|Generate QR code
Open Access
Subscription Access
Identifi cation of Adhesives for Repairing Ancient Ceramics: The Case of the Neolithic and Chalcolithic of Far Northeast Europe
https://doi.org/10.17746/1563-0110.2024.52.3.040-046
Abstract
This study focuses on the composition of the adhesives used to repair clay vessels, and on the technique of their preparation in the Late Neolithic and Chalcolithic (late 4th to early 3rd millennia BC) sites of Far Northeast Europe (the Republic of Komi and the Nenets Autonomous Okrug). Remains of adhesives were detected on 70 of 171 repaired pots. To date, five samples of ceramics from dwellings of the Chuzhyael culture have been analyzed. Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry revealed no markers of coniferous trees or bitumen; but did reveal markers of birch, suggesting that fractures and cracks on broken pots were plastered with birch tar. The composition of organic compounds in samples indicates the use of two vessels in the technological process: in one of them, birch bark was subjected to pyrolysis, while the other was a receptacle for tar. This comparatively complex technology reveals one more specialization in the domestic manufacture of the taiga hunter-gatherers, including the use of special furnaces. Analytic procedures employed by us open up new prospects for the study of the material culture of Far Northeast Europe, extend our knowledge of domestic manufacture, and offer new material for AMS dating.
Keywords
Supporting agencies: This study was carried out under the state assignment “Archaeological Sources: Description, Systematization and Critical Analysis (Based on the Evidence from the European Northeast of Russia)” and the state assignment of the Institute of Geology of the Komi Science Centre of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
About the Authors
V. N. Karmanov
Institute of Language, Literature, and History, Komi Science Centre, Ural Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Karmanov V.N. - Department Head, Leading Researcher
Kommunisticheskaya 26, Syktyvkar, 167982
D. A. Bushnev
Institute of Geology, Komi Science Centre, Ural Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Bushnev D.A. - Laboratory Head, Chief Researcher
Pervomaiskaya 54, Syktyvkar, 16798
O. V. Valyaeva
Institute of Geology, Komi Science Centre, Ural Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Valyaeva O.V. - Senior Researcher
Pervomaiskaya 54, Syktyvkar, 167982
References
1. Aveling E.M., Heron C. 1998 Identifi cation of birch bark tar at the Mesolithic site of Star Carr. Ancient Biomolecules, No. 2: 69–80.
2. Binder D., Bourgeois G., Benoist F., Vitry C. 1990 Identifi cation de brai de bouleau (betula) dans le néolithique de Giribaldi (Nice, France) par la spectrométrie de masse. Revue d’archéométrie, No. 14: 37–42.
3. Boëda E., Bonilauri S., Connan J., Jarvie D., Mercier N., Tobey M., Valladas H., Al-Sakhel H. 2008 New evidence for significant use of bitumen in Middle Palaeolithic technical systems at Umm el Tlel (Syria) around 70,000 BP. Paléorient, vol. 34 (2): 67–83. doi: 10.3406/paleo.2008.5257
4. Brown K.M., Connan J., Poister N.W., Vellanoweth R.L., Zumberge J., Engel M.H. 2014 Sourcing archaeological asphaltum (bitumen) from the California Channel Islands to submarine seeps. Journal of Archaeological Science, No. 43: 66–76. doi: 10.1016/j.jas.2013.12.012
5. Charrié-Duhaut A., Porraz G., Cartwright C.R., Igreja M., Connan J., Poggenpoel C., Texier P.-J. 2013 First molecular identifi cation of a hafting adhesive in the Late Howiesons Poort at Diepkloof Rock Shelter (Western Cape, South Africa). Journal of Archaeological Science, No. 40 (9): 3506–3518. doi: 10.1016/j.jas.2012.12.026
6. Charters S., Evershed R.P., Goad L.J., Heron C., Blinkhorn P. 1993 Identifi cation of an adhesive used to repair a Roman jar. Archaeometry, No. 35 (1): 91–101.
7. Chen S., Vahur S., Teearu A., Leito I., Oras E., Juus T., Zhilin M., Oshibkina S., Savchenko S., Asheichyk V., Vashanau A., Lychagina E., Kashina E., German K., Dubovtseva E., Kriiska A. 2022 Classifi cation of archaeological adhesives from Eastern Europe and Urals by ATR-FT-IR spectroscopy and chemometric analysis. Archaeometry, No. 1 (64): 227–244. doi: 10.1111/arcm.12686
8. Connan J., Priestman S., Vosmer T., Komoot A., Tofi ghian H., Ghorbani B., Engel M.H., Zumberge A., Van de Velde T. 2020 Geochemical analysis of bitumen from West Asian torpedo jars from the c. 8th century Phanom-Surin shipwreck in Thailand. Journal of Archaeological Science, No. 117: 105–111. doi: 10.1016/j.jas.2020.105111
9. Deryugin V.A., Sukhoverkhov S.V., Udziiz E., Pavlov A.D. 2018 On the origin of natural bitumen at Yasnoye-8 (Sakhalin Island). Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia, vol. 46 (1): 34–40. doi: 10.17746/1563-0102.2018.46.1.034-040
10. Dyakonov V.M. 2012 Ceramics of the Ulakhan-Segelennyakh culture, Early Bronze Age, Yakutia. Archaeology, Ethnology and Anthropology of Eurasia, No. 4: 106–115.
11. Gavrish K.V. 2018 Sledy remonta glinyanymi zaplatami na keramike bronzovogo veka Yuzhnogo Zauralya. Geoarkheologiya i arkheologicheskaya mineralogiya, vol. 5: 85–86.
12. Geiko A. 2013 Remont glinyanogo posudu: Istorіya, traditsіi, zvicha. Poltava: ASMІ. (Ukrainskі keramologіchnі studіi; vip. 10).
13. Glushkov I.G. 1996 Keramika kak arkheologicheskiy istochnik. Novosibirsk: Izd. IAET SO RAN.
14. Gutkov A.I. 2000 O traditsii remonta glinyanoy posudy. In Arkheologicheskiy istochnik i modelirovaniye drevnikh tekhnologiy. Chelyabinsk: Kniga, pp. 170–186. (Trudy muzeya-zapovednika Arkaim).
15. Hayek E.W.H., Krenmayr P., Lohninger H., Jordis U., Moche W., Sauter F. 1990 Identifi cation of archaeological and recent wood tar pitches using gas chromatography/mass spectrometry and pattern recognition. Analytical Chemistry, vol. 62 (18): 2038–2043. doi: 10.1021/ac00217a026
16. Helwig K., Monahan V., Poulin J., Andrews T.D. 2014 Ancient projectile weapons from ice patches in northwestern Canada: Identification of resin and compound resin-ochre hafting adhesives. Journal of Archaeological Science, No. 41: 655–665. doi: 10.1016/j.jas.2013.09.010
17. Ivanova A.A., Shergin D.L. 2021 K voprosu o remonte glinyanykh sosudov na territorii Pribaikalya. In Materialy LХI Ros. (s mezhdunarodnym uchastiyem) arkheol.-etnogr. konf. studentov i molodykh uchenykh. Irkutsk: pp. 94–97.
18. Karmanov V.N., Kosinskaya L.L. 2021 Chuzhyayelskaya kultura na Yevropeyskom Severo-Vostoke. In Arkheologiya Volgo-Uralya. Vol. 2: Eneolit i bronzoviy vek. Kazan: Izd. AN Respubliki Tatarstan.
19. Karmanov V.N., Zaretskaya N.E. 2021 Radiouglerodnaya khronologiya chuzhyayelskoy kultury. Povolzhskaya arkheologiya, No. 3: 55–69. doi: 10.24852/pa2021.3.37.55.69
20. Kosinskaya L.L. 1987 Mezolit – rannyaya bronza basseyna Nizhney Vychegdy: Cand. Sc. (History) Dissertation. Syktyvkar.
21. Kozowyk P.R.B., Soressi M., Pomstra D., Langejans G.H.J. 2017 Experimental methods for the Palaeolithic dry distillation of birch bark: implications for the origin and development of Neandertal adhesive technology. Scientific Reports, No. 7 (8033). doi:10.1038/s41598-017-08106-7
22. Langejans G., Aleo A., Fajardo S., Kozowyk P. 2022 Archaeological adhesives. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Anthropology. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press. doi: 10.1093/ acrefore/9780190854584.013.198
23. Lokhov D.N., Rogovskoy E.O., Dudarek S.P. 2013 Severoangarskiy variant keramiki khaytinskogo tipa. Izvestiya Irkutskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Ser.: Geoarkheologiya. Etnologiya. Antropologiya, No. 1 (2): 116–132.
24. Miloglav I. 2020 Drills and holes – pottery repairing as evidence of the social meaning of an object. Quaternary International, vol. 569/570: 120–127. doi: 10.1016/j.quaint.2020.03.049
25. Organic Mass Spectrometry in Art and Archaeology. 2009 M.P. Colombini (ed.). Pisa: Univ. of Pisa.
26. Pesonen P. 1996 Early asbestos ware. In Pithouses and Pomakers in Eastern Finland. Reports of the Ancient Lake Saimaa Project. Helsinki: Univ. of Helsinki. Dep. of Archaeology, pp. 9–39. (Helsinki papers in archaeology; No. 9).
27. Pesonen P. 1999 Radiocarbon dating of birch bark pitches in typical comb ware in Finland. In Dig It All. Papers Dedicated to Ari Siiriainen, M. Huurre (ed.). Helsinki: The Finnish Antiquarian Soc., the Archaeol. Soc. in Finland, pp. 191–200.
28. Rageot M., Lepère C., Henry A., Binder D., Davtian G., Filippi J.-J., Fernandez X., Guilaine J., Jallet F., Radi G., Thirault E., Terradas X., Regert M. 2021 Management systems of adhesive materials throughout the Neolithic in the North-West Mediterranean. Journal of Archaeological Science, No. 126. doi: 10.1016/j.jas.2020.105309
29. Rageot M., Théry-Parisot I., Beyries S., Lepère C., Carré A., Mazuy A., Filippi J.-J., Fernandez X., Binder D., Regert M. 2019 Birch bark tar production: Experimental and biomolecular approaches to the study of a common and widely used prehistoric adhesive. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, No. 26: 276–312. doi: 10.1007/s10816-018-9372-4
30. Regert M. 2004 Investigating the history of prehistoric glues by gas chromatography–mass spectrometry. Journal of Separation Science, No. 27 (3): 244–254. doi: 10.1002/jssc.200301608
31. Stokolos V.S. 1986 Drevniye poseleniya Mezenskoy doliny. Moscow: Nauka.
32. Stokolos V.S. 1988 Kultury epokhi rannego metalla Severnogo Priuralya. Moscow: Nauka.
33. Stokolos V.S. 1995 Poseleniye Muchkas na Mezeni. In Etnokulturniye kontakty v epokhu kamnya, bronzy, rannego zheleza i srednevekovya v Severnom Priuralye, E.A. Savelyeva (ed.). Syktyvkar: Komi NC UrO RAN, pp. 59–64. (Materialy po arkheologii Yevropeyskogo Severo-Vostoka; iss. 13).
34. Stokolos V.S. 1997 Eneolit i bronzoviy vek. In Arkheologiya Respubliki Komi. Moscow: DiK, pp. 213–246
Review
For citations:
Karmanov V.N., Bushnev D.A., Valyaeva O.V. Identifi cation of Adhesives for Repairing Ancient Ceramics: The Case of the Neolithic and Chalcolithic of Far Northeast Europe. Archaeology, Ethnology & Anthropology of Eurasia. 2024;52(3):40-46. https://doi.org/10.17746/1563-0110.2024.52.3.040-046
Views:
205
Email this article 