Conjoining antler fragments form refitting units. The refitting units are recorded,
according to identification numbers. A refitting unit consists of two or more conjoining
elements. Each refitting unit is recorded with several attributes.
a: Antler base
fragment, unshed
antler, left
b: Pedicle fragment, left
Spatial provenience:
a: A
b: A
Distance:
?
Stratigraphical provenance:
a: ?
b: ?
Special characteristics:
Surface preservation of this
refitting unit is poor, the
surface is badly destroyed. Find a is mapped and illustrated in D. Mania (1986b,
Abb. 2, Nr. 17 + Taf. 102,6). The
breakage probably happened as a result of sediment pressure. Differential surface preservation
is observable: using the
analogy of better
documented finds it may be deduced that the more abraded surface of find a, the
lateral surface, was
pointing upward when
excavated. The pedicle, find b, is more abraded medially.
ID:
12
Refit:
191/73,
176/84
Morphological description:
a: Antler base, shed antler,
left
b: Lower
main beam fragment, left
Spatial provenance:
a: B
b: B
Distance:
?
Stratigraphical provenance:
a: ?
b: Planum b
Find a is not mapped in the excavation square plan; it was probably found in the fault
of square 191.
Find b came from the main find horizon; a travertine sand cover of 10-20cm is
documented there.
Special characteristics:
Weathering cracks had formed
prior to breakage of the
refitting unit.
ID:
13
Refit:
338/488, 104/45, 104/44
Morphological description:
a: Lower main beam fragment,
left
b: Antler base fragment,
left
c: Brow
tine, basal fragment, left
Spatial provenance:
a: B
b: A
c: A
Distance:
a - b: ?
b - c: ?
Stratigraphical provenance:
a: a?
b: ?
c: ?
Find a does not occur in the documentation. The degree of erosion, as well as the
high inventory
number, probably point to a provenance from the Chara limestone horizon.
Special characteristics:
Breakage probably occurred due to
sediment overburden.
It is probable that elements from this refitting unit were dispersed as a result of diagenetic processes. Find b
was mapped by D. Mania (1986a, Abb. 2, Nr.
41).
ID:
14
Refit:
196/13,
181/133
Morphological description:
a: Lower main beam
fragment, right
b: Antler base fragment, shed
antler, right
Spatial provenance:
a: B
b: B
Distance:
?
Stratigraphical provenance:
a: Planum
b
b: Planum a?
Find b may come from the Chara limestone horizon. Alternatively, a provenance from
the fault of
square 181 is possible.
Special characteristics:
Both finds, including the
breakages, are heavily
stained by
manganese. This phenomenon is typical for finds of this area of the excavation.
ID:
15
Refit:
271/49,
260/35
Morphological description:
a: Antler base fragment, shed
antler, right
b: Antler base fragment, shed
antler, right
Spatial provenance:
a: B
b: B
Distance:
4.8m
Stratigraphical provenance:
a: Planum b
b: Planum b
Special characteristics:
Both finds appear to have
different colours, which may be a result of using different concentrations of preservative. Find a is medially and
laterally covered with old
scratches.
ID:
16
Refit:
203/B4, 145/a
Morphological description:
a: Lower main
beam fragment, left
b: Brow
tine, basal fragment, left
Spatial provenance:
a: B
b: B
Distance:
c. 20cm
Stratigraphical provenance:
a: Planum
b
b: ?
The inventory number of find b points to a provenance from square 145. Neither the
excavation square
map nor the excavation report from 1976 list a find of a brow tine fragment. In
square 203, however, a brow tine
fragment
is mapped, which is also reported in the excavation report from 1979, but no
corresponding
inventory number
appears in the material. The find mapped for square 203 is very similar
to the find a. So a
mistake in the
registration seems possible here.
Special characteristics:
Find a is laterally more
abraded than medially. The
latter side is more eroded than the former. The conjoining brow tine is medially
encrusted by
carbonate, which typically occurs on those sides found to point downwards. The burr
of find a is disturbed;
further
observation of the burr is restricted because of attached sediments. In order to
prevent further
destruction, an ad hoc
cleaning was not thought advisable.
ID:
17
Refit:
160/B4,
163/B1
Morphological description:
a: Lower main beam, shed
antler, right
b: Second tine, right
Spatial provenance:
a: B
b: B
Distance:
1.7m
Stratigraphical provenance:
a: Planum
b
b: Planum b
The travertine sands that cover the finds are 5-15 cm thick in both squares.
Special characteristics:
-
ID:
18
Refit:
173/83, 172/305
Morphological description:
a: Antler base fragment,
unshed antler, right
b: Brow
tine, basal fragment, right
Spatial provenance:
a: A
b: A
Distance:
20cm
Stratigraphical provenance:
a: ?
b: ?
Special characteristics:
Breakage of the refitting unit
occurred as a result of sediment
pressure.
ID:
19
Refit:
193/45 (B5), 189/44
Morphological description:
a: Antler
base, shed antler,
right
b: Second tine, basal fragment, right
Spatial provenance:
a: B
b: B
Distance:
5.5m
Stratigraphical provenance:
a: Planum
b
b: Planum b?
Special characteristics:
Find a exhibits differential
abrasion; the side found
pointing upwards during excavation was more abraded than the opposite side. The
seal of find a is
centrally concave.
ID:
20
Refit:
144/B1,
149/477
Morphological description:
a: Lower main beam, shed
antler, right
b: Second tine, basal
fragment, right
Spatial provenance:
a: A
b: A
Distance:
8.5m
Stratigraphical provenance:
a: ?
b: ?
Find a was encountered in the shore line area, find b in an area of the diluvial fan,
with a
thickness of travertine sands of 40-50cm, below the diluvial fan relicts of channels
were found here.
![[Back]](/icons/back.gif){kind=icon}
![[Contents]](/icons/toc.gif){kind=icon}
![[Journal Homepage]](/icons/ia.gif){kind=icon}