黑曜石不仅仅是一种工具石:在近东还有其他使用黑曜石的方法

IF 1.1 0 ARCHAEOLOGY
E. Healey
{"title":"黑曜石不仅仅是一种工具石:在近东还有其他使用黑曜石的方法","authors":"E. Healey","doi":"10.2218/jls.5739","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Obsidian was used widely in the Near East in prehistoric and early historic times to make tools and other objects. We know quite a lot about its use as a tool-stone, but much less about other objects made from it, although such things in other contexts would be regarded as markers of identity. This apparent duality of use raises the question of whether the object made or obsidian as a raw material was more significant; it also raises questions about whether the same crafts-people were involved in both the production of tools and other objects or whether they were separated. As research progresses, we are increasingly realising that there is much information that is scattered and that more holistic and integrated approaches are needed. This demands in-depth study of individual objects using multi-disciplinary approaches. Significant areas for further study include the use of geochemical analysis to determine the provenance of the obsidian from which the objects were made and so to evaluate choice of source. Advanced technological investigation is also needed to elucidate manufacturing methods and techniques. These include studies of manufacturing techniques and surface topography as well as an evaluation of experimental data, not only to elucidate which techniques might have been used but also to assess skill and time input. The objects also need to be examined for indications of use and their context of deposition considered in greater detail. The type of objects produced and the way they were crafted also need to be compared to similar objects made of other materials to see if obsidian had a privileged position. Research into these matters is still at an early stage and this paper can only summarise what we know in order to provide a foundation for further study.","PeriodicalId":44072,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Lithic Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Not only a tool-stone: Other ways of using obsidian in the Near East\",\"authors\":\"E. Healey\",\"doi\":\"10.2218/jls.5739\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Obsidian was used widely in the Near East in prehistoric and early historic times to make tools and other objects. We know quite a lot about its use as a tool-stone, but much less about other objects made from it, although such things in other contexts would be regarded as markers of identity. This apparent duality of use raises the question of whether the object made or obsidian as a raw material was more significant; it also raises questions about whether the same crafts-people were involved in both the production of tools and other objects or whether they were separated. As research progresses, we are increasingly realising that there is much information that is scattered and that more holistic and integrated approaches are needed. This demands in-depth study of individual objects using multi-disciplinary approaches. Significant areas for further study include the use of geochemical analysis to determine the provenance of the obsidian from which the objects were made and so to evaluate choice of source. Advanced technological investigation is also needed to elucidate manufacturing methods and techniques. These include studies of manufacturing techniques and surface topography as well as an evaluation of experimental data, not only to elucidate which techniques might have been used but also to assess skill and time input. The objects also need to be examined for indications of use and their context of deposition considered in greater detail. The type of objects produced and the way they were crafted also need to be compared to similar objects made of other materials to see if obsidian had a privileged position. Research into these matters is still at an early stage and this paper can only summarise what we know in order to provide a foundation for further study.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44072,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Lithic Studies\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Lithic Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2218/jls.5739\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"ARCHAEOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Lithic Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2218/jls.5739","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ARCHAEOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

黑石在史前和历史早期在近东被广泛用于制造工具和其他物品。我们对它作为工具石的用途了解很多,但对用它制成的其他物体却知之甚少,尽管在其他情况下,这些东西会被视为身份的标志。这种明显的双重用途引发了一个问题,即制作的物体或作为原材料的黑石是否更重要;这也引发了一个问题,即是否同样的工艺人员参与了工具和其他物品的生产,或者他们是否被分开了。随着研究的进展,我们越来越意识到,有很多信息是分散的,需要更全面、更综合的方法。这需要使用多学科方法对单个对象进行深入研究。需要进一步研究的重要领域包括使用地球化学分析来确定制作这些物体的黑石的来源,从而评估来源的选择。还需要进行先进的技术调查,以阐明制造方法和技术。其中包括对制造技术和表面形貌的研究,以及对实验数据的评估,不仅是为了阐明可能使用了哪些技术,还为了评估技能和时间投入。还需要检查这些物体的使用迹象,并更详细地考虑它们的沉积背景。制作的物品类型和制作方式也需要与其他材料制成的类似物品进行比较,以确定黑石是否具有特权地位。对这些问题的研究仍处于早期阶段,本文只能总结我们所知道的情况,为进一步研究提供基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Not only a tool-stone: Other ways of using obsidian in the Near East
Obsidian was used widely in the Near East in prehistoric and early historic times to make tools and other objects. We know quite a lot about its use as a tool-stone, but much less about other objects made from it, although such things in other contexts would be regarded as markers of identity. This apparent duality of use raises the question of whether the object made or obsidian as a raw material was more significant; it also raises questions about whether the same crafts-people were involved in both the production of tools and other objects or whether they were separated. As research progresses, we are increasingly realising that there is much information that is scattered and that more holistic and integrated approaches are needed. This demands in-depth study of individual objects using multi-disciplinary approaches. Significant areas for further study include the use of geochemical analysis to determine the provenance of the obsidian from which the objects were made and so to evaluate choice of source. Advanced technological investigation is also needed to elucidate manufacturing methods and techniques. These include studies of manufacturing techniques and surface topography as well as an evaluation of experimental data, not only to elucidate which techniques might have been used but also to assess skill and time input. The objects also need to be examined for indications of use and their context of deposition considered in greater detail. The type of objects produced and the way they were crafted also need to be compared to similar objects made of other materials to see if obsidian had a privileged position. Research into these matters is still at an early stage and this paper can only summarise what we know in order to provide a foundation for further study.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
10.00%
发文量
6
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信