Auszug aus:

Roland de Beauclair, Susanne Mnzel und Hannes Napierala (Hrsg.)

Knochen pfastern ihren Weg
Festschrift
fr Margarethe und Hans-Peter Uerpmann
BioArchaeologica 5
Verlag Marie Leidorf GmbH . Rahden/Westf.
2009
Canan akrlar
Problems in determining
the chain of production in shell objects
Observations on shell assemblages from coastal
sites in the Eastern Mediterranean
Von Seite 45 bis 50
ISSN: 1611-356X
ISBN-13: 978-3-86757-952-0
ISBN-10: 3-86757-952-0
Introduction
Mollusk shells of marine, freshwater or terrestrial origin are
regularly represented in archaeological deposits. Despite
their ubiquitous presence, this category of organic mate-
rial constitutes the fnd group that is least exploited for
purposes of palaeoenvironmental and palaeoeconomical
interpretation. This situation is notably evident in archae-
ological schools dealing with late-prehistoric and historic
periods of the Old World. In contrast, archaeological shell
recovered in a state other than its natural form frequently
attracts researchers attention. Modifed shells are often un-
critically considered as artifacts that represent human cog-
nition, beliefs, symbolism, technology, and tool utilization.
The defciency of criticism in approaching modifed
mollusk shells is caused by two factors. One of them is the
pressure an archaeologist feels about fnding direct evi-
dence of past human activity. This pressure is caused both
by scientifc and public expectations, and is a tradition in-
herited from the early days of archaeology when the state
Problems in determining the chain of production
in shell objects
Observations on shell assemblages from coastal
sites in the Eastern Mediterranean
Canan akrlar
Abstract
Archaeological mollusk shells can be recovered in a variety of forms. Shell morphology of aquatic mollusks can
be altered by natural agents during the organisms lifetime, after its death, and after its deposition. They can
be alternatively or coevally modifed by human activity. This paper criticizes the lack of detailed analyses in the
interpretation of modifed archaeological shells, which often leads to the representation of false or manipulated
evidence for anthropogenic activity. Modes of shell modifcation are exemplifed by using modern and
archaeological fnds from the Eastern Mediterranean. The need for conducting experimental and taphonomic
research in order to accurately unfold the processes that were in play in shell modifcation is emphasized.
Keywords: Mollusks, shell modifcation, taphonomy, chain-of-production, diagenesis, ecology
Zusammenfassung
Archologische Molluskenschalen knnen in verschiedenen Formen gefunden werden. Die Schalenmorphologie
von aquatischen Mollusken kann durch natrliche Prozesse whrend der Lebenszeit des Organismus, nach
seinem Tod und nach seiner Ablagerung verndert werden. Alternativ dazu oder zustzlich knnen sie durch
menschliches Zutun modifziert werden. Dieser Beitrag kritisiert den Mangel an detaillierten Analysen bei der
Interpretation von modifzierten archologischen Molluskenresten, der hufg zur falschen oder manipulierten
Darstellungen von Belegen fr anthropogene Aktivitt fhrt. Verschiedene Arten von Modifkationen an
Molluskenschalen werden anhand moderner und archologischer Funde aus dem stlichen Mittelmeer
illustriert. Abschlieend wird die Notwendigkeit von experimenteller und taphonomischer Forschung betont,
um die Prozesse genau aufzuzeigen, die bei der Modifkation von Molluskenresten eine Rolle spielten.
Schlsselwrter: Mollusken, Modifkation, Taphonomie, Produktionskette, Diagenese, kologie
46 Canan akrlar
of art was about collecting artifacts of beauty or price. As
a consequence, sometimes the evidence is created, caus-
ing diferent levels of harm to the scientifc discipline. The
second factor behind this lack of criticism when handling
modifed shell remains is the distance some archaeological
circles insist on keeping from natural sciences. This practice
is also rooted in the complicated avenues of history of the
science. One outcome of this is the unconscious interpreta-
tion of virtually all modifed shells as end-products of de-
liberate human activity. What are at stake here are accurate
descriptions of human behavior, which takes the form of ty-
pologies, explanations of the chain of production, and use,
when the focal point is the discussion of osseous artifacts.
The purpose of this paper is to promote the caution
that must be taken in identifying the modes of modifca-
tion on shell fnds and to evoke skepticism in evaluating
the shell fnds that have been published as shell artifacts.
Attention will be drawn to natural agents that modify shell
morphology. The modes of modifcation that will be de-
scribed in the following sections are not intended to cover
the complete range of modifcations pertaining to process-
es other than human activity. They also do not claim to be
hitherto unknown, new observations. On the contrary, their
strength against arguments supporting human modes of
modifcation lies in the fact that they have previously been
explained by biological and geological phenomena and ex-
emplifed in taphonomic research.
The idea for this research was stimulated by the ne-
cessity to distinguish naturally-modifed shells from shell
artifacts in the colossal mollusk assemblages of coastal
Eastern Mediterranean sites. Most of the examples that are
displayed come from archaeological assemblages of these
sites or have been collected from the Eastern Mediterranean
coast in empty form or when still alive. Principles of nature
transcend conjunctures.
Forms of shell modifcation
Shell modifcation can take a variety of forms that are
caused by diferent agents. These agents can be classifed
in a chronological order that covers the life time of a shell
fnd until its recovery.
7. Modifcations that occur during ontogenic life time.
8. Post-mortem modifcations that occur of-site.
9. Anthropogenic modifcations.
10. Diagenetic modifcations.
Modifcations that occur during or after recovery can be
added to this classifcation, but these usually occur in char-
acteristic breaks that can be readily recognized as fresh-
breaks. They pose a problem in quantifying large amounts
of food refuse rather than in identifying shell artifacts.
1. Ontogenic modifcations occur while organisms are
still alive. Two main causes for this type of modifcation are
predation and abrasion. Shelled mollusks, no matter how
well their shells are adapted to protect the organisms, are
subject to predation by other animals. Diferent modes of
predation leave diferent traces on the shell. The two most
important modes of predation that are of importance to
the discussion here are crushing and drilling.
For example, diferent species of arthropods (mainly
crabs and lobsters) predate on Cypraeidae (cowrie shells) by
crushing their shells with their claws (Vermeij 1993, 94, fg.
5.1). In this manner they break of the top of the snail shell.
Fig. 1: Beach-picked Chamelea gallina valve (Biga, Northwest
Anatolia) displaying typical carnivorous gastropod predation
hole.
Fig. 2: Inside view of the left valve of an Acanthocardium
tuberculatum specimen showing the abraded umbo surface. Live
collected in Troas.
Problems in determining the chain of production in shell objects 47
In appearance this break resembles a globally-distributed
artifact type: the cowrie beads. It might be rightfully argued
that the frst cowrie beads were beach-collected versions of
this naturally-modifed type, constituting the inspiration for
subsequent cowrie bead production.
Some carnivorous gastropods feed on other shelled
mollusks. They weaken their preys shell by secreting an
enzyme to soften the shell and drill the shell with their
radula (Vermeij 1993). This process, which sometimes lasts
for hours, if completed successfully, produces an orderly
hole on the preys shell (Fig.1). The morphology of diferent
shell parts can be transformed by sponges, foraminifera,
bivalves, barnacles, worms, octopods, among others
(Claassen 1999,55).
Shelled aquatic mollusks move as part of their life cycle
and survival method or can be transported by other agents
such as waves. The interaction between shells resistive
properties (thickness, strength, sculpture, periostracum
etc.) and ecological events may cause abrasion of the shell
structure. In burrowing bivalves, the umbo zone, where
two valves rub against each other as the valves periodically
open and close, might be thinned from the outer side. This
trait can be easily observed, particularly in older specimens
(Fig.2). The process speeds up in coarser sands, and abrasion
might be more severe (Zuschin 2003, 45). Abrasion caused
by in situ jostling by wave action has been observed on
the umbo and outer surfaces of epifaunal bivalves that live
attached to rocks (Light 2005).
2. Processes that take place after the death of the
organism and before its deposition in the sediment can
cause abrasion, bioerosion, fragmentation, loss of sculpture,
pitting etc., depending on the length of this post-mortem
period before burial, on the types of ecological agents that
are present, and on the properties of the shell itself. Abrasion
by wave and sand action is most readily efective on the
thinnest shell parts. In gastropods, the most vulnerable
parts are outer lips and apices. In beach-picked bivalves,
umbones of some species are typically perforated due to
abrasion. Smooth edges are formed in both gastropods
and bivalves (Fig. 3). Shells with naturally perforated
umbones or apices resemble culturally-modifed shells that
were most commonly used as pendants or beads (Figs. 4
and 5). Patellidae abraded similarly by sand blasting are also
demonstrated in Zuschin et al. (2003, 44, fg. 6, 62, fg. 15).
Shells with smooth surfaces have appearances in common
with scraping tools (Light 2005).
Fig. 3: Beach-collected Glycymeris valve, (Biga, Northwest
Anatolia). It was probably fragmented prior to abrasion. The shell
sculpture has been severely altered by post-mortem wave and
sand action.
3. Anthropogenic processes can include an enormous
variety of actions done for a similarly vast diversity of
purposes, the efects of which leave diverse signatures
on mollusk shells. It is, unfortunately, impossible to review
these in this paper. What is important to remember in this
context is that in many cases anthropogenic processes
leave no marks at all.
4. Diagenetic processes involve physical and chemical
agents. The frst is most often related to sediment
compaction; the other relates to the properties of the
soil (E.g. pH level). These processes cause fragmentation
that might lead to the complete dissolution of organic
remains (Zuschin et al. 2003). Vulnerability to the efects of
post-depositional processes is specifc to both the species
and the shell portion. Fragmentation usually occurs at
structurally weak points where changes in shell sculpture
and growth interruptions (or slowly formed increments)
are located (Claassen 1998). For example, the shell parts
that are most often absent in archaeological cockle shells
(Cerastoderma glaucum) are ventral-posterior ends where
Fig. 4: Two worn Conus mediterraneus specimens (Biga, Northwest
Anatolia). Wave and sand activity created holes on the apices and
abraded the body to create these bead-like shells.
48 Canan akrlar
the shell is thinnest. Another type of diagenetic process
that afects the shells of this species is the shedding of
diferent shell layers. A cockle valve consists of three layers:
Periostracum, as mentioned above, covers the shell and
is completely organic. This layer completely disintegrates
shortly after burial except in rare anoxic conditions. Below
this are an outer and an inner calcareous layer, which are
held together with a protein matrix. The calcareous layers
have diferent types of crystalline microstructure, which
causes degradation at diferential rates in the same shell.
This results in the occurrence of virtually whole, unbroken
valves whose outer shell layers are partially dissolved in the
matrix. Following this, the inner calcareous layer is exposed
to sedimentary agents and dissolves next. This process can
afect all parts of the shell, but is more often observed in
the zone close to the umbo (Fig. 6). It is known that this
zone was perforated out and used to make cockle beads
in the younger periods of the Franchthi Cave (Miller 1996).
Diagenic limpet (Patella spp.) fragmentation occurs in a
diagnostic pattern, usually around weaker growth lines
(Fig.7).
Discussion and conclusions
The paths that mollusk shells go through from the initial
steps of shell formation until recovery and recording can di-
versify in many other ways than outlined here. These paths
can also overlap. Modifcation traces on a single shell can
represent a variety of evidence. Shells that bear holes due
to abrasion can be picked up from the beach, brought to
the human habitation area, and worn without further modi-
fcation. Marine shells in non-coastal sites are remnants of
distant trade-connections. Some of these traveling shells
are specimens that were modifed only by natural agents.
Examples of cone shells (Conus mediterraneus) and bitter-
sweet clams (Glycymeris glycymeris) that bear water-worn
holes have been found in association with other ornamen-
tal shell fnds in inland sites (E.g. Reese 1990 and 1986). In
other cases, natural holes can be worked neatly into more
regular ones and subsequently used as ornaments. Valves
that are already abraded at the margins can be used as
scrapers or polishers. Shells that were collected for food can
later be perforated by humans or used as tools.
It is necessary to recognize and distinguish the dif-
ferent layers of natural and anthropogenic processes on
modifed shells, instead of readily accepting a shells state
Fig. 5: Beach-picked Patella caerulea specimens (Assos, Northwest
Anatolia) with diferent levels of fragmentation.
Fig. 6: Cockle (C. glaucum) shell in the process of developing a
hole. Archaeological specimen from Yenibademli, Gkeada,
North Aegean.
Fig. 7: Breakage pattern of Patella caerulea shell remains from
Yenibademli, Gkeada, North Aegean. The specimens have
been recovered along with thousands of better preserved Patella
shells from the site that represent shellfsh gathering from rocky
splash-zones of the coastal line and subsequent consumption for
food.
Problems in determining the chain of production in shell objects 49
during recovery as completely human-induced. Failure to
recognize the variety of factors that were responsible for
shell modifcation can result in pseudo-artifacts. Patella
specimens fragmented exactly as displayed in Figs. 5 and
7 were identifed as artifacts in excavation reports and in
more specialized archaeological literature (E.g. Korfmann
2000, 43, fg. 39, Karali 1999, 112, fg. 24; Hood 1981, 677,
pl.142/62).
Experimental studies can play a key role in explaining
the processes that infuenced the modifcations on shell
remains, but it is probably impossible to reproduce the
efects of meters-thick sediments that cover cultural lay-
ers on the shell surface or the efects of human activities
that produced these sediments. Taphonomic descriptions
of fossil or sub-fossil shell remains from purely geological
sediments should be used to support arguments that label
modifed archaeological shells as evidence for human cog-
nition, symbolism and technology.
Acknowledgments
The frst version of this paper was presented at the Worked
Bone Research Group in Veliko Turnovo in September 2005.
I would like to thank my Tbingen Kamerad Petar Zidarov
for shaping the idea for this paper with me over several in-
formal discussions in Tbingen and in Troia, and Dr. Martin
Zuschin for his readiness to answer questions about shell
taphonomy. Special thanks also go to Drs. Pamela Crabtree
and Douglas Campana for their revisions on the fnal ver-
sion of the text. I also would like to thank the editors for
undertaking the large task of preparing this Festschrift for
publication. And last but not the least; I want to express my
most sincere appreciation for the Uerpmanns, to whom I
am indebted for a great many deeds I cannot possibly list
here. The responsibility for the ideas and information that
are presented here are of course mine.
Bibliography
Claassen, C., 1998. Shells. Cambridge Manuals in Archaeology.
Cambridge.
Hood, S., 1981. Excavations in Chios 1938-1955. Prehistoric
Emporio and Ayio Gala. Supplementary volume no 15. British
School of Archaeology at Athens. London.
Korfmann, M., 2000. Troia Ausgrabungen 1999. Studia Troica 10,
1-52.
Light, J., 2005. Marine mussel shells Wear is the evidence. In: Bar-
Yosef Mayer, D.E. (ed.), Archaeomalacology: Molluscs in Former
Environments of Human Behaviour. Proceedings of the 9th
ICAZ Conference, Durham 2002, Oxford, 5662.
Miller, M.A., 1996. The manufacture of cockle shell beads at Early
Neolithic Franchthi Cave, Greece: A case of craft specialization?
Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology 9, 7-37.
Reese, D.S., 1986. Shells at Aphrodisias. In: M.S. Joukowsky, M.S.
(ed.), Prehistoric Aphrodisias, An Account of the Excavations
and Artifact Studies I. Archaeologia Transatlantica III, Providence
and Louvain-la-Neuve, 191196.
Reese, D.S., 1990. Marine and worked shells. In: Algaze, G. (ed.),
Town and Country in Southeastern Anatolia II. The Stratigraphic
Sequence at Kurban Hyk. Oriental Institute Publications 110,
Chicago, 410616.
Vermeij, G.J. 1993. A Natural History of Shells. Princeton.
Zuschin, M., Stachowitsch, M. & Stanton, R.J. Jr., 2003. Patterns and
processes of shell fragmentation in modern and ancient ma-
rine environments. Earth-Science Reviews 63, 33-82.
Dr. Canan akrlar
Universitt Tbingen
Institut fr Ur- und Frhgeschichte
und Archologie des Mittelalters
Zentrum fr Naturwissenschaftliche Archolgie
Archobiologie
Rmelinstr. 23
D-72070 Tbingen
und
Smithsonian Institution
National Museum of Natural History
Museum Support Center
Archaeobiology Laboratory MRC 534
4210 Silver Hill Road
Suitland, MD 20746-2863, USA
cakirlarc@si.edu