10.04.2013 Views

Middle and Late Bronze Age Metal Tools from the Aegean, Eastern ...

Middle and Late Bronze Age Metal Tools from the Aegean, Eastern ...

Middle and Late Bronze Age Metal Tools from the Aegean, Eastern ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Anatolia 8.9 cm (n=245) ±5.74 cm; CV=0.64 0.83 cm (n=269) ±0.67 cm; CV=0.81<br />

Syria-<br />

Palestine<br />

14 cm (n=19) ±5.4 cm; CV=0.39 1.4 cm (n=12) ±0.64; CV=0.46<br />

Shipwrecks 13.55 cm (n=14) ±7.3 cm; CV=0.54 2.3 cm (n=16) ±1.1 cm; CV=0.48<br />

Table 4.9: Chisel length <strong>and</strong> cutting edge width by region (also see Fig. 4.10)<br />

The regionalism in chisel size is evident in a series of scatter plots (Fig. 4.10) <strong>and</strong><br />

Table 4.9, which gives <strong>the</strong> average, st<strong>and</strong>ard deviation, <strong>and</strong> coefficient of variation values<br />

for chisel length <strong>and</strong> cutting edge width. The relative dearth of wide chisels (Sizes 4 <strong>and</strong><br />

5) <strong>from</strong> Anatolia <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> eastern Mediterranean st<strong>and</strong>s in stark contrast to <strong>the</strong>ir<br />

abundance in <strong>the</strong> <strong>Aegean</strong>, <strong>and</strong> explains why <strong>the</strong>re is a significant disparity in tool size<br />

between <strong>the</strong> regions. The average Anatolian chisel length <strong>and</strong> cutting width are 8.9 <strong>and</strong><br />

0.83 cm, respectively. For comparison, <strong>the</strong> Cretan chisel average is considerably greater,<br />

at 16.6 cm (length) <strong>and</strong> 2.2 cm (cutting edge width), while <strong>the</strong> mainl<strong>and</strong> average falls at<br />

10.1 cm (length) <strong>and</strong> 1.94 cm (cutting edge width). The extraordinarily narrow Anatolian<br />

chisels were impractical for major wood/stone cutting tasks, <strong>and</strong> must have been<br />

restricted to specialized, delicate wood work, such as cabinetry. At <strong>the</strong> opposite extreme,<br />

<strong>the</strong> large, elongated Minoan chisels are ideal for wood <strong>and</strong> stone cutting. 388<br />

To summarize <strong>the</strong> chisel types, <strong>the</strong> Anatolian bit-size chisel (Plate 4.18-19) is <strong>the</strong><br />

smallest type in <strong>the</strong> dataset, <strong>and</strong> it is difficult to imagine how <strong>the</strong>y were utilized in craft<br />

work. Larger yet still narrow-sized chisels certainly cut wood, as suggested by<br />

comparable measurements with mortise chisels (Plates 4.20-4.21). These narrow<br />

versions—<strong>the</strong> most common chisel type cross-regionally—were equally effective in<br />

detailed masonry work. Wider chisels (as well as axes <strong>and</strong> adzes), however, would have<br />

been more efficient in cutting thick timber <strong>and</strong> roughly fashioning a stone block (Plates<br />

4.24-26). Markings <strong>from</strong> chisels are regularly preserved on masonry faces in Minoan,<br />

388 Evely 1993, 14.<br />

163

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!