A WBRG session will be organised at the
15th International Council for Archaeozoology conference
to be held from 17.–22. May 2027 in Vancouver, Canada
entitled
The case of the missing waste bone data:
Workflow gaps in recognizing hard osseous manufactured material
This methodological, hybrid session aims at improving cooperation between bone tool specialists and general faunal analysts. The goal is to create an open-source, downloadable, digital identification book, available to all academic, archaeology-related institutions. Ideally, access to this reference book should help faunal analysts to recognize less obvious, bone fragments that are likely associated with manufacturing activities as well as very fragmented pieces of worked bone. Since what constitutes worked bone and manufacturing will differ significantly depending on geographical location, time-period and degree of serial, industrial production the reference book will need to be continually revised.
In the best of all possible worlds, these two groups of specialists work together in an organic fashion. However, Although there are places where faunal analysts and specialists in worked hard osseous materials work together organically as a team, the stark reality is that financial and time constraints often, make such direct cooperation difficult. Debris from manufacturing can be very difficult to recognize. Furthermore, the presence of very fragmented or unusually used objects can also be signaled by the presence of macroscopically visible areas of polish from heavy use or even ritual handling of bone which was essentially unworked (or only minimally worked). Such objects must be properly identified during microscopic analysis, but their surfaces often have visible polish or minor (but sometimes very specific) modifications, visible at low magnifications, which can
provide grounds for their preliminary classification.
The session would revolve around developing general protocols to define what both groups of specialists would be interested in adding to their research repertoire and different possibilities of transmitting basic know-how between these two tightly related fields. Papers should be kept short and be closely concerned with what waste bone from manufacturing sequences looks like in their research area
Possible points to cover:
1. Recognition/identification of waste and worked hard osseous material.
a. What type of tool marks are associated with bone tool reduction and where are they typically located?
b. How can these marks be distinguished from butchery marks and taphonomic damage (or can they be)?
c. What is the best way to disseminate this information?
d. What kind of information about worked hard osseous materials would be of most practical use to faunal analysts?
2. When there is no bone tool specialist – what minimal but basic information do zooarchaeologists need to take into account about the worked hard osseous materials they find in the faunal sample?
3. How should worked bone specialists organize their workflow in the absence of a zooarchaeologist?
4. Structural, storage problems with separation of small finds assemblages and objects found in the faunal assemblage.
5. How can the study of worked hard osseous material be included in zooarchaeology courses?