1

The Krumlovský les hornstone quarries in the Czech Republic © Pete Topping EDITORIAL Welcome to the new three part issue of The Quarry which includes a heads-up about group events at Sacramento, an update on the recent UISPP meeting in Vienna during September 2010, and a report on the discovery of a new basalt quarry site in Israel. Part 6:2, delivered separately, includes another research report on the prehistoric Dover quarry sites and the provenance of chert swords in Tennessee. Part 6:3 has a report on last year’s PQEMIG symposium at St Louis and the visit to the Cresent Hills quarries. As ever I would like reiterate my call for papers / reports or brief notes from the membership. This is your newsletter and an easy way to get your information out to our 700+ members. There is no cost involved, and if material is forthcoming I can put newsletters out as frequently as needs be. And as you will have discovered, The Quarry is also now available on the SAA website in the members section devoted to

The QuarryThe QuarryThe QuarryThe Quarry The The The The eeee----Newsletter of the SAA’s Prehistoric QuarrNewsletter of the SAA’s Prehistoric QuarrNewsletter of the SAA’s Prehistoric QuarrNewsletter of the SAA’s Prehistoric Quarriesiesiesies & & & &

Early Mines Early Mines Early Mines Early Mines Interest GroupInterest GroupInterest GroupInterest Group

####6:16:16:16:1 MarchMarchMarchMarch 20 20 20 2011111111

2

interest groups, so circulation is about as good as it could be. We are interested in news stories, discoveries, research reports, notification of meetings or conferences, new publications and generally anything to do with studies of prehistoric extraction sites – and without any geographical bias. As Seasick Steve says ‘It’s all good’. So what are you waiting for, get a paper in to the Editor at: pete.topping@english-heritage.org.uk Notes for contributors Contributions can be any length but ideally up to 2000 words maximum and supplied in Word format. Plans and photographs should be supplied as low resolution jpegs; try to keep these to 5 or less to keep the Editors job as simple as possible and prevent the file size from growing too large. It will also help authors focus their efforts and use only the critical images. If you do use photographs please ensure that you can also supply written permission from the photographer for their use, and if anyone is featured in a photo that they also give their written permission for their image to be used in the e-newsletter and on the SAA website. These copyright procedures are essential to protect the interests of all concerned and must be in place before web dissemination can take place. NEWS & COMING EVENTS 76th SAA Annual Meeting, Sacramento, 30 th March – 3 rd April 2011 Your committee would like to draw your attention to three events occurring at the Sacramento meeting which you might like to support. Firstly, there is the interest group meeting on Thursday 31st, which gives the members the opportunity to meet the committee and hear their annual report. This is the only annual forum where members can present ideas or discuss issues face to face with the committee. Our preliminary agenda will be as follows: 1) Present the annual report, 2) Solicit a replacement for the position of Meetings Secretary formerly held by Dr. Burke, 3) Discuss the feasibility of a tour or field trip associated with the next SAA in Memphis, TN, 4) Make a plan to upload the electronic forum for an on-line listserv or discussion group, 5) Propose a training workshop on quarry complexes similar to the Rock Art workshop planned for this year's SAAs, 6) Discuss potential symposia topics for PQEMIG sponsorship status, 7) Facilitate a materials show and tell by asking attendees to bring a sample of a source material from a quarry in their region and passing it around, 8) Encourage participants to give a short verbal description of their work, 9) Display participant publications that might assist each of us in learning what our colleagues are publishing, and encourage hand-outs for article reprints; and, 10) Announce any jobs available that may relate to prehistoric quarry or mining research. Join everyone for an informal social gathering after the meeting at a local restaurant. Secondly, the interest group is sponsoring two symposia this year. The first on Saturday afternoon (April 2) is ‘Recognising social behaviour in ancient quarries and lithic workshops’ which has a wide range of speakers and subjects. The second symposium is on Sunday morning (April 3) entitled ‘Mining and quarrying in the ancient Andes’.

16

RESEARCH REPORTS

Giv’at Schumit - A Basalt Building Block Quarry in Northern Israel: a Preliminary Report

Joan S. Schneider* and Danny Rosenberg** * California State Parks, Colorado Desert District, 200 Palm Canyon Drive, Borrego Springs, CA 92004 USA **Laboratory for Groundstone Research, Zinman Institute of Archaeology, University of Haifa, Mount Carmel, 31905, Israel

Introduction In recent years, basalt quarries have been sought in northern Israel in response to data that attribute many basalt vessels, implements, and other items to volcanic stone sources in this area, in Jordan, and in Syria. Other than a basalt bifacial quarry and production site recently

Fig. 1 Star marks the approximate location of Giv’at Schumit in northern Israel.

17

identified at Giv’at Kipod (Rosenberg et al. 2008), as far as we are aware, no other basalt quarry or workshop has been found or reported. Guided by geochemical data, a few K-Ar dates from basalt artifacts, and thin-section petrography, a field survey of basalt outcrops in northern Israel, the Golan, and other selected areas in Israel began in 2004 (Schneider and LaPorta 2009). During 2006 field survey, one of us (J. Schneider) identified a number of locations on the western side of the Hula Valley that meet the criteria for a basalt quarry/workshop area, including quarrying scars on basalt outcrops, piles of reduction debris, and broken and discarded preforms. Preliminary investigations were conducted at one of these locations, Giv’at Schumit, in December 2010 and this short report concerns the results of our work.

Fig. 2 Surface of Giv’at Schumit, about mid-point along the hill. View to the east from a distance. Giv’at Schumit Giv’at Schumit (Schumit Hill) is located within the city of Kiryat Shemona at the western edge of the Hula Valley in northern-most Israel (Figs. 1, 2). Givat Schumit is a city park and is partially forested, has a dense cover of annual grasses and seasonal wildflowers, and exhibits numerous basalt boulder outcrops that have weathered from a volcanic flow. The Hill is readily accessible (roads circle its base) and there are numerous informal trails across its surface. Terracing in the past has left terrace walls and other walls extant at the site suggest that several other types of structures once existed. Our December 2010 survey indicates that the debris resulting from testing and quarrying large basalt boulders that have

18

Fig. 3 Typical quarrying marks on large basalt boulder at Giv’at Schumit. Note the large flake scars and the lichen on flake scars. weathered from the original volcanic flow is extremely frequent over the surface of the northern two-thirds of the hill (Figs. 3, 4). In this regard, many of the terrace walls notably contain some debris of the basalt quarrying and production that took place in the past. Heavy lichen growth is evident on the boulder outcrops, including many of the culturally altered surfaces at the site. Soil appears to be fairly well-developed organic loam with some clay.

Fig. 4 Typical accumulation of quarrying and production debris at Giv’at Schumit.

Petrographically, the stone of the Hill is olivine-rich basalt (tholeitic) and highly vesicular (La Porta 2007). It has been attributed to the Hasbani basalt and may be of mid-Pleistocene age (i.e., about 1.06 MYA by one K-Ar determination [Heimann 1990]; personal communication, Shimon Ilani 2010). Although the basalt is, by and large, compact and dense, one can see

19

obvious variation in degree of vesicularity. The feldspar component is a high-calcium plagioclase or high-calcium bytownite (La Porta 2007).

Other Cultural Features In addition to the almost ubiquitous presence of tested and quarried bedrock surfaces, debris of quarrying, and broken and discarded preforms, other cultural materials and features are present at Giv’at Schumit. There are numerous terrace walls and portions of walls of structures. It is beyond the scope of this report to further describe these except for the fact that the structural features incorporate the debris of the quarrying activity that once took place at the Hill. In addition, there are several occurrences of bedrock features (cf. Nadel and Rosenberg 2010) and marks that may be “quarry marks” – personal or corporate ownership symbols, and sparse shards of ceramic vessels, fragments of flint, and a few fragments of ground stone tools (Figs. 5, 6). Survey of the surface was non-systematic and was hampered by vegetation cover. It is likely that with additional systematic inventory, a great deal more features and artifacts would be recognized. Cultural materials recovered during the excavation of two test units will be discussed in a future publication.

Fig. 5 Cup mark on a boulder at Giv’at Schumit.

20

Fig. 6 Marking on a boulder at Giv’at Schumit. Description of the Quarry Source The reconnaissance survey of the surface of Giv’at Schumit indicates that most of the northern two-thirds of the Hill have extremely abundant evidence that large basalt boulders have been tested for quality, then, in many cases, strategically positioned or mounted on other rocks and/or debris piles, and then shaped by percussion reduction. Piles and scatters of debris from this work mark the work areas (Fig. 7). The debris accumulations contain numerous well-formed percussion flakes of varying sizes and shapes, rock shatter, and fragments of broken or discarded products (Figs. 8, 9). Many rectangular blocks of stone were found that seem to indicate that the end product of at least a majority of the most recent work at the Hill was the manufacture of basalt building blocks. There is rare evidence that the basalt of the Hill may have been used to manufacture other items (Fig. 10); this fact suggests to us that more investigation is needed, perhaps in areas where soil and debris accumulations are substantial. It is evident that the basalt that makes up Giv’at Schumit is readily shaped by percussion reduction (i.e., good conchoidal fracturing characteristics). We did not observe any scoring scars or chisel marks frequent at more recent quarries for limestone, marble, or granites. The fairly dense vegetation cover (about 60 percent vegetation cover) prevented complete visibility of the cultural materials present.

21

Fig. 7. Typical workshop area at Giv’at Schumit with debris from multiple work episodes.

Fig. 8 Elongated basalt preform; one product of quarry at Giv’at Schumit.

22

Fig. 9 Cubic basalt blocks; another product of Giv’at Schumit.

Fig. 10 Globular preform, possibly for a vessel, found at Giv’at Schumit. Description of the Approach to the Shaping of the Quarry Materials While the following interpretations of the activities that took place at Giv’at Schumit are tentative, they are presented here within the framework of châine opératoire.

23

• Testing: large boulders, some up to two meters or more in their greatest dimension, exhibit marks from exploratory testing for quality (Fig. 11).

• Positioning: when a boulder of suitable quality and dimensions was selected, it was either worked in place or moved into a position where it was more optimally placed for work (Fig. 12). Just how these extremely heavy boulders were moved and positioned is not known at this point of the research.

• Reduction and shaping by percussion : from our preliminary observations at Giv’at Schumit, we suggest that the first series of flakes were removed along the margins of the boulder, leaving a series of overlapping flake scars. With the goal of attaining a rectangular form with six flat surfaces from a rounded form, our observations suggest that several series of flakes were removed; flake scars of previous flaking episodes are visible on all surfaces of preforms. It also appears that, for the most part, the flakes that were removed were progressively smaller and more strategically placed as the final form was approached. We have not worked out the exact sequence, but we do know that primary, secondary, and tertiary flakes and angular and rounded shatter of a variety of sizes are present. Experimental archaeology and analysis of the debitage recovered from the excavation unit (GS-1; see below) will further our understanding of the exact methods and approach used. At this stage of the project, it is not known what tools were used for the testing and working of the basalt, but it seems that they were metal tools such as hammers.

Fig. 11 Tested boulder at Giv’at Schumit. Lichen covers the flake scar.

24

Fig. 12 Example of large rounded boulder propped up on debris pile.

Fig. 13 Locus 1, view to north toward GS-1.

25

Fig. 14. Locus 1, drawn to scale. The two center boulders (black fill) supported the boulder (missing) worked here. All other shapes (no fill) are percussion flakes and angular shatter removed from the boulder to make a block. GS-1 is the 1x1 meter excavated test unit.

• Description of the debris of reduction and shaping: the 2010 work included the surface clearing, partial excavation, and scale drawing of one segregated locus (Locus 1) where the end product was missing, but which otherwise appeared to be undisturbed (Figs. 13, 14). The locus was selected because it was relatively small and was not complex (as other loci were). At Locus 1, two small boulders evidently supported the parent boulder, for the scatter of debris that surrounded the supporting boulders appeared to be from one block and were of a variety of sizes. Most flakes are extremely well-formed, with the platform, bulb of percussion, and terminations present (Fig.15). The materials recovered from one meter-square excavation unit (GS-1) within this locus suggest that the outer weathered and highly vesicular exposed layer was first removed to expose the more homogenous and less-weathered rock of the parent boulder. From that point, work progressed further.

Rock Flake

GS-1

TN

1 meter

26

Fig. 15 Large percussion flake from a debris pile at Giv’at Schumit, showing characteristic topography. • Description of broken and discarded preforms and finished products:

two products apparently were the goals of the most recent work at the quarry: long, relatively thin, rectangular blocks (ca. 100 x 25 x 25 cm), and smaller, almost cubic blocks (ca. 40 x 25 x 25 cm). In cross-section, all blocks were almost square or slightly rectangular; most variation occurred in length. The longer product may have been sought for roof constructions and lintels; the shorter for wall blocks. It seems that when possible (when the original block permitted this) a long block was made. Occasionally, the longer block may have been broken into two or three shorter blocks after the initial reduction.

Chronological Placement At the moment, we are not certain about the time when basalt of Giv’at Schumit was worked. Even today, basalt blocks are used for walls and other structures in the Hula, Golan, and other nearby areas. However, the basalt blocks have been used for an extended period of time, as is evident in their existence in old houses of northern Israel (and probably neighboring countries) and other structures in the Golan. That the basalt of Giv’at Schumit and other hills in the vicinity of Kiryat Shemona is a material with superior characteristics for shaping is undoubtedly correct, judging by the evidence from materials at the Hill such as the topography of both flakes and flake scars. It is entirely possible that the basalt has been used over a long period of time. Chronological placement of the quarrying and manufacturing basalt block industry at the Hill remains to be determined and will be pursued through historical and ethnographic research as well as other means.

27

Acknowledgements

The present and past field and laboratory work in the search for basalt quarries in Israel was funded by grants from the Irene Levi-Sala CARE Archaeological Foundation. Zinman Institute of Archaeology, University of Haifa, Mount Carmel, provided field and laboratory support for the 2010 work. We thank David Hadash and Ammnon Assaf for their help as well.

Dodi Ben Ami and Philip La Porta assisted Schneider in previous reconnaissance field surveys. La Porta also provided thin-section descriptions of the Giv’at Schumit basalt. The Albright Institute of Archaeology, Professor Steven Rosen of Ben Gurion University of the Negev, the Israel Geological Survey, Yorke Rowan, Graham Rutter, and Jennie Ebeling provided guidance, data, advice, or logistical assistance during previous phases of the basalt quarry project.

References

La Porta, P 2007. Technical report on thin-section samples from three sites at Kiryat Shemona, Hula Valley, Israel. Report on file at the Irene Levi-Sala CARE Archaeological Foundation and in possession of the authors. Rosenberg, D, Shimelmitz, R & Nativ, A 2008. Basalt Bifacials Production in the Southern Levant: a Glance at the Quarry and Workshop Site of Giv’at Kipod, Israel. Antiquity, 82: 367-376. Nadel, D & Rosenberg, D 2010. New Insights into Late Natufian Bedrock Features (Mortars and Cupmarks). Eurasian Prehistory, 7(1): 65-87. Schneider, JS, & La Porta, P 2009. Geological constraints on ground stone production and consumption in the Southern Levant. In Y Rowan and J Ebeling (eds.) New Approaches to Old Stones: Recent Studies of Ground Stone Artifacts. London: Equinox Publishing, Ltd. pp.19-40.