 506). This polish does not extend very far back from the tool edge because of the resistant nature of the shell, which does not allow deep penetration by the tool, as occurs with butchering, fiberworking, or woodworking tools.

Cutting Shell. One obsidian blade and three chert flakes were used to cut marine shell. All but one of these developed striations parallel to the margin on either the dorsal or the ventral side (Figures 65 and 67). Two of these have a few stray perpendicular or diagonal striae as well. Extreme edge attrition on one of the shell-cutting specimens is responsible for its lack of microflake scars. The remaining three tools all have symmetrical patterns of scars arranged in random fashion or almost continuously in a single tier along the dorsal and ventral margins. Several types of scars are represented: half-moon or "snappedoff" fractures, scalar and deep scalar shapes. The row of microfractures does not extend beyond 1 millimeter from the margin on either dorsal or ventral surface, probably because the high edge-attrition rate consistently erodes the margin, snapping off or grinding away the microfractured bit.

Incising Shell. One of the two chert gravers is striated; it has scratches parallel and perpendicular to the dorsal surface and parallel to the ventral aspect. These striae are long, narrow, and vary in depth from faint to deeply etched (Figure 64). Both gravers have symmetri-

114

The Experimental Use Wear

Figure 63. (top left) Edge attrition on ventral surface of obsidian specimen no. 39, used to cut shell; 164×. Figure 64. (top right) Shell-working polish and parallel striae on ventral surface of chert flake no. 24, used to incise shell; 164×. Figure 65. (bottom left) Shell-working polish and parallel striations on dorsal aspect of chert specimen no. 25, used to saw shell; 164×. Figure 66. (bottom right) Shell-working polish and parallel striae on ventral side of chert specimen no. 24, used to incise shell; 164×.

Damage from Cutting Sherds

115

Figure 67. Type 1 parallel striations on ventral aspect of obsidian specimen no. 39, used to cut shell; 164×.

cal patterns of scar edge damage. They consist of a single dorsal and ventral tier of half-moon "snapped" or irregular-shaped microflake scars that may form a discontinuous, clustered, or almost continuous flaked margin. Drilling Shell. A single unretouched chert flake with a natural point was used to drill holes in thick Pacific Coast shell. Polish did not form on this specimen. Striations formed along both lateral margins, some perpendicular, others diagonal; they are narrow, deep, and vary from medium to long. These striations form within 1 centimeter of the tip. Flake scars on the perforator occur as a single tier of scalar and irregular-shaped removals that are clustered along the dorsal margin and arranged in a continuous strip on the opposing ventral side. These scars are largest at the drill tip, where they measure up to 2 millimeters long, and much tinier, i.e., less than 0.2 millimeter long down 1 centimeter from the tip. Damage from Cutting Sherds Abrasion caused considerable damage to the surfaces and margins of all chert and obsidian tools used to cut and shape sherds into net

116

The Experim en tal Use Wear

Figure 68. Crushed margin on dorsal side of obsidian specimen no. 40, used to cut sherds; 200×.

weights and pot lids. The working edges on all five tools were extremely abraded after just 5 minutes' use. The two obsidian blades suffered such attrition that their margins were totally crushed, thickened, and roughened (Figure 68). Surface abrasion also affected each of the sherd-cutting implements; all developed dorsal polish or roughening, and four of these also have polish on the opposing, ventral surface. Abrasive surface "polish" on obsidian starts as a roughening of the otherwise smooth topography (Figure 69). With further tool use the surface becomes more abraded, and dark, gouged-out, linear features form (Figure 70). Eventually, large rough patches develop bilaterally along the cutting edge (Figure 71). Sherd working causes a bright polish on chert flakes. In its incipient stage, sherd polish appears as a highly reflective smoothing on the high spots along the margin. With extensive utilization the polish spreads to cover a larger area; eventually, linear striations reflecting the direction of use may form in the enlarged polished zone (Figure 72). Striations parallel to the cutting edge characterize all five sherdworking tools; a few perpendicular and diagonal striae also occur. All dorsal and ventral surfaces are striated. Striae are long but vary in width and depth (Figures 69, 70, and 72). They make up a broad band that extends a considerable distance out from the abraded edge.

Damage from Cutting Sherds

117

Figure 69. (top left) Surface abrasion, parallel and perpendicular striations on ventral side of obsidian specimen no. 40, used to cut sherds; 360×. Figure 70. (top right) Elongate zone of gouged-out surface abrasion and parallel striations on dorsal aspect of obsidian specimen no. 40, used to cut sherds; 180×. Figure 71. (bottom left) Large abraded surface locus and parallel striations on ventral surface of obsidian specimen no. 40, used to cut sherds; 180×. Figure 72. (bottom right) Sherd polish and parallel striations on dorsal aspect of chert specimen no. 40, used to cut sherds; 180×.

118

The Experimental Use Wear

Microflake scars are not plentiful on tools that suffer such extensive edge attrition. The scars that do form, however, are distributed in an approximately symmetrical manner on both opposing surfaces. Sherd cutting produces "snapped-off " or half-moon scars and also a few scalar and deep scalar scars. The single row of microflake scars ranges from approximately 0.5 millimeter to 3 millimeters in flake length; smaller scars are quickly eroded away by the friction between stone and sherds. Fiber Traces (Table 14) Lowland tropical fibers are pliable, yet coarse and resistant enough to abrade the surfaces of most stone tools used to cut them into lengths for rope or twine, or to cut and scrape off bumps prior to basketmaking. All but one of the thirteen fiberworking tools show some degree of abrasive polish, which is more likely to form on the dorsal ( N = 8 ) than on the ventral ( N = I I) surface. On chert flakes, polish develops as a light smoothing on the high spots of the stone surface: it bears a striking resemblance to wood polish (Figure 73). It is not as bright as polish caused by sherd or shell working. The effect of fiber abrasion on obsidian knives is a linear roughening oriented in the direction of the tool's use (Figures 74-76). It is finer grained than the abrasive gouges that result from contact with sherds. In a previous study (Lewenstein 1981:179)1 recorded the presence of wide bands of roughening or dulling on both dorsal and ventral aspects of obsidian blades used to cut jute fibers. This dulling was more pronounced than the roughening observed on the obsidian fibercutting implements described here, probably because at Cerros I was working freshly gathered vines and fibers, unlike the (drier) seasoned rope used in the previous experiment. The surface abrasion or polish caused by contact with fibers extends in a broad band out from the cutting edge on both dorsal and ventral surfaces of obsidian and chert tools. The extensive abraded area results from deep penetration of the tool into the contact material. Fibers are not as hard or resistant as shell, bone, or potsherds. Contact is made over a wider area on the tools, resulting in a much wider zone of polish for fiberworking implements than for the tools used to process the other three materials. Fiberworking with stone tools results in slight to moderate edge rounding, depending on the length of tool use (Figure 77). This abrasion did not take the form of severe attrition of the margin, as was the case with bone and sherd cutting, but rather a gradual smoothing of the edge similar to the effects of hide working.

Table 14. Fiberworking

use wear Dorsal Striations

Specimen No.

Ventral Flak e Scars

Flak e Scars

No. of

Angle