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: >Lower main beam, shed
antler, left
b: Second tine, left
Spatial provenance:
a: B
b: B
Distance:
20cm
Stratigraphical provenance:
a: Planum
b
b: Planum b
Special characteristics:
Weathering cracks and advanced
surface destruction
characterise the surface preservation of both finds. The second tine carries many
weathering cracks; it is
slightly more
abraded than the lower main beam.
ID:
72
Refit:
153/B5, 153/B6
Morphological description:
a: Lower main beam fragment,
unshed antler,
right
b: Lower main beam fragment, right
Spatial provenance:
a: A
b: A
Distance:
15cm
Stratigraphical provenance:
a: ?
b: ?
The travertine sands in square 153 are 20-30cm thick and thin out towards the south.
In the shore
line area, Chara limestone lies directly on top of the loesslike sediment; finds are
very rare here.
Special characteristics:
Both finds exhibit differential
abrasion. During excavation it was apparent that the sides which
faced upwards were more abraded than the
opposite sides.
Probably the
breakage of the refitting unit was prior to abrasion.
ID:
73
Refit:
41/78, 100/B1
Morphological description:
a: Second tine, left
b: Lower
main beam fragment, unshed antler, left
Spatial provenance:
a: A
b: A
Distance:
?
Stratigraphical provenance:
a: ?
b: ?
Special characteristics:
Both finds exhibit weathering
cracks and advanced surface destruction. Both are more abraded laterally than medially. Formation of
weathering cracks occurred partly prior to breakage of the refitting unit.
It cannot be determined whether abrasion took place after fragmentation for these finds. Find b is
mapped and illustrated in Mania (1986b, Abb. 2, Nr. 48
+ Taf. 100, 3).
ID:
74
Refit:
103/29,
103/41
Morphological description:
a: Antler fragment
b: Antler fragment
Spatial provenance:
a: A
b: A
Distance:
?
Stratigraphical provenance:
a: ?
b: ?
Special characteristics:
-
ID:
75
Refit:
150/B1, 150/B7
Morphological description:
a: Antler base fragment, unshed
antler, right
b: Lower main beam fragment, right
Spatial provenance:
a: A
b: A
Distance:
1,13m
Stratigraphical provenance:
a: ?
b: ?
The finds come from the diluvial fan facies. The plans indicate that
they underlay other finds.
Special characteristics:
This refitting unit was
interpreted by Mania (1986b, Taf
108) as deliberately broken. Three parallel grooves are located on the lower main beam on the lateral side of find a
(Figure 30), in the second tine area, about 1cm away
from the stepped breakage between both elements.
These have been
interpreted as hack
marks. My recent experiments, however, show that hacking this part of an antler
with a heavy duty tool
does not
break the antler - traces of hack marks would be more intensive. Secondly, the elasticity of the antler means it
absorbs
the energy of heavy blows of the tools. Thirdly, the micromorphology of the
experimental hack marks are
different from the grooves which are documented and observed on find a.
ID:
76
Refit:
69/34,
82/R578
Morphological description:
a: Crown tine fragment,
basal
b: Tip
of tine
Spatial provenance:
a: A
b: A
Distance:
?
Stratigraphical provenance:
a: ?
b: ?
Special characteristics:
Iron oxide staining of the
antler surface is dissected
by
the breakage of the refitting unit. This indicates a breakage after diagenetic
processes had affected the
refitting unit.
Weathering cracks formed prior to breakage of the refitting unit.
![[Back]](/icons/back.gif){kind=icon}
![[Contents]](/icons/toc.gif){kind=icon}
![[Journal Homepage]](/icons/ia.gif){kind=icon}