Frgmenti grnčarije kao alatke u kasnoneolitskoj Vinči

Abstract

U radu su predstavljene alatke nastale recikliranjem polomljenih keramičkih posuda; izvršena je njihova klasifikacija na alatke sa radnom ivicom i alatke sa radnom površinom; analizirani su tragovi upotrebe i njihova distribucija, na osnovu čega je pretpostavljena funkcija alatki - korišćenje u procesu oblikovanja i modifikovanja površina keramičkih posuda.

Over the last few years, careful analysis of a large quantity of ceramic material found during excavation at Vinca has identified a significant number of ceramic fragments with clear use-wear traces. Recycled fragments of ceramic vessels are characterized by the presence of damage and deformation caused by abrasive processes i.e. contact of the fragments with hard material. All recorded recycled fragments can generally be divided into two basic groups: fragments representing tools with a working edge, and fragments with traces of abrasion on their outer surface. The largest group comprises fragments whose edges form the working edge of a tool, rounded or flattened through use and so becoming smooth. In contrast to so-called burnishers (the secondarily used, striped handles with traces of the action of water, manifesting in a uniformly rounded break) with ceramic tools only one edge of the fragment is rounded and used; the remaining edge indicates a completely normal break. In addition, most fragments also have abrasions directly beneath the working edge, which indicates holding the tool at a certain angle during use. That damage can occur both on the exterior and interior surfaces. It is striking that in a large group of fragments, the rim is used as a working edge. Tools are mostly fragmented, but it appears that their shape was not modified before use. In that sense, two straight polygonal tools can be distinguished (T. I/1a-b), or tools which are rectangular in shape with rounded corners (T. II4a-b), preserved complete. In most cases, these are fragments of bowls, so tools usually have polished or burnished surfaces, but ornamental parts formed by burnished lines or channelling are also noticeable. Fragments of rough fabric were never used as tools, but only those with an admixture of fine sand. Very rarely, actually in two cases, fragments of amphorae were used as tools (T. IV/2,5). Usually the upper parts of vessels were used, although there are several exceptions, where parts of the base and body were used as well (T. IV/3). Also, in the damaged area straight depressions can often be noticed, which apparently represent some kind of negative impression of the object on which they were used, or, in rare cases, the whole working surface is step-like. The second group of fragments do not generally differ from the first group as regards their form and the surface treatment. The difference can be seen in the distribution of damage. To be precise, the zone of intensive abrasion lies on the surface of fragments and is manifested by complete removal of original surface, while across it, marks caused by contact with hard material often result in deep incisions, which can be seen with the naked eye. These marks can be found on the most protruted parts of vessels i.e. on the shoulder, apart from two cases concerning the shoulder, or the thickened rim of an amphora (T.V/1,5). Finally, we should emphasise the fact that not one ceramic tool has been found around an architectural structure. Specimens originate from archaeological layers or contexts which do not represent a specific zone of activity (destruction layers, ditch filling, posthole, levelling layers etc) but in contexts in which waste material was deposited. From that perspective, one example can particularly be distinguished, a tool with a working edge found near the ceramic substructure of a oven. By analysis of the distribution, shape and kind of damage, as well as the position and shape of the working edge, it is possible to reconstruct the direction of movement and position of the tool during use. Scraping tools show marks in the form of dense incisions, visible both macroscopically and microscopically. They can also be characterised by a pronouncedly rounded working edge. Bearing these characteristics in mind, tools from Vinca with rounded working edges can be categorized as tools for scraping away excess clay and for thinning the surface of unfired vessels. They were held at right angles or slanting in relation to the vessel, with the working edge horizontal or also at an angle or lateral to the working edge, so that the vessels walls were thinned by movements in various directions. Ceramic tools were not specialized, and were undoubtedly multi-functional. They could have been used for smoothing and polishing. This is supported by the fact that abrasion traces are parallel or distributed in various directions. A group of tools with a flattened working edge, judging by preserved marks, had a rather different function. There are indications that these were held at right angles to the vessel but that the movement was not lateral. The tool was probably held with the working edge in a vertical position, so that burnished decoration could be carried out by using up/down movements, when it was necessary to make thin burnished lines of uniform thickness and with clearly defined edges. Bearing in mind traces of 'negative' impressions of the item on which the tools were used, the tool could also have been used in a left-right direction, when it was used to execute the burnished zone typical for upper bowls' parts. One of the important characteristics of ceramic tools is the use of the rim of a broken vessel as a working edge. This is a very logical choice. Bowl rims have a naturally rounded and often symmetrical, sharpened shape. Thus, craftsmen got a ready-made thin, relatively sharp tool, so there was no need to modify a fragment or re-shape it for the working edge to obtain the desired shape. Likewise, as mentioned before, the existence of a negative impression on work edges, usually rims, makes it probable that such tools were used to shape and burnish the rims of vessels. It is an interesting fact that most of these tools comprise fragments of bowls, and this is not coincidental. Important role in the appearance and form of traces caused by abrasive processes is played by characteristics of the abrasive, i.e. tool, such as hardness and granulation. All bowls are characterised by their fine fabric and fine-sand admixture, thin walls, burnished or polished surfaces and firing in a reduced atmosphere. These characteristics are very significant regarding the reaction of material to mechanical stress. A reduced atmosphere during firing increases the hardness of ceramics. Ceramics with fine granulation and lower porosity show greater resistance to mechanical stress than ceramics of rougher fabric with larger quantities of a coarse admixture. Burnishing and polishing lead to the compression of particles on surfaces, which creates a hard, compact structure, resistant to abrasion. It was especially convenient to have tools made of materials with identical characteristics as material they were used on. Analysis of ceramic fragments from the early phase of the Late Neolithic settlement at Vinca indicated an exceptional number of recycled vessel fragments, shaped as tools and used in the process of shaping and modifying ceramic surfaces. Since this concerns a new class of archaeological finds, it is necessary to suggest a direction for future research, particularly experimental, which would, together with microscopic identification of use-wear traces, reveal completely the activities in which ceramic tools were used.