Worked Bone and Shell

Remains from the faunal dataset that owe some aspect of their form to human modification were submitted to the Reductive Technology Group (RTG) for further analysis; these items however, did not include items modified during butchering or broken during marrow extraction (Phagan and Hurby 1984:110). The physical qualities of shell and especially bone, make these items unsuitable for most tasks in cutting, chopping, scraping, and piercing; their place in the prehistoric toolkit is for the most part limited to "manipulative tasks" including the scraping and piercing of softer materials (ibid:135). RTG analysts observed that basic modes of production used in the manufacture of non-flaked lithic tools were also prehistorically applied to bone; "tools and ornaments produced from bone or shell are reduced to appropriate shape and length largely by horizontal abrasion, which may or may not have been preceded by vertical force applications" (ibid:109). As the non-flaked lithic tool analysis system produced an artifact inventory organized by attributes, so too did the worked bone system; but since there were far fewer worked bone artifacts, their analysis was more exhaustive. In addition, the paucity of literature on the subject of bone tool use gave the DAP worked bone analysis an "experimental posture" that resulted in several variables of "suspected interpretive utility" (ibid:109). Broken items that could be refitted were analyzed as a single tool; attributes were recorded for a single catalog number and additional fragments received only minimal information such as basic provenience data. As with stone tools, worked bone and shell represent a fairly stable cultural subsystem; for example, significant changes in their production and use are not anticipated during the nearly 300 years of Anasazi occupation in the project area (ibid:6). Analysis of their technological or functional characteristics can, however, provide meaningful information regarding the spatial and structural variability in Anasazi behavior.

本动物群数据集内，外形存在人类改造痕迹的遗存被提交至还原技术工作组（Reductive Technology Group, RTG）开展进一步分析；但此类遗存不包含屠宰过程中被改造或骨髓提取时断裂的标本（Phagan与Hurby, 1984：110）。贝壳尤其是骨骼的物理特性，使其难以胜任切割、砍削、刮擦与穿刺等多数作业；因此它们在史前工具组合中的应用大多局限于“操控性作业”，例如对软性材料的刮擦与穿刺（同前注：135）。还原技术工作组的分析人员发现，史前时期制作非剥片石制工具所采用的基础生产工艺，同样被应用于骨骼加工；“骨骼或贝壳制成的工具与装饰品，主要通过横向磨蚀加工至合适的形状与长度，该工序前后可辅以垂直施力操作”（同前注：109）。如同非剥片石制工具分析体系按属性构建遗物清单，加工骨骼分析体系亦采用相同逻辑；但由于加工骨骼遗物的数量远少于石制遗物，其分析工作更为详尽全面。此外，有关骨骼工具使用的研究文献较为匮乏，使得DAP的加工骨骼分析采取了“实验性研究姿态”，由此衍生出若干“疑似具备解释效用”的变量（同前注：109）。可拼接修复的断裂遗物被作为一件完整工具开展分析；仅为单个编号记录属性信息，其余附加碎片仅需记录基础出土地点等极简信息。与石制工具类似，加工骨骼与贝壳制品构成了一个相对稳定的文化子系统；例如，在项目区域内阿纳萨齐人（Anasazi）占据的近300年期间，其生产与使用方式预计不会出现显著变化（同前注：6）。不过，对其技术与功能特征的分析，能够为揭示阿纳萨齐人行为的空间与结构变异提供有价值的信息。