The Iceman's lithic toolkit: Raw material, technology, typology and use

Abstract

The Tyrolean Iceman, a 5,300-year-old glacier mummy recovered at the Tisenjoch (South Tyrol, Italy) together with his clothes and personal equipment, represents a unique opportunity for prehistoric research. The present work examines the Iceman's tools which are made from chert or are related to chert working - dagger, two arrowheads, endscraper, borer, small flake and antler retoucher - and considers also the arrowhead still embedded in the shoulder of the mummy. The interdisciplinary results achieved by study of the lithic raw material, technology, use-wear analysis, CT analysis and typology all add new information to Ötzi's individual history and his last days, and allow insights into the way of life of Alpine Copper Age communities. The chert raw material of the small assemblage originates from at least three different areas of provenance in the Southalpine region. One, or possibly two, sources derive from outcrops in the Trentino, specifically the Non Valley. Such variability suggests an extensive provisioning network, not at all limited to the Lessini mountains, which was able to reach the local communities. The Iceman's toolkit displays typological characteristics of the Northern Italian tradition, but also comprises features typical of the Swiss Horgen culture, which will come as no surprise in the toolkit of a man who lived in a territory where transalpine contacts would have been of great importance. Ötzi was not a flintknapper, but he was able to resharpen his tools with a medium to good level of skill. Wear traces reveal that he was a right-hander. Most instruments in the toolkit had reached their final stage of usability, displaying extensive usage, mostly from plant working, resharpenings and breaks. Evidently Ötzi had not had any access to chert for quite some time, which must have been problematic during his last hectic days, preventing him from repairing and integrating his weapons, in particular his arrows. Freshly modified blade tools without any wear suggest planned work which he never carried out, possibly prevented by the events which made him return to the mountains where he was killed by a Southern Alpine archer.

Fig 1. The Iceman lithic assemblage.

a) Dagger, b) Endscraper, c) Borer, d) Arrowhead 14, e) Arrowhead 12, f) Small flake.

Fig 2. Dagger.

Red outline = ancient fracture; Blue outline = remnants of preform; blue arrow = long detachment; red dots = location of use-wear; 1 = wide hinged scar; L = last crushed detachments; a = fracture of the tip, corresponding to an embedded fossil; b = Scratch on the dagger surface produced by a copper object.

Fig 3. Use-wear on dagger.

a) Use-wear polish referable to working soft animal material (140x); b) Use-wear polish compatible with the contact with the bast scabbard (140x).

Fig 4. Arrowhead 12.

blue arrow = plunged scar; red dots = location of use-wear.

Fig 5. Arrowhead 12: Sequence of actions.

Fig 6. Use-wear on arrowhead 12.

a) Edge rounding localized on the maximum width of the arrowhead (60x); b) Dark residues, probably birch-bark-tar, on the maximum width of the point (60x). Use-wear on arrowhead 14: c) Well developed luster and longitudinal striations from cutting siliceous plants (420x); d) Micropolish and longitudinal striations from cutting siliceous plants (420x).

Fig 7. Arrowhead 14.

blue outline = remnant of flake blank; yellow line = birch-bark-tar interrupted by later detachments; red dots = location of gloss; red lines = gloss visible to the naked eye; blue stars = last and clean detachments; f = fresh detachments (recent?).

Fig 8. Arrowhead 14: Sequence of actions.

Fig 9. Endscraper.

a) overstepping negatives made with pressure; b) endscraper front made with direct percussion; c) superimposition of fresh on glossy negatives. Upper right: distribution and intensity of gloss; red dots = location of small crushings.

Fig 10. Use-wear on endscraper.

a) Very developed luster from cutting siliceous plants on the ventral face (140x); b) Very developed gloss and longitudinal striations on the dorsal face; c) Crushing and smoothed areas consistent with the use as “strike-a-light”. Use-wear on borer. d) Micropolishing on the tip referable to contact with hard material (560x); e) Micropolishing on a lateral edge referable to transport or prehension (560x); f) Light crushing referable to a use as a “strike-a-light”.

Fig 11. Endscraper: Sequence of actions.

Fig 12. Borer.

blue arrow = oblique dorsal negative; L = Last detachment; red dots = location of use-wear; cross section with sequence of retouch; lower right left and right: details of crushings.

Fig 13. Borer: Sequence of actions.

Fig 14. Small flake.

0 = remnant of ventral face of flake blank; ea = spontaneous negative; arrow = burin-like accident; red dots = location of use-wear.

Fig 15. Use-wear on small flake.

Use-wear polish from cutting vegetal material (soft wood or reeds) (560x).

Fig 16. Retoucher.

a) the wooden handle and antler tip, b-c) detail of the radiological structure of the antler spike, displaying the cortical and the cancellous parts, d) CT image depicting its radiological structure.

Fig 17. Shape and radiological structure of natural antler points.

a) red deer, b) roe deer (yearling), c) adult roe deer. Size comparison with the antler spike of Ötzi’s retoucher (red outline).

Fig 18. Most evident incisions from the use as pressure flaker visible on the retoucher.

The “/”-orientation of the incisions were produced by a right-hander.

Fig 19

a-b) Arrowhead 12 (Scaglia Variegata Alpina, Trento Plateau). a) pale brown patina. The true grey to green chert color is visible in places; b) Microcrystalline chert matrix with planktic foraminifers - the species Rotalipora cushmani (1) and Preglobotruncana gibba (2) are clearly recognizable - and radiolarians. Some microfossils have light reddish to brown fillings. c) Arrowhead 14 (Maiolica, Trento Plateau). Very clean and fine crystalline chert matrix incorporating whitish radiolarians.

Fig 20

a-b) Borer and small flake (Maiolica, Trento Plateau). Fine crystalline chert matrix with radiolarians, a few sponge spicules and spotted limestone remains, sometimes surrounding green clay. Sparse iron oxides are common. c–d) Endscaper (Maiolica, Trento Plateau). Dark grey, fine crystalline chert matrix incorporating very well preserved radiolarians, sponge spicules and differently “digested” limestone remains. At places (d) these latter are almost completely silicified leaving only concentrations of calcite particles. There are also vague laminations.

Fig 21. Dagger (Maiolica, Lombard basin).

a) Bioturbation (trace fossil). The microfacies is similar to the surrounding sediment, but darker due to the organic matter enrichment; b) Benthic crinoid stem ossicle in correspondence with the apical fracture; c-d, f) Radiolarians, sponge spicules, pelagic crinoids (Saccocoma), calpionellids, holoturians sclerites in a microcrystalline quartz and calcite matrix. Fe-Mn oxide spots and organic matter remains also occur. The not fully silicified chert has a microdetrital look; e) Radiolarians, partly filled with ferruginous mud, in a microcrystalline quartz matrix spotted by several tiny brownish calcite particles.

Fig 22. Geological outline of the Austroalpine and Southalpine series, separated by the Periadriatic line.

The Iceman was found in an area where the substratum is fully metamorphic (Austroalpine). The lithic tools come from the Southalpine: 5 from the Trento Plateau series, most probably from the outcrops situated near the Adige valley (Non Valley, Baldo-Bondone, Lessini), whereas the provenance of the dagger is probably from the eastern slope of the Lombard Basin.

Fig 23. Schematic drawing of the upper Jurassic-Eocene sedimentary series of the western Trento plateau.

The NW sector of the area (right) characterizes for upper Jurassic gaps or very condensed series. The Iceman’s tools are indicated in correspondence with the comparable chert types.

Fig 24. Dagger.

Typological comparisons. 1–2) CT-image and drawing of the Iceman dagger; 3) Wallhausen; 4) Ludwigshafen-Seehalde; 5) Zürich-Otelfingen (Kantonsarchäologie Zürich); 6) Sipplingen-Osthafen; 7) Buca delle Fate, Cardoso; 8) Brentonico; 9) Iceman dagger in bast scabbard.

Fig 25. Arrowhead 12.

Typological comparisons. 1–2) CT-image and drawing of the Iceman’s arrowhead; 3) Riparo Valtenesi; 4) Isera La Torretta; 5) Schlern Roterdhang; 6) La Nasa di Cerro; 7) Povegliano Veronese; 8) Steinhausen-Sennweid; 9) Petit-Chasseur III.

Fig 26. Arrowhead 14.

Typological comparisons. 1–2) CT-image and drawing of the Iceman arrowhead; 3, 7–9) Spilamberto; 4–5, 10) Remedello Sotto; 6) Scalucce di Molina; 11) Monte Loffa; 12) Palù di Cordignano; 13) Montello; 14–17) Vahrn; 18) Casarole; 19) Monte Aiona/Prato Mollo; 20) Sanguani; 21) Isera La Torretta; 22) Buca d’Andrea; 23) Ca’dei Grii; 24) Steinhausen-Sennweid; 25) Zürich-Kanalisationssanierung (Kantonsarchäologie Zürich); 26) Uebeschi-Subelmoos.

Fig 27. Arrowhead stuck in the Iceman’s shoulder.

Typological comparisons. 1) CT-image of the arrowhead; 2) Volongo; 3) Altino Vallesina; 4–5) Vahrn; 6–7) Cham-St. Andreas; 8) Zürich- Kanalisationssanierung (Kantonsarchäologie Zürich).

Fig 28. Endscraper.

Typological, morphological and use-wear comparisons. 1. Iceman’s tool from Tisenjoch; 2. Zug-Vorstadt; 3–4,10 Arbon Bleiche 3 (Amt für Archäologie Thurgau); 5. Feldmeilen-Vorderfeld (Kantonsarchäologie Zürich); 6. Steinhausen-Sennweid; 7. Twann-Bahnhof; 8. Ermatingen-Westerfeld (Amt für Archäologie Thurgau); 9. Zürich-Parkhaus Opéra; 11. Pfäffikon-Burg (both Kantonsarchäologie Zürich); 12. Riparo Valtenesi; 13. Riparo Balm Chanto; 14. Arco-Linfano. Green areas = gloss; RS = resharpened; SAL = strike-a-light.

Fig 29. Results of the present study integrated to past reconstructions of Ötzi‘s last days, based on the Iceman last itinerary and meals [, –160], the state of his wounds [–156], the causes of his death [157] and the damaged and insufficient equipment [9].