Proposals for a Practical System of Significance Evaluation in Archaeological Heritage Management

World Heritage & Archaeological Resource Managemen

Extracting residues from stone tools for optical analysis: towards an experiment-based protocol

The identification of residues is traditionally based on the distinctive morphologies of the residue fragments by means of light microscopy. Most residue fragments are amorphous, in the sense that they lack distinguishing shapes or easily visible structures under reflected light microscopy. Amorphous residues can only be identified by using transmitted light microscopy, which requires the extraction of residues from the tool’s surface. Residues are usually extracted with a pipette or an ultrasonic bath in combination with distilled water. However, a number of researchers avoid residue extraction because it is unclear whether current extraction techniques are representative for the use-related residue that adheres to a flaked stone tool. In this paper, we aim at resolving these methodological uncertainties by critically evaluating current extraction methodologies. Attention is focused on the variation in residue types, their causes of deposition and their adhesion and on the most successful technique for extracting a range of residue types from the stone tool surface. Based on an experimental reference sample in flint, we argue that a stepwise extraction protocol is most successful in providing rep- resentative residue extractions and in preventing damage, destruction or loss of residue.Evohaf

Making sense of residues on flaked stone artefacts: learning from blind tests

Residue analysis has become a frequently applied method for identifying prehistoric stone tool use. Residues adhering to the stone tool with varying frequencies are interpreted as being the result of an intentional contact with the worked material during use. Yet, other processes during the life cycle of a stone tool or after deposition may leave residues and these residues may potentially lead to misinterpretations. We present a blind test that was designed to examine this issue. Results confirm that production, retouch, prehension, hafting, various incidental contacts during use and deposition may lead to residue depositions that significantly affect the accurateness of identifications of tool-use. All currently applied residue approaches are concerned. We therefore argue for a closer interaction with independent wear studies and a step-wise procedure in which a low magnification of wear traces is used as a first step for selecting potentially used flakes in archaeological contexts. In addition, residue concentrations on a tool's edge should be sufficiently dense before linking them with use

Presumptive blood test using Hemastix® with EDTA in archaeology

A presumptive test is a rapid screening method that indicates the possible identity of a substance. To ensure a presumptive test is reliable, accurate and replicable, it has to be validated. In this paper we present a method validation for the cost-effective, presumptive blood test, Hemastix® with sodium ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) specifically for archaeology and buried residues. Hemastix®, a haemoglobin specific chemical reagent test strip (Hb-CRTS), was used with the addition of a chelating agent (EDTA) which increases the specificity of this test. It was conducted using a collection of 146 substances (plant, animal, metal compounds, chemical solutions including blood), 6 experimentally degraded samples, 177 experimental artefacts, 238 reference samples (on microscope slides) and 39 mixtures of substances. We also compared the Hemastix® and Hemastix® with EDTA test to two other Hb-CRTSs (URS-10 and Chemstrip® 10MD) and two additional presumptive tests, the tetramethylbenzidine (TMB) test and the phenolphthalein test. The results demonstrate that Hemastix® is the most specific, sensitive and cost-effective presumptive test evaluated which can be substituted with any other Hb-CRTS. Although the longevity and survival of haemoglobin on archaeological artefacts requires further investigation, the method validation described here supports Hemastix® performed with EDTA as being a reliable presumptive test for the presence of residual blood on buried artefacts