scholarly journals Ground stone tools from the copper production site Al-Khashbah, Sultanate of Oman

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-24
Author(s):  
Stephanie Döpper

Archaeological research at Al-Khashbah, Sultanate of Oman, conducted by the University of Tübingen, revealed a large Early Bronze Age (3rd millennium BCE) site. During the intensive surface survey and excavations, several ground stone tools were found. Most of them came from the vicinity of monumental stone and mud-brick structures, so-called towers, and are clearly connected to copper-processing waste such as slag, furnace fragments and prills, i.e., droplets of molten copper. Therefore, it is assumed that these ground stone tools were used within the operational procedures of copper-processing. Interestingly, only the monumental towers from the first half of the 3rd millennium BCE, i.e., the Hafit period, feature larger quantities of ground stone tools as well as copper processing waste. Towers from the second half of the 3rd millennium BCE, i.e., the Umm an-Nar period, have none. Within the scope of this paper, the distribution of the different types of ground stone tools in Al-Khashbah as well as their find context will be presented. They are illustrated with drawings generated from 3D models created using digital photography processed with the software Agisoft Photoscan. Comparisons with other 3rd millennium BCE sites in Eastern Arabia show that there as well, copper-processing remains are often associated with ground stone tools. The overall variety of types seems to be rather homogeneous in the region.

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tasos Bekiaris ◽  
Danai Chondrou ◽  
Ismini Ninou ◽  
Soultana-Maria Valamoti

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (21) ◽  
pp. 8869
Author(s):  
Andrew McCarthy

Cultural objects are thought to have a lifespan. From selection, through construction, use, destruction, and discard, materials do not normally last forever, transforming through stages of life, eventually leading to their death. The materiality of stone objects, however, can defy the inevitable demise of an object, especially durable ground stone tools that can outlive generations of human lifespans. How groups of people deal with the relative permanence of stone tools depends on their own relationship with the past, and whether they venerate it or reject its influence on the present. A case study from the long-lived site of Prasteio-Mesorotsos in Cyprus demonstrates a shifting attitude toward ground stone objects, from the socially conservative habit of ritually killing of objects and burying them, to one of more casual re-use and reinterpretation of ground stone. This shift in attitude coincides with a socio-political change that eventually led to the ultimate rejection of the past: complete abandonment of the settlement.


2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Caroline Hamon

In the Southern Caucasus, the evolution of the Neolithic to Bronze age (6th-3rd millenia BCE) economies is often investigated through the prism of adaptation to constrasted landscapes and environments (arid plain, high moutains, subtropical western coasts) and strategies of natural resource exploitation. This overview of the main technological and functional characteristics of ground stone tools from about 20 sites in the Kura Valley (Georgia, Azerbaijan) contributes to the discussion surrounding these questions. After an overview of the evolution of the grinding equipment and stone tool manufacture within a long term perspective, from the Late Neoliothic to the Early Bronze Age, several issues are adressed. The composition of the macrolithic toolkit is a key issue when discussing the importance of agriculture versus pastoralism in the economy of these populations, which evolved in different regional and environmental contexts. Its management also contributes to our understanding of the degree of sedentarity versus mobility of the populations. Finally, we discuss how the technical evolution of the macrolithic toolkit reflects the principal global changes occurring during this long period of time (neolithisation, emergence of metallurgy, and the mining phenomenon) and their cultural meaning. Our initial results underline the significance of some implements as cultural markers, and also contribute to defining the common cultural background and regional specificities within the South Caucasus region.


2010 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 143 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Moser ◽  
Simon Hye ◽  
Gert Goldenberg ◽  
Klaus Hanke ◽  
Kristóf Kovács

<p>In 2007 the special research program HiMAT - History of Mining Activities in Tyrol and adjacent areas, focussing on environment and human societies, was established at the University of Innsbruck as an interdisciplinary and international research project, sponsored by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF). During late medieval and early modern times, the mining area of Schwaz in Tyrol became famous in Europe, due to the large scale exploitation of copper and silver bearing fahlores, going along with the development of high technologies in the field of mining and metallurgy. In that period, Schwaz was even called “the mother of all mines”.</p><p>In the area of Schwaz/Brixlegg the main focus of our research project is on early traces of copper mining and metallurgy dating back to the late Bronze Age. Such traces are still preserved, especially in boundary areas of the main ore deposits. On the basis of previous surveys a little valley called “Maukental” was chosen for archaeological investigations, because within this small area the entire copper production process of the late Bronze Age can be studied in detail. During the past two years, the Institute of Archaeology and Surveying and the Geoinformation Unit of the University of Innsbruck worked together in this area. One object of interest was a late Bronze Age ore dressing site situated in a former peat-bog. In this place the advantageous environment preserved fragile wooden structures and artefacts which could be digitally documented in the condition of retrieval.</p>


2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Joan S. Schneider ◽  
Tserendagva Yadmaa ◽  
Thomas C. Hart ◽  
Arlene M. Rosen ◽  
Annelise Spiro

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document