The Stone of Life: The Archaeology of Querns, Mills and Flour Production in Europe up to c. AD 500 9780992633608

Citation preview

THE STONE OF LIFE

THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF QUERNS,MILLS AND FLOUR PRODUCTIONIN EUROPE UP TO c. AD 500

David Peacock

With illustrations by Chris Green

HP

SOUTHAMPTON MONOGRAPHSIN ARCHAEOLOGY NEWSERIES1 © DPS Peacock 2013 © CMGreenoriginalillustrations 2013

ISBN: 978-0-9926336-0-8

A CIP record for this book is available from The British Library

Published by The Highfield Press Southampton, 10 Hiltingbury Road, Chandlers Ford, SO53 5ST, United Kingdom This book is available from Oxbow BooksLtd, 10 Hythe Bridge Street, Oxford, OX1 2EW or from David Brown Book Company, 28 Main Street, Oakville, CT06779, USA

Printed in Great Britain by The Short Run Press Ltd, Exeter

THE STONE OF LIFE THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF QUERNS, MILLS AND FLOUR PRODUCTION IN EUROPE UP TO c. AD 500

SOUTHAMPTON MONOGRAPHSIN ARCHAEOLOGY NEWSERIES1

Frontispiece: Stele showing a Pompetan-style mill probably in a bakery. The catillus 7s shown broken and maybe being destroyed, possibly to mark the death of the master baker standing on the right (Museo Nationale, Chiett, Italy; photo: courtesy DAI Rome)

CONTENTS List of Illustrations Preface and Acknowledgements

Vil

Chapter 1: Introduction

Chapter 2: In the beginning: the saddle quern and the rock mortar Introduction: ethnography Types of saddle quern The origin of saddle querns The Neolithic Neolithic querns in action The exchange of Neolithic querns

Neolithic quern quarries

Conclusions: Neolithic querns and the spread of agriculture The Bronze Age Rock mortars and alternative grinding methods The Iron Age andlater Chapter 3: Greeks and barbarians: the Olynthus mill and its derivatives Origins Morphologyof the Olynthus mill Operation of the Olynthus mill Chronology Sources Distribution Derivative types

The Olynthus mill and the rotary mill Chapter 4: Revolution in flour production: the rotary quern The origin of the rotary quern Towardsa classification of rotary querns Regional groups The Roman quern Chapter 5: Of men andbeasts: the Pompeian-style mill Introduction

Typology

The superstructure The substructure Rock type and sources Chronologyandorigin The Pompeian mull in the Middle East Ring mills Sequel

12 16 17 21 23 25 26 26 31 35

38 39 43 46 48 50 52

54 58 63 72

80) 83 85 86 88 92 94 97

THE STONE OF LIFE Chapter 6: The power of water and the problem of large millstones Types of watermill The origins of the watermill

Roman watermills

Mill buildings and equipment Floating mills and tide mills Large millstones Typology and driving mechanism Date and find-sites Chapter 7: Grain: experiments, ethnographyand the ergonomics of milling The nature of grain and its consumption The structure of grain Modern milling and flour assessment The problem of dehusking Experiment and production rates Experiment and flour quality Experiment and abrasion

98 100 102 108 111 111 117 118

120 123 124 125 126 129 130

Chapter 8: From quarryto user: the social setting and organisation of production and distribution Introductory remarks: the role of the quarry 131 Ethnographic evidence for quarrying and production 134 Archaeological evidence for quarrying 135 The social setting of rock extraction 139 The chaine opératoire 141 Distribution: exchange and marketing 145

Chapter 9: A matter of life and death: symbolism and the wider significance of querns mills From the material to the spiritual: mythology, religion and querns Querns, mills andfertility From quern to cult: the evidence of the artefacts From quern to cult: the pit phenomenon A chronological perspective

and 162 166 168 173 173

Chapter 10: Methods and approaches: into the future Field collection and retention Examining form Surface textures Examining material Scientific methods of rock characterisation Organic residues Millstones and human pathology Conclusion

181 181 184 185 187 189 191 191

Bibliography and General Index

192 Vi

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Frontispiece: Stele showing a Pompeian-style mill probablyin a bakery. The cat/us is shown broken and maybe being destroyed, possibly to mark the death of the master baker standing on the right (Museo Nationale, Chieti, Italy; photo: courtesy DAI Rome) Fig, 1.1:

Simple rotary quern in use by a Berber woman in Tunisia ¢. 1995. From a postcard

Modern saddle quern tn the Sassi at Matera, Italy, approximately 40 cm across (photo: author) Modern Irish saddle quern photographed in County Antrim by William Alfred Fig. 2.2: Green (1870-1958). © National Museums Northern Ireland, collection of the Ulster Folk and Transport Museum \HOYFM.WAG.1962] Fig, 2.3: Pounders and querns according to Storck and Teague Fig, 2.4: Zimmerman/Graefe system for classifying saddle querns Fig. 2.5: Proposed typologyof saddle querns. Type 1, Runnymede; Type 2, Turnershall Farm, Hertfordshire; Type 3, Irchonwelz, Belgium; Type 4, Aegean (not toscale); Type 5, Chapon-Seraing, Belgium; Type 6, Carn Glas, Ross-shire (after Needham

Fig, 2.1:

Fig, 2.6:

and Spence 1966; Constantin e/a/ 1978; Runnels 1981; Close-Brooks 1983)

Quern at Papa Westray, OrkneyIslands, approximately 80 cm long (photo: J Rendall)

Fig. 2.7: Some Neolithic querns. a, Langweiler 8 querns; b, hand-stone from a Langweiler

long quern; c,Aegean shaped quern; d, Cucuteni culture quern and hand-stones

Fig. Fig, Fig, Fig.

from P4uleni Cuic, Romania (after Zimmerman 1988; Runnels 1981 and photo by author) 2.8: Reconstruction of the Medgidia mill house, after Hartuche (1981). The position of a possible secondarypartition is shown 2.9: Hittite milling at Karatepe, Adana, southern Turkey. Reconstruction based on excavated remains 2.10: The spread of agriculture across Neolithic Europe and the Near-East(after Turney and Brown 2007) 2.11: Nuraghic quern, Santu Antine, Sardinia, at the samescale as Figs 2.5 and 2.7 (after photo by author)

Fig, 2.12: The grinding rock, Indian Grinding Rock State Park, near Jackson, California

(photo: RG Lemmon)

Fig, 2.13: Cup mark patterns at Chatton, Northumberland(top left) and from Kenya (not

to scale) (after Morris 1989; Odak 1992)

Fig, 2.14: An Irish bullan stone (from Bennett and Elton 1898) Fig. 2.15: Cup-and-ring mark, Snowden Carr Road, Otley, Yorkshire, diameter 16 cm (photo: author)

Fig. 3.1: Possible forerunners of the Olynthus mill: a, Sant Cristofol; b, The Fayum, c, Wadi Gazza, Egypt; d, Priene; e, Thera (after anon 1923; Caton-Thompson and Gardner 1934; photo by author; Weigand and Schrader 1904; von Gaer-

tringen and Wilski 1904) Fig. 3.2: Theclassic type: a, b, Olynthus; c, Velia (after photo: author); d, typical milling Vu

THE STONE OF LIFE pattern, Delos (after Robinson and Graham 1938; photo: author; Childe 1943) Fig. 3.3: Typology of Olynthus mills (after Frankel 2003) Fig. 3.4: The Kyrenia cargo (from Bass 1972) Fig. 3.5: The oscillating mode of operation: a, b, on Megarian bowl; c, based on evidence from Gamla; d, Carthage, Byrsa; e, Martigues; (after Rostovtzeff 1937; Frankel 2003; Chausserie-Laprée 1998; Lancel 1982) Fig. 3.6: Suggested alternative mode of operation (after Magan 1993) Fig. 3.7: Complete mills in Kertch Museum showing asymmetric wear: a, from Kimmerikon; b, no provenance. Upper stones 33 cm and 42 cm (photos: author) Fig. 3.8: Map of the Aegean and detail of Nisyros showing Mandraki, Paleokastro and Avlaki Fig. 3.9: Unfinished mills on Nisyros. a, Avlaki; b, Mandraki main street (cross-section of block); c-d, Hotel Porfiris, Mandraki (photos: author) Fig, 3.10: The distribution of classic and barbarised Olynthus mills. Based on Frankel 2003, with additions and corrections Fig. 3.11: Some varieties of barbarised mills from Ukraine, Czech Republic and Alpine Italy: a, Zatec; b, Prikubantya; c, Chrudim; d, Scythian town of N eapolis,

Simferopol; e, Vilémov, f/ Simferopol Museum, g, Stulles-Val Passiria (Merano

Museum)(after Holodfak and Mag 1999; Anfimov 1951; Ctverdk, Holodfak and Sigl 2007; Schutz 1957 (no scale); after photos by author)

Fig. 4.1: The typology of querns according to Curwen (1937; 1941). a, Wessex; b, Sussex; c Hunsbury; d, puddingstone;e, flat beehive Fig. 4.2: The quern zones of England, based on native rock types. Red dots, quarries; black, main concentration; grey, frequent finds; a, Millstone Grit; b, Pen Pits (Upper Greensand) and Spilsby Sandstone(late Jurassic); c, Old Red Sandstone;

>

d, Hertfordshire Puddingstone; e, Lodsworth (Lower Greensand); f, Folkestone

(Lower Greensand) Fig, 4.3: a, the cylindrical heavy quern;b, the lighter variety Fig. 4.4: Staubitz’s classification of the cylindrical quern (after Staubitz 2007) Fig, 4.5: The hemispherical group. a, Magdeburg, Germany; b, Wittelte, Netherlands; c, Vallée de PAisne, France (after Lies 1963; Harsema 1979; Pommepuy1999) Fig. 4.6: The Iberian quern. La Bastida de Moixent, Valencia, diameter 52 cm (after Equipe d’Alorda Park 2002) Pig. 4.7: The conical group. Based on Dacian querns from Oarta de Sus, Baia Mare Museum, Romania (after Stanciu 1992) Fig. 4.8: Upper stonescollected together at the entrance to Citania de Briteiros, Portugal; typically 25-30 cm in diameter (photo: author) Fig. 4.9: Unfinished late Roman hoppered quern, from Limpsfield, Surrey. Caterham Museum, diameter 42 cm (photo: author) Fig, 4.10: The operation of the Highland quern. From a painting by RR Mclan (Logan 1900) Fig. 5.1: a, millin the bakery of Modestus, Pompeii; b, schematic drawing showing component

parts Fig, 5.2: Carl Bloch: Samson and the Philistines (1863). Statens Museum for Kunst/National Gallery of Denmark Vill

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Fig. 5.3: Above, Engraving showing excavation of the bakery of Modestus at Pompeu (Regio VII, 1, 36) (from Monnier 1894, iron clamps emphasised); below, the same scene

today, suggesting repairs to the mill in the foreground were ancient (photo: author) Fig. 5.4: A Morgantina-type mill in Solunto Museum (photo: author); and Morgantina mills (after Marco Crisafull, in Sposito 2007) Fig. 5.5: Utica mill, diameter 38 cm (photo: RJA Wilson), and left, schematically Fig. 5.6: Meta types. left, unused meta in a garden at Mulargia, Sardinia, diameterat ledge «. 25 cm; right, in bakery of Sylvanusat Ostia, in Orvieto rock, with hollowinterior,

diam. ¢. 130 cm (photos: author) Fig. 5.7: Fragment of a sarcophagusside in the Vatican Museum showingthe operation of a donkey mull (from Amelung 1903) Fig. 5.8: Complete mill with flour catcher, Ramdan Jamal, Algeria. (from Reinach 1893) Fig. 5.9: a, unfinished mull, Palazzo dell’Opera del Duomo, Orvieto. Basal diameter c. 1 m;

b, view from Orvieto to the quarries on opposing hill. Note the Roman road connecting the town with quarries. The quarries are in the wooded natural amphitheatre at its head; c, unfinished Pompeian mill and hand mill (diameter«. 55 cm) in the quarryarea, San Trinita, Orveito (photos: author) Fig. 5.10: Above, distribution of Orvieto mills; below, distribution of Mulargia mills (after Antonelli and Lazzarini 2010, with additions) Fig, 5.11: El Sec mull (after Arribas et a/, 1987) Fig. 5.12: Miniature mill, Qasr Ibn Wardan,Syria, diameter ¢ 35 cm (photo: author) Fig. 5.13: Ring mill at Volubilis, Morocco, with reconstructed superstructure (photo:

author) Fig. 5.14: Ring mills from Umm ar Rasas, Jordan, cat/lus diameter c. 60 cm (photo: author) Fig. 5.15: Segmented mill, Delos, diameter 70 cm (after Deonna 1938) Fig. 6.1: The operation of the horizontally-wheeled mill Fig. 6.2: A recently reconstructed horizontally-wheeled watermill at Skor, near Hyllestad (Sogn i Fjordane), Norway. Note the powerderived from relatively weak flow in the leet (photo: author) Fig. 6.3: The operation of a, undershot; b, breast; and c, overshot, vertical wheels

Fig. 6.4: Other watermill designs: a, spiral turbine; b, arubah penstock (after Roder and Roder 1993) Fig. 6.5: The structure of the Chemtou mill (photo: Sheredot) Fig. 6.6: Vitruvian-type mill at Ickham, Kent, reconstructed by RJ Spain (from Bennette¢ al, 2010) Fig. 6.7: An early reconstruction of a Vitruvian mill in a woodcut (from Barbaro 1556) Fig. 6.8: Roman mill houses reconstructed at (from top) Hagedorn, Munchen-Perlach, and Ickham (the exterior of Fig, 6.6); ( from Gahwiler and Speck 1991; Volpert 1997; Spain 2008) Fig. 6.9: Reconstruction of the Barbegal mill complex near Arles, fed by an aqueduct feeding a millpond (isometric; 10 m divisions) Fig. 6.10: The Zugmantel lantern as found and reconstructed in use (from Jacobi 1912) Fig. 6.11: Schematic reconstruction of domed millstones from Avenches(after Castella 1994, fig. 31) Fig. 6.12: Flat watermill stones (reconstructed); a, Orton Hall Farm (but not certainly from a watermill); b, Kenchester; c, Ickham (after Macreth 1996; Willmot and Rahtz 1X

THE STONE OF LIFE

1985; Bennett e¢ a/ 2010) Fig, 6.13: Relief on the sarcophagus of L Annius Octavius Valerianus. Vatican Museum (from Baatz 1995) Fig. 6.14: Upper, reconstruction of Zugmantel mill (from Jacobi 1912) and lower, mill (c. 1800) from Mashbury, stone diameter 57 cm. Colchester Museum (photo: C Green) Fig. 6.15: Animal mills., upper, Saalburg reconstruction (after Baatz 1995); lower, recent Sardinian (after Veiga de Oliveira et al. 1983) Fig. 6.16: Roman millstone from Gonneville-sur-Scie, Normandy. Service Régional

Archéologique de Normandie

Fig. 6.17: Rynd recesses and central perforations. a, Chew Valley Lake; b, Chesters; c, Halstock; d, Fishbourne; e, Gadebridge Park, flower stone (after Rahtz and Greenfield 1977; Scott Garrett 1938; Lucas 1993; Cunliffe 1971; Neal 1974)

Fig. 7.1: a, einkorn (Inticum monococcum); b, eoamer (Triticum dicoccum); c, spelt (Triticum spelta); d, bread wheat (Triticum aestivium); e, rivet (Triticum turgidum); £, darum wheat (Inticum durum) (photo C Green) Fig. 7.2: The anatomyof a spikelet of Triticum durum (approximately x2) andits grain (x3). Hulled wheats have the lemmafused with the palea and are difficult to dehusk Fig. 7.3: Ear, grain and husk of bread wheat Triticum aestivum (photo: C Green) Fig. 8.1: Recent working inside the Grottes d’Hercules, 14 km west of Tangiers, Morocco,

Fig.

Fig. Fig.

Fig, Fig. Fig. Fig.

Fig.

Fig,

today a museum of quern quarrying (photo: author). Curwen (1956) witnessed quarrying in progress and these are the voidsleft in the rock face 8.2: The topography of the Lodsworth quarrysite, showing one of the shallowpits. Without further verification it would not be evident that this was a quern quarry (photo: author) 8.3: Wharncliffe Crags, a quern quarry near Sheffield, S. Yorkshire (photo: C Green) 8.4: Wharncliffe Crags from the survey by Butcher, 1950-55. Working floors seen by Butcherare in yellow; floors surveyed by English Heritage in 1999 above the cliff are shownin red (from Pearson and Oswald 2000). Thearea ofthe plan is approximately 850 X 525 m. Courtesy Sheffield Museums and English Heritage 8.5: The cliff and beach at Copt Point, Folkestone (Kent); a source of quern and mill stone rock from the Neolithic to medieval times (photo: C Green) 8.6: The chaine opératoire at Collonge-en-Charollais (after Jaccotteyet a/ 201 1a) 8.7: Drilling Hertfordshire Puddingstone (from Green 2011) 8.8: The chaine opératoire of Hertfordshire Puddingstone; a-b, dividing a concretion using wedges; c-e, flaking from both faces; f, pecking to shape; g-h, drilling the feed-pipe (and sockets); 1, grinding the stones together under pressure; j, pecking the groove and adding woodenplugsfor fixing ironwork; k, smoothing the pecked surface with a puddingstone maulor ‘hammerstone’; |, fitting the ironwork: spindle, bearing, driving band, and eye to hold theceiling pole 8.9: The Roman quarry at Chables, Switzerland, showing extraction of querns by trenching round a cylinder with white wedge marksclearly visible (photo: T Anderson, courtesy Service Archéologique de Etat de Fribourg) 8.10: A diachronic view of the distribution of Lodsworth querns(after Shaffrey and Roe 2011)

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Fig, 8.11: Kunéticka Hora, near Pardubice, Czech Republic; a source of querns (photo: author) Fig. 8.12: The distribution of Mayen lava and Chaine des Puys querns and mills (based on Gluhak and Hofmeister 2011, with additions) Fig. 8.13: A group of querns from Newstead, Scotland, mainly Mayen lava (from Curle 1911) Fig. 8.14: Southern French sources (solid) and querns (open) according to Reille. Find sites: 1 Pech Maho; 2 Montlaures; 3 Cayla de Mailhac; 4 La Ramasse; 5 Lattes; 6 Ambrussum; 7 Nages; 8 Le Marduel; 9 Martigues; 10 La Cloche; 11 Atx-enProvence; 12 Entremont; 13 Olbia

Fig, 8.15: Presumed quarrysite at Bowl’s Dell, Puckeridge, Hertfordshire (photo: author) Fig, 8.16: The distribution of Hertfordshire, French and Worms Heath puddingstone querns in

France and Britain (Green and Peacock forthcoming). Data for Seine-Maritime from Rogeret (1997)

Fig. 9.1: Mural painting in a small temple near Pandharpur, Maharashtra,India, showing the god Vitthal/Krishnaassisting the poetess and saint Janabai with milling (from Poitevin 1997) Fig, 9.2: Roman millstone from Itchen Farm (Southern Park and Ride), Winchester, original diameter about 65 cm. Excavated by Thames Valley Archaeological Services (photo: L Cutler and courtesy TVAS) Fig. 9.3: Millstone fragments built into Westbere Church, Kent (photo: author) Fig. 9.4: Cross-marked querns: a, Dunadd, Argyll, Scotland (diameter 40 cm); b, Lismore,

Munster, Ireland; c, Glendalough, County Wicklow,Ireland (not to scale) (after Campbell 1987, Power 1939, Bennett and Elton 1898) Fig. 9.5: a, miniature Pompeian mill, Aleppo Museum,Syria; b, millstone in St Simeon’s

Monastery, Aswan, Egypt (photos: author) Fig. 9.6: Neolithic pit section excavated by Wheeler at Maiden Castle, and the saddle quern found ‘firmly bedded on the bottom’(after Peacock and Cutler 2010; quern 28 cm across). Fig. 10.1: a, the diagnostic features of a saddle quern (unusuallyin tabular flint); b, rotary quern in Folkestone Greensand Fig, 10.2: The diagnostic features of a Pompeian-style mill above, and, below, an Olynthus mull Fig. 10.3: Traces of drilling in the feed-pipe of a quern in Hertfordshire Puddingstone (photo: C Green) Fig. 10.4: Iron Age saddle quern from Easton Lane, Winchester, showing a conventional photograph compared with an RTT image, scale 10 cm (photo: N Beale and H Pagz) Fig. 10.5: Digital photomicrographs of quern surfaces; a, Upper Greensand, showing quartz and dark glauconite grains; b, Lodsworth rock, showing the cross-section of a fossil worm

burrow; c, Millstone Grit, showing quartz, pink feldspar and white kaolinised feldspar; d, Hertfordshire Puddingstone, showing a brown pebble with a dark surface in a quartz matrix; e, French puddingstone, showing black pebbles with pale cores. The bright white patches are chalk encrustation (from Rowbury); f,Worms Heath puddingstone, showing decaying flints (white) and ferruginous sand matrix. Scale bar 5 mm (photos: author) Fig. 10.6: Phytolith of Ttcum from an Iron Age quern found at Owslebury, 30 microns long, the(photo: R Scaife and T Bishop)

Xi

PREFACE In 2010 I was fortunate enough to be selected for a Leverhulme Emeritus Fellowship, the

subject of which was querns and mills, a long-standing interest which had been eclipsed by other things such as ceramics, field work in Egypt and Eritrea, and latterly University administration. My proposal was straightforward: ....... to re-evaluate and explain the technologt-

cal changes in querns and milling, which took place primarily during the critical time of the Iron Age and

Roman periods. During these eras there was a movefrom saddle querns or rubbing stones to rotary querns and in the Roman pertod to Ponspeian-style animal mills as well as the watermill, changes which mayreflect differences in social structure and subsistence strategies. In practice this proved no simple matter. The Iron Age could not be understood without an appreciation of what went before, and so the chronological scope was expanded backwards through the Bronze Age, Neolithic, Mesolithic and ultimately the Upper Palaeolithic, a span of some 30,000 years of human development. Originally it was intended to focus on the British evidence albeit in its Continental setting. However, Britain is surrounded by water which is usually (mistakenly) considered a barrier and defence. Before the development of paved roads it would be mucheasier to travel by sea or river and in reality our island was a hub with contacts radiating outin all directions. However, study of the Continental fringes was not enough because they also had connectivity with the hinterland. In the end it was necessary to cover a vast geographical region of some 8 or 9 million km’, stretching from the Black Sea to the Atlantic and from the Arctic to North Africa. Any attempt to do justice to an area this size over such a long period is, of course, both foolhardyand all but impossible except at a most superficial level. Nevertheless, such a wide canvas encourages stepping back and taking a broad overview. While detail is not ignored, patterns and trends begin to emerge which are invisible from the closer perspective. I am forcibly reminded of the words of Paul Mantoux (1927, 41), who was trying to make sense of the Industrial Revolution. Nowhere do phenomena succeed one another so gradually or so imperceptibly as in the sphere of economics, that domain of necessity and instincts, where everyclassification and distinction of kind or time become more orless artificial. Nevertheless differences do exist, and in spite of the vagueness of their outhne one can eastly distinguish certain groups offacts that belong together and which by the relateve position they occupy, give character to the greatperiods of economic history. In attempting this task, | am of course limited by the material available to me, and the data

can be best regarded as sampled rather than comprehensively reviewed. Notall the work I came across is incorporated because of space constraints and the avoidance of repetition. And of course, there is much that I have missed or been unable to find. However, I have

had at mydisposal the resources of the Bodleian in Oxford, one of the great libraries of the world, and I have been fortunate in that so manyoverseas colleagues have kept me in touch with developments in their country. Some countries and regions have beenlittle studied from the point of view of querns and milling and I have been able to make amendsbyfield visits to some of them including Portugal, Romania and the Crimea. The study of mills and querns essentially developed during the twentieth century. At the very end of the nineteenth century two seminal works set the stage. The first was Bennett and Elton’s History of corn milling published in 1898, followed in 1899 byan article by Lindet Xi

PREFACE published in Revue Archéologique. Both were aware of the scantiness of available information as is apparent from their reference to earlier nineteenth century works including those of Mongez published in 1818, Keller on the Swiss lake dwellings which appeared in1866, Hume in 1868 or Blumner’s Technologie und Terminologie der Gewerbe und Kinste bei Greichen und Rémern (1875-87) with its important section on bread and milling, An outstanding if little known contribution was Divis-Cistecky’s (1893) accountof the querns from Kunétické Hota in the Czech Republic. Here he identified quarries andillustrated typology with both cross-sections and perspective views in a work well ahead of its ttme. Daremberg, Saglio and Pottier (1904) include a brief discussion of classical millstones under the entry wo/a in volumeIII of their Dictionnaire des antiquités grecques et romaines. Unfortunately their fig. 5103 (borrowed from Blumner 1875-87) is an anachronism as it shows a medieval pot quern. However, it seems that Bennett and Elton and Lindet were the first to drawattention to the importance and interest of the subject despite the paucity of the evidence at their disposal. Despite this propitiousstart, little new work seems to have been generated and one of the most influential figures in our study, Cecil Curwen, a Sussex doctor and amateur archaeologist, was a babe in armsat this time. Nearly forty years later he was still able to write: The development of the quern presents an immense fieldfor study, and represents a gap in our knowledge which is crying out to be filled. (Carwen 1937, 151) This mantra has been repeated many times since by manydifferent workers and Searcy (2011) writing on Mayan metates is one of the latest to join the distinguished band. However, in reality the last decade has seen an unprecedented explosion of interest and activity which promises well for the future. There have been four international conferences attended by

delegates from manyparts of Europe and even the USA,the first in 2002 held in La Ferte-

sous-Jouarre, the world capital of millstone production, the second in Grenoble in 2005, the third in Rome in 2009 and the mostrecent in Bergen in 2011. The subjectis truly international and interest is burgeoning all over Europe and indeed the world. This is reflected in a stream,

if not a flood, of publications. The papers of the first three conferences have been published to which can be added a fable ronde held at Clermont-Ferrand in 1995, published as Moudre et

Broyer in 2002. A colloquium on Newperspectives on querns in Neolithic societies edited by Caroline Hamonand Jan Graefe appeared in 2008. More recently another ‘able ronde held in 2009 was published in 2011 underthetitle Evolution typologiqueet techniques des meules du Néolithique a lan mille. A further colloquium, yet to be published, took place at Lons-le-Saunier in the autumn of 2011. Until recently there were few books on the subject, with the exception of Storck and Teague’s Flourfor man’ bread (1952) and Moritz’s Grain mills andflour in Classical Antiquity published in 1958. In the last decade new books have appeared, beginning in 2002 with Martin Watts’ Archaeology of mills and milling. This was followed in 2003 bythe publication of one of the very few excavations of a quern quarry by Tim Anderson and colleagues as Des artisans a la campagne. In 2006 Alain Belmont published his great two volume corpus of millstone quarries under the title La pierre a pain and in the same year Ruth Shaffrey’s Grinding and milling, an in depth study of Old Red Sandstone querns and mills in Britain, appeared. 2008 sawthe publication of Robert Spain’s BAR on Thepower andperformance of Roman watermills and David Heslop’s Patterns of quern production, acquisition and deposition, a comprehensive report on the Yorkshire quern survey launched in 1985 by the late Don Spratt and late Raymond Hayes. A work marking 2009 was Jan Graefe’s Neohthische Mahlsteine zwischen Weserbergland und dem X11

THE STONE OF LIFE

Niederrhein, and in the same year Charles Hockensmith publishedhis useful overview of more recent millstone making underthe title The millstone industry. In 2010 Luca Bombardieri’s BAR on Petre da macina. Macintper mulini, appeared, focussing on early developments in the Near Fast. An important addition to the ethnographic literature is Michael Searcy’s Lfe-giving stone, published in 2011. Two seminal books based on doctoral theses appeared in 2012, alas too late for full consideration in this book. The first is Stephanie Wefers’ Laténezeitliche Miihlen aus dem Gebtet xnrschen Steinbruchrivieren Mayen und Lovosice, the second by Samuel Longepierre concerns Meules, moulins et meuliéres en Gaule méridionale du Ie s. av. J.-C. au Ve ap. J.-C.. The

list is impressive and to it must be added the numerouspapers published in journals and in conference proceedings. A further important work is Susan Watts’ PhD thesis presented at Exeter University in 2012 entitled The structured deposition of querns: The contexts of use and deposition of quernsin the south-west of Englandfrom the Neolithic to the Iron Age. This develops and expands some of the themes explored in chapter 9, but appeared too late to be included in the discussion here. The epithet ‘neglected’ hardly seems appropriate, but rather the subject seems to be enjoying an unprecedented boom. Despite burgeoning activity the attempts at any form of overall synthesis dealing in any measure with the subject matter of this book have been few andit is necessary to look back over a centuryto identify them. Watts’ Archaeology of mills and milling covets some of the same ground,butlargely from a British perspective, Storck and Teague’s Flourfor man’s bread covers the subject very briefly as does Bennett and Elton’s History of corn milling, but the twolatter works are now hopelessly out of date. Hopefully, therefore, this work will fill a lacuna. If it draws attention to the interest and importance of the subject and stimulates new work,it will have served a useful purpose.

XIV

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The writing of this book wasfacilitated by the award of a Leverhulme Emeritus Fellowship, which enabled a lifelong, if neglected, passion to be pursued. I am grateful to the Trust for this award and for the support of myreferees, Professor Alain Belmontand Professor Jeroen Poblome. Manypeople have helped me in this task and without them it would have been much more arduous. Chris Green topsthe list as he has produced the elegantline drawings which adorn the pages and edited the scans and photographs taken byothers, as well as contributing his own. Furthermore he has read every chapter, and his perspicacious insights have helped me eliminate manyerrors and consider aspects I would otherwise have neglected, although I alone am responsible for any errors and omissions. Lyn Cutler and Alison Moorealso read the whole volume and made manycorrections and suggestions for which the readerwill be as grateful as I am. Other colleagues have also read and commentedon individual chapters. ] am particularly grateful to Tim Anderson, Tertia Barnett, Matthew Johnson, AndyJones, Rob Scaife, Fraser Sturt, Martin and Sue Watts and David Williams, who have generously

shared their knowledge. While much of the research was done in the library, a numberof field visits have enabled meto clarify certain issues and to collect newdata. In Britain, David Allen of Hampshire Museum Service has put up with frequent visits to the Winchester store and facilitated the study in every way possible. Jon Iverson of Dover Museum was similarly helpful as were Keith Parfitt of the Canterbury Archaeological Trust and Marianne Eve of the British Museum. Paul Sealeyfacilitated access to Colchester querns and the Mashburymill, while in Chelmsford, Mark Atkinson and Hilary Major allowed meto see the important querns from Elms Farm in advance of publication. Also in East Anglia, Philip Wise of Ipswich Museum and John Davies of Norwich Castle Museum were similarly helpful. In France, I thank Mme Angélique Demon of the Service Archéologique de Boulogne, and M. Theirry Lepert of the Service Régional Archéologique de Normandie. In the Czech Republic I thank the many curators who have shown metheir collections and furnished me with published material I would otherwise have missed, including Dr Petr Holodnak (Zatec), Dr Jana Cizmarova (Brno), DrJiti Kalfest (Hradec Kralove), DrJan Jilek (Pardubice), Dr Ondiej Chvojka (Ceské Budéjovice)and Mer. Jaroslav Hadec (Teplice). In Slovakia, Dr Martin Kvietok showed me the collections in the Banska Bystrica County Museum. In Romania, I was helped by Dr Dan Buzea (Sf. Georghe), Dr Marius Ardeleanu (Baia Mare) and Dr Sandor Berecki (Targu Mures). In addition Dr Tamas Bezeczky kindly shared with me information on querns in Croatia and Austria. In Sicily I was helped by Professor Roger Wilson and Dr Martin Mohr (Monte Iato) and in Marsala by Dtt.ssa Maria Luisa Fama and Dtt.ssa Maria Grazia Griffo. I also thank Giandaniele Castangia for information about Sardinian querns and Sra. Battista Meloni of Mulargia, Sardinia, for showing me her collection of local millstones and allowing me to trample over her lower beds to photograph them.Janet and David Ralphs, mysister and brother-in-law, showed me a good sample of the cup-and-ring marks of the West Riding of Yorkshire, discussed in chapter 2.

Some of the illustrations derive from published works, but others are photographs taken by colleagues and acquaintances. I thank the National Museum of Northern Ireland (Ulster and Folk Transport Museum) for Fig. 2.2, taken by William Alfred Green at the turn of the XV

THE STONE OF LIFE nineteenth and twentieth centuries. I also thank Jocelyn Rendall for the Papa Westray quern (Fig. 2.6), Bob LemmonJr. for the photograph of the Indian Grinding Rock (Fig. 2.12), Roger Wilson for the Utica mill (Fig, 5.5), Lyn Cutler for the Winchester millstone (Fig. 9.2). Fig. 10.4 is an RTI photograph by Nicole Beale assisted by Hembo Pagi. Fig. 10.6 was taken by Rob Scaife and Tom Bishop. I must also thank Nicole Beale and Hembo Pagifor undertaking the Reflectance Transformation Imagining (RTI) discussed in chapter 10. Susan Katzevkindly gave permission for the reproduction of Fig, 3.4, originally photographed byJohn Veltri for the Kyrenia ship excavation and published in George Bass’ book, A history of seafaring. Robert Spain generously permitted the use of images used in his book, Tepower and performance of Roman watermills (Figs 6.6 and 6.8). Fig. 5.2, the painting Samson and the Philistines by Carl Bloch (1863), was made freely available by Statens Museum for Kunst, Copenhagen.

The frontispiece was originally thought to be a moneyer at work and was published as such

by John Porteous in his book Cozus. However,it clearly depicts the breaking of a Pompeiian style mill and I am grateful to Daria Lanzuolo and the Deutsches Archaologisches Institut in Rome for furnishing me with a high resolution image (Neg D-DAI-Rom 3091). Fig. 8.9, from Des artisans a la campagne by Timothy Anderson ef a/, is reproduced courtesy of the Service Archéologique de l’Etat de Fribourg, Switzerland. Fig, 8.4 is based on a plan byLeslie Butcher and the survey by Trevor Pearson and Alastair Oswald with kind permission of City of Sheffield Museums and English Heritage respectively. Fig. 9.1, from Le chant des meules by the late Guy Poitevin is reproduced with thanks to Kailash Editions. Renata Janktova kindly helped with translations from Czech. A shortened version of chapter 6 with a different emphasis has been published in the Journa/ of Roman Archaeology, Supplement 95. Finally, I must thank Hilary O’Shea of Oxford University Press and their two readers who made manyhelpful and positive comments on sample chapters. This book would have been pubished by OUP, but for my perverse demands. It is usual to conclude by thanking one’s wife for her forbearance during the preparation of a book. However, in this case she wouldlike to thank mefor the manyinteresting places that the search for querns and mills has taken us.

Xv1

1 INTRODUCTION I pity the man who can travel from Dan to Beersheba andcry, “Tis all barren’; - and so isall the world to him who will not cultivate the fruits it offers. Laurence Sterne A SentimentalJourney through France and Italy 1768 Querns and mills are common artefacts, to some, commonplace and uninteresting, and

yet despite this, in manysocieties, theyare vital to human subsistence. While interviewing modern Mayans of Guatemala, Michael Searcy (2011, 137) posed the question ‘whyare metates (grindstones) important to you’? Theinvariable answer, often in unison, was ‘mac’a li ca, mac’a’ li cua ‘no metate, no food’. Without this instrument food could not

be prepared. It is a simple device made of stones whicharetrulylife-giving. The quern and mill were just that in pre-Roman and Roman Europe and so this bookis entitled the ‘Stone of hfe’. Of course, it 1s perfectly possible to consumegrain without grinding as it can be prepared as the basis of a stew or porridge (p. 122), but flour is more versatile and easier to both transport and manipulate. Unfortunately, grain retains the germ and stone-ground flour hasfatty acids released from germ during grinding, which oxidise and go rancid when exposed to air, so neither can be kept for long periods. One solution is to bake the flour to form bread which, if desiccated, will keep for as long as

needed. In Egypt today, some households bakeat infrequent intervals and the breadis kept and eaten much later, softened with water if need be, as it gets harder andstaler.

The writer experienced this in 1987 in his first night in the desert at Mons Claudianus, Egypt. The lorry with food supplies failed to arrive and we were fed by the workers with bread they had brought with them from the Nile Valley which they soaked to soften it. While not a cordon bleu dish, it was nutritious and sustaining. In more humid climates bread maylast a few weeks, particularly if kept in a container such as the oldfashioned bread bin. However, more importantly, bread is the ultimate convenience food: a ready-prepared meal that can be carried on the person and eaten as hunger dictates without further preparation. Rawgrain would need cooking in a pot overa fire so it might be necessary to carry fuel and equipment, but equally importantly, it would take time to prepare. Even a pre-prepared cold dish would need a receptacle which might be troublesome to transport: bread was thus the original fast food permitting greater freedom and mobility. The modern sandwich, the ultimate meal for those on the move, has a long ancestry, beginning well before the eighteenth century when the Earl of Sandwich is reputed to have invented it. The baking of bread can be rankedas a major innovation, freeing humans from the household hearth and enabling them to spend more time doing things other than preparing and eating food, while at the same time enabling them to range further from home. It is not surprising that bread becamethestaple of the European diet from the Neolithic onwards and today a Europe without it is unthinkable. Bread is made from flour and flour needs a quern or mill to transform the grain: the quern takes on a newsignificance — two stones rubbing against one-another become an essential tool which supports life. The quern thus acquires an importance and symbolism which goes far beyondits original purpose. It is not by chance that querns and millstones often feature in ritual andreligion. 1

THE STONE OF LIFE The productivity of a quern will depend on twofactors,its design, and the rock of whichit is made. Of these the rock type is fundamental. A mortarium merely requires a hard rock which will not disintegrate when a substanceplaced in it is ground or pounded with a pestle of wood orstone. A quern demands something more: a hard rock which is rough, with hard and soft patches, which will remain so as it wears. If stone wears smooth it will need to be periodically roughened with a pounderorit will fail to cut the grain. Without this it may developa ‘ball-bearing’ effect where the stonesglide across one another lubricated with balls of uncut grain. The ideal rock for grinding is a vesicular lava with cavities left by trapped gasses, and these often develop particularly well in the upper part of lava flows. In use, the vesicles develop and retain sharp edges, which continue to cut the grain as the stone wears. In the absence oflavait is of course possible to use almost any reasonably hard rock with an uneven texture. A good example of an alternative stone, is the garnet-mica-schist from Hyllestad, on the Sogn Fjord, Norway, which was exploited over many centuries from the Viking era onwards. The rockis relatively soft, but the garnets are contrastingly hard and remain so as the quern wears; no doubtit is this trait which made it so desirable for so

long, However, if a rock is too soft, the stone may wear fast and need frequent replacement. The resulting flour will also be gritty and less palatable with detached mineral particles mixed in with the product. A really good quern will be hard andtake a lot longer to make, but it maylast through several generations andit will produce better quality, less polluted, flour. Thus, whilst almost any hard rock will serve for making a mortarium, the requirements for a quern are much morestringent.

Good quern rocks are in short supply, the more so when large millstones are being produced as the rock must have massive bedding and also be free of serious jointing so that large, thick discs

can be cut. Exceptionally, this need not be the case, for at La Ferté-sous-Jouarre, east of Paris and centre of the most important post-medieval industry in Europe,thesiliceous rock is onlyavailable as small pieces. It is so hard and with a cavernous texture that the rock is the ideal milling stone. The problem of size was overcomebysetting smaller pieces in a concrete matrix bound with iron bands thus forming large artificial composite millstone. Such mills were traded all over the world and the componentparts might be assembled locally to meet regional tastes and needs. However, this option demands good quality concrete and a skilled blacksmith to bind it and for these reasons this type of millstone does not appear until the post-medieval period. While lava is perhaps the ultimate choice, other suitable rocks for grinding include coarse sandstones with an uneven texture, gritstones and arkoses, hard silicified limestones with voidsorfossil cavities and conglomerates. In manycases the ideal was notavailable and hencelesser locally-available rocks would be put into

service.

Another factor affecting the choice of rock might be the quest for pure white flour, for it was generally foundthat a white stone would produce white flour, while a dark rock would inevitably yield a slight shade of grey due to fine particles incorporated in it. Traditionally white bread was the prerogative of the wealthy, while brown bran-tich bread was for the poorer classes —a situation whichis essentially reversed today, as the health conscious optfor bread with a higher fibre content. As Belmont(2011, 14) states, writing about the millstones of Claix in south-western France: The kmestone of Clair thereforeplayed an essential rile in obtaining a snowwhite bread, a bread that was synonymous nith refinement, power andgood taste, of which the elite of the 13th to 15th centuries were sofond. However, the ‘best’ milling rocks, whether the main characteristic was whiteness or hardness and

roughness, would be in demand over wide areas andthis acted as a catalyst for exchange and 2

INTRODUCTION ultimately trade. From the Roman period onwards, facilitated by the development of transport and a market system, rocks such as German Mayen lava developed a massive distribution shadow manyhundreds of kilometres across. The weight of mills and querns would always be a constraint and water transport would always be preferable to land. No doubt the popularity of Mayen mills was promoted bythe proximity of the river Rhine and of the North Sea. The shape and weight of querns and mills is also important as this affects its mode of operation and the productivity of the milling process. There are four main types: saddle querns, Olynthus mills (or hopper rubbers), rotary querns, and power mills driven by animal or human muscle or water. Mills and querns can be hard to differentiate as one type grades into the other and it maybe difficult to assess how a mill was driven from the stonesalone. There are no hard and fast rules, but querns, driven by hand, are usually less than 50 cm in

diameter, while anything greater than 60 cm is best regarded a power mill. However, this is not absolute, as weight is another factor. A 60 cm quern can be thin and relatively light so hand-turningis feasible, or it might be so heavythatthis is impossible. Weight is an ephemeral parameteras it changes throughthe life of the artefact, reducing as the rock wears awayuntil the mill or quern becomesineffective and is discarded. Inevitably, there remains an area of uncertainty and the terms “quern’or ‘mill’ tend to be interchangeable and cannot be defined exactly. However, the word quern usually denotes a hand operated device whereas a mill is usually, but not always, bigger and heavier. It is possible to speak of a hand mill but not of a powered quern. Each differs considerably in efficiencyas discussed in chapter7. Of the different forms of grinding apparatus, the saddle quern held sway for the longest period of time and can thus claim to be the most ubiquitous and important. However, there are manytypes of saddle quern ranging from whatis essentially a mortarium through rudimentary, unshaped querns to carefully designed and shaped ones. Equally, it can be difficult to distinguish a lower stone from an upper or hand-stone, sometimesreferred to as the rubber or muller. Where there is a problem,thestriations on the active surface maygive an indication, butall too often this detail is not seen or recorded. The reporting of saddle querns is often lax and it can be unclear which of thetypesis referred to. The derivative of the saddle quern, the Olynthus mill, and eventually the rotary quern, are technologically more demanding to make. A saddle quern can be shaped using a hammerstone and until recently Guatemalan metates were made this way(p. 134), but to make anything more elaborate would require iron instruments and if working the harder rocks, knowledge of how to temperiron would be necessary. The eye of a rotary quern, if not drilled, or the hopper of an Olynthus mill would be all but impossible without these aids. The central hole might be furnished with a rynd, a piece of metal or wood bridging the eye and pivoting on the spindle housed in the lower stone. The recess to accommodate the rynd might demand the precision that only a metal tool can give. Drilling can be performed using soft materials such as copper or even wood,using the debris from the process as a grinding medium on the principle diamond cuts diamond. However, it seems that both the Olynthus mill and the rotary quern rely on the readyavailability of iron technologyand this may be a determining factor in their adoption. Rotary querns also show considerable variation. Their weight andsize can dictate the way in which they were operated. Small querns might be suitable for turning by a woman sitting on thefloor or 3

THE STONEOF LIFE working at a table (Fig, 1.1), but larger ones might need two women or some mechanical aid to turn them, such as long rod, pivoted at the top. Some querns have no handle hole and were probably operated by a handle held in position byan iron bandor even a rope aroundthe circumference. The attribution of this task to the female sex is not chauvinistic, but a statement of normal observed

practice. Alternatively, if very heavy, the operator might walk round them capstan-style and this might involve men.

There has been somediscussion whether rotary querns might sometimes be usedin an oscillatory rather than a fully rotational mode. Rdderconsidered theywere operated as Pendelmiihlen oroscillating mills in the pre-Roman era, whereas in the Romanperiod full rotation was the rule (Crawford and Roder 1955, 70). Reynolds (1995, 312) suggested that asymmetric wear was characteristic of oscillatory movement which he claimed was quite different to the even wear created byfull rotation. However, the operators will unwittingly put greater pressure on the side nearest them, and so the position of the quern in use mayplaya role. Furthermore, oscillatory motion would

require increased effort to continually break the inertia of a heavy stone and rotary movement

would be the natural and efficient mode of use. It is curious that asymmetric querns seem to be more common in Britain than the rest of the Continent.

The work would be madeeasier and the mill or quern more efficient by senéering the upper stone. The gap between the two stones would be adjusted byliftng the upper oneslightly. This would permit the grain to flow more freely through the mill to the outer edge where mostof the grinding would take place. At the sametime this would reduce the friction between the stones, making them easier to turn. Various methodsof tentering might be adopted but in the case of querns, a hole in the lower stone can sometimesbeindicative. The spindle would beattached to a wooden bat which could be raised or lowered. This would connect with the rynd and so raise or lower the stone bya small increment. Thus the weight of the upper stone on the lower could be reduced (or increased) and in Shetland the device was appropriately knownas the ‘lighteningtree’, The two parameters, rock type and typology, should be studied in conjunction to give a full understanding of the quern. The quarryis the keyto providing a unified view linking thesetraits, but unfortunately our knowledge of quern quarriesis in its infancy. All too often quernsare described typologically with scant attention to the rock of which they were made. However, the twoare often inextricably intertwined and typological traits will be indicative of the quarryor region oforigin just as much as will rock type. For example, Curwen’s (1937) ‘Sussex style’ quern seemsto be a speciality of the quarry at Lodsworth near Petworth (Peacock 1987) and the majority can be assignedto that quarry. However, somelack the distinctive Lodsworth geological traits and it maybe that there are other quarries in the Lower Greensand, producingthis style, albeit probably in the samepart of Sussex. Until we know more of quarries it will be difficult to be certain. Curwen’s ‘Wessexstyle’ usually occurs in Upper Greensand rocks sometimes with phosphatic nodules, which implies a quarry or quarries in a different part of southern England,further to the west. Thus, typology and petrologyare equally important and need to be considered 1n conjunction. This book is designed as two distinct but overlapping sections. In the first part we will introduce different quern and mill types by focussing on typology, origin, chronology and technologicalattributes. We will begin with saddle querns, and their main European offspring, the Olynthus mill. We will then progress through rotary motion with the rotary quern, the

INTRODUCTION

THE STONE OF LIFE Pompeian-style animal mill and finally power mills, which will include other types of mill powered by animal or human muscle as well as watermills (conveniently a sang or a eau in French). Wind power was not used in Europe until the medieval period and thus lies beyond the chronological scope of this book. In the second section we will consider the organisation and technology of the quarry and the question of distribution mechanisms. Another chapter will review experimental work in an attemptto assess therelative efficiency of different mill and quern types. We will also consider the symbolic significance of mills and the way in which they were perceivedin preindustrial societies. Finally, we will examine methods and approaches, reviewing best practice in recording and scientific methods of characterisation. At the same time we will examine the potential of other approaches such as the analysis of residues, or the potential impact of stone on health.

2 IN THE BEGINNING: THE SADDLE QUERN AND THE ROCK MORTAR In this chapter we will discuss the simplest and oldest form of quern known variouslyas the saddle quern, grinding stone or grain rubber. The term saddle quernis preferred for this generic type. ‘Grain rubber’ presupposesa use for grain milling, which is not always the case, while ‘grinding stone’ could imply a sharpener or even a rock face used for this purpose. In America they would be called ‘metates’. The saddle quern is a portable stone used for milling although they maynot alwaysbestrictly saddle-shaped. They would be used with an upper stone alternatively called hand-stone, rubber, rubbing stone, muller or, in America, ‘mano’.

Both Hamon (2008b, Table 1) and Graefe (2009, 20-1) have usefully summarised European linguistic differences, but the term hand-stone will be adoptedhere. Introduction: ethnography Ethnographic evidence is comparatively sparse, but what there is suggests a complexity and an archaeological potential which far exceeds that currentlyrealised. We will attempt to introduce the subject of saddle querns by focussing on some recent European and African examples which lie closest to the theme of this chapter. There is, of course, more to be gleaned from adopting a broader canvas and thefinal section touches on the widerpicture. Ethnographic evidence is so important that we will return to it as the discussion develops. Central Europe and the Balkans Oneof the stranger folk stories of Transylvania concerns the familiar problem ofa beautiful princess taken captive by an evil dragon. However, the tale then takes an unusual twist, for the power of the dragonlay not in the beastitself, but was hidden in the forest. In the wood was a wild boar andin its head a hare and in the head of the hare was a box of wasps. It was here that the power was vested. The hero of the tale, a poor shepherd boy, set out to free the princess. After various adventures he found the box and took it home onhis five-legged horse. The box was then rubbed against a stone and the powerdissipated, so the shepherd could rescue the princess and be duly rewarded bythe king (Gunda 1961, 42). It seems possible that the box and the stone are an allegory of a quern, the buzzing of the wasps being reminiscent of the stone-on-stone grinding noise. If this is the case, and it is hard to think of a better interpretation, the tale emphasises the magical properties and the power of the quern, a theme to which wewill return later in chapter 9. Furthermore, the

description of the rubbing process might implya saddle quern rather than a rotary. Gunda (1961) uses this story as the prologue to a discussion of simple saddle quernsstill in use in the Balkans and central Europe well into the twentieth century. He discusses andillustrates such querns from Romania, Bulgaria, Poland, Hungary, Slovakia, Moravia and Byelorussia. Clearly their use, while sporadic, was very widespread. The types varied from region to region, but comprised, in essence, a slab of stone rubbed with a rounded river pebble. Sometimes the lower stones were made from broken millstones, emphasising their role as complementary technology. It may seem strange that this simple form of milling, which hasits roots in the Palaeolithic, should survive for so long over such wide areas despite the existence of more sophisticated 7

TELE STONE. OP LIFE means. However, it 1s a convenient, cheap andreadily available method for grinding small quantities, perhaps more related to the kitchen mortarium than the hand or watermill. Thus, the main use of these querns was in the householdor, particularly, the kitchen to grind commodities such as salt, sugar, pepper, poppy seeds or frozen potatoes, which, in household quantities, would have been uneconomicto process in a rotary quern or mill. Only

occasionally were they used for grain such as barley or maize. Otherparts of Europe

The use of this simple methodis not restricted to central Europe, because it is also to be seen in the southern Italian town of Matera. A display in a traditional house in the Sassi, the old town of Matera, shows a pounder anda saddle quernas part of the typical

household equipment in use up to the 1950s (Fig. 2.1). Their exact purpose is not made clear but the pounder, presumablyused for de-husking grain, suggests flour production as

one of the activities.

Saddle querns were also used up to the early twentieth century in Ireland. The Ulster Folk and Transport Museumpossesses a photograph of an old lady in County Antrim using one

to grind oats (Fig. 2.2).

Cardoso (1959) publisheda photograph of a woman working a caro/ada or flat saddle quern

to grind millet in the village of Santa Cruz da Trapa, Viseu, Portugal. There are sufficient indications to suggest that the use of saddle querns was widespread in the recent past of Europe.

Fig. 2.1: Modern saddle quern in the Sassi at Matera, Italy, approximately 40 cm across (photo: author) 8

6 SUIPUIIS dU] UT pasn aq prynoa sauoys Jaddn uasayyIp OA\T, ‘UII JOY UT asOYR UALO s{vA\Y JOU P]NOA ULUWIOM ¥ PUL PapsdU FI Spjoyssnoy IJ9YIO O} S9UO}IS PUI] OF ATVUTOISND SvA\ I] ‘Ss.JAayIOUW Tay} pasn [AS puv potsrew Auda dJd9A\ OA puv gol dui JO} PJO 00} aTdA\ UATIOA\ dy Jo OA :9U0}S SUT]OU pry INOF ATUG) ‘OAV pry sisans IvpNSai YWA\ asou puL spfoyssnoy JASIL] IMAM ‘JuOIs Suu suo pey /z ATUO paasasqo sun jua} OC JO IU sprIOdaI JOYOY ‘aimised 07 aimised woz paaour sJapsay oy) pur sjauvs oy ATUO puvsTfaA\ punore sdurv) Arvuoneis pawyojy AsayJO spray Joya YAN PaVIGIUU SaTUVy IYI Joy ssapAasayzq] OwU IJIM IID, SYJUOW A\aF V FO SP99dU9YI JOAOD ATUO Pynoar sdosd ay YSnoyYe‘ures svar aay UdYA\ UMOIS SVA\ JOTIYDTYA\ UT Pjay & pry awios pur sivos pur daays pey sproyasnoyauos Inq Sstapsoy [Pwd ATTeTseq a7dM\ spewWoU oY ‘UONLndod AviUapas ay] sv [JaA\ sv spewoU Aq pasn ‘Aysurstidins ‘atasuranb appes Injeq UssyIIOUUT yey savaddev iy ‘Iea, Sursvwepv puv oun jo asessed dy] uaats ‘pasuvyp svy sonovid ayi 1UaIX9 IWYA\ 01 IvIPD 1OUST pur OSL SIVIA (JZ JOAO SUONVAIISGO I[quNTVA IpPvuU(J66] ‘QQG6]) JOYOH{ pur uoypys ‘[vonuapr AyengasrAa rv sutanb usapour pur STyPOIN IayAr vIvYLS UIISvd dU UT UIs 9q 0} ST AVAISUO] IeTTUUTS UDPHY

IZ96 L OPMWWAAOH] wnoasnyy

yodsuviy. puv YO. Jis[A 9Yy2 JO UONDATIOD ‘puryposy UIDYIION suMasnyy [LUONVNG) (966/

-QZ8 1) Uae Pad MITE NY MG Udedpuy (unoy ul pagqvasojogd udsanb APPVS GSU] UABPOTNT ?7°7 “BLY

SUV.LYOW MOOY ANV SNUANO AIGAVS

THE STONE OF LIFE

of mullet, the first for coarse grinding, the secondfor fine grinding of the flour. The second was usually smaller and less hard than the first. The stones were usually metamorphic rocks with a high mica content, but the stone used in the second process wasof a finer texture. The stones were not procured bythe tribe, but bought at markets run by the sedentary Fur tribe. Here women both made and used the querns (Haaland 1997). In 1984/5 lower stones would cost £5 Sudanese, the uppers would cost £0.25 and £0.15 respectively for the first and second grinding processes. The cost of the lower stone would equate to about £8 at 2010 prices, and the uppers approximately 40p and 24p. The stones would be transported on camel-back but, in the 1980s, grinding equipment was gradually being given up by the nomads of northern Dafur as people turned to motorised mills available in the villages. Sometimes the stones would be used for purposes other than processing grain. Foodstuffs such as dried tomatoes, spices and onions, as well as medicines and cosmetics, might be ground. Salt, added to drinking water for animals, would be ground by men. The F~zrtribe would crush ochre and clay for pottery making, but this was not done by the nomads who did not make pottery. It would take about 75 minutes to grind sufficient flour for a meal for eight people. The stone would be placed on stones so that the upper end would be about 10 cm higher than the lower. About twice a month the surface would be roughened bythe women beating the surface with a hard quartzite stone. Nigeria Gronenborn (1994) has published an interesting paper showing the distribution of querns in the small village of Galaga in north-eastern Nigeria. Here the few housesare in pairs, one for the man, the other for his wife, and a saddle quern would be located outside the woman’s house. The exception was a womanliving alone who had her own quern while huts occupied by young girls looking after goats had no querns. The querns had a protrusion on the underside (rather like the Iron Age Napoleon’s hat variety from Mayen, p. 36 below). No doubt this was to hold them firmlyin the ground. Mah More recently Hamon and Le Gall (2011) have described, in detail, the production of saddle querns in Mali. These are quarried and produced for the market in a number of workshopsin the village of Farakoro (whichtranslates as ‘near the stone’). Used in association with pestles and mortars to grind millet and the components of sauces (leaves, fruits, fishes, spices), they

form part of a newly-wed’s dowryandplaya keyrole in founding a household.

This is a surprising survival, as mechanical mills are widely used in West Africa. Hammon and Le Gall describe the chaine opératoire of shaping, from the extraction of blocks in sandstone quarries to the final stages. Otherparts of the world In the Americas the lower stone of the saddle quern is known as the metafe and upper stone as the wano. The Indians north of the Pueblo region seem to have adopted simple dished or flat stones (¢.g. Webb Hodge 1912), but further south in the Aztec, Maya, Inca and neighbouring regions the mefates can be highly refined. They are superbly crafted from 10

SADDLE QUERNS AND ROCK MORTARS basalt lava and comprise concave rectangular tables on legs, with the rear higher than the front. Some of the early ones were elaborately decorated and clearly intended for ritual rather than domestic use. Thus, they are ornamented with animals such as felines, monkeys, crocodiles or serpents, perhaps representing deities (Stone and Balser 1957, 176). There are

a numberof different forms ranging from the legless variety to three and four legged ones and ones with or without rims, as Stone and Balser (1957) have described from Costa Rica. It is suggested that they may have had different purposes: the rimless variety was probablyfor grinding maize, the rmmedfor crushing tubers and peyvalle fruit. They remain the favoured means of milling, made byhighlyskilled specialist stone-workers, one of whom, working in Bajo, California, was described by Aschmann (1949). They were distributed widely through the market system and Cook’s (1976, 1982) study of production and marketing in the Mexican State of Oaxaca remains a classic analysis of mill making and marketing (p. 147). More recently Searcy (2005; 2011) has undertaken a detailed ethnoarchaeological study of metate production and distribution among contemporary Mayan communities of Guatemala. He gives insights into the transmission of manufacturing ideas from one generation to another and notes the wayin which the finished items can also be handed down from one generation to the next. He emphasises their importance in subsistence and that they are used almost exclusively by women with men sometimesstrictly prohibited. The record of use1s particularly useful. It appears that the me/ate is very muchpart of the total food preparation process as the dough is mixed on the mill as grinding proceeds and flour is immediately converted into paste by adding water. This intimate relationship between grinding and the finished item (in this case tortillas) may well explain whythe type has survived so long in the face of competition from more efficient commercial mills. Nepal provides a fascinating insight into the relationship of rotary and saddle querns, for both are in use often in the same household (Baudais and Lundstrom-Baudais 2002). The saddle querns are of two types: dished mortaria or long, flat (or slightly concave) shaped ones. They are multi-purpose and can be used for a wide variety of commodities, but the former maybe used for grinding spices and the latter for other purposes such as dried beans. Therotary mills, which include hand querns and watermills, are invariably used for grain, but

mortaria are never employed for this purpose. On the other hand,rotary mills are never used for e/eusine (birdsfoot or finger millet), which is cultivated for its grain.

In Australia, aboriginal querns usually comprise a slab of quarried sandstone, which may be roughly or sometimes neatly trimmed to shape — oval, pear-shaped or lenticular (McCarthy 1976, 59). Some are finished by pecking the surface with a hammer. They usually have a depression on the working surface or between one and four grooves. These maybe used for axe sharpening butalso for increasing the efficiency when grinding seeds. Theflat stones are particularly suited for wet grinding of soft grains. Alternatively, a large flat pebble may be used for multifarious tasks involving grinding or crushing or even sharpening. Conclusions

These insights, which are far from comprehensive, are of immense value in understanding

saddle querns found in archaeological deposits. They are clearly much more complex and sophisticated than their rough shape might imply. The following points emerge: 11

THE STONE OF LIFE

-saddle querns might be a guide to the numberof family units in a group and their intra-site distribution is potentially an important social indicator -they would have an intimate and direct relationship with the family unit and in some cases they mayhave formed part of a dowry -they are usually, but not always, made by men but operated by women -despite their rough and basic appearance they can be the object of trade and exchange -a lower stone might be used with multiple uppers -they are readily transportable and may have moved with the group -they may have had many purposes in the home, some of which can cross with those of rotary querns. Generally rotary querns, when available, will be preferred for grain -they are durable and in viewof their value may be handed down from one generation to another. Types of saddle quern Saddle querns are often indiscriminately grouped together and not properly analysed. Even Cecil Curwen sometimes simply reported that saddle querns were found in his excavations, but without further comment, description or illustration. This is a great

pity as the sub-varieties do matter and may indicate a variety of different social or economic milieu. One of the earliest attempts at a classification was that of Curwen (1937) who distinguished between the ‘grain rubber’, in which the grinding motion could be in any direction, and the true saddle quern, which was used with a to-and-fro movement. This

basic observation was later refined by Storck and Teague (1952, fig. 18), who suggested a scheme for pounders and querns based on the motions used (here Fig. 2.3). The first is the pounder rubber with indiscriminate motions (A); the secondis the tall mortar with up-and-down motion (B); the third is the small mortar with round-about motion and some pounding (C); while the remainder (D and EF) are of the saddlestone — metate variety, characterised by to-and-fro motion. A rather similar scheme, but concentrating on the ‘basin metate, has been proposed by Adams (1999; 2002) for the American south-west.

French archaeologists, working in the shadowof Leroi-Gourhan (1971), have tended to concentrate on the mode of hand movementas the key diagnostic feature (e.g. Hamon 2008b; Milleville 2007; de Beaune 2004). An alternative approach is to construct a

classification based primarily on morphology. This is well exemplified by the work of Karen Wright (1992) in her study of grindstones from the prehistoric Levant. Her system is elaborate and the major divisions of the material relevant hereare:

A. Grinding slabs/querns.

B. Mortars. C. Hand-stones (upper stones). Within these headings she recognises fourteen varieties of grinding slabs or querns, nine types of mortar and 40 varieties of hand-stones. This is undoubtedly useful in the field, but to employit here would obscure the broad picture, which is where the interest and broader significance of quernslie. 12

SADDLE QUERNS AND ROCK MORTARS

Fig. 2.3: Pounders and querns according to Storck and Teague (see text abovefor description) Oneof thefirst attempts at morphological classification was that of Hurlimann (1965). He worked on material from a lacustrine settlement on the Greifensee, in Switzerland, and identified six types of stone, without distinguishing upper and lower: I. Il. II. IV. V. VI.

Long axis convex, transverse convex (7 large and 10 small examples). Long axis concave, transverse convex (5 large and 34 small examples). Longaxis flat, transverse convex (10 large and 12 small examples). Long axis concave, transverse flat (19 large and 10 small examples). Longaxis flat, transverse flat (20 large and 25 small examples). Long axis concave, transverse concave (5 large and 3 small examples).

The figures suggest that types IT, IV and Vare the most important, I, III and VIless so. With regard to the upper stones, Hurlimann suggested that the small specimens of type I might have been used with the large stones of type VI. The large and small stones of type Vfit pretty well together. The large specimens of type IV might be used with small stones of type II. A rathersimilar, but more user-friendly system has been proposed by Zimmerman (1988) and now Graefe (2009), who adopt the threefold classification of Neolithic querns summed in Fig. 2.4. In form 1, the upper stone is longer than the width of the lower, the cross-section of the lower is convex and the long axis of the upper has a concave working surface. In form 2, the upper stonejust fits the width of the lower stone and both have flat working surfaces. In form 3, the upper stone is shorter than the width of the lower. The lower stone is concave and the upper has a convex working surface.

13

THE STONE GP LIPE FORM |]

FORM 2

3a free

FORM 3

te

SRA Seaeee ae i Ns $9 Sais, AAKaeSe sire ogy 5

3b fixed v7

=v

WAERS ‘ weetRENN a ins UESSEANEeaie WMSraat t

Fzg. 2.4: Zimmerman/Graefe systemforclassifying saddle querns(see text). Twosub-forms are recognised: 3a, with a free upper stone and 3b, with the upper constrained in a trough in the lower. Hand-stones can always be distinguished from lower stones as the former will have use striations across the length while lower stones will have themalong the length. All too often this important detail is omitted from quern reports.

Connolly (1994) classified Irish querns by the shape of the lower stone: ovoid, pear shaped and elongate, of which there were two sub-varieties, trapezoidal and sub-rectangular. This system is easy to apply, but perhaps over-influenced bythe fortuitous initial shape of the raw material used. Runnels (1981) was generally dealing with deliberately shaped querns and distinguished

square/rectangular, ovate and elliptical forms, the latter having a hemispherical or carinated cross-section.

Here we will attempt a classification built on previous attempts, but the over-riding criterion will be morphology, particularly that of the lower stone, as in archaeology we can seldom be certain of the hand movements usedin the past and upperstones are often difficult to relate to the lower. These are all grinding devices, although this does not preclude anyof the following

types being subject to pounding from time to time, usually shown bytypical percussion pock marks on the surface. Onthis basis it is possible to recognise six distinct types (Fig, 2.5): Type 1. Flat slabs. Type 2. Dished querns (Curwen’s grain rubbers). Type 3. Concave irregular slabs. ‘Type 4. Shaped querns: these maybe,ideally, an approximationto: T4a. Rectangular. T4b. Ovate.

T4c. Elliptical. The latter may have a flat, hemispherical or carinated transverse crosssection Type 5. Convex querns. Type 6. Trough querns.

Type 1: The flat slab As noted above, most of the querns used in the recent past of central Europe are of this type. Many querns might start in this way and eventually develop a concavity, but a true

concave mill will be markedly concave along both the long andthe short axes andthis 1s unlikely to develop strongly without design. The flat quern could be used tn anydirection, with or without 14

SADDLE QUERNS AND ROCK MORTARS

Fig. 2.5: Proposed typology of saddle querns. Type 1, Runnymede; Type 2, Turnershall Farm, Hertfordshire; Type 3, Irchonwelz, Belgium; Type 4, Aegean (notto scale); Type 5, Chapon-Seraing, Belgium; Type 6, Carn Glas, Ross-shire (after Needham and Spence 1966, Constantin et al. 1978;

Runnels 1981, Close-Brooks 1983)

a poundingaction. This varietyis likely to be a domestic product used in a domestic situation. The stone is almostalways local and they seem to be an opportunistic product, produced onsite from whatever was available. This form is equivalent to Zimmerman and Graefe’s form 2 above. The date range extends from the Palaeolithic to the present day. Type 2: Dished querns This is a highlydistinctive type comprising a stone with a shallow bow!-shaped depression, almost 15

THE STONE OF LIFE always of a locallyavailable rock; if found outside its natural area, it could indicate the movement of people rather than exchange. This type was aptlyreferred to as the ‘saucer’ quern by Childe (1942). It would be used with a pebble as an upper stone andthis could be movedin anydirection. Pounding wouldalso be feasible. It is basically a mortarium suitable for processing small quantities in the kitchen or home. It ranges in date from the Palaeolithic to the presentday. Type 3: Concave slabs These are longslabs of rock with a concavityboth laterally and longitudinally. Theydiffer from the abovein their overall length and shape. The stone mayalso have someevidence of basic trimming, but usuallythey are not well finished. The rock is sometimes local and sometimes imported to the region as they can be produced in specialised quarries. This type is equivalent to Zimmerman and Graefe’s form 3a above. Theyrange in date from the Neolithic to the present day. Lype 4: Shaped querns These are similar to type 3, but they are clearly dressed and may be roughly rectangular, ovate or elliptical. They maybe flat or slightly concave longitudinally and flat or convex laterally. They sometimes have a marked carination or keel, presumablyto facilitate setting into the ground. The rockis almost always from a specialised quarry region. Theyrange in date from the early Neolithic in the Aegean butdo not generally appear until late Bronze Age or the Iron Age in northernlands. Type 5: Convex querns This type has a lower stone which is markedly convex laterally and flat or slightly concave longitudinally. They have a roughly triangular cross-section. The upper stone is the key feature, as this is a shaped stone with a concave grinding surface and shows wear across rather than alongits length. A marked lip often developsat the edges. This type equates with Zimmerman and Graefe’s form 1 above. This seemsto be a highlyspecialised variety restricted to the Neolithic and perhaps to the Linearbandkeramk culture. Type 6: Trough querns These are similar to type 3 but the grinding takes place in a marked trough, which can be open ended to permit egress of the flour. The upper stone can be a pebble or purposely dressed. The stones are usuallylocal and they seem to be a local product in most cases. This type equates with Zimmerman and Graefe’s form 3b above. The origin of saddle querns Sophie de Beaune (2004) has cogently argued that this type of mill may have its ongins in the LowerPalaeolithic, perhapsas early as 77,000 years ago. There is no evidence of grinding at this early stage, but pebbles and anvils sometimes show thetell-tale marks of, what Leroi-Gourhan (1971) called, ‘thrusting percussion’. This pounding action would be usedin, for example, cracking nuts and, interestingly, the tools used by chimpanzees, early hominids or modern humansdisplay identical traits. Pounding continued to be used, but in the Upper Palaeolithic it was sometimes accompanied by a grinding action, and there is now evidence that this was employed to process the seeds of wild grasses. The study of phytoliths (p. 188 below) and starch grains preserved in the surface of querns has shown this to be the case at Ohalo in Israel (Piperno et a/ 2004), at Bilancino in Italy (Aranguren ef a/, 2007) and at Cuddie Springs in Australia (Fullagar and Field 1997). It seems that this innovation arose about 25-30,000 years ago. Sophie de 16

SADDLE QUERNS AND ROCK MORTARS Beaune (2003) has suggested, on the basis of discoveries at Arcy-sur-Cure in Burgundy, that grinding stones of Chatelperronian date (32,000 years) employed for preparing ochre, may have been used by Neanderthalers, which, in turn, suggests that grinding was not necessarily an innovation associated exclusively with Homo sapiens. Of course, the process was notrestricted to grain: tubers would be ground to removetoxinsorfibre, or red ochre would need grinding to produce pigment. Most of these early querns are of the dished multidirectional variety. The moreefficienttoand-fro motion, demanding an elongate quern, may have been used occasionally. However, it is not unul 10,000 years ago that specialised forms begin to appear at sites such as Mureybet and Cheikh Hassan in Syria (e.g. Nierlé 1982). Even so, to-and-fro motion may have been the exception rather than therule. We would expect querns to be similarly used during the Mesolithic, but there is a dearth

of evidence from Europe and undetr-representation has been stressed by a number of

workers (eg. Lidstrom Holmberg 2004; Zvelebil 1994). Childe’s (1956, 80) explanation maystill apply: Yet one quern, representing perhaps 0.2% of the stonework from a site, would on current definitions, suffice to transfer the whole assemblagefrom the Mesolithic to the Neolithic bracket. However, querns are known from Mesolithic Scandinavia and many seem to have been of our type 2, used for both percussion and grinding. This seems clear from Lidstrom Holmberg’s (2004, 206) description: ...¢hese querns generally consist of concave quern slabs with short rounded hand-stones displaying both pounding and grinding use-wear. Alternatively, cobblestones might be used as quern slabs, such as one from Myskdalen, Sweden, dated to 4800-4300 BC. Mikkelsen (1984, fig. 2) described a third type from a Mesolithic dwelling place at Frebergsvik 1 Borre, Vestfold, Norway, comprising smooth, thin, polished pieces of hard sandstone or quartzite. This would equate to our flat quern (type 1). Of course, Mesolithic querns need not have been used exclusively for processing wild seeds: they could have been employed for grinding shells, minerals or even edible algae. Querns are more commonlypresent in the Epipalaeolithic. This term is almost equivalent to ‘Mesolithic’ but is usually reserved for cultures less affected bythe retreat of the ice. For example, Valla ef a/ (1999) record a quern in the Epipalaeolithic Natufian of Israel, while Wendorf and Schild (1976) mention their use for grinding plants in the Egyptian Fayum. Dubreuil (2004) has made a comprehensive study of wear marks on 166 Natufian grinding stones and found them compatible with the grinding of legumes and cereals. Runnels (1981) recorded a fragment of what maybe a dished quern from Mesolithic contexts in the Franchthi cave in Greece. The querns used in the Mesolithic Capsian culture of Tunisia seem also to be of our type 2. The Neolithic In the Levant around 10,250 BP (8300 BC), the Natufian seems to have given wayto the Neolithic, the main difference being a gradual transition from hunter-gathering to hunterfarming (Finlayson and Warren 2010). The need for grinding would have been virtually identical, the only change being a switch from wild to domesticated grain. Consequently, 17

LHE STONE OF LIFE

Neolithic querns may differ little from their predecessors. Nevertheless, it is in the Neolithic that we see the first major innovations in milling, with refined elongate saddle querns operatedin a to-and-fro manner(types 3, 4 and 5 above). The dishedvarieties (type 2) continued to be used and in some parts of the world, such as the British Isles, they were never superseded during the entire span of the Neolithic. The causewayed enclosure at Etton, near Peterborough, is fairly typical. Seven examples are illustrated, all of them

type 2 dished querns and they are accompanied by three hand-stones (Pryor 1998, 25760). Barford, on the other side of England, tells much the same story (Oswald 1965) and

numerous other examples could be cited.

In Scotland, many querns appearto be of the troughvariety, a type that seems to have been

typical of successive periods and not just the Neolithic. A fine example was excavatedat

the Neolithic settlement of Knap of Howar, on Papa Westrayin the Orkneyarchipelago,

and Ritchie (1983, Pl. 7 c, d) illustrates it alongside a dished quern (Fig, 2.6). Similar trough mills are known from Skara Brae andothersites in Scotland (Close-Brooks 1983). Some of the grind stones from Knap of Howar showclear evidence of percussion, perhaps to break open shell fish or bones rather than nuts and seeds. The querns, often made from boulders, are reminiscent of Scandinavian Mesolithic stones.

In Irelanda fine dished quern was found reusedin a Neolithic passage tombat Baltinglass Hill, county Wicklow (Cooney 1981). In the previous decade Connolly (1994) reviewed the evidence for saddle querns in Ireland, but of the 250 recorded, very few could be firmly dated to the Neolithic. Nine querns were recorded from the Neolithic house at Balleygalley, County Antrim, but only three were in secure Neolithic contexts. All appear to be ofthe dishedvariety.

Fig. 2.6:Quern at Papa Westray, Orkney Islands, approximately 80 cmlong (photo: | Rendall) 18

SADDLE QUERNS AND ROCK MORTARS The dished quern is best seen as a culinary tool, ideal for processing small quantities for the individual family or other unit. The elongate querns imply the need to process more grain more efficiently and to make flour rather than to simply crack the grain. In short, the demand wassuch that it was worthwhile for the more skilled stone workers to process less grain themselves and to concentrate on their craft. The types of quern employed and the way in which they were distributed can be explained in terms of the importance of flour and flour-based products, such as bread, in the local diet. If this is accepted,it gives a valuable tool for assessing the nature of the Neolithic diet. This, in turn, leads to a consideration of how ingrained crop farming was and howit ranked in importance with hunting and gathering or animal rearing. On the basis of the querns, it would appearthat flour and bread was not a major componentin the British Neolithic. Perhaps it was more akin to the Mesolithic economywith, perhaps, sporadic crops here and there. The role of crop growing is itself a matter of continuing debate which can becrystallised in two seminal papers. In 1989, Moffet, Robinson and Straker published a reviewof the botanical evidence for the Neolithic economyin which they envisaged minimalagriculture and maximum use of nuts, fruit and other wild plants. The Neolithic would have differed

but little from the preceding Mesolithic. In 2007, Jones and Rowley-Conwyrevisited the subject in the light of a wealth of new work undertaken in the intervening years. They drewattention to taphonomicissues — in particular, why the ubiquitous hazel nut shell was so often a feature of assemblages. Theyargued that it was a waste product often disposed of by throwing onfires and thuslikely to be preserved in a charred state, so hazel nuts tend to be exaggerated in consideration of Neolithic diet. Charred grain, on the other hand, resulted from an accident rather than waste disposal; hence any deposits would represent the tip of an iceberg, composed of uncharred grain. They concludedthatcereal cultivation was central to the British Neolithic economyand could not be written off as a special crop destined for ritual ceremonies. Thus opinion has changed, although each side has its archaeological adherents and there is no agreed consensus, perhaps, in part, due to the variable nature of the

archaeological record. Grain needs some form of processing and it is here that the quern evidence enters the argument. British Neolithic querns are, without exception, of the dished variety (type 2) or the related trough type (6). The former have their origins in the Palaeolithic and would be little better than a kitchen mortar. They would be very suitable for pounding, cracking grain or even grinding but not for serious flour production. It is hard to see how extensive flour production could rely so totally on this rudimentary instrument. It would seem to indicate that either cereal growing was less important than Jones and Rowley-Conwyclaim or, more probably, that flour and, consequently, bread was not a major item of Neolithic diet. Grain may have been

grown in quantity but it was not consumed as bread(p. 122). The picture on the Continent is rather different. Harsema (1979) has discussed Neolithic mills in the Dutch province of Drenthe where, like Britain, the scene is dominated by dished querns. He was, perhaps, the first to note that more advanced types are associated with Linearbandkeramik [LBK] settlements. The LBK culture, dating between 5400 and 4900 BC, stretches from the Ukraine

to the Paris basin and is generally thought to have comprised the first true farming communities, responsible for the introduction of agriculture to Europe. 19

THE STONE OF LIFE

Fug. 2.7: Some Neolithic querns. a, Langweiler 8 querns; b, hand stonefrom a Langweiler long quern; 6, Aegean shaped quern; d, Cucuteniculture quern and hand-stonesfrom Pauleni Cuic, Romania (after Zimmerman 1988; Runnels 1981 andphoto by author)

There is no doubtthat the stone assemblages from these sites are quite different from anything seen in Britain, as exemplified by Zimmerman’s (1988) fine report on the stone from Langweiler8, a settlement in the Dien area of Germany. Here the dominant quern is the long shaped variety, often concave longitudinally (type 3 and 4 above) (Fig, 2.7a). Surprisingly, this form of quern often displays a lateral camber, in other words, a small degree of transverse convexity (type 4). Thisis a curious anomaly but, on closer examination, it appears to be a feature of many shaped querns

and mustbe deliberate. It might be considered an undesirable trait, butit is a persistent feature of

the shaped quern and by no meansrestricted to the LBK.Atfirst sight we might expect the grain to slip off the slab during grinding, but, if the camberis slight enough, this does not happen, but tather the bran drifts to the edge and is morereadily separated (Samuel 2009). These querns are thus much more sophisticated and technologically advanced than their basic shape might suggest. Theyare present in most LBKsettlements (¢g. Geleen-Jankampfeld in the Netherlands (Verbaas and van Gijn 2007) or the Paris basin (Hamon 2009) to cite but two). Once introduced the type remained a favourite and appears, for example, in the later Neolithic Funnel Beaker [TRB] culture of Scandinavia. It does not appear in Britain until the late Bronze Age.

In the Paris basin the earliest Neolithic used dished querns of our type 2, which were replaced with types 3 and 4 with thearrival of LBK (Hamon2009). Another type of quern which appears in the LBK groupis type 5 above. This consists of a long, laterally convex, base stone and a short concave upper, distinguished by transverse rather than longitudinal wear. The type wasfirst described from the Omalien of Belgium, a branch of LBK (Destexhe-Jamotte 1951), and is sometimes known as the ‘ong quern’ (Hamon 2008a) (Fig. 2.7b). Asfar as is known,this form is restricted to LBK andallied cultures, butit is possible that the form will be foundelsewhere, as unless the transverse wear is recognised, the upper stones could be mistaken for very short lower ones. 20

SADDLE QUERNS AND ROCK MORTARS Further south Milleville (2007) has discussed the querns from the lacustrine settlements along La Combe d’Ain in the Jura, situated on glacial lakes at the upper limits of grain cultivation. The settlements date between 3900 and 2550 BC and canbe attributed to the middle Neolithic and its successors (Cortaillod-Port Conty, Horgen, Ferriéres). The querns are oval or elongate in shape, but somewhat smaller than those usually encountered on terra firma. Most would, however, have been operated with a to-and-fro motion and a good number have a convexactive surface, placing them between types 3 and 4 as defined. In the Aegean, Neolithic querns seem to be of a verydistinctive and uniform type: a well shaped,rather thin oval or rectangular form often showing marked concavity. Runnels (1981) illustrated examples from Lerna and from the Franchthi cave and these correspond almost exactly with the ovates reported by Takaoglu (2005) from the early Neolithic settlement of Coskuntepe, in the Troad region of Turkey (Fig, 2.7c). On the northern and western shores of the Black Sea, over an area stretching from Romania to the Ukraine and southern Russia, the highlight of the late Neolithic is the Cucuteni— ‘Tripolye culture. Here the querns are long but used with small hand-stones (Fig, 2.7d). This might represent a transitional stage in the developmentof type3.

This theme could be pursued profitably throughout the Neolithic cultures of Europe, but to

do so here would unbalance a book of this nature. Sufficient has been said to demonstrate that there is a very close correlation between thearrival of intensive agriculture and more sophisticated quern types. It seems that the idea of flour and bread making was introduced from the east, but that this did not penetrate Atlantic regions until muchlater.

Neolithic querns in action It is clear from ethnographic models that, if we are to understandthe social significance of querns, we must know something about howtheyare distributed across a settlement. Was the pattern one per household oris there a concentration in particular places suggesting a degree of specialisation? Here there is a problem as, apart from LBK settlements,

comparatively few Neolithic houses have been fully excavated and often their preservation is so poor that, in Britain and neighbouring parts of the Continent, we are grateful to recognise a single structure. Exceptions to this are to be seen in the remarkable finds from the Alpine lakes where preservation is good enough to discern the pattern of housing within whole villages. Many were excavated years ago before recording had been fully developed, but those around lakes in the Combe d’Ain are the exception as they have been meticulously excavated and recorded by Petréquin and his colleagues. Milleville (2007) was thus able to study the intra-site distribution of querns. Unfortunately, there was a complication as many of the querns had been broken and discarded and thus they were not in their original position of use. Nevertheless, by judicious appraisal of the data she was able to show that in somecases (¢.g. Chalain 2C) there may have been one per household, elsewhere there may have been one for every two houses(e.g. Chalain 3 villages VII and VI). In others (such as Chalain 19O) there appeared to be two concentrationsat specific parts of the village. This suggests some degree of specialisation with perhaps one household grinding for their neighbours orrelatives. Alternatively, it could be that querns were lent between households as in the recent past of Sudan. Hamon (2009) has studied the LBK and Villeneuve-Saint-Germain (VSG) sites of the 21

THE STONE OF LIFE Paris basin where 117 houses across 16 sites were excavated. These yielded a total of 260 querns, suggesting that every household hadat least one quern, in manycases two or more. It seems, therefore, that in north-west Europe grinding was generally a domestic activity and there waslittle or no craft specialisation. However, this does not seem to be the case in southeast Europe. Particularly striking is a remarkable discovery at Medgidia in Romania, where a building has been excavated which appears to be a specialised mill house (Hartuche 1981; here Fig. 2.8). It dates to the late fifth or early fourth millenntum BC and has been ascribed to the Gumelnita culture. Thus it may be Chalcolithic rather than Neolithic (Monah 2002). The building was rectangular, 8 m by 10 m, and had three saddle quernsset in the floor on clay seatings. Around the periphery were eight pottery storage jars. An adjacent room had a large hearth, perhaps for drying or parching grain. This may have been a communal mill

Fig. 2.8: Reconstruction of the Medgidia mill house, after Hartuche (1981). Theposition of apossible secondary partition 1s shown 22

SADDLE QUERNS AND ROCK MORTARS

Fig. 2.9: Hittite milling at Karatepe, Adana, southern Turkey. Reconstruction based on excavated remains house to which families would cometo grind grain, or it might representthe first specialist millers. There is, however, a problem with the plan as the double quern setting is too close to the wall for comfortable operation from behind — the natural working position (Samuel 2009). This suggests that the partition wall could be a secondaryfeature and notpart of the original working mill; as Monah (2002) states, similar but less spectacular discoveries have been made at Poduri, also in Romania. At Medgidia two of the querns were set side by side, perhaps for use by two people simultaneously, but more probably, as they were rather close together, so that both hands could be used bya single person. A very similar system was used at a muchlater date in the Hittite city of Karatepe, near Adana in southern Turkey (Fig. 2.9). Thus the presence of multiple querns in a building could be indicative of this type of usage. The exchange of Neolithic querns Dished querns are generally made of local rocks, although there maybe regional differences (e.g. between the Paris basin and Wessex). Those in Wessex are usually of sarsen, the only really hard stone available. This was formed in the Palaeogene, but is now seen as residual boulders whichlitter the Chalk Downland and, no doubt, these would have been more readily

available in the Neolithic. At Maiden Castle in Dorset a dished puddingstone quern was found to have originated in the Plateau of St-André, south of Evreux, a distance of over 300 km from the find spot (Peacock and Cutler 2010). If weare right in assumingthat British dished querns were locally-made domestic tools, this would seem to indicate that the French quern 23

THE STONE OF LIFE

arrived amongthe chattels of an immigrant family rather than as an object of trade. Interestingly, reconsideration of radiocarbon dates provides independent corroborative evidence for immigration (Collard et a/. 2010, now supported by Whittle e¢ a/ 2011). Fiona Roe (2009) has discussed the sources of Neolithic querns used in southern England. Local materials such as sarsen were widely used, but some rocks were clearly considered desirable and were transported over some distance. Thus the MayHill sandstone from northern Gloucestershire was used 40 km away from the outcrop. The same is true of Old Red Sandstone from the Mendips, found at Hambledon Hill in

Dorset. It seems that 40 km is normally the maximum that can be expected.

With the arrival of shaped querns the situation changed rapidly. The quern was no longer part kitchen mortarium,but a serious instrument for more efficiently processing grain. Thus, the property of the rock was important and good quern rocks would be sought and exploited. To what extent these quarries were producing and exchanging rocks or the finished artefact, as opposed to the outcrops being visited by persons or groups in need of new querns, is unclear.

Milleville (2007) has made a careful petrographic study of the sources of rocks used in the Neolithic settlements of the Combe d’Ain. The massif of Serre, 60 km to

the north, seems to have been a major source, furnishing both granite and Triassic sandstone, while limestone was generally of local origin. Subarkose outcrops 20 km away in the Rhaetian of Miéry. Other rocks, such as leucogranite and the greywackes, are mote difficult to place, but the latter may originate somewhere on the Swiss plateau. Her work provides a clear demonstration of the importance of finding the right rock and it is no longer the case of anything local will do. In the Paris basin the more distant rock sources of the earliest Neolithic seem to have been replaced with more local ones on the arrival of LBK — presumably as demand increased and the newsettlers became better acquainted with their local resources. Hamon (2009) sums the situation admirably: The arrival of late L.BKpopulations in north-western Europe (Hainaut, Hesbaye and the Paris Basin) was accompanied by a change in the functional and symbolic practices related to grinding stone tools. Contrary to former L.BK practices, grinding tools were bythis time no longer objects of long-distance exchange or circulation. Instead, they were made quastsystematically of local sandstones of pretty high quality or of localgranites on the western or southern periphery of the sedimentary Paris Basin (Normandy, Yonne). In Hessen, Germany, Ramminger (2008) states that the LBK inhabitants of the Morlener Bucht imported Triassic sandstone from up to 40 km away. As there is no production waste or rock without traces of wear on site, quern making must have taken place in the quarries. This would make economic sense as maximum reduction of the rock at source would ease the problem of transporting such heavymaterial. On the other hand, Graefe (2008) suggests that in north-western Germany, 12 different rock types (sandstones and granite) were imported from distances ranging between 5 and 60 km away. Rough trimming would take place in the quarries with finishing completed in the settlements.

24

SADDLE QUERNS AND ROCK MORTARS Neolithic quern quarries It is clear that, during the Neolithic, the first attempts were made to seek and exploit rocks with particularly good grinding properties. Unfortunately, these would usually be sought by later millers so that the Neolithic evidence is, at best, obscured and, at worst, eliminated by

later exploitation. For this reason Neolithic quern quarries are a great rarity. In Germany, Graefe (2009, 119) encountered exactly this problem when trying to determine the precise quarries of the Neolithic querns encountered on settlement sites. Although geological considerationsled to the identification of the rock or geological formation (usually sandstone or more rarely granitic rock), evidence for Neolithic working was rare. The same applied to Britain and, while six Neolithic quarrysites are known,theyare all concerned with axes and none with querns. The mosttelling evidence for the first systematic quern quarrying comes from the environs of the early Neolithic settlement of Coskuntepe, in the Troad of Turkey (Takaoglu 2005). Dated to around 6000 BC, the material comes not from excavation but from surface survey, as a result of which most finds were not /w stu but built into modern field walls. The rocks sought and exploited for quern making were of igneous origin, among which andesites or basalt were generally preferred. These occur naturallyas blocks lying around in the area and could beeasily exploited without the need to quarrythe living rock. They were worked with basalt hammer-stones which often had a medial groove, presumablyto facilitate halfting. The sequence suggestedis: coarse flaking to make a rough-out which would then be shaped into a quern pre-form by pecking, after which the surface would be smoothed bygrinding. The aim was to produce an elegant shaped oval quern. Two of Takaoglu’s illustrations suggest that the familiar transverse camber on the working surface was part of the design. Thus, even at this early date, it seems that technologically advanced querns were being made, no doubt because the extent of cereal growing warranted it. Radiocarbon dating suggests that the earliest Neolithic in this region would have been established between 8-6000 BC, which correspondswell with the quern evidence(¢.g. Turney and Brown 2007). The Neolithic quarries of the Massif de la Serre, in the French Jura, have been studied

and excavated by Jaccottey and Milleville (Jaccottey 2011). Material would have been dug with picks from the scree. Selected blocks would then be knapped to shape with quartzite hammer-stones, coarsely then finely, after which the grinding surfaces would be carefully adjusted. Most of the rock exploited was sandstone and onlyrarely was the harder granite worked. Similar exploitation, with numerousdiscarded saddle quern roughouts, has been identified at

Rossbusch,in the German Eifel, the most undisturbed quarryin the region (Horter 1994,14, 107). Here a boulderfield seems to have been worked for saddle querns, whichare difficult to date: some could be of Neolithic date but many are more probably Iron Age. Thereare also hard rock workings ofthe thirteenth to fifteenth centuries AD, further complicating the picture. Bloxam (2011) has given an account of the quarries on the west bank of the Nile, at Aswan in Egypt. Over a stretch of about 12 km of hyperarid desert, between Wadi Kubbaniya and the Aswan Old Dam,is an extensive series of old workings in hard quartzitic sandstone. Both querns and ornamental pieces were produced from this rock. It appears that grinding stone production changed butlittle over a period of about 16,000 years, from the late Palaeolithic (18,400-18,100 BP) into the early Roman period (30 BC). The term ‘quarry’is notreally appropriate, as the evidence 25

THE STONE OF LIFE

appears in the form of small sand-filled working hollowsset in a field of loose sandstone blocks.

Bloxam doesnotdetail the typologybut it appears that the New Kingdom saw the production of beautiful boat-shaped querns compared with the somewhat simpler and cruder stones of earlier and later periods. All the evidence we have to date suggests that Neolithic quarrying involved the exploitation of loose blocks rather than hard rock extraction, presumably because this was deemed unnecessary and too difficult. Hamon documents similar extraction in the Paris basin (Boyer e¢ a/ 2006) and the exploitation of moraine is seen in the Vosges, as well as along the shores of the Swiss lakes (JJaccottey 2011). Conclusions: Neolithic querns and the spread of agriculture It is evident from the above that the development of the elongate to-and-fro quern seems

to correlate closely with a demand for flour products among which bread might be of prime importance. This, in turn, might also imply increasing cereal growing, perhaps at the expense of

husbandry. Indeed,it could be that the arrival of this quern typeis an indicator of the importance of both bread and cereals in the economy. What is now needed1s to see how well finds of charred grain correlate with quern types. Here there are major problems, largely of a taphonomic nature, as the two types of evidence are seldom found in the same contexts. As Jones and Rowley-Conwy (2007) point out, charred grain is usually the result of an accident. Quernsare often discarded when broken, but they are tough and breaking maybe deliberate for ritual reasons (see chapter 9). Grain

will last for a season or so but a tough quern can be used through manygenerations before it is worn out. Thus, it maystill be in use if cereal growing declined or even if more advanced methods of processing becameavailable.

The organisation of quern production is still poorly understood, but it seems to vary with differences in the amount of work done in the quarry as opposed to the settlement. The most reasonable explanation is that villagers were visiting the quarry sites to seek raw materials and sometimes working on site and sometimes bringing worked or partially worked stones back to the settlement for finishing. However, the sophistication of some querns suggests they were being madebyspecialists with technical know-how. Theearliest and most sophisticated querns develop in the Near East andit is here that the first specialised mills appear. There seems to be a strong

correlation across Europe between the spread of agriculture and the spread of to-and-fro querns.

Fig. 2.10 attempts to synthesise the evidence from radiocarbon dates. The map,taken from Turney and Brown (2007), shows the median probability radiocarbon date for the beginnings of the Neolithic across Europe. The dates are calibrated but quoted in millenia before present. It will be seen that agriculture spread from eastern Anatolia and the Levantinto south-east Europe, followed by further expansion in the Mediterranean and central Europe and, finally, the north and northwest. Shaped querns follow the same pattern, with the earliest examples in Anatolia followed by a spread which seems to equate with the Linearbandkeramtk. The Bronze Age Despite being younger than the Neolithic, the Bronze Age is more difficult to assess outside the Mediterranean basin. While the Helladic Bronze Age of the Aegean region has been extensively explored in a series of important excavations, the problems begin as we move northwards and westwards. The main reason for this is that very few settlement sites have been excavated and most of those are of the later Bronze Age. The early and middle Bronze Age is dominated by funerary archaeology. Even in the later settlements, very few querns 26

SADDLE QUERNS AND ROCK MORTARS v

present | O I

calibrated ka BP ar

q

qT

qT

qT

o

10

15

Fig. 2.10: The spread of agriculture across Neolithic Europe and the Near-East (after Turney and

Brown 2007)

have been reported and these are often inadequately described. For example, extensive work at the late Bronze Age fortified settlement of Biskupin, in Poland, produced only one complete mill, eight fragments and 213 hand-stones (Maciejewski 1950). Similarly, onlysix large ‘Mahlplatten’ are recorded from the importantsite at Zug-Sumpf in Switzerland (Seifert 2004, 305). Excavations on the late Bronze Age settlement of the Walkemthle, Gottingen,

produced a single type 3 mill and its hand-stone (Busch 1975, 22). It is difficult to know to what extent this dearth is real and to whatextentit is a reflection of either the lack of settlement archaeologyorjust neglect by archaeologists, pre-occupied with metal and other glories of the age. Thus, in comparison with the Neolithic, there are immense problems in producing a synthesis of this period. We will review some of the moresignificant evidence. The excavations at Sitagroi, on the Drama plain of north-eastern Greece, make a good starting point (Elster and Renfrew 2003). The site is a #e/, which has been shown by radiocarbon dates to span the late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age. The excavated deposits were divided into five phases, with Phase I dating between 5500 and 5200 BC and Phase V between 3100 and 2200 BC. The excavations produced 98 quern fragments which were studied by Biskowski (2003). He recognised two quern types, the saddle and the flat, with Zi

THE STONE OF LIFE 59 flat and 39 saddles. It seems that the querns might equate with our types 1 and 2 (or possibly 3 and 4), respectively. He was able to demonstrate that, while both types were present throughout, the flat quern seems to have increased in importance so that, by Phase V, it was the dominant type. The saddle quernsare not extensivelyillustrated but seem to be elongate concave stones; but one finely shaped ovate example is illustrated from Phase V (Elster and Renfrew 2003, Pl. 5.24). Biskowski argued, on analogy with contemporary Mesoamerican practice, that the flat quern might have been better suited if the grain was being chemically treated (e.g. with lime) to ease grinding or if other nutrients were being added. While this is an intriguing hypothesis, it is totally without proof. Perhaps the new querns were multifunctional and used for other activities, such as ore grinding, as well as grain processing. Nevertheless, the evidence does strongly suggest that, with the onset of the Bronze Age, old Neolithic forms were being simplified and a long established type was becomingincreasingly popular. Runnels (1981) made a careful diachronic study of the mills found on Helladic sites in the Argolid, dated between 2800 and 1060 BC. These include such well-known and welldated places as Lerna, Mycenae, Tiryns, Asine and the Franchthi cave, comprising perhaps the largest assemblage of Bronze Age (and Neolithic querns) ever studied from a single region. He noted changes in size, shape and raw material, with the most notable differences

occurring at the beginning of the Bronze Age (Runnels 1981, 131). Neolithic mills tend to be small and ovate in shape, but with the onset of the ensuing Bronze Age, there seems to be an increase in overall size and morevariation in form. The most noteworthychange was the development of the large grinding slab and the introduction of the specialisedelliptical hand-stone. Thelatter first occur in Early Helladic II (2500-2300 BC) and increase in subsequent phases. The Helladic sites of the Argolid thus overlap with, and continue, the Sitagroi sequence. It is hard, on the available evidence, to substantiate the flattening noted at Sitagroi, although perhaps this equates with the introduction of the‘large grinding slab’. It is clear that the early Bronze Ageis a time of significant change in both regions. Another area of the Mediterranean which displays interesting developments during the Bronze Age is Sardinia, where the Nuraghic culture flourished from the eighteenth century BC butpersisted to the second century AD. Nuraghic querns are of the saddle variety and are usually carefully shaped concave rectangular slabs of lava with hand-stones which often have a dorsal ridge acting as a handle. They would belong to our type 4a, but, while normal sizes are represented, often they were exceptionally large: they could range up to 70 cm long and 40-50 cm wide, with correspondingly large hand-stones (Fig. 2.11). They emphasise the importance of flour and agriculture in Nuraghic Sardinia but, if used by women,it is likely that two operatives would be needed, unless they had Amazonian characteristics. This, is turn, suggests that flour production was a collaborative act either between families or within the extended family. Early and middle Bronze Age quernsare hard to find outside the Mediterranean. However, some have been found in funerary contexts such asthatillustrated by Close-Brookes (1983): a dished quern (type 2) found in a Beaker cist at Fallaws in Scotland. A particularly important site is Scarcewater, Pennance in Cornwall, which produced both middle andlate Bronze Age material (Quinnell 2010). The middle Bronze Age yielded 19 saddle querns and 38 handstones, while a single hand-stone and a single saddle quern date to the late Bronze Age. 28

SADDLE QUERNS AND ROCK MORTARS lOcm axon.

Fag. 2.11: Nuraghic quern, Santu Antine, Sardinia, at the same scale as Figs 2.5 and 2.7 (afterphoto by author) The quernsare small and fragmentary but probablyrelate to our type2. Two sarsen querns were found in a middle Bronze Age pit at Winnall, Winchester (Hawkes 1969). Both are of the roughly shaped type 3 and oneappearsto havea lateral camber. Hawkes considered them to be the components of a single quern but, as the wear pattern was not observed,it is hard to be certain. The fine type 3 querns from Flag Fen are rather similar and have been dated by dendrochronology to 1350 BC (Buckley and Ingle 2001). Excavations at St-Veit-Klinglberg, in the eastern Alps, produced six quern fragments which mayhave been used for cereals or for grinding copper ore (Shennan 1995, 241). The site is dated by radiocarbon to between about 1850 and 1400 BC and the querns seem to be of the elongate roughly-shaped pattern (type 3). By the late Bronze Age querns begin to appear more frequently in the European archaeological record. As noted above, a feature of settlements such as Biskupin or Zug-Sumpf is the surprising rarity of querns and the size of those found. Thelatter is implied by the reference to ‘grosse Mah/platten’ at Zug-Sumpf and by the one published photograph from Biskupin. 29

THE STONE OF LIFE At Lunteren, in the Netherlands, a quern was found under a late Bronze Age urn dated by radiocarbon to about 800 BC.It appears to be an elliptical hand-stone with a carination or keel (van Heeringen 1985, GLD 11). The rock suggests importation from the Mayen volcanic area. The quarries in this region were certainly being exploited as early as the Neolithic, with small rectangular or oval querns in use until late Bronze Age Urnfield times. Here the major change seems to have taken place in the early Hallstatt (Ho6rter 1994, 15). In Britain, Runnymede must rank as one of the most important late Bronze Agesites (Needham 1991, 132; Needham and Spence 1996, 165). The numberof querns was notgreat and, as far as can be judged from the small fragments, there appears to be a mixture offlat

querns (type 1) and, possibly, type 2, with a fine shaped upper stone of our type 4b.

Nowakowski’s (1991) excavation of a late Bronze Age settlement at Trethellan farm, near Newquay, is a further example. The most numerous stone finds were rubbing stones which may, or may not, have been used for purposes other than grain processing, These comprised 26% of the assemblage, followed by quern fragments which accounted for 16%. Two of the three complete querns were of our type 3, while the other was type 4a. They were all large with a length of 480-600 mm. Curwen (1937, 135) illustrated the querns from the late Bronze Age settlement on New Barn Down in his seminal Aniquity paper, while the site itself and the placing of the querns has been discussed both before and after that publication (Curwen 1934; Seager Thomas 1999). Two appear to be of our type 3. The report on the late Bronze Age settlement on Cock Hill ilustrates four querns, but without comment (Ratcliffe-Densham and Ratcliffe-Densham 1961). One is a fine dished quern of our type 2 and two ofthe other three appear to be of type 3. Oneis an elliptical hand-stone (type 4c). It is interesting to note that, in the Sussex area, Drewett (1982) collected evidence for imported Greensand on 12 sites of the period 1400-800 BC, and muchof this may have been used for querns. The problem is not so much the lack of material as a lack of proper and full publication. It seems probable that there are many more Bronze Age querns awaiting systematic study, as the number of querns known from Bronze Agesites in Britain is far from negligible and this maybe typical of other regions. The typology seemsto indicate a continuation ofthe tradition of flat and dished querns, which are supplanted by type 3 to-and-fro querns, which might imply an increasing interest in flour and, hence, bread. In the late Bronze Age shaped querns (type 4) make their appearance, perhaps indicating more centralised and less do-it-yourself production. However, having said that the lack of querns may be more apparentthanreal, there seems to be a veryreal dearth in someparts of Europe. Presumably in such cases grain was not converted to flour, but consumedin other ways, perhaps in the form of a dish akin to frumenty(p. 122). This was the conclusion reached by Beranova (1986) as a result of her experimental work: Before the diffusion of rotary hand mills, bread or cakes of emmerflour were difficult to confect. Bread could thus not have been a common, cheap orparticularly esteemedfood. We should also envisage consumption of not very much ground or even complete grains asporridges... the assumption of an overwhelmingly cereal diet in prehistoric times nith a minimum representation of animalproducts seems unlkely... in view of theprocedures connected nith utihsation of prehistoric hulled cereals. 30

SADDLE QUERNS AND ROCK MORTARS Rock mortars and alternative grinding methods While it is possible to explain the dearth of Bronze Age querns as a phenomenon generated by archaeological neglect or by a lack of habitationsites, this is not always the only explanation and, in some places and periods,the lacuna seemsto be a real one. One possible explanation is that subsistence was based almost exclusively on animal husbandry, although this is hard to substantiate for crops were certainly being grown. However,it is clear from ethnographic considerationsthat an absence of querns does not mean that no grinding wastakingplace. Schroth (1996, 64 ff) has reviewed the North American ethnographic evidence andlists the alternatives. Wooden mortars could have been employed, although these are better suited to grinding soft foodstuffs such as meat or berries. An alternative is the pit mortar. Sometimes a small conical hole was dug, which was then lined with stones, and this was a favoured method in

areas where hard rock was scarce. Most striking ofall are the bedrock mortars which were used by manyIndian tribes over wide areas of America. The best known example is undoubtedlythe Indian Grinding RockState Historic Park, located in the Sierra Nevada foothills eight miles east of Jackson, California (Fig, 2.12). The much-visited park nestles in a little valley 2,400 feet above sea level with open meadowsandlarge valley oaks that once provided the Native Americansof this area with an ample supply of acorns, thoughtto be the principal foodstuff processed on thesite. The core of the park comprises a rock surface pitted with some 1185 mortar holes, Theholes differ slightly from place to place over America, but they vary in diameter between about 7 and 12 cm and in depth between roughly5 and 25 cm.In theinitial stages they would be shallow depressions surrounded bya basketry wall to retain the material being pounded or ground,butas the hole wore deeper this would become unnecessary. The holes would be abandoned whenthe depth exceeded about 30 cm. Cup marks Such bedrock holes are not limited to America and they seem to feature in East Africa as well. Theyare strikingly similar to the cup marks and the cup-and-ring marks which are a major feature of European rock art. Odak (1989), following Soper (1966), discusses the arrangement of Kenyan cup marks which, in some cases, bear a striking resemblance to those in northern lands. For example, one pattern found in Gusii cup marks is very close to a similar pattern on Chatton, Northumberland or High Banks, Galloway (4f Odak 1989, fig. 6.1, and Morris 1989, Pl. 11c or PL 5b) (Fig, 2.13). He suggests that, in some cases, they were used for games but, in others, they would be used for the grinding and pounding of wild fruits and berries or other vegetable matter. In Zimbabwe, they mayhave been used for pulverising quartz flux or grog for pottery making, In the Kilimanjaro area of ‘Tanzania it seems they were used for shattering small lumps of iron ore (Fosbrooke 1954). This was used as currency and neededto be shattered to produce ‘small change’ used in market transactions. In a more recent paper, Odak (1992) has stressed the secular nature of many cup marks, many of which were used as game boards, while other forms of rock art had sacred significance. So it appears that this phenomenonis presentall over East Africa and a functional explanation is demonstrable in manycases. Cup marks are known from manyparts of the world, from Gurukperu in Benin to Pu’u Loa, Hawaii (http://meuliere.ish-lyon.cnrs.fr). Those from Gurukperu were places for communal grinding, but those from Pu’u Loa, Hawaii, have been interpreted in conflicting ways. In 1823, the Reverend William Ellis was told they were made bytravellers going around the island — similar to carving initials on tree or stone, the rings representing the numberin 31

THE SrONE OF LIFE

the party. In 1914, Martha Beckwith was told they were made by new mothers whoplaced their babies’ umbilical cord in them. This was then covered with a stone and, if it had disappeared overnight, that would ensure the longevity and well-being of the child (Ellis

1826; Beckwith n.d.). Thus, ethnography produces a wide choice of explanations, ranging from the secular to the spiritual, and it maywell be that there is no single explanation, but it is worth considering a little further whether some maynot have beenused for grinding, albeit possibly of a ritual nature.

Bennett and Elton (1898, 21) long ago drewattention to the bullan stones of Ireland, which are not unlike the grinding rocks of Gurukperu (Fig, 2.14). These were stones with multiple cup-shaped cavities, where women might gather to grind grain for their families, in a manner akin to the way in which the French /wvoir was used. Bennett and Elton then went on to drawattention to the similarity of these stones to prehistoric cup-and-ring marks, but did not pursuethe idea, instead deferring to the authority of Sir James Simpson whohaddecidedthat they were but symbolic ornamentation, the purpose of which there 1s no clue. Found largelyin

north-western Europe, from Switzerland and northernItaly to the Atlantic regions, the cupand-ring mark remains a recurring, if enigmatic, feature of prehistoric rock art. The cups vary in size from 2 cm to 20 cm in diameter, with a maximumdepth of 6 cm, andtheyare often surroundedbya peckedring or sometimes several concentric ones. A channel often leads across the rings from the cupto the exterior of the final ring, They occur on natural rock surfaces,

earth-fast boulders and on small portable blocks. Other components which might be present in the carving are channels, grooves and spirals (Fig. 2.15). Cup-and-ring markedstones are

Fag. 2.12: The grinding rock, Indian Grinding Rock State Park, nearJackson, California (photo: RG Lemmon) De

SADDLE QUERNS AND ROCK MORTARS

T

*

Fig. 2.13: Cup mark patterns at Chatton, Northumberland(top left) andfrom Kenya(not to scale) (after Morris 1989; Odak 1992) very difficult to date. In Britain, for example, most are dated by comparison with similar marks on stones forming part of dated monuments. For example, at Fowberry Moor, Northumberland, the remains of a round barrow included stones carved with the same symbol as those found on the outcrop rock immediately beneath the barrow. These have been dated to ¢« 1600 BC fromassociated finds such as pottery and flint work and the

tradition of the burial (Beckensall 1986). Those in northern England and Scotland have been

dated to between 4000 BC and AD 100, but more often between 2000 and 1600 BC(see

e.g. Morris 1989). Interestingly they all occur onflat or sloping surfaces with few exceptions, such as Ballochmyle, Scotland, whichis on avertical face (Morris 1989). Of course, they also

occur on standing stones, but these wouldhavelain flat originally. It is worth noting that the duct usually leads downslope rather than up. It is also interesting that they are found in sandstone and gritstone territory, but rarely on other rock types (ciid. 1989, 48), except in Cumbria and Scotland where theyare often found

on schists andother varieties. Clearly there 1s scope for a more detailed geological appraisal but they do seemtocluster on rocks that would be goodfor grinding. [kley Moor, in Yorkshire,

is a good example because here they occur in abundance (Boughey and Vickerman 2003). The rock is Millstone Grit and, in the middle of the moor, the 1:25,000 Ordnance Survey map marks a disused whetstone quarry. Of course, this is not the complete answer as there are plenty of Millstone Grit outcrops which have no trace of cup or cup-and-ring marks. It could be that they are concentrated in places where there were periodic regional gatherings. In short, although they have a potentially wide date range, many seemto fall within the period when quern stones are least in evidence. It is tempting to suggest that rather than being‘art’ they are really rock mortars Oe

of the type noted in America and East Africa. The parallels are close and convincing. The close * 3

THE STONE-OP LpBPE relationship between cup markedstones andsaddle querns is admirably demonstratedat the pre-pottery Neolithic site of Gilgal in Israel, where the twoare virtually indistinguishable (Noy 1979). In the case of European cup-and-ring marked stones, the cup would be where the pounding or grinding took place, the ring would be a seating for a retaining basket and

the ducts would be a means of egress for the finished product. The parallel is a close one

and only exceptional sites, such as Ballochmyle, do not fit the explanation. However,it is

argued (p. 161 below) that distinction between profane and sacred is an artificial one. There 1s no reason why cup-and-ring stones could not have been usedfor grinding or pounding some special substances with religious significance and, equally, there is no reason why Ballochmyle could not be a sacred representation ofa utilitarian object. It is worth noting that boats and other artefacts are sometimes portrayed, so why not anartefact intimately

linked to survival? A compromise solution might well be that the concentrations of cup marks indicate places where people were gathering for some special event and that the hollows were used for grinding or pounding substances which were used inritual practices.

Alternatively, they might be a convenient way of avoiding the transport of a heavy quern for foodpreparation. Either way, they would have the special significance which has always been accorded to them. Perhaps the uplandplaces where they are found markgatherings of the type indicated by the massive late Bronze Age middens of lowland England, although because of the

exposed nature of these sites the other material would have less chance of preservation (see belowp. 36; McOmish 1996). Equally,it is worth noting that ethnographysuggests that they may have multiple uses — not only for grinding anything from foodstuffs to ores, but

also for playing games.

eac T net

t oh i aa A y

Ser qi

re

Pe

edie”

‘

lecartsmga |

A

AD ‘

(rt

J) wri a

. ahs

:

¢

4

.

‘

e*?

es

eeeet

yy ae

is ‘

\

‘

:

=a

oh

gS

Neg

\\

'

MD

vl)NyEs . an eyjen

ath PALMA , Gt “*S

. s 8 YON rer ,Sye oy

vit) we . .*

e\

~\ Sa \s "6

ag a” «%

¥

“ as \

asa’ de

.

.

‘a

=a

Fig. 2.14:_An Inshbullanstone (from Bennett and Elton 1898) 34

\

°

:

é ie ti

‘ Ne

Hepat

wm Wis

.

ay 2 a;

SADDLE QUERNS AND ROCK MORTARS

Fig. 2.15: Cup-and-ring mark, Snowden Carr Road, Otley, Yorkshire, diameter 16cm(photo: author) However,this is, at best, a partial answer whichonlyreally applies to western regions where

the cup-and-ring mark predominates. Pit mortars are worthy of further consideration as their use would be indicated by hollows lined with smoothed faceted small stones. However, such things have never been contemplated in Europe and thus never sought, soit is difficult

to be certain whether or not theyexisted. The Iron Age and later In the Aegeanarea, the collapse of the Helladic Bronze Agecivilisations was followed by the

so-called Dark Ages where the evidence of mills is sparse. Eventually this gave wayto the

Archaic and subsequent Classical eras, where newideas andtechnologies were promulgated. Our survey of Europeanmilling traditions must therefore start further to the north-west. Lachish, in Israel, has been the subject of renewed excavations led by David Ussishkin

(2004) andthe site has nowbeenextensively published1na series of fine exhaustive volumes. However, despite the detailed reports, thereis little evidence of milling in the Bronze Age andit is not until the Judean period Iron Age that they appear, when Sass (2004) records a series of beautiful shaped saddle querns of our types 3 and4. A date in the ninth or eighth century BC would seemto be appropriate.

3

(m1

With the onset of the Hallstatt period on the Continent the problem of mill scarcity 1s exacerbated. It appears that on manycentral Europeansites there is a very real absence of

THE STONE OF LIFE

querns. Thus, the late Urnfield and Hallstatt settlement of Enkering-Gatzacker, in Bavaria, produced pounders and smoothing stones but the absence of lower stones is specifically noted (Kas 2006, 52). A similar lack of lower stones was noted at the Heuneburg, occupied from 700 BC up to perhaps the La Téne period. The careful stone report records many pestles and pounders, but no lower stones (Sievers 1984). The oppidium of Manchingis later, spanning the late fourth to mid-first centuries BC. While Jacobi (1974, 132) records La Téne rotary mills, he noted four ball-shaped rubbing stones, which, he suggests, could have been

used for de-husking grain. The lower stones are lacking. In all of these cases the stone

finds have been meticulously and systematically catalogued and published, so the absence Is certainly a genuine one. Thus, it seems safe to state that while pestles and pounders (or hammer-stones) abound,there is a stark lack of corresponding lower stones. Indeed, according to Koch (1991, 215), a predominance of pounders or hammer-stones seems to be typical of many Hallstatt settlements in southern Germany. It seems therefore that in

this area bread was not a mainstay of the Hallstatt period diet, and grain would have been consumed in other ways.

The evidence from central Germanyis little more positive, althoughstill sparse. Thelate Hallstatt-early La Téne settlement of Wiershem, in the middle Rhineland, produced a few fragments of the ‘Napoleon’s hat’ type of saddle quern in Mayen lava, which would, of course, have been importedto thesite (Jost 2001, 112).

Production in the Mayen area is one of the best documented in Europe, thanks to the long term investigationsof the late Josef Réder andhis colleagues. Their work, now conveniently summarised in a book by Fridolin Horter (1994), charts the development of the millstone industry from the Neolithic to recent times. The Iron Age period has been the subject of more detailed study by Joachim (1985) and, for the Netherlands, by van Heeringen (1985). Joachim (1985, Abb. 3) distinguished the typology of products of the Hallstatt and early La Tene periods. During the Hallstatt, it appears that querns were of the shaped elliptical variety (our type 4b) with a triangular cross-section — reminiscent of Napoleon’s hat, but, in the La Téne period, they develop a marked keel in which the hat-like features are even more accentuated. The shape was presumablyto facilitate embedding in the ground, butit also served to reduce weight as they were objects of extensive trade. The type is found along the Rhine andits tributaries, such as the Mosel. They were much soughtafter in the Netherlands where good milling rock is at a premium.

In Britain the Bronze Age-Iron Age transition occurs little later than on the Continentat

about 800-600 BC. However, some early assemblagesare strikingly similar to Hallstatt period

ones. The latter were characterised by a paucity of querns (Mahi/steine) and an abundance of pounders or hammer-stones (K/opfsteine), which may have been used for grain processing amongst otheractivities. Interestingly, one of these transitional sites, All Cannings Cross, displays exactly the same phenomenon. Indeed, it was the prodigious abundance of flint and sarsen hammer-stones that led Maude Cunnington to investigate the site in the first instance. In contrast, her report draws attention to only nine complete ‘mealing stones’ and a number of fragments. The oneillustrated example (Cunnington 1923, Pl. 27, 8) suggests that they were of ourtype 3. It is now clear that All Cannings is one of a numberof sites in southern Britain which are characterised by huge middens containing domestic debris andit is paralleled by sites such as East Chisenbury or Potterne. McOmish (1996) suggests that they were not places of 36

SADDLE QUERNS AND ROCK MORTARS

permanenthabitation, but rather centres for ritual feasting, where the debris was conserved rather than being spread as manure onthefields. Thus, over the years, vast accumulations built up and these seem to have had specialsignificance. However, whatevertheir nature, there can belittle doubt that food was being prepared onsite and that the querns, as well as perhaps some of the hammer-stones, were part of the process. The site at Potterne,

in Wiltshire, is similar to All Cannings in manyrespects, but there are differences in the

number and type of saddle querns. 116 quern fragments were recovered, together with 43 ‘mullers, rubbers and hand-stones’. The querns are described as having a flat orslightly hollowsurface, in other words our types 1 and 2 (Seager Smith 2000). While this contrasts with All Cannings,in some respects it accords in the scarcity of type 3 querns. In bothsites the evidence suggests that the diet may have been decidedly meat-oriented. Swallowcliffe Down, an inhabited site protected bya palisade, belonging to what Cunliffe (2005) has termed the A/ Cannings Cross-Meon Hill ceramic group, can be broadly dated to the fifth to third centuries BC. According to Clay (1927, 88) ... fifty-five whole, orfragments of querns were found, and all, without exception, were of the early or saddle type. One of these, preserved in Devizes Museum,is an Upper Greensand saddle of our type 3. In contrast to All Cannings and to some extent Potterne, hammer-stones were not numerous. So, on this site it appears that the quern ruled supreme and wecan suggest, therefore, that flour and bread were an importantpart of the diet. At Meon Hillitself, Liddle’s (1935, 34) brief reportlists 21 potential saddle querns but onlyfour flint hammer-stones, which suggests a similar pattern. Perhaps the contrast is one of everyday subsistence versusritual feasting. Winnall Down, near Winchester, is another ditched enclosure of the sixth—fifth centuries

(Fasham 1985). It was occupied in the Bronze Age also, but the earliest Iron Age phases produced 24 saddle querns and no rotaries. They appear once again to be the ubiquitous type 3.

In about the fifth century BC a newtype of mill arrived on the scene — the rotary quern. Where it came from is still a matter of debate, but it was immensely faster and more efficient and the age-old problem of de-husking was resolved in a single instrument. What is perhaps surprising is that the saddle quern was not immediately replaced but continued to be used, perhaps up to and beyond the Roman period. However, during this long period there seemsto have been little, if any, development and simple types 2 and 3 querns were

the ones that persisted. Presumably technological innovation was diverted towards the newrotaries and the old technologyleft standing. The reason for this longevityis hard to discern. Certainly type 2 querns would continueto play their part as kitchen mortaria, but rotaries and saddles must have had different but complementaryroles. In theorythere are two possible scenarios. Firstly, the two instruments could have been used by different sectors of society. For example, saddles mightbe retained by poorer people who could not afford a rotary. Alternatively, the rotaries were used by more specialised sectors: perhaps milling was in the hands of specialist millers or of family units specialising in milling. It is frustrating that such questions might be answered if we knew more about the distribution of mills within and across a site, but this type of detail has seldom

been recorded.

37

3 GREEKS AND BARBARIANS: THE OLYNTHUS MILL AND ITS DERIVATIVES After the collapse of the brilliant Aegean Bronze Age, for two centuries Greece entered a “Dark Age’ wherethereis little archaeological or other evidence. No millstones are known from this era, and it is not until the Geometric period, 900-700 BC, when the roots of Classical civilization were

established, that they finally re-appear. Runnels (1981, Pl. 19-21) illustrates a few and they appear to be saddle querns of our types 3 and 4. However, bythe fifth century, if not before, a new type of mill appears which has been variously called the hopper-rubber, the pushing mill (the moa trusatilis of Cato (De Agni Cultura, 10.4, 11.4), or better, the Olynthus mill after the site where it was first systematically described (Robinson and Graham 1938; Prankel 2003). Essentially, it 1s little more than a refined and adapted saddle quern which has been given a hopper to facilitate a more continuous feed. These querns are square or rectangular and have a feed slot in the upper stone. So different are they from the conventional concept of a mill, that they were originally considered to be sieves or windows, the latter view persisting until recent times when Delougaz and Haines

(1960) found one in the Byzantine church at Khirbat al-Karak. In its simplest form, it would have functionedlike a saddle quern with to-and-fro motion. However, some were semi-mechanised with a horizontal pivoted bar operated with an oscillating movement, givingrise to the first milling machine, the ‘oscillatory mull’. Origins Theorigins of the Olynthusmill are hard to discern (Fig, 3.1). An Iberian quern from Sant Cristofol, in Catalonia (Fig, 3.1a), has an upper stone with two ears on either side to give a good grip and similar stones are known from Ptolemaic settlements in the Fayum of Egypt (Fig. 3.1b). These are fairly common on gold-working sites in the Eastern Desert of Egypt, such as Wadi Gazza (Fig, 3.1c). A further example from Bresanone,Italy, was published by Donner and Marzoli (1994,fig. 8). From such quernsit is a relatively small step to hopper-rubbers such as the one from Priene (Fig. 3.1d), or those from Delosillustrated by Deonna (1938,PI. 368-9). However, the sequence is sparsely populated and far from satisfactory, but a rectangular example with handgrips from Thera implies usage in this manner and providesa link to the classic rectangular form of mill (Fig, 3.1e). Morphology of the Olynthus mill There are numerousvariants on the Olynthus themebuttheclassic form is shown1n Fig, 3.2. The upperstoneis a square or rectangular block, usually of the order of 45-55 cm long, 35-40 cm wide and 15-20 cm thick, although larger and smaller varieties are sometimes encountered. ‘The block has a recessed hopper, akin to the frog in a brick, at the bottom of whichis a slit through which

the grain will feed. Around the hopperis a flat rim, usually with two recessed flat bottomedslots,

presumably to accommodate a bar. Beneath these, at either end, there maybe holes which, in some

cases, accommodate lead andiron fittings, although in others they may be voids which might have been for wood. More often than notthere is just a single hole at one end. The favoured rock was vesicular lava, although someare found in other rocks such as limestone, sandstone or granite.

The lower stone1s a rectangular slab with dimensionsusually about 5—10 cm in excess of the upper stone. Both the lower stone and the lower face of the upper stone may show furrow-dressing or ‘milling’ to help evacuate the flour once ground. There are manyvariations in form, as shown in Fig, 3.3. Sometimes the hopper cavity ts round rather than rectangular or even butterfly-shaped; 38

OLYNTHUS MILLS

Fig. 3.1: Possebleforerunners of the Okynthus mill: a, Sant Cristofol: b, The Fayum; c, Wadi Gazza, Egypt; d, Pnene;e, Thera (after anon 1923; Caton-Thompson and Gardner 1934,photo by author; Weigand and

Schrader 1904; von Gaertringen and Wilski 1904)

sometimes there are protuberances and sometmes the slot is reduced to a small perforation,

normally seen in mills of wregular shape (Frankel types I, 4 and 5). The significance of these variationsis by no meansclear, but they maysimplybe regional variants, perhapsall with the same degree of efficiency. Operation of the Olynthus mill Someof the stones were certainly used in a to-and-fro manner,like a saddle quern, but the presence of a handle slot suggests a measure of mechanisation in most cases. A potential mode of operation was long ago postulated by Kourouniotes (1917), who drew attention to a scene on a Megarian bowl which, purportedly, showed one of these mills being operated in a side to side oscillating motion, driven bya pivoted bar (Fig. 3.5a). Theinstallation for one of these mills has been found preserved in the corner of the room of a house in Gamla (Fig, 3.5b), with a further example reported more recently from Fakhura, both in Israel (Frankel 2003; Zingboym and AvshalomGorni 2009). Other schemes, shown1n Fig. 3.5 c-d, will be discussed below. The case would seem to be closed andit is generally assumed that all Olynthus mills with bar slots would be operated in oscillating mode, with but few exceptions. Thelead filled holes would beto hold the bar in position. 39

THE STONE OF LIFE

Fig. 3.2: The classic type: a, b, Olynthus; 6 Vela (from a photograph by author); d, typical milling pattern, Delos (after Robinson and Graham 1938,from Childe 1943) Howeverattractive this hypothesis might seem,in reality it does not seem to be appropriate, except in a few cases. The lower stones at Gamla and at Fakhura are large, elongate, rectangular slabs and would certainly permit a wide sweep of the pivoted bar. The mill would thus workefficiently and greatly facilitate rapid grain processing. However, in most cases the lower stones are much smaller, and often only about 5-10 cm larger than the upperstone,asis well-illustrated by Runnels’ (1981) analysis of the stones from the Kyrenia wreck. As these were an unused consignment, presumablyon its way from the place of production to the market, it can be assumed that lower and upper stones were intended to match. Indeed, graffi in the form of Greek letters, seem to be an indication of which upper should go with which lower stone. Further examples of matching upper and lower stones were recovered from the wrecks of Banco del Bagno,

40

OLYNTHUS MILLS Lipari and Mahdia, Tunisia and again the lower stones were onlya little larger than the upper (Beltrame and Boetto 1997; Baatz 1994). It seems that the sweep of the upper stone would be very limited to as little as 5 cm or less in each direction, or it would slip off the lower stone. Should this happen it would damage the grinding surfaces and necessitate remounting. Furthermore, oscillatory motion would result in arc-like striations across the working surfaces, but these have never been noted. In the few cases, wherestriations have been recorded, they seem to run parallel to the sides of the stone suggesting a to-and-fro motion. This can be seen, tentatively and with difficulty, by carefully examining photographs of lower stones from KrSevica in south-eastern Serbia, Agrigento in Sicily or Lattes in France (Popovic and Kapuran 2007, Pl. 1,4b; Dal

Ri 1994,fig. 8; Py 1992, fig. 7). A to-and-fro motion would fit Cato’s term mo/a trusatilts, which according to Moritz (1958, 66), describes a thrusting mill rather better than one based on rotary or oscillatory movement. Furthermore, if the lower stone from the wreck at Serce Limani in south-western Turkey has been correctly identified, 1t must have been used in a to-and-fro manner as it has a rim which would restrict oscillatory movement (Pulak and Townsend 1987, fig. 13). It seems more probable that, in most cases, the stones would have been driven by more

limited to-and-fro motion. There are two types: those without a handle slot and those with.

handled

Fig. 3.3: Typology of Olnthus mills (after Frankel 2003) 4]

(Z/61 ssegutodf) 06.109 DIUAMS AY], f°E “OL

4a) tO ANOLS HAL

OLYNTHUS MILLS The stones lacking the bar recess, which is frequently the case, might have simply been pushed to-and-fro like a saddle quern. While the Kyrenia stones have never been adequately published, Katzev’s (1972) photograph of them lying on the sea bed shows one with a handle recess, the rest without (Fig, 3.4). The lack of a slot is also seen in other mills, such as the southern French ones from Saint-Pierre-les-Martigues or Lattes (Chausserie-Laprée 1998; Py 1992). ChauserieLaprée (1998, fig. 17) attempted a reconstruction with the upper stone housed in a wooden frame which would permit to-and-fro motion, but, at the same time, keep it on its limited lower stone

while permitting extra pressure to be applied (Fig, 3.5c). However, such a scheme seems to be unnecessarily complex.

Stones displaying the handle slot should be easier to interpret, but even here there are different interpretations. Magen (1993, fig. 38) illustrates a possible mode of use with a bar pushed to-andfro by two women (Fig, 3.6). The stone from the Carthage Byrsa had notches on the corners, but the place of the bar slot was taken by two circular holes at either end, (Lancel 1982, figs 120-1). The notch is seen again on a mill from the El Sec wreck (Arribas e¢ a/ 1987, Pl. 5). Lancel suggests (fig. 122) that they accommodated two bars held in place by an arrangement of strings pivoted at one end (Fig. 3.5d). However, the mill could equally well have been operated in a to-and-fro rather than oscillatory mode. The hole at one or both ends, plugged with lead and iron, would hold the bar in place but this would be advantageous whatever system was adopted. Thus, while it is usual to assume that the Olynthus mill was invariably prvoted and used with an oscillaung movement, it is nowclear that there are alternatives and oscillation arcs may have been the exception rather than the rule. The wear pattern is a factor which might help determine how a stone was employed because we would expect maximum wear on the leading edge. In a pivoted mill greatest wear would be beneath the bar at the furthest point from the pivot, which is where pressure would be greatest. In a mill used with a bar operated in a to-and-fro manner,it would be parallel to the slot on the side furthest from the operator. Interestingly, while examining Olynthus mills in Crimea the writer found four examples showing asymmetric wear. Two in Kertch Museum (Fig. 3.7a, b) and one in Yevpatria showedthelatter type, while one in Feodosia Museum showed the former. Interestingly, exactly the same asymmetric wear as the Kertch examples, was recorded by Grakov(1954, fig. 15.2) on a mill from Zoltaia Balka, Ukraine. It is also worth notingthat the oscillatory mode mayhave been used sporadically over a long period of time. Gamla was occupied during the first century BC up to AD 67 and Fakhura could belong to the second century AD orlater. On the other hand, Megarion bowls are the forerunners of Arretine ware, but the Homericseries, to which the one with the milling scene belongs, maydate to third or second centuries BC. A clay model of a bakery from Tyre showing a lever mill is said to date from seventh century BC (Frankel 2003,fig. 9). Chronology While it is clear that the Olynthus mill is par excellence characteristic of the Hellenistic period, the beginnings and end of the tradition are hard to discern. The earliest evidence is the clay model mentioned above, but this is open to interpretation and is not direct testumony. There is a piece from Athens, dated to the late fifth century BC (Runnels 1981, 296), butit is not until the fourth century that evidence abounds. Particularly important are the wrecks of El Sec, off the Majorcan coast, and Kyrenia (Cyprus), which demonstrate a developed trade in Olynthus-style millstones 43

THE STONE OF LIFE

Vee

DUNES

SOOCeO eer AVWYAW RIA PIS

ms eS

eH

coy Poe ola

4

>

.

6

.

Fig. 3.5: The oscillating mode of operation: a, b, on Megarian bowl; c, based on evidencefrom Gamla; d, Carthage, Byrsa; e, Martigues; (after Rostovtzeff 1937; Frankel 2003; Chausserie-Laprée 1998,

Lance! 1982)

44

OLYNTHUS MILLS

Fig. 3.6: Suggested alternative mode of operation, afterMagan 1993 by that period (Katzev 1972; Arribas e¢ a/1987). Olynthusitself mayfall in the same time bracket as the town was destroyed and looted in 348 BC, although it now seemsthat thesite may have been reoccupied in part. Rather similar historical evidence is used by White (1963, 205) to place the Morgantina mills in the latter part of the fourth century. Both White (1963) and Robinson and Graham (1938) regard the un-slotted, handle-less variety as a precursor to the lever mill, and hence earlier. While this would make evolutionarysense,

such an argumentis fraught with pitfalls. A warning shot comes from both the Kyrenia and the El Sec wrecks, which seem to havethe twovarieties in transport, and therefore presumably in use simultaneously in the fourth century. Py (2009, 216) claims that, at Lattes, the Olynthus type appears in the middle of the fourth century replacing the traditional saddle quern, and disappearsa little after 200 BC. The example from Kerkouane 1n Tunisia, should date from before 250 BC (Morel 1969, 480). ChausserieLaprée (1998, 227) was firmly of the viewthat, at Martigues, they could not be dated before the end of the third century, despite the proximity of the Greek colony of Massalia and the potential for earlier innovation. It seems therefore, that there is no case for an evolutionary development from simple to complex and presumably therefore, the typology would relate more to the circumstances of use. The sameline of argument might suggest that the manual to-and-fro propulsion with a horizontal bar would precede the more sophisticated oscillatory pivoted mull, but firm evidenceis lacking. The end of the Olynthus mill is as difficult to discern as its beginning, due largely to the ever present problem of rubbish survival on late sites. Here is a list of the latest finds known to the writer: 45

THE STONE GP LIFE

Fug. 3.7: Complete mills in Kertch Museum showing asymmetric wear: a, from Kimmerikon, b, no provenance. Upperstones 33 cm and 42 cm (photos: author)

Masada, Israel: first century BC — first century AD (Netzer 1991, fig. 516) Ouseir al-Qadim, Egypt: first — second century AD (Meyer 1982,fig. 54,g) Wadi Barnd, Egypt: early first centuryAD (Peacock 1997,fig, 8.5)

Didyma, Egypt. afterAD 76/77 (Brun 2011, 245)

Isthmia, Greece: first— second century AD (Runnels 1981, 127) Athenian Agora, Greece: first— second century AD (Runnels 1981, 127) Mons Porphynites, Egypt. second century AD (Peacock 2007,fig. 9.8) Fakhura, Israek. second— third century AD (Zingboym and Avshalom-Gorni 2009)

Jalame, Palestine: late Roman (Davidson Weinberg 1988, PI. 8, 99-100. This is an anomalous type discussed belowunder dertvattves) Lamra, Israel: sixth century AD (Tepper 2007) Kbirbat al-Karak, Palestine: sixth century AD (Delougaz and Haines 1960, Pl. 22, 10) The eight datesfalling in the first-second centuries AD leavelittle doubt that this mill type was still current at this time in the Aegean and Near East. This is certainly the case at the fort of Mons Porphyrites, which was an Antonine foundation, so a second century date would seem to be provenatleast in this instance. The late Romanandsixth century occurrencesat Jalame, Tamra and Khirbat al-Karak might be residual, but equally this is not certain and the mills could have continuedin use until this late date. Sources Strabo is one of the few ancient authors to mention millstone production, although he

does not mention type. Twolocalities are cited: the island of Nisyros and Etna in Sicily. Of

46

OLYNTHUS MILLS

Nisyros, he says (Geog. 10.5.16): Nisyros hes to the north of Telos, and ts aboutsixtystadia distant bothfrom it andfrom Kos. It is round and high and rocky, the rock being that of which millstones are made; at any rate, the neighbouringpeoples are well supplied with millstonesfrom there. Of Etna, he says (Geog. 6. 2. 3): But when the lava changes to a solid, it turns the surface of the earth into stone to a considerable depth, so that quarrying is necessary on thepart of any who wish to uncover the original surface; Jor when the mass of rock in the craters melts and then is thrown up, the liquid that ispoured out over the top is black mud and flows down the mountain, and then, solidifying, becomes millstone, keeping the same colourit had when in a liquid state. As he was writing at the end of the first century BC and presumably drawing onearlier material, he could be referring to either Olynthus or rotary mills. However, it seems that Nisyros was, aboveall, a production centre for Olynthus mills and, as they are known to have been produced from Etnalava, it seems possible, if not probable, that he was referring

to this type. The evidence for Nisyros is twofold. Firstly, chemical analysis of the basalt rock has shown that manypieces match the lava of this small island in the Dodecanese. Thus five examples from Cyprus, now housed in the Paphos and Larnaca Museums, were

from this source (Williams-Thorpe e¢ a/ 1991, table V), as was one from the El Sec wreck

(Williams-Thorpe and Thorpe 1990). The Kyrenia mills are reputed to be from Nisyros

(Runnels 1981, 125) and, more recently, Segal (2006) has demonstrated chemically that four examples from Nahal Tut and ‘En Hofez, in Israel, are from this source.

Secondly, there is field evidence from theislanditself. There has beenlittle archaeological work on Nisyros, but Runnels (1981, 91) investigated a supposed mill quarry at Avlaki, on

OQ

Profitis

A Ilias 698 m

Fig. 3.8: Map of the Aegean and detail of Nisyros showing Mandraki, Paleokastro and Avlaki

47

THE STONE OF LIFE the south coast, identified by the nineteenth century Germantraveller Ludwig Ross (1843) (Fig. 3.8). Runnels’ results were inconclusive and he reasonably supposed that the main production was in the north, around Mandraki, using the main outcrop of basaltic andesite

on which Paleokastro was built. In 2005, the writer visited the island and saw an unfinished mill cemented into the top of the path leading to Avlaki cove. It was 47 cm square and

15 cm thick with an unperforated feed slot and no handle slot (Fig. 3.9a). However, more

evidence was found in Mandraki. In the main street was a rough rectangular block which could have been a preliminary roughout for an Olynthus mill (Fig. 3.9b). The block was 35X32 cm and about 25 cm thick. In the garden of the Porfyris hotel were two further mills, both without handle slots and both clearly unused as the feed slot had not been perforated (Fig. 3.9c, d). The dimensions were 363615 cm and 483315 cm respectively. These

sizes fall within the range encountered on othersites away from the island. No unfinished rotary querns were encountered, with the possible exception of a large whitewashed drum at the entrance to the cemetery.

Thereis, therefore, clear archaeological attestation of Strabo’s assertion and, furthermore,

the distribution, confirmed by geochemistry, suggests that Nisyros was a very important source, perhaps even the market leader, supplying much of the eastern Mediterranean.

Unfortunately Etna is more of a problem as recent eruptions may have obscured or destroyed the evidence. However, it seems entirely probable that a major Olynthus mill industry was based on these lavas. Dal Ri (1994) noted 12 find localities on the island of Sicily, with a further four in the Italian Mezzogiorno. Archaeometry comes to the rescue, for Lorenzoni ef a/. (1996; 1997) have shown howOlynthus mills of Etna lava were distributed to Apulia and Basilicata, leaving no doubt about the importance of the source. Of course, Nisyros and Etna were not the only sources to be exploited for Olynthus mills and many are indicated by the geology. In Crimea, for example, the quern from Kimmerikon now in Kertch Museum,is in a purplish porphyry, as is one in Simferopol Museum, while others in Feodosia and Yevpatria Museumsare in local grey limestones. Williams-Thorpe and Thorpe (1990) have shown, geochemically, that most of the El Sec mills came from Pantelleria, while Renzulli e¢ a/ (2002) claim that those from Monte Bibele, in central Italy, are in the leucite phonolite lava of Orvieto. No doubt many more sources will cometo light as research progresses. In Egypt, some of the mills, such as those from Quseir are in black lava, which wasclearly imported, while others, such as those from Mons Porphyrites, are of local granite. One from the fort at Wadi Barud, near MonsClaudianus,

is in the local granodiorite (Meyer 1982; Peacock 2007; Peacock 1997) and another from Didymoi has been assigned to Aswan granite (Brun 2011, 245). It seems that while some were clearly imported, others were locally made, presumably imitating the imports. Distribution

Frankel (2003) has published a comprehensive distribution map with most of the evidence

available up to the publication date. There are now a few further sites, but the onlyradical changes are greater concentrations in Egypt and in the Czech Republic, the latter due largely to the researches of Petr Holodiak in Bohemia and Milos Cizmai in Moravia. In Egypt, Frankel has listed seven sites, mostly in the Delta: Naukratis, Defenneh,

Nesbesheh, Dimeh, Tanis, the Fayum and Ehnasya. To this it is now possible to add Mons 48

(OLYINT EUS: WELLS

Fig. 3.9: Unfinished mills on Nisyros: a, Avlaki; b,Mandraki main street (cross-section of block); c-d, Hotel Porfyris,Mandraki(photos: author)

49

THE STONE OF LIFE

Porphyrites, Wadi Barud, Wadi Fawahkir, Didymoi, and Quseir al-Qadim,all in the Eastern Desertorits littoral (Peacock 1997, 2007; Brun 2011; Meeks 1997). Thefirst three are quarry sites, but there is no reason to suppose that they were used for anything other than food pteparation, with the possible exception of Fawahkir, where gold mining as well as stone quarrying took place. Frankel (2003, figs 11-14) carefully analyses the distribution of some of his main types showing their regionality. Thus, mills with hand grips are concentrated in the Aegean; those

with round or oval hoppers (Type 1.2) are seen on the western shores of the Aegean, while types I.3, 11.4 and IL5 occur in the Aegean, the Black Sea and Anatolia. The remaining types are more sketchily represented, with few specimensclassified, andit is difficult to draw hard and fast conclusions.

It is however, possible to take a broader view and boil the data downto twoessential types: the classic form (albeit with variants) and the very different, often bizarre, derivatives, which have been aptly called the ‘barbarised’ Olynthus mill (essentially Frankel’s types 1.4 and 1.5 to be discussed in more detail below). The results are shownin Fig, 3.10. It will be seen that the classic type occurs in Greece and in areas colonised by the Greeks overseas, such as the Black Sea, Magna Graecia, the south of France, Egypt, the Levant and the Mediterranean littoral in

general, but also in cognate regions such as Macedonia, Croatia or the Ukrainian hinterland. Derivative types

Thebarbarised mills which seem to be copies of this type and are foundinland awayfrom the

Mediterranean: in Crimea and the Ukraine, in the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Austria, Germany

and in Alpine Italy (Fig. 3.10b). It seems that the further a find from the Mediterranean heartland, the greater is the deviation from the norm. Someof the varieties are illustrated in Fig. 3.11. It will be apparent that although they have some resemblanceto the classic form, largely because of a handle recess and fixing holes, they are crude andirregular, oftenlittle more than a flat slab of stone with a hole in it. Such stones maywell have been published as weights rather than mills andit is possible that more will appear as awareness increases. The presence of characteristic handleslots might suggest that they were driven in the same manner as the prototype, but this is not necessarily the case. Perhaps the mosttelling difference is that most have a central feed hole or oval, rather than a slot, a feature which is common to derivative mills, whether from the Black Sea region, central Europe or northern Italy. This could indicate rotary rather than to-and-fro or oscillatory movement, particularly as many of the holes are smooth and rounded, perhaps dueto friction against a spindle. The milling pattern on the active surface sometimestakes the form of a cross, which would be well-suited to expelling the flour on rotation of the stone. The active surface of a find from Straky, near Nymburk in the Czech Republic, showsstriations which seem to be unequivocal evidence of rotary motion (Motykova and Holodnak 2005, Obr. 2). There is no reason, of course, whythe opposing handleslots could not have accommodated a device for rotation. Some maythus be an adaptation of the Olynthus form by people who knew andpreferred rotary movement (see p. 58).

Fig, 3.10 shows the wide distribution of mills of the barbarised derivatives. They are found in Crimea at Neapolis (Simferopol), at Popesti, Vaslui and Timisoara in Romania, at Tamanska in southern Russia, at Prikubaniya in the Ukraine, in the Czech Republic and at Steinsberg bei Romhild and Gorsleben in Germany (Schmidt 1931, fig. 199; Schmidt 1933, fig, 50

OLYNTHUS MILLS

[-) derivative

Fig. 3.10: The distribution of classic and barbarised Olynthus mills. (Based on Frankel 2003, with additions and corrections)

THE STONE OF LIFE

116; Schultz 1957,fig. 11; Bucur 1983,figs 12-13; Beranova 1987,fig. 2; Anfimov 1951, fig. 1; Frohlich and Waldhauser 1989, fig, 6; Weffers 2009). Theyare also found in the Trentino — Alto Adige region of AlpineItaly, at sites such as Stulles or Collepietra (Donner and Marzoli 1994, figs 13 and 15). However, thereis little doubtthat this is a serious underestimate and many more are now known from Bohemia and Moravia, due to the researches of Petr Holodnak andthe late Milos

Cizmat. Theoriginal three from KraSovice, Lourtovice, and Zatec, has increased to about 30, with five concentrated in Moravia and the rest spread throughout Bohemia (¢g. Holodfiak and Mag 1999; Cizmat 1990; Ctverdk ef al 2007). It seems probable that similar work in Slovakia, Ukraine and Romania will multiply the numberof finds and transform what seemsto bea rarity into an important type. There are some important dates from the Czech Republic. In Moravia, they are known from La Tene A, ranging through to La Téne C2 and D1 in Bohemia (Holodmiak 2001, 40). Thus, a broad date range can be suggested during which thesemills were being made and used,say ¢. 450-100 BC. The barbarised mills from the Alpine region cannotbe precisely dated, but some might date to La Tene B-C andif so, would be more orless contemporarywith those from central Europe (Holodnak and Mag 1999, 430). If the central European examples really were derived from Greek prototypes, it is tempting to see the Scythians as a major agent in transmitting ideas from east to west. This hardly accounts for the northern Italian finds and here we must envisage derivation from Magna Graecia through Etruscan intermediaries. However, in truth, few finds from this region can be properly dated and as there is no evidence that the Olynthus mill was widely adopted by the Etruscans (Dal Ri 1994, 62) such a theory would be extravagantin the current state of our knowledge. The somewhatcontroversial finds from Monte Bibele, near Bologna, remain the only potential Etruscan candidates. On the other hand, examples of theclassic type are now known from Kastela, near Trogir, and the island of Vis, on the Croatian coast (information Tamas

Bezeczky). It is probable that many more will be foundin future research andit is possible that the idea was transmitted along the Adriatic to northern Italy.

Thefind from Jalame is anomalousin two respects. It occurs in a region which was well supplied bythe classic form andit is late Roman in date (Davidson Weinberg 1988). It serves to confirm that these mills were crude ‘country-style’ copies which need notall be of the same date. They could have been made at anyperiod after the Iron Age, although they do seem to be prevalent on Scythian and La Teéneperiodsites. The Olynthus mill and the rotary mill From at least the fourth century BC the Olynthus mill was used contemporaneously with rotary mills (below p. 55). It would seem therefore that they were not so muchthe precursorof the rotary quern, but more an alternative. They seem to have been truly characteristic of the Greeks and the barbarians with whom they were in contact. It is possible that they were intimately linked with Greek diet in the same way that Mesoamerican metates survive because they are preferred in the preparation of the local cuisine. If so, it might be immaterial that they were less efficient than the rotary quern (p. 127).

Opposite. Fag. 3.11: Some varieties of barbarised millsfrom Ukraine, Czech Republic andAlpine Italy: a, Zatec;

b, Prkubantya; ¢ Chrudim; d, Scythian town of Neapolis, Simjeropol; e, Vilémon;f, SimferopolMuseum;

& Stulles-Val Passinia (Merano Museum) (after Holodiiak and Mag 1999; Anfimov 1951; Ctverak, Holodiiak and Sigl 2007; Schutz 1957 (no scale); afterphotos by author) 52

OLYNTHUS MILLS

me X Shite ee

Mea ae

1 fan ee “ eee VEL

53

REVOLUTION IN FLOUR PRODUCTION: THE ROTARY QUERN There can be no doubt that the adoption of the rotary quern was an epoch-making innovation, not only in the history of mulling, but also for the humanrace as a whole.

Experiments demonstrate that the rotary quern could be manytimes more efficient

than the saddle variety and that the age-old problem of de-husking hulled grain was solved (see chapter 7). In addition, rotary action lends itself to mechanisation (chapter 6). The net result was an ability to produce flour quicker and in greater quantity. In a society where bread was the staple, this would mean that an increased population could be supported. It is not by chance that the arrival of the rotary quern was accompanied by other phenomenaindicating changes in the structure of society. In much of Europe, the innovation seems to have taken hold in the middle Iron Age, around 350 BC. Earlier rotary querns certainly existed, but it is at this time that rotaries becomes commonplace. At Danebury in Hampshire, for example, the most

fully excavated hill-fort in Britain, 94% of the rotary quern assemblage dates from the middle to late Iron Age (ze. 350 BC-AD 43). Interestingly, the middle Iron Age was,in other respects, a significant time in southern central Britain. The refurbishment of hillfort defences with the development of massive multi-vallation and the very numerous storage pits dating to this period all suggest growing population pressure whichstarted in the early Iron Age, as Cunliffe (2005, 593) has cautiously indicated. Despite this, the European adoption of the rotary quern was patchyand, for example, did not appear in Scandinavia before the second century AD (Jorgensen 2002; Zachrisson 2004). However, there is one prerequisite to this innovation that is often neglected: whereas a saddle quern can be made with stonetools, the production of a rotary quern is more complex and would require metal tools to shape the rock. The widespread adoption of this type of quern would only be possible when iron became readily available. It is noteworthy that at Daneburythere are 16 times more iron artefacts in the middle Iron Age than in the early Iron Age (Sharples 2010, 134). Perhaps this, more than any other factor, accounts for the sporadic adoption of this new method of grinding,forit followed in the wake of the iron tools upon which it was dependent. The origin of the rotary quern The origin of this important technological innovation has been the subject of much debate and Curwen (1937) was amongthefirst to raise the issue. He thought the works of Xenophon, Aristotle, and Alexis, dating ¢ 400-350 BC, might refer to donkeys grinding grain and that that this must imply the existence of rotary donkey mills in Greece, perhaps before 400 BC. In fact, the evidence is both obscure and insecure and

relies on the metonym for the upper millstone being ‘donkey’ in Greek. The error was then compounded byhis view that:

54

THE ROTARY QUERN . the revolving mill is so great an advance on any previous appliance that it cannot possibly have come into being by the normal process of development. With the possible exception of the potters wheel it ts the earhest piece of machinery to replace an oscillating movement by a continuous rotary one. This ts the principle of most modern machinery, whereby, for instance, we have the circular saw instead of the to-and-fro movement of the hand-saw, and the propeller instead of oars. Such an advance could only have been the product of a brilhant engineer or mathematician — someforgotten forerunner of Archimedes, who failed to achieve the immortality of the classics. However, in its simplest form the rotary quern need not be complex, particularly to people who already used the wheel, and there is no reason to suppose that it could not have arisen wherever need acted as a stimulus. Such a viewhas not been widely accepted and the search for a single point of origin has been the ‘holy grail’ of quern studies. Curwen’s work stimulated Gordon Childe (1943) to bring his encyclopaedic knowledge of European prehistory to bear on the problem and he, with characteristic perspicacity, pointed to northeastern Iberia as a probable point of origin for the rotary quern. The East, he claimed, was dominated by the oscillatory Olynthus-style mill and the North by saddle querns. Moritz (1958, 115) was of similar mind, but thoughtthat the Italian Pompeian mill and the Iberian type had a commonancestor in someas yet unidentified area of the Mediterranean. Current research has, on the face of it, proved Childe’s ideas fundamentally correct for Alonso (1997; 1995; 2002) and her colleagues have shownthat the rotary quern in Catalonia goes back to fifth century BC, while Runnels (1990) has demonstrated it did not appear in Greece until the first century BC. The same seemsto be true of Illyria (roughly equivalent to the former Yugoslavia and Albania combined) as pre-Roman rotaries are only found in the Istrian peninsular, which wassettled by the Celts (Stipcevie 1977, 129). Furthermore, in 1992 Michel Py concluded that the earliest rotary querns at Lattes, made from locallavas, date from 400 BC (Py 2009, 216), supporting the evidence from Catalonia. It is worth noting that assemblages of Punic or Greek mills in Sicily lack rotary querns: the sites of Agrigento, Akrai and Motya are dominated by Olynthus mills and while Pompeian/Morgantina types are present occasionally, rotary querns are absent (personal observation). This suggests that they were not used to any extent in the central Mediterranean between the sixth and second centuries BC, which accords with Wefers’ (2012, 88) claim that rotary querns do not appear in the Italian peninsular before the second century BC. On the other hand, another keysite in the central Mediterranean, Carthage, has produced evidence of a rotary quern which mightbe the earliest anywhere in the ancient Mediterranean. Morel (2001) describes a fragment from a tomb which seemsto be sixth century BC in date, even earlier than the Catalan examples. Unfortunately, his illustration gives little awayasit comprises a photograph of what appears to be an amorphous block of stone. However, the author is a respected and knowledgeable archaeologist, who would certainly have known a rotary quern and the find cannot beeasily dismissed. Equally, it could be argued thatasit was foundas a fragment, it is more likely to be intrusive rather than an integral grave good. This must be balanced with evidence that quern breakage might be a ritual connected with funerary activities (chapter 9). However, whether or not the early date from Carthage1s accepted, this town cannot be the point of origin as the piece in question is of medium grey lava which must have been imported since volcanic rocks are absent from northern Tunisia. It might come from Sardinia, where grey lavas were exploited for querns, or it might 55

THE STONE OF LIFE

originate in Sicily (Williams-Thorpe and Thorpe 1989). In the sixth century BC both these islands would have been under Punic hegemonyandit is this culture that would have been responsible for the innovation. Italy has been suggested as another place where rotary querns might have been invented. This is based on a passing remark by Pliny (NH, 36, 135) whichitself refers to an earlier work by Varro now lost. Pliny, and hence Varro before him, claimed that millstones were invented at Bolsena (Volsinii). No date can be given, but Varro would have written in the first century BC. However, it is argued elsewhere (chapter 5) that this is more probably a reference to the important quarries at Orvieto and the case for Italy seems untenable on present evidence. While the search for the origins of the rotary quern has been concentrated in Mediterranean lands, some astonishingly early dates have been claimed north of the Alps. Wefers (2011) has reviewed the evidence andhas identified two pieces, one from Munzenberg Ober-Horgen and the other from Regensburg-Harting in Germany, which maydate from theearlylate Iron Age (c. fifth-third century BC). However,it is in Britain, which might be expected to be nearly the last to recetve Mediterranean innovations, where secure early dates based on radiocarbon dating have been ascertained. In recent years, the southern British, or more specifically Wessex, Iron Age, has been the

subject of extensive research, principally by Geoff Wainwright, who organised a series of co-ordinated rescue excavations, and Barry Cunliffe, who undertook major research excavations at a number of Wessex hill-forts and settlements, notably Danebury. Asa result we are now in a position to re-evaluate the date of the arrival of rotary querns. Threesites seem of particular importance: Rowbury Farm in Wherwell, Daneburynear Stockbridge and Gussage All Saints in Dorset. The only other potentially early British site is Thorpe Thewles in Cleveland. These have been discussed by Peacock and Cutler (2011) but are summarised here for convenience. Rowbury The site at Rowbury Farm comprised an enclosure occupied from the early Iron Age to the second century AD and has produced whatis potentially the earliest rotary quern yet excavated from British soil. It comprises a rather shapeless lump of puddingstone about 115 mm thick and 225 mm across. There are traces of a spindle hole demonstrating that it was the lower stone of a rotary quern. The studyof British and French puddingstones showsthat the rock is similar to the rock from the quarries in the Bois-des-Hogues, St-Léonard, near Fécamp on the Normandycoast. The associated pottery suggests a date between 550-450 BC. If correctly dated it would be the earliest French puddingstone yet discovered anywhere, as well as perhapsthe earliest rotary quern known from Britain. However, the Rowbury evidence must be treated with caution. The find came from the uppermostlayer of a very shallow pit and while there is no mention of contamination, this must remain a possibility. Secondly, many of the pits considered to be of middle Iron Age date contained earlier pottery (Cunliffe and Poole 2008, 131) and so it could be that the quern, rather than the pottery, dates the pit. Rowburyfurnishes important evidence for the 56

THE ROTARY QUERN pre-Conquest importation of French puddingstone, althoughit is less secure as evidence for the innovation of the rotary quern. Gussage-All-Saints Our second Wessex site was published almost a decade earlier (Wainwright 1979). Thesite is a similar enclosed settlement occupied betweenthe earliest Iron Age and first century AD. Three radiocarbon dates suggest the introduction of rotary querns at some stage between the eighth and fifth centuries BC. In this case, caution is needed as only three radiocarbon dates are available and the pits were phased bytheir pottery content. Again, it is possible that a middle Iron Age pit would contain nothing but early pottery and that the quernsdate the pits rather than vice-versa. Danebury This Hampshire hill-fort provides rather better evidence. The site has been phased on the basis of ceramics and the sequence is supported by multiple radiocarbon dates. The dating is absolute and more secure than most other Iron Agesites. It appears that rotary querns were introduced in ceramic phase (cp) 5. There were nine radiocarbon dates for cp 4-5 whichtranslate as broadly 450-400 BC (Cunliffe 1984, 194). This suggests firmly that rotary querns were used in Wessex in the fifth century BC. If we allow for the small radiocarbon sample, the error inherent in the method and the broad phasing of Gussage, there need be no conflict between the two. Thorpe Thewles This site in Cleveland, Northumberland (Heslop 1987, 111) has been cited in evidence for the fifth century BC introduction of the rotary quern (e.g. Watts 2002, 28). The dating is based on the thermoluminescent dating of pottery, but the standard error is huge. At the 68%confidencelevel there would be a one in three chance of the date lying outside the range 675-295 BC andit appears, sadly, that the case is far from proven. It is now becoming clear that rotary querns have been in use for a much longerperiod than previously suspected and there is a strong case for suggesting that the idea was adopted in Britain at least as early as fifth century BC, rather than the mid fourth to early third.It remains an open possibility that future research will promote the case for a sixth century date. Moreover, it is worth noting that the rotary quern appears as the fully developed ‘Sussex’ type, suggesting that there might be a precursor. This means that querns in Wessex are as early as any in Europe and could even be as old as the Carthage example. It begins to appearthat Iberia no longer has priority and that rotary querns were appearing at about the same time in Britain and perhaps not muchlater in central and north-western Europe. The most probable explanation is that the idea did not emanate from single point but developed independentlyin different places. There is, however, another line of enquiry that needs to be considered. It is possible that there is a relationship between the central European derivatives of the Olynthus mill and the rotary quern. Holodnak and Mag (1999, 430) have shownthat, at Sobésuky, the former dates from La Téne B1, before the arrival of the rotary quern in La Téne B2 and,possibly, as early as 400 BC. However, in Moravia, they may go back to La Tene A, perhaps 475-400 BC (Cizmat

57

THE STONE OF LIFE

1990). Holodnak’s experiments have shownthatthis type may have been usedin a to-and-fro manner rather than in the oscillatory mode. However, almost invariably they have a central feed hole rather than slit and this could readily accommodate a spindle which would enable them to be used as rotary querns. As mentioned above (p. 50) the quern from Straky, near Nymburk, has concentric striations on the working surface suggesting use in this way. A remarkable quern in the museum of VySkov, Moravia, seen by the writer, may also be an intermediate form, although there are nostriations visible on the working surface (museum number 31/99-524/173). It is possible that we are witnessing an experimental process where the Olynthus derivatives were being used in a new way. The evidence begins to suggest that the idea of rotary hand querns mayhave originated in several places at different times. The earliest querns are those of the Punic realm, Catalonia and Britain dating to fifth century BC or before, with later innovations in southern France, Germany and the Czech Republic, all after 400 BC. With the exception of Carthage, the rotary quern seemsto havearrivedlate in the central and eastern Mediterranean and early querns are largely a feature of the western Mediterranean and of Europe north of the Alps. Conclusion It has often been said that necessityis the motherof invention, andit is almost a commonplace that innovationsrelate to need and if there is no need there will be no innovation.If society, of its economic milieu changes, this might act as a catalyst for introducing new concepts and techniques. In this case, increased population might lead for a need to process more grain quickly, or perhaps there was a social change in which a process, once sited in every household, became the preserve of specialists producing flour for the whole community. Such factors might promote innovation with no outside intervention. However, withoutiron tools, these querns, together with the Greek Olynthus mill, could not

have been made;the availability of iron mightthus have been a major determinant. A scarcity of iron would condemnthe miller to the old-fashioned saddle quern and this, in turn, would limit the rate of flour production and the numbersthat could be fed. It is probable that there is no simple equation and that the middle Iron Age saw an increase in population and,with it, an increase in demandfor and availability of iron; both of which would promotethe rotary quern. This type would thus emerge whenever and wherever these conditions prevailed. If this is accepted, the sporadic pattern of adoption that seems apparent begins to make sense and dates muchearlier than those so far established are perhapsunlikely. Towardsa classification of rotary querns Most artefacts found in archaeological excavations have been subjected to rigorous typological classification, so thatit is often possible to refer to a ‘type series’ of a particular date or to a diachronic succession of types. Despite their ubiquity and variety of forms this is not the case with querns. There is no equivalent of Dressel’s classification of amphorae, of Loeschke’s work on lamps or of Dragendorff’s samian forms, upon which later workers were able to build and to develop. Nor is it possible to make comparison with the regional typologies which have been established for Roman coarse wares. The best we can offer is the 75 year old seminal work of a Sussex doctor, Cecil Curwen, one of the great pioneers of our study. 58

THE ROTARY QUERN Approaches to classification: historical Theclassification of querns began seriously with Curwen’s article of 1937 in which he attempted to establish a dated sequence, so that ultimately they would be of use as chronological markers. Chronologywas naturally and rightlya priorityin the formative years of British archaeology. Childe (1943) later glowingly endorsed his work saying: Dr Ceal Cunven hasgiven us a really epoch-making contribution toprehistory and history. Not only has heprovided theprehistorian nith a newinstrumentfor the establishment of chronology, but he has drawn the attention ofexcavators to a revolutionarybut curously neglected advance in technology.

Fag. 4.1: The typology of querns according to Curwen (1937; 1941). a, Wessex; b, Sussex; 6 Hunsbury;d, puddingstone, e, flat beehive

59

THE STONE OFLIFE Curwen’s paper outlined the stages in the developmentof the rotary quern in Britain: 1) Pre-Roman types; 2) Romano-British domestic types; 3) Flat querns; 4) Pot querns. Pre-Roman querns (Fig. 4.1) were then divided into three types, which were given regional names:

a Wessex, where upper stones were doughnut-shaped and had some form of

hopper. The grinding surface was concave. b Sussex, with a flat top, no hopper and a concave grinding surface. ¢ Hunsbury (Northamptonshire), which was ‘apparently derived from the Wessex type’, but taller with a well-defined hopper. The grinding surface was usuallyflat. Komano-British quetns were seen as developing from the Sussex type, but had flatter grinding surfaces, an increase in diameter and a decrease in thickness. Later in the Roman period they were to develop a marked collar round the hopper (Fig. 4.1e). Flat querns were those whose grinding surface sloped at less than three degrees. Curwen recognised two groups: the disc type of late Roman date deriving from the earlier Romano-British forms and the ‘flat beehive’ characteristic of Scotland, which he saw

as developing from his supposed ‘Roman legionary quern’ (p. 153; see below for a discussion of the ‘beehive’ quern). Some Hunsbury querns were also regarded as a type of flat quern. However, the concept of a specific legionary quern implies that the Roman army was entirely self-sufficient and did not trade with the natives, which is patently not the case. The problem is further discussed below(chapter8). Pot querns represent the end of the sequence and date to the medieval period. Later, in 1941, he added the Romano-British puddingstone quern (Fig. 4.1d) with its characteristic lithology and a resemblance to the Hunsburyflat quern. Throughout, Curwen seems to assume that Iron Age querns were locally made and hence would reflect the prevailing regional culture in the same manneras pottery was assumedto do. In this respect he was very much child of his times. In 1950 Judith Philips revisited the subject of Hunsbury style querns and refined the classification into those with a moulded rim around the hopper in the upper stone and those without. From this emerged a “Yorkshire group’ with a handle socket which does not pierce the hopper and an ‘East Anglian group’ whichis flatter, wider and more bun-shaped than the Yorkshire. In 1977 Séamus Caulfield described the bun-shaped Irish querns, which are similar to Curwen’s flat beehives of northern England. For him the most important determinant was the type of handle hole and he recognised three groups: B1 Oval horizontal handle hole. B2 Round perpendicular handle hole. B3 Oval off-horizontal handle hole. Thereafter there waslittle debate until Caroline Ingle (1989; 1994) presented her revised 60

THE ROTARY QUERN typology of beehive querns which, for the first time, focussed on the question of lithology. While this had been mentioned, it was not seen as a key determinant by most workers. However,in reality the stone type reflects the quarry and is a key parameter. The unfortunate emphasis on regional namesrather than rock type assumes limited inter-regional exchange and tends to confuse rather than clarifythe issue. Curwen put muchreliance on the angle of the grinding surface, doubtless because he thought (erroneously) that the rotary quern was derived from the Pompeian mill. This had steep grinding surfaces and he seems to have assumed a gradual evolutionaryflattening. While it is true that there is a marked trend towardsflatter querns with the passage of time, it cannot be for the reasons he posited. It is premature to propose a new classification, as it is unclear how to weigh the different traits which characterise a quern. Each of the main attributes, form and lithologydisplay numerous variables which must be taken into account and here we can do no more than draw attention to them.

Approaches to classification: description offorms It is unfortunate that, despite the emphasis on typology, there is no agreed uniform nomenclature. The same quern can be described in a range ways by different workers. Thus, a quern might be described as flat, rounded, bun-shaped, doughnut-shapedor even beehiveshaped, by different workers. Such terms are vivid descriptors, but used indiscriminately they conceal rather than define the true nature of a quern. The problem relates mainly to the upper stone, which is generally the most complex and hence the most diagnostic; lower stones have fewer traits and may be generally less useful. A further complication is wear. Unlike most artefacts, which retain their shape throughouttheir life, querns change shape as they wear. A hemisphere may become bun-shaped,a cylinder may becomea disc and the position of the handle will appear to gradually migrate downwardsor belost altogether. This mayresult in the cutting of a new handle hole, which maydiffer radically from the first. A quern mayalso become markedly asymmetric and quite unlike its original design. However, although the rate of wear is of immenseinterest,it is all but impossible to determine in most cases. At the most basic level the upper stones of all rotary querns can berelated to one of three geometric shapes. Seen in profile they mayappear as a truncated cone(with the point missing); they may take the form of a hemisphere or a tangential slice through a sphere; alternatively they may comprise a cylinder or a flat disc, itself a transverse slice through a cylinder. The geometry may not be perfect and sometimes the form may appear as a hemisphere-cone hybrid, but nevertheless there is usually a close resemblance to one or other of these shapes. In somecases the distinctionis clear, in others it is a matter of judgement. The hemisphere and the truncated cone are sometimes grouped together in Britain and referred to collectively as the ‘beehive’ quern. In fact, they do not in the least resemble a modern hive, but rather the old-fashioned,traditional bee ‘skep’. These were dome-shaped, made out of a wicker frame plastered with mud or of coils of grass and straw sewn together, and some querns bear a passing resemblance to them. However, this unsatisfactory term, ingrained in theliterature, is also widely and indiscriminately applied to include other querns which are flatter and not in 61

THE STONE OF LIFE the least domed. However, havingsaid this,it is true that conical and hemispherical querns seem to merge and querns appear to be a hybrid of the two forms. Superimposed on the geometryare other traits which indicate the way a quern was used. Thelist includes:

Go NN

Aon YN >

The presence or absence of a hopper on the upper surface The presence or absence of a rim around the hopper The size and shape of the feed-pipe The angle of the active grinding surface Theposition and type of the handle hole or slot — orits total absence The shape of the rynd slot if present (the rynd is a piece of iron or woodplaced across the central hole to accommodate the spindle, while allowing the passage of grain) The position of the rynd, on the upper or lower surface The quern rock 9, The diameter of the quern 10. The mass of the quern 11. The thickness of the quern 12. The degree of asymmetry.

Thelast three mayresult from use and wear, but it is difficult to rank the other parameters in

order of importance as each hasa different role to play. For example, the presence or absence of a hopperrelates to the manner of feeding, the position of the handle hole to the mode of turning and the position of the rynd, if present, may indicate tentering, It would be as unwise asit is impossible, to rank these in order of importance. The use of typologyto classify querns is complex and dependent on the ranking of criteria. The lower stoneis a little easier as it is less complicated. It is usually cylindrical or hemispherical in shape and comprises a block of stone, the same diameter as the upper, with a hole for the spindle. Other variables include the angle of the grinding surface and the diameter of the hole, its shape and its depth. Sometimes, the lower stone maybe thinner and perforated which may, in manycases, be an indication of tentering (ze. the lifting of the upper stone to reduce friction andfacilitate the grain feed).

Approaches to classification: lithology An alternative approach1s to begin with lithology rather than form. Thetable below shows some of the principal quern rocks found in England during the Iron Age and Roman period,the associated typology and an indication of some of the major quarries. The same rotary type may appear in different rocks and sometimes several varieties are found made of the same rock. It will be seen there is a broad correlation between lithology(and therefore point of origin) with form. The overlaps mayindicate an interchange of workers or regional fashions. Nevertheless, clear categories emerge and geology makes a viable starting point for understanding typology. Such an approach may seem self-evident, but contrasts markedly with the usual method whichis the reverse — to start with form and considerlithology as an optional addendum.

62

THE ROTARY QUERN

Clearly this scheme,intended as an incomplete example, onlycovers, in broad outline, some of the main rock types: it could be expanded byrock type and by geographical region.It is evident that typology cannotbesensibly divorced from lithology and a majorcriticism ofall previous workis that, with the exception of Ingle (1989; 1994), this is exactly what has happened.Itis perhaps too early to propose a rigorousclassification as with saddle querns (chapter 2), but the wayaheadis gradually emerging. Rock type

Common type attribution

Known quarries

Millstone Grit

Hunsbury (Steepsided conical and hemispherical)

Unknown

Yordale Sandstone

Hunsburystyle

Unknown

Coal Measures Sandstone

Hunsburystyle

Wharncliffe, Yorks and unknown

Jurassic/ Cretaceous Sandstone

Hunsburystyle

North Yorkshire Moors

and unknownin the Spilsby (Lincs) region

Hertfordshire

Puddingstone

French Puddingstone

Hemispherical and conical puddingstone (with handle holes not reaching hopper)

Bowl’s Dell and local surface collection, Herts

Hemispherical and

Fécampregion, Saint-Saéns, La Londe (Seine-Maritime)

conical puddingstone (with handles piercing

hopper) Ferruginous Puddingstone

Hemispherical and conical puddingstone

Worms Heath, Surrey

Lower Greensand

Sussex style

Lodsworth, Sussex

Lower Greensand

Hunsburystyle

Folkestone, Kent

Upper Greensand

Wessex

Unknown

Upper Greensand

Flat discs

Pen Pits, Penselwood, Wilts

Old Red Sandstone

“‘Beehives’ and flat discs

Forest of Dean; Bristol area

Lava

Discs and cylinders

Mayen

(calcareous)

Regional groups THE PATTERN OF BriTISH QUERN PRODUCTION AND USE

The geological approach leads naturally to consideration of the zones of quern usage and the pattern for Britain is illustrated schematically in Fig. 4.2. There is, of course, diachronic variation andthefigure is an overview covering a long timeinterval in the Iron Age and subsequent 63

LOE SON fF LIP

Fig. 4.2: The quern zones of England based on native rock types. Red dots, quarries; black, main concentration,grey,frequentfinds. a,Millstone Grit and similarsandstones, Pennines (Carboniferous); b, Pen Pits, Wiltshire/ Somerset (Upper Greensand) and Spilsby Sandstone, Lincolnshire (Jurassic/ Cretaceous), ¢, Old Red Sandstone; d, Hertfordshire Puddingstone, Chiltern Hills (Palaeocene) e, Lodsworth (Lower Greensand);f, Folkestone (Lower Greensand). 100 km grid

64

THE ROTARY QUERN Roman period, which will be discussed further in chapter 8. Southern England is dominated by Greensand of which three quarry areas are known: Folkestone in Kent, and Lodsworth in Sussex,

both in Lower Greensand, while Pen Pits on the Somerset-Wiltshire-Dorset boundaryis the only known Upper Greensand quarry. The products of these quarries were widelydistributed, with Lodsworth travelling over 150 km from its source to the north and the west. There are differences in typology with Folkestone producing both conical and hemispherical mills, while Lodsworth concentrated on Curwen’s ‘Sussex style’ and Pen Pits on simple disc-like querns. There are, however, further currently unknown sources in central England utilising the Upper Greensand, one of which produced what Curwencalled the “Wessex style’ quern. Each rock type seems to be accompanied bycharacteristic typology, no doubt reflecting differences in date as well as providing a hall-mark of origin to the user. Most querns seem to date from the middle Iron Age (¢ 350 BC) but Lodsworth and Folkestone persisted into the Roman period. Western and central England and the northern part of Wessex are dominated by querns of Old Red Sandstone from the Forest of Dean or the Bristol region. Iron Age examples are hemispherical, but the industry becomes importantin the Romanperiod anddiscs or cylinders are the rule. From the Midlands to Scotland the dominant form is the conical, hoppered quern which

Curwen called the Hunsburytype. It is conical in form and has a large hopper, which

is penetrated bya horizontal handle hole. There are a number of quarries knownin the

Millstone Grit of the Pennines, in Jurassic sandstones, in the Coal Measure sandstones and in the Spilsby sandstone. The conical form is also found in southern Scotland where it is accompanied by the hemispherical quern. Further north they becomeflatter slices of a hemisphere. Ireland is dominated by hemispherical querns and these maybe later Iron Age in date, running in to the Romanperiodin areas further south. Thus, in Britain, a series of quarries, each with distinctive traits, is combined with a

more or less discrete area of exchange, creating verydistinctive regional patterning. EUROPEAN REGIONAL GROUPS

The distribution of different types of rotary quern across Europe is a subject of great interest, but one that is fraught with problems. While it is possible to see patternsin restricted areas, as demonstrated above for Britain, the broader European picture is much more difficult to unravel. Firstly, national surveys are, at best, incomplete or not yet attempted,

and much of the literature is published in sources that are only available to those living in the countries concerned. Clearly we must await the completion of systematic surveys, such as those progressing rapidly in France. A further question is posed by our inadequate knowledge of chronology. Few querns can be dated with any precision and sometimes even the differentiation of Iron Age and Roman can be a problem. There is a grave danger of

conflating material at use in very different periods.

It may seem premature to even begin the task but, by standing back and taking a very broad view of Europe, certain regional and chronological characteristics seem to appear in shadowyoutline, although only time will reveal the reality of the emerging pattern. Across Europe there is a wide mix of different quern types and the basic geometric shapes; many approximating to cylindrical, hemispherical and conical forms recur more or less everywhere. This is to be expected as rotary querns can only be made in a limited 65

THE STONE OF LIFE

number of ways. However, despite this, there are areas where certain forms are dominant and there is a much higher probability of their occurrence. They give character to the regional quern assemblage without precluding their occurrence elsewhere. It is as though Europe was covered with a knowledge cloud through which occasional peaks of clarity appear. One such peak is the so-called ‘Celtic’? quern which dominates central Europe but the same shape also occurs in, for example, Italy and Portugal. A pattern seems to be emerging, the main characteristics of which are outlined below. Hopefully, as the subject develops it will be possible to subdivide and addto these basic categories. Currently it is only possible to consider broad groups of related forms some of whichare illustrated in Figs 4.3-7.

The cylindricalgroup A dominant type over much of Iron Age Europe is what has been called the ‘Celtic’ quern andit seems to be concentrated in the heartland of Celtic culture, namely central and southern France, central and southern Germany, together with the Czech and Slovak republics, but it is not characteristic of all Celtic lands (such as Ireland, Scotland

or England). In view of thisit is perhaps best to renameit the ‘cylindrical’ group. There are in fact two varieties which maybe linked in some manner: 1. The heavycylindrical quern weighing about 35 kg or more with a diameter often in excess of 40 cm,a side handle and an ogee-shaped feed hole and rynd slot (Fig. 4.3a). There is a dished hopper but no rim aroundit. This quern would presumably have been untentered and would, therefore, require considerable force to turn. It would presumably have been mounted on a podium and the operative would walk round it. The lower stones have a spindle hole but are not perforated. 2. A thinner variety with a marked rim around the hopper (Fig. 4.3b). These are often less than 40 cm in diameter.

These two types were recognised by Py (1992) among the querns from the town of Lattara (Lattes) in the south of France, where he called them B1 and B2 respectively. Staubitz (2007) has elaborated this basic bipartite division in his study of the querns from the late Celtic oppidum of Heidetrank, in the Taunus hills. He sees four types of upper stone(Fig. 4.4): Type A: Upper stone without rim Type B: Upper stone with sloping rim Type C: Upper stone with flat rim Type D: Upper stone with flat upper surface and no rim. He also separates three varieties of lower stone: Type 1: Lower stone with flat underside Type 2: Lower stone with slightly dished underside Type 3: Lower stone with strongly dished underside Types 1 and 2 are shown with pivot holes not perforating the stone and type 3 with a perforation. 66

THE ROTARY QUERN

Fig. 4.3: a, the cylindrical heavy quern,b, the lighter variety

Fig. 4.4: Staubitz’ classification of the cylindrical quern (after Staubitz 2007) 67

THE STONE OF LIFE There is no doubt that this family of querns was dominant over large areas of Europe. Some of the more important sites include Lattes and Bibracte in France, various sites in Hessen and Bohemia (Staubitz 2007, 48). To this can be added Moravia and Slovakia (eg. Cizmat and Leichmann 2002; 2007; personal observation Trnava Museum). Few can be firmly dated, but Waldhauser (1981) claimed that almost all the Bohemian mills could be ascribed to La Téne B2-D1 (¢ 250-150 BC) and this is supported by Holodfiak and Mag (1999, 430) on the basis of evidence from Sobésuky. At Lattes, Py (2009, 216) dates them from ¢ 400 BC, but elsewhere in Provence they are unknown before the second century BC. A piece from Bibracte is well dated between the first century BC and the Augustan period (Buchsenschutz and Boyer 1999, 212). It is equally clear that the type has a very long life and ultimately translates into the classic Roman period quern of north-western Europe, which will be discussed below (p. 72). While cylindrical querns seem to be the dominant type in central Europe they regularly occur outside this region. The hemisphericalgroup In northern Europe a different family or group of querns dominate the Iron Age and subsequent Roman period. Here many take the form of a hemisphereor ofslices from one, but sometimes they appear more as a truncated cone than a hemisphere. The type might be termed the ‘Germanic’ quern as opposedto the ‘Celtic’, but again cultural nomenclatureis inadvisable because querns of this type are by no meansrestricted to Germanic peoples. They are found in northern Germany and Poland, in the northern Netherlands and across the North Sea in the British Isles, where they comprise the so-called ‘beehive’ tradition.

Fig. 4.5: The hemisphericalgroup. a, Magdeburg, Germany, b, Wittelte, Netherlands; c, Vallée de L’Aisne, France (after Lies 1963; Harsema 1979; Pommepuy 1999) 68

THE ROTARY QUERN One of the problems of northern Europe is that much of the region was not occupied by the Romans, so there is no cut-off point to distinguish pre-Roman as Iron Age cultures continued unchecked. Asa result dating is often more problematic. The group (Fig. 4.5) has manyvariants which seem to be related and merge with one another, although all are distinct from the cylindrical group. Many querns are characterised by the rounded profile of the upper stones. Others have a well-formed hopper with an almost conical profile. Some may have a handle inserted horizontally or vertically into the upper surface. In other cases they have no handle hole atall, suggesting that it would have been held in place by a band of fibre around the circumference. Theyare generally less than 35 cm in diameter although they may range up to 45 cm on occasions. Caulfield (1977) has described the Irish series in some detail, suggesting that they were introduced in the final La Téne — probably in the first centuries BC/AD. Somecertainly seem to have been used as vehicles for La Téne art, suggesting that they were valued objects. Flat disc quernsalso exist in Ireland but these have never been properly studied and maydate largely from the early medieval period. The Iron Age querns of Scotland are of a similar date, but are of two types: a flatter bun in the Highlands and a more domed varietyin the Scottish borderlands (MacKie 1971a and b). Again they are accompanied bydisc querns. MacKie (1971a, 144) dismissed Curwen’s (1937) theorythat the bun-shapedvariety had been introduced by the Romanlegions and suggested that the disc and the domedvarieties represent two different strains from different sources introduced between the first century BC and the second and third centuries AD. A main point of distinction was whether theyhad loose or fixed handles, which must always be hard to determine. The bun-shaped form also occurs in the north of England,althoughit is rare in comparison with the more conical variety with which it merges imperceptibly (Heslop 2008). In the south, Curwen (1937) has distinguished the Wessex and Sussex varieties of which the Wessex quern is of the category considered here, while the Sussex is more of a truncated cone or cylinder with a stronger resemblance to the central Europeantype. In France, the Iron Age puddingstone industry of Normandyincluded querns of this form as well as other examples, similar to the Hunsburytype. Theyare present in Roman contexts in Drenthe, in the northern Netherlands, although apparently usually dated to the Roman period, and also in Denmark where they were not introduced until c. AD 200 (Harsema 1979, fig. 8; Jorgensen 2002). The group extends across northern Europe and has been reported from Magdeburg in north Germany, parts of the Czech Republic and Poland (Lies 1963; Halama and Zeman 2009; Nasz 1950). The contexts are usually Romanperiod Iron Age, but with earlier antecedents. The Iberian group Cato the Elder’s De Agncu/tura, a digest of farming practice dating largely to the second century BC, contains an intriguing reference to the Spanish mill (#o/a hispanensis). Cato served as governor of Hispania Citerior, using brutal methodsto reduceit to a state of tranquillity 69

THE STONE OF LIFE between 185-179 BC andit is probable, therefore, that the name wascoinedto describe a distinctive form of mill which he encountered during his stay in the province. Presumablytherefore, this 1s a name based on more than hearsay or fashion. There has been somediscussion of the possible nature of the Iberian mill, led by Childe in 1943. He suggests that it was a cylindrical rotary quern with one or two lugs which would have accommodated a vertical handle (Fig. 4.6). It had a flat top, sometimes with a rim. Childe argued that it could date from fourth to third centuries BC

in Catalonia, but was also present before the Roman conquest of Numantia in 150 BC. More

examples have been described from Alorda Park and other Iberian sites in Catalonia (Equipe d’Alorda Park 2002; Alonso 2002). They sometimeslack the lugs but have instead two opposing holes for a turning device.

10cm

Fg. 4.6: The Iberian quern. La Bastida de Moixent, Valencia, diameter 52 cm (after Equipe d’Alorda Park 2002) The conicalgroup A different type of quern seemsto characterise the eastern fringes of Europe, particularly in the Aegean and the Black Sea region. Here many appear in the form of a truncated cone, ¢ 37 cm in diameter, with a marked deep hopper and a handle hole placed 1n the side. The rynd ts often on top and the feed hole maybe tripartite, but this is not mandatory and a variety of rynd--recesses are known.Fig, 4.7 is based on two limestone examples from Oarta de Sus, Romania. These can be dated from the second century BCto the first century AD (Stanctu 1992). This type is common in Romania, whereit is often referred to as the ‘Dacian’ mill, which had a long life,

10cm

Fig. 4.7: The conicalgroup. Based on Dacian quernsfrom Oarta de Sus, Bata Mare Museum, Romania (after Stanciu 1992) 70

THE ROTARY QUERN dating between the third or second century BC to the early second century AD (Bucur 1983). However, the form has a muchwiderdistribution and appears in Greece as Runnels’ (1990) “Roman hopper mill’. It is also known from Delos and Ephesus (Deonna 1938, fig. 386; Amouretti 1986, Pl 25a; Williams-Thorpe and Thorpe 1993, 270). The same form

appears at Quseir al-Qadim, Egypt, in a cellar with Olynthus mills (Meyer 1982, fig. 54g). It is also found, associated with Olynthus mills, on the Mahdia wreck, and on the wrecks of Ile Maire, Marseille and Acireale, Sicily, all of which might be explained as eastern

imports (Baatz 1994; Beltrame and Boetto 1997). A fine series from Malaya Kopanya, on the western fringes of the Ukraine, has been published by Kotigoroshko (1989). An example, which might relate to examples from Aquileia and Alpine Italy, has been

found along the Adriatic at Siculi (Trogir) in Croatia (information Tamas Bezeczky). Those from Sicily, on sites such as Panormos and Morgantina, might be attributable to Greek contact (Sebesta 1977; Dal Ri 1994, fig. 7 and 12; White 1963, type 4). This form is often found on the samesites as the Olynthus mill which suggests a geographical relationship. There are fewfirm dates but Morgantina seemsto be the earliest and could dateto the third century BC. In Greece, there are no rotaries which can be dated before first century BC (Runnels 1990) and Baatz (1994, 98) has suggested that the idea was transmitted eastwards by the Roman invasion of Greece in the first century BC. The Quseir al-Qadim finds seem to date to the first century AD, but examples from Dacia demonstrate a much wider chronological span. This type seems dominant in Eastern Europe whence Mediterranean examples might derive, butit occurs elsewhere as the British Hunsburytype, in the pre-Roman Folkestone quarries and in Picardy (Philips 1950; information K.Parfitt; Pommepuy1999, figs 15-17). Others are known from Celles in Charente Maritime and Villiers-sous-Saint-Leu in the Paris region (Dautheil 1930). Conclusion Theisolation of regional groups is fraught with problems. Firstly, we cannot be sure that the literature reflects the true situation andit is possible that the more interesting artefacts are being singled out for publication. If so, simple disc querns have a high chance of being ignored. Secondly, the writer’s sampling of the literature depends on what can be obtained in British libraries or through his contacts. Thirdly, there are vast regions where the evidenceis sparse orentirely absent. In addition, the broad brush strokes adopted here conceal the inevitable intermixing of types, as inevitably each zone has querns which do not fit the pattern for the area as a whole. This might be due to exchange between regions or to the movementof people, but this is not necessarily the case. There are only so many ways of making a rotary quern andit is almost inevitable that the same form will recur in different places at different times. Thus the Dacian and Hunsburytypes have much in commontypologically, but this is unlikely to be significant and chance, rather than contact, is a more probable explanation. Despite this it seems that, in the current state of theart, a case can be madefor certain distinct regional fashions, all of which are capable of more subdivision and refinement.

71

THE STONE OF LIFE The Roman quern The Roman period saw considerable advances in milling technology, but the simple hand quern remained basically unchanged from its Iron Age precedents; over much of the Roman Empire hand querns seem to derive primarily from their pre-Roman antecedents. Throughout the Roman period there seem to be small but significant developments so that it is usually possible to distinguish a late Roman quern from anearly one. The origin of the Roman quern is particularly clear in north-western Europe where the commonest types were made of Mayen lava from the Eifel region of Germany. This 1s clear from Horter’s (1994) diachronic study of this industry, in which heillustrates typical examples of each period. Roman querns from this region owe muchto the so-called ‘Celtic’ quern which we have renamed‘the cylindrical group’ above. The Roman period successors

telate to the smaller pre-Roman querns: they retain the broad dished hopper-like top and

the rim, but differ in detail. They seem to be significantly larger, of the order of 40 cm or

more, rather than 35-40 cm which appears to be the norm for the Iron Age. They often have a perforation for a ring handle, although Crawford and Roder (1955) considered this, without discussion, to be present on earlier versions. Sometimes Roman querns havea pair of holes on the upper surface and it seems that the preferred means of traction was bya stick which would have been pivotedat its upper end, thus giving a considerable mechanical advantage (see below pp. 74-6). Another feature of Roman Mayen quernsis that the rynd is often on top rather than under the stone and the lower stone is normally perforated. The role of the army in promoting the Mayen quernis discussed below in chapter 8. In France, it appears that Roman querns had a similar heritage for Jaccottey e¢ af (2011b) draw attention to an increased diameter, citing examples from Alsace, Burgundy, Franche-

Comte, Eure-et-Loire and the Languedoc. Their claim of a general size increase applies not just to France, but to Europe as a whole as will be argued below.

In Portugal,it is instructive to compare the querns of Conimbriga (Borges 1978) with those

of the Castros. Some examples of the latter, from largely pre-Roman Citania de Briteiros,

are shownin Fig, 4.8 and they appear similar to the smaller central European variety. They are about 35 cm in diameter, have a marked rim and side handle hole and the lower stones

are generally unperforated. The Conimbriga quernsare similar with the lower stones usually unperforated and the side handle in the upper stone. However, the rim is vestigial or absent and the average diameter is 40 cm. There is little evidence from Italy, but at Pompeii domestic querns seem to resemble the heavycylindrical type (Peacock 1989, type 1). It could be that they are related to central Europe, but equally they may be an independentstrand. In Britain, the Old Red Sandstone quernsnot only survived the Roman conquest, but flourished, to become one of the major industries of lowland England with exports from Monmouthshire and the Bristol region into central England and the Midlands (Shaffrey 2006). Shaffrey was able to demonstrate an increase in the average and median diameter and the maximum diameter over time. The increase is gradual from the Iron Age into the first century AD, followed bya decrease in the second century and a further increase from the third century onwards. 72

THE ROTARY QUERN

=

~

7

ac Ait Ww.

«eee

Fig. 4.8: Upperstones collected together at the entrance to Citania de Briteiros, Portugal; typically 25-30 cm in diameter(photo: author)

In East Anglia the principal Roman form is the hemispherical mill, usually made of

Hertfordshire Puddingstone. It may have begun just before or after the conquest, but it seems to be based on an Iron Age prototype. It has been shownthat in the pre-Romanera French puddingstone querns were being imported into East Anglia and these mayhave been the model (Green with Peacock forthcoming). The typological resemblance is so close it

is even possible that the Hertfordshire industry was created by an immigration of quernmakers from Normandy. In this case, the Romanversionis generally smaller than the French

Iron Age ones andrarely exceeds 35 cm (Green 2011, 123). There is no evidence of Roman size increase, possibly because of the constraints imposedbythe rock and possibly because of the date, as production after c 150 AD is hard to substantiate. The quarries of Lodsworth, between Petworth and Midhurst in Sussex, also continued production into the Romanperiod. The Iron Age querns are typically small, of the order of 30-45 cm. In the Romanperiod they seem to be supplemented bylarger stones such as one

from Littlehampton whichis 50 cm in diameter (Shaffrey and Roe 2011, 318). The average diameter increases because Lodsworthalso produced millstones. Folkestone is another production site which seems to have continuedafter the conquest. The quarry lies on the foreshore, just below the well-known Romanvilla (Rellee DISS), The querns recovered seem similar to the more conical Hunsbury type or alternatively as ry ved:

acd

THE STONE OF LIFE hemispherical ‘bun-shaped’ types. Recent excavations have shownthat an extensive Iron Age site underlies the villa, providing a wonderful opportunity to attempt a diachronic study of the industry. This however must remain for the future. In the north of Britain the conical and hemispherical ‘beehive’ querns persist into the Roman period as shown by the fine assemblage from the native settlement at Huckhoe in Northumberland, occupied from at least the second century AD until the late third century (Jobey 1959). The average diameter is 35 cm. While this is small, it is larger than many querns recorded in the north Yorkshire and southern Durham survey (Heslop 2008). It appears that in this region the tallest querns were earliest, becoming flatter towards and into the Roman period, to become what Curwen (1937) called the “Legionary type’ with a diameter around 35 cm. The South Shields Roman fort was built around 163 AD and persisted into the fourth century. Here the quernsare flat versions of the hemispherical variety and the eleven published examples have an average diameter of 46 cm, suggesting that enlargement was particularly marked in the later Roman period (Allason-Jones and Miket 1984). It would be possible to continue this line of enquiry, but the evidence begins to suggest that there is indeed an overall increase in size during the Roman period, particularly in the later centuries. This would seem to apply all over north-western Europe. At the same time there is a general flattening and thinning of querns although theyretain a vestige of their original Iron Age shape. The perforation of the lower stone, presumably to facilitate tentering, now becomes commonplace. Onefeature that does seem to mark the later Roman period is a raised ridge around the hopper which Curwen (1937, figs 19 and 20) illustrated with an example dating from the fourth century at Thundersbarrow Hill and another from Richborough (Fig. 4.9). The samefeature is also seen at Huckhoe and South Shields demonstrating that is not simply a regional trait. It also occurs in Mayen millstones although these are larger (up to 60 cm) and dated by Horter (1994, 39) to the early Middle Ages. Curwenillustrates one disc quern or mill 87 cm in diameter from Pevensey for which he claims a fourth century AD date. While this review is in no way comprehensive a pattern does seem to emerge. On the whole, it seems that Roman querns havea larger diameter andare flatter than their Iron Age

counterparts. This immediately provokes the question ‘why’. One explanation could be that they were operated in a different way. Small querns less than 35 cm in diameterare ideally suited to use by a single person sitting on the floor or at a table. An assistant may have fed the grain while the other turned the quern, but this is not really necessary as the instrument can be used single-handed. Larger sizes could sometimes be operated in this way, but often they would be too large and would require a mechanical aid and perhaps two people. A stick pivoted from an overhead rafter or even the branch of a tree would give considerable mechanical advantage.It is interesting to note that this system was used in the Highlandsin the eighteenth century (Rackwitz 2007, 311). The Highland quern was usually about 1ft 6in -2ft (45-60 cm) in diameter and thus comparable with some late Roman querns. The upper stones were driven by two women turning a stick placed in one of a number of smaller depressions on the upper surface, and pivoted at the top end where it would betethered. There are a numberof illustrations showing this system in action. Pennant’s Tour of Scotland published in 1776 shows a rural schemeat Talisker on Skye dating to around 1760. To the 74

THE ROTARY QUERN

Fg. 4.9: Unfinished late Roman hoppered quern, from Limpsfield, Surrey. Caterham Museum, diameter 42 cm (photo author)

right of the scene are fourteen women ‘waulking’ or fulling cloth, while to the left are two women operating a quern. They both grasp a long stick attached to a tree above, while one prepares to feed grain into the quern. It is even more surprising to find the same technique illustrated in Bede and Mackay’s (1902) book on the Argyll Highlands taken from a watercolour by R. R. Mclan (Fig. 4.10); they state that a few werestill in use especially in Kintyre. They explain that these large flat querns had a diameterof 1ft Gin to 2ft 6in (45-75 cm) and operated as follows: An upright stick was placed in a hole on the margin of the upper stone, and was clasped by the hands oftwo girls who, seated on the ground on eitherside, turned the stone rapidly round and round, while they poured in the grain at the central cavity. Sometimes the top of

the stick was loosely fixed in a piece of wood that projected horizontally from any upright beam within the cottage and thus was better kept in its place, and lightened the lassies’ work while theyfurther cheered themselves with songs. A cloth was placed under the handmill and

~ nn

as it was made to revolve with great velocity the grain was speedily ground and the mealfell out upon the cloth.

THE STONE OFLIFE

THE HANDMILL.

Fig. 4.10: The operation of the Highland quern. From a painting by RK Mcelan (Lagan 1900) There is every reason to believe that this system would be usedto drive the larger Roman querns, although direct evidence 1s, of course, lacking. As in the Roman period, more efficient watermills were available in the Highlands but, as Rackwitz (2007, 311) remarks, the

Highlanders mayhave preferred the quern because they did not have to pay the miller or to transport their corn over large distances. Indeed, Dr Johnson observedthe use of querns on Raasay andSkye in 1773 and noted that although watermills were available on bothislands they were toodistant fromthe islanders’ settlements, requiring womentogrindtheir oats at home with querns.

76

5 OF MEN AND BEASTS: THE POMPEIAN-STYLE MILL Introduction The invention of the Pompeian-style mill represents an early step towards mechanisation and a considerable advance in efficiency, with possibly a tenfold increase in output over the rotary quern (chapter 7). For the very first trme rotary mills were powered byanimals or by the significant mechanical enhancement of human muscle. In addition, they would havelarge capacity and the stone would bereversible, promising a longlife. The classic Pompeian-style mill has an hourglass-shaped cati/lus (upper stone) and conical meta or lower stone, which is often hollowed out (Fig. 5.1a, b). The waist-band of the cazdllus has

two lugs with slots and holes for the attachment of a wooden driving mechanism. There is little doubt that donkeys or mules were frequently used as there are a numberof reliefs which depict these animals and their harness. Fine examples are to be seen in the Vatican museum and the Villa Medici, Rome(¢,g. Troitzsch and Weber 1996; Schioler 2007; Amelung 1903). For

this reason these mills are sometimesreferred to as “donkeymills’ and, indeed, Moritz (1958) entitles his chapter 11 “The Pompeian donkey-mill’. However, some have been found in the bakeries of Pompeii, Herculaneum, or Ostia sited in a manner suggesting that humantraction mayhave been employed on occasion. Carl Bloch’s anachronistic and fanciful painting (Fig. 5.2) gives the flavour of humantraction, although even Samson might have had difficulty moving an untentered mill with the slave mastersitting on it. They were presumablythe o/a asinana of Cato (de Re Rus. 10.4; 11.4). However, the term ‘Pompeian-style’ is preferred here as it does not presupposethe type of traction. The Pompeian-style mill is, par excellence, characteristic of the urban bakeries of RomanItaly. At this time it appears that milling and baking were not separate trades, but that the baker ground the grain on his premises, next to dough kneading machines and ovens.It is only with the introduction of the watermill that the two processes were, of necessity, separated. The Pompeian mill belongs essentially to the early Roman period, with the type site predating the eruption of AD 79 (Fig, 5.3); the bakeries of Ostia are likely to have persisted into the second or perhapsthe early third centuries AD. In Pompeii 21 bakeries can be identified with certainty, using 75 mills, but as only about twothirds of the town has been excavated, there mayoriginally have been as manyas 30 bakeries and over 110 mills (Bakker 1999, 11). Of the 21 known bakeries 16 are on main streets or at an intersection. There is a striking scarcity of /orrea, or store houses, at Pompei suggesting that grain mayhave been transported directly to bakeries from the surrounding countryside (Bakker 1999, 13). The situation in Ostia is rather different as a much greater proportion of the site remains unexcavated. Five bakeries are known so far, but scattered finds of millstones and kneading machines implies many more. The town also has numerous/orrea and it seems probable that 77

THE. STONE, (OP LIFE

at hy we a hsyea AR SEPeA, Wy, Pet, ee a

i— rr

Ps

— 3

ie,

qe

=

ao iP,

Cal

Pei

—4 t a = [= by

4 —

ANY 1 Bd =]

=

2 =

—

ay

=> hd = =e

Be ch

Sr

>=

ss .

Sere)

i

Sh ¥,

= ( es

ok —~

QS

fo.

=.~~ ee =" Pe pe es

= F4 € feo 4 Po wf )

Ker Ww

Ly

—

=
ad ae igh=> beeS Ahh NU Ea een ea SMTiDeedes B eVe hw \\ieltome LO PagtxPre Ra) mers Ee Feat ap Lc a) wmMeiV

“ i! i By:ATI's,

e

Zs = ane

SES

5

Vi

= SS ——S

1

=

a

aq Za

S

Gace

t=)

"i=

HH Za

pa 4 & F pe = & 1 ._——— 3 4 —n-F—

eo NY

=:

Mya omy’ =

}

y

AS

a

q

~

E

: 3

ny

yr

=

:

a

ee

x

a

€

fT{ H (| :

5

t i SS

F7g. 6.7: An early reconstruction of a Vitruvian mill, in a woodcut (from Barbaro 1556) Watermills are turned on the same principle, and are in all respects similar, except that at

one end of the axts they are provided with a drum-wheel, toothed and framed fast to the

said axis; this being placedvertically on the edge turns round with the wheel. Corresponding with the drum-wheel a larger horizontal toothed wheel is placed, working on an axis whose upper head ts inserted into the millstone. Thus the teeth of the drum-wheel which is made Jast to the axis acting on the teeth of the horizontal wheel, produce the revolution of the millstones, and in the engine a suspended hopper supplying them with grain, in the same revolution the flour ts produced. Fis 6.6-7 showreconstructions based on Vitruvius. The ‘horizontal toothed drum wheel

placed vertically on edge’ and the ‘larger horizontal toothed wheel’ present a problem atid it 18. usial to represent the scheme in the mannerillustrated. The confusion could

arise from a vertical wheel having a horizontal axis, but Vitruvius’ statement has caused

considerable debate (e.g. Moritz 1958; Spain 1987; Wikander 2000). No toothed wheel has survived, but its counterpart, a small ‘lantern’ gear has survived from the Limes fort of Zugmantel (Jacobi 1912, 89; Spain 2008, fig. 1; below Fig. 6.10). It seems probable that this was the norm and, although the Zugmantel mill was not driven by water, it gives validity to the suggested reconstructions. The size of the vertical wheel in relation to that of the horizontal wheel, would determine the speed of revolution of the stones.

In recent vertical mills speeds of up to 120 rpm are commonlyachieved, a 100% increase on the speed andhence the output of a modern horizontal mill. We can expect that the Vitruvian mill wouldyield a significant improvement over the horizontal, but without dimensions and other details it is impossible to say by how much.

106

POWER MILLS

7oy ei STengl H

See Se ageoe

Se

:

sot we. —tyye «a

rh

a

S

a

sseut hy,

SS eee

-adh. oe AM

aik. the.

‘seep on oie

s

vb { , A ‘‘

CWSeee SO NES a

\e awe a lS ¢ “ y »

6 a

Gas

Mowtye

F2g. 6.8: Roman mill houses reconstructedat (from top) Hagendorn, Miinchen-Perlach, and Ickham(the exterior of Fig. 6.6); (from Gahwiler and Speck 1991, \olpert 1997, Spain 2008)

ko?

THE STONE OF LIFE Mill buildings and equipment These can be of stone or wood, although in the north-western provinces, the majority seem to have been wooden. Theyare often in a poor state of preservation because they are situated near water-courses and thus subject to erosion and damage from the force of water, although if not swept away the chances of finding surviving timber are reasonably good (Spain 1984). The example from Avenches seemsto have been of the order of 2.5 m square and those from Ickham, Hagendorn or Miinchen-Perlach could have been similar (Castella 1994; Bennett ef af 2010; Gahwiler and Speck 1991; Volpert 1997). Haltwhistle Burn and the Athenian AgoraIJ are bigger at roughly 7 x 5 m, but small cramped conditions seem to have been the order of the day (Parsons 1936; Simpson 1976).

Fig. 6.9: Reconstruction of the Barbegal mill complex near Arles, fed by an aqueductfeeding a millpond (tsometric; 10 m divisions) 108

POWER MILLS

Fig. 6.10: The Zugmantel lantern asfound and reconstructed in use (from Jacobi 1912) Reconstructions of examples excavated at Hagendorn, Munchen-Perlach and Ickham are shownin Fig. 6.8. In some cases the buildings are much more complex and were

about as close as the ancient world came toestablishing a ‘factory’ in the modernsense of the term, ze. a place where numerous workers were groupedtogether in a single

building operating at machinery powered by something more than human or animal muscle (Hodge 1960). Thus, at Barbegal, nowdated to the second century AD onwards, there were 16 waterwheels in two separate rows; the Aurelian mills on the Janiculum in Rome may have been similar although onlypartially preserved (Leveau 1996; Bell 1994; Wilson 2001; 2002). A closely similar building, dating between the third and

sixth centuries, has been described from the baths of Caracalla, also in Rome (Schioler and Wikander 1983). Fig. 6.9 shows what the Barbegal mill may have looked like. An aqueduct fed a mill pond whichacted as a caste//um aquae, splitting the water into two streams running downthe hillside. Each flow powered eight mills, giving a total of 16

mill houses, divided into twolines by access stairs. The mill may have fed the nearby town of Arles (Are/ate), but the enterprise was so massive that it may have exported flour to many of the towns of the Roman Mzdi.

109

THE STONE OF LIFE The part of the mill that is most readily preserved is, of course, the millstone. These may be of basalt, sandstone or gritstone such as Millstone Grit. There seem to be twodistinct types: a domedvariety with sloping grinding surfaces and a flat type. A study was made of 66 stones from sites where there was other clear evidence of the existence of a watermill. These included, Athens, Avenches, Muinchen-Perlach, Mesclans, Longvic, Vareilles, L’Auribelle

Basse, Croix de Fenouille, Barbegal, Ickham, and Haltwhistle Burn, giving wide geographical coverage (Parsons 1936; Castella 1994; Volpert 1997; Brun and Borréani 1998; Jaccottey and Labeaune 2010; Longepierre 2007; Bennett ef a/ 2010; Simpson 1976). The domed variety

(N=38) had a mean diameter of 64£9 cm while the flat type (N=28) was 78415 cm. In other words the flat type is generally larger but showsgreatvariability. The domed type often has four holes in the upper surface of the upper stone and these are sometimes connected by channels cut into the surface. Castella (1994,fig. 31) suggested that this was the seating for a driving mechanism (Fig. 6.11). It might well have been employed because the slope of the active surface would have made it hard to accommodate a rynd into the active surface of the upper stone. On the other hand, flat stones usually show the seating for a rynd, often of the dovetail or bow-tie form described by Vitruvius. Sometimes however, there is no clear evidence of howthe stones were driven. Nevertheless, there would

need to be some mechanism for driving and for adjusting the gap between stones(tentering). Domed millstones seem to be the earliest type and those from Avenchesare securely dated by the dendrochronologyof the mill house to the mid-first century AD. On the other hand Haltwhistle Burn seems to date from the mid-third century while Barbegal seems to have flourished between second and fourth centuries AD (Simpson 1976, 42; Leveau 1996, 146).

Fig. 6.11: Schematic reconstruction of domed millstonesfrom Avenches (after Castella 1994, fig. 31) 110

POWER MILLS The type thus has a very long period of usage. It would certainly have overlapped with the flat millstones as these seem to have been in use between the late second and third centuries at Munchen-Perlach, whilst at Ickham theyare dated early third to late fourth or earlyfifth century (Volpert 1997, 260; Bennett e¢ a/ 2010). On the other hand, the verylarge thin flat millstones from the Athenian Agora maywell be of fifth century date (Parsons 1936, 88). Very large thin flat millstones may represent a final stage in the development of the Roman watermill (Fig. 6.12). These would need the power of a vertically-wheeled mill to drive them. In the succeeding Saxon period it seems that horizontally-wheeled mills were in vogue, as in the celebrated example excavated at Tamworth (Rahtz and Meeson 1992). Floating mills and tide mills It is not clear to what extent floating mills were used in the Roman world. Theyare attested in the sixth century by Procopius writing about the Gothic wars. Belisarius, commanderof the Romegarrison,is reputed to have devised them in AD 537 when the Gothshad cut the water supplyto the mills of the Janiculum. Bennett and Elton (1899) translate: When the water was cut off and the mills stopped, and the cattle could not grind, the city was deprived offood, andprovision could scarcely befoundfor the horses. But Belisarius, an ingenious man, devised a remedyfor the distress. Below the bridge across the Tiber, which arches to the walls of the Janiculum, he extended ropes, wellfastened across the riverfrom bank to bank. To these he affixed two boats of equal stze, twofeet apart, at a spot where the currentflowed with greatest velocity under the arches; andplacing large millstones in one of the boats he suspended the machines by which they were turned in the water space between them. Healso contrived, at certain intervals on the river, other machines of the like kind, and these beingput in motion by theforce of the water, drove as many mills as were necessary to grindfoodfor the city. Mention ofcattle mills is interesting, suggesting, as Wikander (1981, 31) has pointed out, that Romedid notrely exclusively on water powerat this time. However, presumablyas there was insufficient fodder for the horses, this would applyto cattle also. Alternatively, Procopius may have been deliberately exaggerating the importance of watermills, perhaps to make a point aboutthe ingenuity of Belisarius. It is evidentthat floating mills were something of a novelty in the sixth century and theyare therefore unlikely to have been widely adopted during the Roman period, although the chances of recovering their remains are particularly remote. Tide mills, relying on the daily ebb and flow of the seas outside the Mediterranean, are another possibility worth considering. They could be floating or sited on the banks of a tidal waterway. Most of the known ones belong to the post-medieval period and have been found along the Atlantic shores of Europe. One of the few known from the early-medieval period has been excavated at Nendrum monastery on Strangford Lough in Northern Ireland (McErlean and Crothers 2007), but whether or not they existed in the Roman period is uncertain. Spain (nd; 2008, 67) has suggested that Roman structures found on the north side of an island in the River Fleet, London, could tentatively be interpreted as the remains of a tide mill.

Large millstones

Large heavy millstones have been found on manysites in Roman Britain, both urban and

rural. They are so commonthatit is hardly possible to read the stone report of a RomanoBritish excavation without seeing mention and Bennettef a/. (2010,fig. 26) map some. Indeed, 111

THE STONE OF LIFE

tm rage ve ’ A ney “ays

ie t aS

on weet na ora oe

TEIN GRrte

YETtee et ratengneae nee foe. Fem Oe eee Oa Ree rey Sweeney:

Tre my en Oe oe, may

OP ee Heey ane a MORN ro on enty rea cevanns, 1A a ae ney, : ee wast et eee ae cd Hm creat tee nn Fee,

(

8 WATER Hat, orno, FOR are, OF OR nine oe “* Frey, ENTIRE ee enn,

a EEA Aree n OESERAS et Eye PAV we oi PRRCROWEa os ver oesSASS ree ees PRES neeveg Mosse rere Soe mae waeaen ONG te ae os

af

Fee © etree

fa . Fe eeay

. BE ee pee Meee.

SL

Dy

ee we on eae ees sate yenery wes,. at adh pw, . + eet eR ST eed“oes ; ERP Ne Lomvane oe er nigh aAyee CEE eABanna PEN =e ees: IEE OBE Tasbata gS To . se mney PARREN srr Tia va ee Sy Pm en 5 TEdemain. Mee ante. 2 ter otra SO, mT teog: TTA OE ed Bneen WAN eee es TN neg I A Be me mn ? ‘* < A mak oes tn. wes ARTetetig yheseasaee PNET Ny ae wat rneg mig aea ae oR ee rien OUIS ter entEe a mgt.

i,

Le +,

i

te

as

A Ra

ee

me

Ne

ON, me

_

s

PUREE Nor TLOW oe ett Re RES wee nae TENN aa ge ween aye ate STEN Ree ALENT me a WHSened, eee ~

etree arepens x

Rs

Ane WbseNmta

e

tye

Ae te meee y APE eS reeey es . eR SEER BA Ry mee, om tater ace nthas;

WM tm meeeRRDS om ame ie ante ~ FeSO ELEY Po meATEEe ey TiO SPL See SSISE Sa neae”

-

ot

os Ten .

Tome ea

Ne ete Sow wen an

SB ees Mea Rear, a: on

vA

seer

v?

Wt

meeo Fee

oe COLINReig me yee

Oe. OW moe: mes erage, Nee tain FS FA En ey TEN he terte te oe, TERI ey ny

ane tee POON Ome ecg ingp oe ~ fw lames sen og tH. Sy SUT Be en,ony: ~ re, Ong MotOFay, iy My tye, ney ape 7 : 0

.

-

.

AR PT penne: TS oe RENT hte - Dieyy LO” AeNEcentreep ee cal at . a at os eemaormes ane gate al ot 2 aemnvao CQFE TEane eer ‘ erat une, . et | x . ommeot eteel : Wi. a 2 .

yeee eee

¥

ExT Meee in

ye ny eas 5 a . nM ™, ~ v SeastesPe oo oles ace eienbee Be :Tastee wrecks te ' 8 AUN SE ORE RTM eee Teemeyntnee We te aha Fri eee MS ” . AE Ee oly oping a WN Ray RN IPEBe OL ANE Ort Det gee POON GA, tr eterno me TAOoat ee sme ete oe FR ae, EEL aspen SONTe Fe oe weSerwes: BGR a Ce PINE OED a ons SPER ALMe wet A Bees pe, SOIee nage

Pate

7

.

.

;

a

ome

“tn,

; Hey

' may .

:

“.

aa See *NGSR 3 ed

oats ne: st y . te J Wy

Fig. 6.12: Flat watermill stones (reconstructed); a, Orton Hall Farm (but not certainlyfrom a watermill); b, Kenchester, ¢, lckham (after Macreth 1996; Willmott and Rahtz 1985, Bennett et al. 2010) 112

POWER MILLS they are found throughout Europeand these have been listed by Wikander (1980; 1985). It is often assumedthat these derive from watermills, but in fact all that can safely be said is that they must have been mechanically driven in some manner. In a footnote Wikander (2000, note 8) asserts that it is not possible to separate stones

driven by water from those powered byhorses, but it seems that the domedvariety1s frequently associated with waterandit is onlythe flat type that presents a problem. There would seemto be three possibilities as an alternative to water power:

Option 1:

They were driven by human muscle enhanced bythe lever principle. There

is an interesting relief on the sarcophagus of L. Annius Octavius Valerianus once in the Lateran Museum, Rome, showing two men working a pair of large heavy millstones using

a capstan device inserted into the centre of the upper stone (Fig. 6.13; Sebesta 1977, fig. 211). However, whether they are grinding corn or simply bedding in stones during the manufacturing process is unclear. Presumably the hole would be square and recesses would be neededin the shaft or the stone to feed the grain. This is very similar to what

Longepierre (2012) has called the Haltern type, which would have been operated bya cross-bar perhaps pushed by two workers. If the stone was thick enough, it might be possible to insert a horizontal bar into the side as seems to be the case with the heavy central European cylindrical quern. Option 2: They were driven by human muscle enhancedbya system of gears. Jacobi (1912) suggestedthat the third century Zugmantel mill was poweredin this way(Fig. 6.14 upper). It was basically a Vitruvian mill with a turning handle instead of a waterwheel.

Fic, 6.13: Relief on the sarcophagus of L.Annius Octavius Valerianus. Vatican Museum (from Baatz dS of [ Sd J al a

1995)

THE STONE OF LIFE

Interestingly, a device of this type, from Mashbury near Chelmsford, Essex, dating to « 1800 is preserved in Colchester Museum (Fig. 6.14 lower). It drove an upper stone 6.5 cm thick and 57 cm in diameter. An almostidentical machine wasused until recently on the Ilha de Sao Jorge, Acores and is now preserved in the Beira Ethnographic Museum (Veiga de Oliveira et a 1983, des 25), Leonardo da Vinci invented an even simpler mechanical system operated by a rod attached to a cranked drive shaft, illustrated by an example from Castelo de Vide, Portugal (Veiga de Oliveira et a/ 1983, des 23). However, the crank may not have been known in antiquity. Both types of machine seem to have been widely employed in the post-medieval period, the first in Germany, while the cranked type is known from fifteenth century Italy and from the mote recent past of Lower Saxony (Bomann 1941; de Rachewitz 1994). Option 3: They were driven by animal power. This might take the form of simply replacing

the men in the first option (capstan type) with an animalor a pair of animals, but it might be

desirable to devise a more sophisticated scheme that would keep animal feet and dung away from the flour emerging from the stones. An interesting suggestion along these lines stems from Neal’s (1996) analysis of the Stanwick villa, Northamptonshire. The villa had a circular building attachedtoit, in which the main feature was a worn circular track, possibly resulting from wear caused by animals’ hoofs. Neal suggests that this was a two storey donkeymill, the animal on the ground floor driving millstones on the floor above. This would separate the grain and flour collection from the stable-like conditions below, as he claims was done in medieval donkeymills. It is now thought that the Zugmantel and Saalburg mills were driven in this way (Fig. 6.15 upper) andcertainly theyare too large and heavyto be plausibly hand driven (Baatz 1995). A schemesuch as that proposed for Stanwick and Zugmantelis to be seen amongst Agostino Ramelli’s mechanical designs published in Schate-Kammer der Mechanischen Kunst (1620). However, separation of animals and flour on different floors is not strictly necessary as the recent Sardinian donkey mill was mounted in a wooden tub which collected the flour and preventedit spilling on the floor (Fig. 6.15 lower). A hatch at the bottom ensuredits easy removal (Veiga de Oliveira e¢ a/. 1983, des 27-9). There is, however, a real problem in deciding whether a mill was water-powered or not, and if not, what other method wasused. This can sometimes be adduced ftom the geographical setting of the find site. Thus, at Kenchester or in the Old Winteringham settlement there is water nearby and it seems probable that the stones were from watermills (Stead 1976; Wilmott and Rahtz 1985). In other casesthis is improbable; Cunliffe thought that Fishbourne was unlikely to have had access to a sufficient head of water, and at Orton Hall Farm, Spain considered human traction to be probable (Cunliffe 1971, 153; Mackreth 1996). It seems likely that the Chew stones were from a watermill as they were found near the course of the river Chew, but the Chedworth and Winterton villas areless likely as the water supply would

have been insufficient. Similarly, the stones from Poundbury, Dorchester, do not seem to

have been found near water (Sparey Green 1987). This is also the case with theillustrated French Puddingstone mill (Fig. 6.16), which was found on a plateau well away from water. Unfortunately, it is all too often impossible to make deductions such as this from the literature as insufficient geographical detail is included in excavation reports to make a sound judgement. Millstones are very common in Roman Britain and many, if not a majority, are 114

POWER MILLS

Fig. 6.14: Upper, reconstruction of Zugmantel mill (from Jacobi 1912); lower, mill (c. 1800) from Mashbury, stones diameter 57 cm. Colchester

| Museums (photo: C Green)

THE STONE OF LIFE

A

Fig. 6.15: Animal mills. upper, Saalburg reconstruction (after Baatz 1995), lower, recent Sardinian (after Veiga de Olveira et al. 1983) 116

POWER MILLS

10cm

Fig. 6.16: Roman millstone from Gonneville-sur-Sae, Normandy. Service Régional Archéologique de Normandie found away from a substantial water source. Much more research is needed, but it becomes increasingly probable that watermulls were the exception and that the normal method wasto use a slow wheel driven by human or animal traction. In the Mediterranean, the Pompeian hour-glass shaped mill is characteristic of bakeries in towns such as Pompeii, Herculanium or Ostia and there is a thin spread northwards to Gaul and Britain (Jaccottey and Longepierre 2011; Williams and Peacock 2011). They were driven by animal or sometmes human power, butscarcity in the north is notable and it seems probable that their place was largely taken byflat mulls, albeit often driven in a similar manner. In the late Roman period these were to become the norm. Typology and driving mechanism It might be expected that the typology of millstones would vary with the way they were driven, but a preliminary search of the literature suggests this is not the case. Longepierre (2011) usefully attempted to define the typology of stones employed in manual querns, animal or human (@ sang) mills and watermills, but he did not address this question. A notable featureis the way in which the rynd and iron driving rod was accommodated, although at present it is impossible to relate rynd type to the type of traction. The rod would pass through the lower stone and slot into the upper stone in order to transmit power and to permit tentering or adjustment of the gap between the stones. Unul the end of the eighteenth century, the rynd takes the form of a substantial iron cross fixed to the top of an iron driving rod capable of supporting a very heavy millstone. Later, its place 1s taken by a bar spanning the eye (information M Watts). In Roman Britain millstones have a variety of rynd forms demonstrated by 117

THE STONEOF LIFE their seating which is often the only evidence. A common form,often, but not exclusively, associated with stones in Old Red Sandstone, is a bow-tie shape cut right through the stone,

presumablyto facilitate the feed of grain (Fig, 6.17a, b).

This can be seen in the mills from Chew Valley Lake, Winterton, Brough on Noe, Kenchester or Chesters (Rahtz and Greenfield 1977; Stead 1976; Jones e¢ a/ 1966; Wilmott and Rahtz

1985; Scott Garrett 1938). Sometimes the bow-tie is recessed into the stone rather than penetrating it. An alternative is four or more notches on the lower surface of the upper stone, as at Fishbourne, Orton Hall Farm or Greyhound Yard, Dorchester (Cunliffe 1971;

Mackreth 1996; Woodward e¢ a/ 1993). More rarely a row of three holes can be seen, as at Halstock, or a square hole as at Gadebridge (Lucas 1993; Neal 1974). The square hole may indicate turning of the upper stone from above rather than below as in option 1 above. Sometimes no rynd recess is present. This often indicates a lower stone, as at Chedworth,

Ickham or Whitton (Jarrett and Wrathmell 1981), but this is also the case with upper stones at Ickham (Bennett ef a/ 2010). This seems to be a characteristic of somelava mills, begging the question of howtheywere driven. All of these forms seem to have been in use in the late Roman period and, on the evidence currentlyavailable, there seems to be no typological progression, nor can it be demonstrated that any one type is associated exclusively with watermiulls. Date and find-sites Large millstones seem to be characteristic of the late Roman period, with very few dated before the second century AD. Theyare found in a wide variety of sites, from towns to forts, but are concentrated in the countryside. They are found in rural establishments such as Ickham, but are characteristic of villas. Indeed, hardlya villa has been excavated without

revealing a few fragments. It seems that virtually every villa would have a mill powered by water or some other power source and that grain grown on the estate was converted to flour before leaving the premises. This makes good economic senseasit is less bulky to transport and will not germinate, a major consideration in a damp northern climate. However, stone ground flour, unlike that from the modern roller mill, does not keep well and large mills would need a substantial market nearbyto justify their existence. It seems, therefore, that in the Late Roman period, we begin to see specialisation, with the separation of milling and baking, contrasting markedly with combined mill-bakeries characteristic of the earlier Mediterranean and seen, for example, in places such as Pompeii, Ostia or Herculaneum.

Opposite. Fig. 6.17: Rynd recesses and centralperforations. a, Chew Valley Lake; b, Chesters; c, Halstock; d, Fishbourne, e, Gadebridge Park, ?lower stone (after Rahtz and Greenfield 1977, Scott Garrett 1938; Lucas 1993; Cuntiffe 1971; Neal 1974)

118

POWER MILLS

. ee NRGATSeeTROT EO sear BeSpt

weg ett

set? wt ae

on APPSNEL IEET Ne,

ase os

1 eet ae z

7

ASUS wows "

nae! wow? awe we oa ; axe OEE PRO TRETAENS hey enn saan: wees RAEee SY

4.3,

et AS’ Tie.

7 GRAIN: EXPERIMENTS, ETHNOGRAPHY AND THE ERGONOMICS OF MILLING The nature of grain and its consumption There are manydifferent types of grain which can be consumed:cats, barley, rye, pulses, rice and maize, but in Europe the most important has always been wheat. Acorns were sometimes ground to produceflour at times of dearth. Theyhave a bitter taste when first ground but can be made palatable by being leached in hot water as described by Bennett and Elton (1989, 5-6). Mason and Nesbitt (2009) describe thier contemporaryuse in south-eastern Turkey. Wheat, which is our main concern, falls into one of two categories, the hulled variety and

the free-threshing type. As Nesbitt and Samuel (1996) state, the main character that separates hulled wheat from free-threshing wheatis the persistent enclosing hull. The hull acts as a protective casing which deters fungal disease andfacilitates storage. When a spike of hulled wheat is threshed, it breaks up into its chaff components. The spikelets consist of tough glumesattached to a rachis segment and each encloses one or more grains. Usually, when free-threshing wheatis threshed, the rachis segments stay attached to each other, while the glumes and other chaff break, releasing the free grain. The main hulled wheats include einkorn (Triticum monococcum), eramer (I. dicoccum) and spelt (T°: spe/ta). Free threshing wheat, sometimes knownas naked wheat, includes durum/macaroni (I: durum), rivet (T. targidum) and bread wheat (I. aestivum) (Fig. 7.1). The latter does not occur in the wild, and seems to first appear about 7000 BC in the Near East as a result of hybridisation and is a clear indication of domestication (Nesbitt and Samuel 1996, 63). It is perhaps surprising that hulled wheat continued to be grown and even favoured given the early innovation of free-threshing varieties. An explanation might be sought in the realm of flavour and taste, but perhaps the over-riding factor was the enclosing hull which gave it greater longevity in the store. This would clearly be important as a cropthat could not be kept through a long winter season would be of less use than one which could. Also, it could be harvested, transported and stored away from the area of production to areas of consumption ze. without the grain dropping out (Jones 1981). Hulled wheat, which dominates the archaeological record, andis still used todayfor speciality products, would require parching (ze. scorching in an oven/corn drier) to make the inflorescences brittle followed by dehusking before grinding, which was a major problem for early peoples. This process would produce chaff which is quite distinct from bran and suitable only for feeding to animals or tempering clay when making pottery or daub for houses. Otherwiseit is relatively useless and destruction seems to be the rule, although it mayalso have been good

for kindling domestic fires.

Grains vary in hardness and different species have been bred to create hard and soft varieties, so it is possible to speak of hard or soft emmeror bread wheat. Hard wheats are used for bread, soft ones for cakes and pastries and durum wasspecially bred and cultivated for making pasta. It seems probable, however, that most early grains would be hard and bread would be the dominant product. 120

GRAIN

THE STONE OF LIFE

It is often imagined that wheat and other grain can only be consumed when groundto flour, but this is far from the case. Avitsur (1969) discussed some of the alternatives. Grain can, for example, be eaten raw and green straight from the field (avzv in Israel)

and ‘threshed’ by rubbing between the fingers to release the grain. A slight advance on this is what was known in Israel as karme/. The husks would be removed byplacing the unripe grain on piles of drythistles or twigs which were then set alight. The grain would be picked from the fire before being charred or desiccated and rubbedin the palm of the handto extract the warm, sweet tasting grain. Even ripe grain could be eaten with a minimum of preparation — by roasting until warm and soft and consuming immediately. However, the parched grain could be pounded and steeped in water or milk products to makegv, a sort of porridge, or ground to flour which would keep for two or three monthsin suitable containers. From the medieval period, if not before, a popular dish in Western Europe wasfrumenty (from the Latin word frumentum, ‘grain’). It was made primarily from boiled, cracked wheat, hence its name. Different recipes required the addition of milk, eggs or broth. Frumenty was served with meat as a pottage, and could have exotic spices added to enhancethe flavour. The meat would usually be venison or mutton. ‘Cracked wheat’ as the name suggests would comprise grains broken in a mortar. A typical medieval recipe (from Samuel Pegge The forme of cury compiled in about 1390) runs as follows: To make frumente. lak clene whete ¢» brayeyt wel in a morter tyl the holes gon of; sethe it tel it breste in water. Nym it up C lat it cole. Tak good broth C sweet mylk of kyn or of almand ¢» tempere it therwith. Nym yelkys of eyren rawe C» saffroun C> cast therto; salt it; lat it naught boyle after the eyren ben cast therinne. Messe if forth with venesoun or with fat motoun fresch. Bowl the kibbled (cracked) wheat in the water until softened, about 15 minutes. Remove from the heat and allow to stand for another 15 minutes or until the water is absorbed. Add the stock and milk (or almond milk) and bring back to a boil. Reduce heat to low and stir mixture for about 5 minutes. Stir in eggyolks and saffron and continue stirring until the egg starts to thicken. Do not let the mixture boil. Remove from the heat and allow to

standfor 5 minutes before serving. The mixture will continue to thicken during thisperiod. (http:/ [wwwbitwise.net/ ~ken-bill/ medrcp09him.) Accessed January 2011

For very poor people who could not afford wheat, frumenty would be too expensive and its place might be taken by oats, which would thicken pottage (thick vegetable soup). Oats would require crushing or milling before use and a quern mighttherefore be useful. In Eastern Europe, a rather similar dish Kuta is a sweet grain pudding, traditionally served in the Ukraine, Lithuania, Byelorussia and Poland. It is often the first dish in the traditional twelve-dish Christmas Eve supper and rarely served at other times of the year. It resembles the Serbian or Romanian ko/iva whichts usually reserved for funerals, but this is mixed with walnuts, sugar and raisins. At funerals or memorial services the koliva mixture, with earth-like appearance, is shaped into a mound resembling a grave. The whole is then covered with sugar in which theinitials of the deceased are inscribed. 122

GRAIN A candle, which is lit at the beginning of the service and extinguished at its end, is placed in the centre of the koliva. After the service, those attending share in eating the koliva and as they speak of the deceased they request God’s forgiveness on him orher. This brief discussion indicates that grain can be processed and eaten without the quern as intermediary, although some sort of mortar might be needed. This could be of wood, which would have a limited chance of survival. The to-and-fro querns of our types 3-5 (p. 15) are grinding instruments which would be used to produce a powder — flour in the case of grain. Only types 1 and 2 would be suitable for percussion as well as grinding and are therefore potentially multipurpose tools. The implication is that querns of our types 3-5 indicate the production of flour, which in turn suggests that flour based products such as bread were assuming importance in the prehistoric diet. Querns relate to diet in the first instance and only secondarily to agriculture. The production of breadis likely to have acted as a stimulus for agriculture. The structure of grain Most grains have a similar structure and a typical wheat grain is shown in Figs 7.2 and 7.3. A grain is a complex organism and each of its component parts has a different nutritional value. The outer shell which comprises several distinct skins 1s pale brown in colour and knownas bran. This is rich in dietary fibre, and contains significant quantities of fatty acids, starches, vitamins and minerals. Most of the core is occupied bythe endosperm, which is white in colour and contains starch and protein. The other major componentis the germ whichis the reproductive part of the grain. It contains fibre but is a concentrated source of several essential nutrients including vitamin E, folic acid, phosphorus, thiamin, zinc and magnesium,as well as essential fatty acids and fatty alcohols.

a

Qwn

gz glume Im lemma c caryopsis (‘grain’) p palea r rachis p pericarp se Starchy endosperm e embryo (‘germ’)

Fig. 7.2: The anatomy of a spikelet of Triticum durum (approximately x2) and its grain (x3). Hulled wheats have the lemmafused with the palea andare difficult to dehusk

123

THE SON EAP LDPE

Fig. 7.3: Ear, grain and husk of bread wheat Triticum aestivum (photo: C Green) Both this and the bran are removed from modern white bread. A typical grain will con-

tain 83°% endosperm, 14% bran and 3% germ. Modern milling and flour assessment Modern flour mills are sophisticated establishments designed to separate the component parts of a grain, which may then be recombined to produce speciality flours.A modern flour is thus a blend in a manner not all that different to a blended Scotch Whisky. The process involves cleaning, sifting and purifying often manytimes over. The wheat is cleaned taking out straw, seeds and other varieties of grain such as oats and barley. It is then wetted to soften the bran skins and to ensure they formflakes rather than powder in the grinding process. It is not possible to simply skin off the bran as there is a central groove in the grain from which it would be difficult to extract. Because of this the

grain is split using rollers with small teeth. The top roller goes faster than the lower and the grain tends tostick to the lower and be split open by the upper. This first grind produces

a mixture of bran and semolina whichts purifiedin a jet of air used to blowthe light bran away. The semolina is then ground between smoothrollers to make flour. The process of cleaning, purifying and grinding will take place manytimes to separate the germ, to clean and to make flours of different fineness. These may then be recombinedas required for different baking purposes.

GRAIN This contrasts markedly with stone-ground flour, which will contain the whole grain. It may have a brownish colour due to the bran being retained and will not keep as well since the germ has not been removed. Furthermore it will have minute chips of stone, which will further discolour the flour, particularly if the rock is grey or black. In the post-medieval period the aim was to produce white flour so that a white loaf could be baked. For this reason millstones made of a white or light coloured rock were often preferred (p. 2). Todaythis situation has been reversed as brown bread1s often seen as more desirable than white, if only for the nutritional benefits it brings. Today flour is subjected to complex chemical and physical tests designed to assess its quality and fitness for purpose. These range from chemical analysis of the organic compoundspresent to the elasticity of the dough. However, as far as we are concerned the two main measures seem to be fineness (or particle size), which can be measured bysieving or other methods and mineral content, which will indicate the quantity of bran or huskstill present. This is usually assayed by measuring the amountofashleft as a residue when a given weight of flouris ignited. This maybe dry flour although in American tests 14% moisture is allowed. The problem of dehusking As mentioned above, hulled grains must be dehusked before being ground and this would have been an obstacle in the absence of free-threshing wheats. Dehusking was a major problem which faced the early miller and various experiments have been carried out to see how easy it was to dehusk on a saddle quern. The most extensive experiments were those of MeurersBalke and Luning (1992). They compared untreated and heated emmer dehusked on a saddle quern with dehusking in a tub mortar and in a solid wooden mortar. Finally they attempted to use a saddle quern to both dehusk and grind grain. While they were duly cautious about the significance of their results acknowledging their inexperience, particularly in respect of time and efficiency measurements, their results are interesting and important: The results of the test series have proven that during the Linear-Pottery culture, a parching of the grain before dehusking was neither necessary nor, in view of the botanical remains, probable. Fxven the use of archaeologically attested saddle quernsfor dehusking is to be rejected, owing to the unavoidable high rate of loss. The comparison between the results of the tests obtainedfor the saddle quern with those of the wooden mortarproves that the latter was the superior instrument in everyrespect. These experiments contrast with earlier work which suggested that dehusking might be feasible with the application of heat and the use of a quern. Thus Kuster (1984, 310; 1985,

60) attempted to dehusk einkorn (Inticum monococcum ) on a saddle quern after drying at 100°C. He concluded that it was possible with a light upper stone that did not generate too muchpressure, after which the light bran and chaff could be blown off. A heavy stone tended to break up both grains and bran into very small fractions at the same time. Unroasted grain tended to stick to both itself and to the quern, while if grain was roasted at a higher temperature (180°C) the two components broke into very small fractions which could not be separated. Beranova (1986, 323) stressed the difficulties of dehusking emmer with a saddle quern,

but found that it was possible by slight roasting and soaking before heating. Attempts to 125

THE STONE OF LIFE

dehusk without this treatment were feasible but very slow. However, saddle querns are of several varieties (see above p. 15). The simple flat or dished quern where the hand-stone could movein anydirection (types 1 and 2) could also be used with a pounding action and these would be suitable for dehusking, although perhaps on a small scale. The to-and-fro motion characteristic of many saddle querns(types 3-5) would be better suited to grinding as pounding would probably damagethe active working surface of the quern. Dehusking experiments were conducted by Beranova (1980, 1981a, b; 1986) using rotary querns. The querns used were a heavy Iron Age variety now in Teplice Museum and a much lighter Slavic one from Mikul¢ice in southern Bohemia. Her aim was to produce fine flour suitable for use in cooking. In the case of spelt it was possible to separate flour and bran/chaff by grinding and then sifting through a coarse sieve. The flour contained spikelets and the bread made from it was coarse-grained but nevertheless tasty. Emmer, on the other hand, was mucheasier to process and produced a flour which contained a lot of fine fibre and bran/chaff and would have been anideal healthy flour verysuitable for human consumption. It produced excellent bread. It seems therefore that with a rotary quern dehusking was no longer a particular problem. The hulls were crushed with the flour and the chaff was released, much of which could

be separated bysieving or blowing a stream of air across it. Alternatively the chaff might be fine enough to be consumed along with the flour. Thus it seems that the rotary quern would have solved a major problem inherent in the saddle quern. Experiment and production rates The temptation for archaeologists to use ancient querns in order to assess their capabilities goes back 70 years or more. One of the first to explore the field was Cecil Curwen (1941) who reconstructed querns by cementing in missing parts of the stone. He then attempted to reconstruct wooden handles and rynds in order to see which might be feasible and which not. For many years these formed the main part of the quern display in Lewes Museum. As some of the querns were complete and accessible on a bench they were supplied with grain and used to produce flour. This eventually became a hands-on educationalfacility for use byvisitors. There is no doubt that using a quern appeals to the layman encouraging an appreciation of the problems of subsistence before the water and wind mill. However, the use of ancient querns in this wayis detrimental to serious scholarship. The active surfaces will become abraded in a way that maynot be consistent with ancient usage, any phytoliths (and other inclusions, such as starch or pollen, preserved in the grinding surface cavities will be lost or at best blanketed with new ones. All too often these valuable artefacts will be broken as seems to have happened at Lewes. However, having said this, controlled scientific experiment can provide exceptional insights and lead to informed quantification. The main problem is that the experimenter is almost always a novice compared with original users who may have operated querns on a daily basis. Nevertheless, experimentation can be of considerable value in several areas of enquiry: - the experimental making of querns will provide data permitting their value to be assessed - their use may reveal how querns functioned andthe best operation position - the rate of flour production can be evaluated in quantitative terms 126

GRAIN - the efficiency of the quern in the dehusking process can be assessed and quantified - the quality of flour can be assessed Saddle, Ohynthus and rotary querns: a comparison There is now a useful and growing bodyof experimental data on which to base an assessment

of the relative merits of these fundamental quern types. The most rigorous experiments are

those of Menasanch, Risch and Soldevilla (2002) who were concerned with the early Bronze Age querns of the Argaric Culture of Almeria Province, Spain. They conducted some 36 separate experiments, mainly using experimental artefacts but also employing 10 genuine specimens. They carefully analysed the variables which might have influencedtheir results and recorded the material of which both the quern and the hand-stone were made, the operationalposition of the experimenter(on the floor or standing), the shape and smoothness of the wooden rubber, the type of grain (wheat or barley), the number of passes, the time and the amountof flour and bran produced. Their data suggests a production rate of flour between 55 and 408¢ per hour. This is broadly in line with Samuel (2009) who used a replica Egyptian quern to yield between 571 and 800g per hour depending on the hardness of the grain. Hampl (1976) records 400g per hour, but Waldhauser (1981, 206) recorded a much higher rate although only for crushing and notfull grinding and so his results are not used here. Destexte-Jamotte (1951) claimed to have produced 1 kg in one hour and Hennig (1966) 1 kg in 40 minutes. In round figures this suggests that a saddle quern could be expected to produce something of the order of 0.5 — 1 kg of flour per hour. These figures contrast markedly with experiments using Cucuteni-Triploye querns with small hand-stones. Here the rate was only 125 g per hour after very considerable effort (Buzea, Cotruta and Briewig 2008, 222). Samuel (2000; 2009) used a modern granite quern and cylindrical hand-stone of south-east Asian origin. She found that use of a pounder before milling eased the task and that to produce fine meal two passes were needed. Shealso found that it was muchless effort to use a quern on a raised emplacementsothatthe full weight of the upper bodycan be brought to bear. In the kneeling position considerably more effort was needed andstress experienced. Baum (1982) compared smooth and roughenedsurfaces, but found both effective. However, a surface roughened with a flint hammer-stone shortened the milling time. Unfortunately, no experimental data is available for the classic Olynthus form, but the barbarised version has been studied by Holodnak (2001). He used several upper stones, two from Sobesuky in Chomutovdistrict, one from Vilémov, and one from Zatec, Louny. The

lower stone was a replica as no archaeological examples were available. He found that these mills were most efficient when operated in a to-and-fro rather than an oscillatory manner with the operator sitting down and holding the upper stone perpendicular to the shortaxis. Two operators returned rates of 2.4 and 2.25 kg per hour respectively. This type of mill would seem to be 2-4 times moreefficient than a simple saddle quern. Howthis data might applyto the classic form of the Olynthus mill is not clear, but presumablythe latter would be even moreefficient. Rotary querns have also been the subject of experimental evaluation. One of the earliest experiments was that of Moritz and Jones (1950) who useda ‘Sussex style’ quern from Iver, 127

THE STONEOF LIFE Buckinghamshire from the Lewes Museum collection. While it is referred to as RomanoBritish, it is more likely to belong to the pre-Roman, Iron Age. This quern had worn lopsided and the upper stone was thinner under the handle slot than on the opposingside. They record that this was beneficial giving a feeling of balance when the quern was turned, the thrust on the handle being countered by the added weight of the thicker side. They also found that the lower stone must have been fixed in some wayas it was thinner and lighter than the upper stone and would otherwise have turned with it. Their observation about the lop-sided nature of the quern is importantas it runs counter to Reynolds’ (1995, 312) claim that this was due to oscillatory rather than rotary motion. The rotary quern was capable of producing about 11b of flour per hour if turned at the optimum speed of 100 revolutions per minute, but in the hands of an experienced operator the output might have been considerably more. This would give a rate of 453 g per hour, which is no better than a saddle quern. The raw figures quoted by Moritz and Jones suggest that the rotary quern might have been only marginally more efficient than a saddle quern, which is patently not the case. Two passes through the rotary quern might have been followed by sieving ideally with a 0.5 mm mesh.It was necessary to control the feed rate to prevent the upper stone riding the grains without crushing them. Similar experiments have been conducted on Iron Age mills in central Europe, which are usually heavier. Hampl (1976, 8), Frohlich and Waldhauser (1989, 107) and Beranova (1993, 113) all broadly agree and quote a production rate of 4-5 kg per hour. Hennig (1996) is in agreement with 4 kg per hour for a Roman period quern, while Pleinerova (1986, 161) and Beranova (1993, 114) claim 3-4 kg per hour for Slavonic ones. Again, this disregards anomalousresults by Waldhauser (1981, 206) who hada yield of 16 kg per hour, but only for crushing. Overall, it is reasonable to assume a production rate of about 4 kg per hour, which would make the rotary quern nearly twiceas efficient as the barbarised Olynthusvariety and 4-10 times more productive than the saddle quern. The low output recorded by Moritz and Jones might be due to the smaller size of British Iron Age querns or to the inexperience of the operators. Thereis little data on Pompeian-style mills, but Crisafulli (Sposito 2007) claims that the early (Morgantina) type could grind 5 kg of dry grain with 270 revolutions, giving a rate of ¢. 33 kg per hour. Thisis a little high compared with modern animal mills (see below) but does demonstrate the advantage of this type of mill. Ethnographic data Experimental data can be supplemented to some extent with ethnographic information. Unfortunately,it is difficult to make meaningful comparisonsfor a variety of reasons ranging from reliability of the record to the way in which data was acquired and the verydifferent grains often utilised. Nevertheless, it is worth exploring the themea little further. Thereislittle quantified data on saddle quern productionrates, although Schon and Holter (1990, 363) record that, in Sudan, a woman could grind 4,500 cc of Pennisetum typhoideum in two passes 128

GRAIN over 75 minutes. Fermented millet was easier and 3,000 cc could be ground in two passes over 25 minutes. Sorghum took a total of 50 minutes for an unstated volume, presumably 3,000 cc. The first case would serve two meals to eight persons, mostly adults, the second three meals for seven women and children and the third one meal for four adults. It is difficult to compare this with the experimental data butit might imply a considerably increased productionrate. Rotary querns also produce anomalous ethnographic data. Bennett and Elton (1898, 169) refer to Dr Johnson’s account of eighteenth century Scottish querns where he claimsit took two pairs of hands four hours to grind a bushel of corn, equivalent to a rate of 6.8 kg per hour. Jasny (1944) gives modern Indian data ranging from 1.82 to 8.2 kg per hour. Valuable data has also been recorded by aid-workers seeking to introduce simple technologies to third-world peoples; their website is a useful starting point (http://www. Analvsis_of the various types of mulls 2). They state that the rotary quern (mistakenly referred to as Neolithic on the website) can be expected to produce 1.5 — 2 kg of flour per hour. Interestingly they also compare different grinding wheels, synthetic and natural. Stone is described as heavy and onlysuitable for well dried grain. They also make an interesting comparison between manual, animal and watermills. This must be used with care as the manual mill is not a rotary quern but a mechanical device, not unlike that shown in Fig, 6.13, but without the heavystones, hence the enhancedspeed of rotation. Animal mills are not like the Pompeian-style but geared and perhapsakin to the reconstruction of the Saalburg mill (Fig, 6.16). The watermill is of the ungeared horizontally-wheeled variety rather than the vertical and drives a 75 cm stone. Nevertheless, this does emphasize the markedly increased output of animal and particularly watermills. A simple horizontal watermill would have output over ten tmes greater than a rotary quern and over twenty tumes better than a saddle quern. Manual

Animal-powered

Water-powered

Through-put

c. 10 kg/h

10 to 20 kg/h

25 to 50 kg/h

Rotation speed of mobile wheel

350 rpm

100 to 200 rpm

120 rpm

Hereit is worth noting thatJacobi (1912) claimed an output of 100 kg per hour for a geared handoperated mill of the type shown in Fig, 6.14, but this excessive and anomalousresult is out of line with all other evidence. Experimentandflour quality Most experimenters have endeavouredto assess the quality of their products and to compare them with modern flour. Modern flour and the dough made from it is subjected to a range of tests, but two seem particularly pertinentto archaeology. Thefirst is particle size which is a reflection of the smoothness or coarseness of the flour and the secondis the content of bran and possibly husk remains. The former can be determined most easily bysieving, the second byashing a standard weight. Ashing will dispose of the bran and husks and only the mineral componentwill remain as a teflection of the bran/chaff content. Useful data are recorded by Samuel (2009), Moritz and Jones (1950), Holodnak (2001) and Menasanch ef a/ (2002). For the rotary quern, Moritz and Jones found that with two passes they could obtain flour with 75%of the particles smaller than 0.86 mm and 25%smaller than 0.21 mm. Theresults obtained by 129

THE STONE OF LIFE Samuel (2009) are of the same order which led her to claim that the rotary quern did not produce a more finely milled product. Inspection of Holodriak’s Table 1, leads to the same conclusion. Holodnak’s ash values were between 1.65 and 5.17%, while those for the rotary mill were between 0.95 and 1.04%. Holodiiak found that modern bread wheat gave a value of 1.61% and that the highervalues were associated with emmer. Ash is quoted neither by Samuel, nor by Menasanch ef a/, but the latter do give the flour/bran ratio in their products. This varied widely but averaged about 20%bran. This work seemsto lead to the conclusionthatall types of hand mill were capable ofyielding a comparable quality of flour and that the main difference layin the rate of production. Experiment and abrasion Oneofthe least explored fields of experimentationis that of abrasion patterns on the surface of grinding instruments. Dubreuil (2004) noted that under the stereo microscope, working surfaces appear as a series of alternating peaks and valleys and, that there were variations in the degree of rounding of the peaks and in their breadth. He therefore conducted series of controlled experiments byartificially grinding different substances and then observing the resultant striations. His work, based on basalt, included dry stone against stone contact,

grinding ochre, domestic wheat, dehusking and grinding barley, grinding acorns, other nuts, mustard, legumes, dried fish and meat. It appears that each process produces its own wear pattern providing a useful tool for distinguishing what commodity was being ground. He applied his findings to Natufian tools suggesting that they had been used for multifarious tasks, including cereal processing legumes and mineral grinding.It is clear that this technique has enormouspotential in the study of querns, but equally, there are unlikely to be hard and fast rules and each rock type needs to be considered separately. Hamon(2008) has conducted a similarseries of grinding, pounding and abrasion experiments on replicas of sandstone tools of the Neolithic Linearbandkeramik and Villeneuve-SaintGermain cultures. They were used for dehusking and grinding cereals, pounding temper, colourants and variousplants and shaping a variety of mineral, vegetable and animalobjects, including schist, bone, antler and wood. The results were then examined under a stereo

microscope and details of the resulting surface textures noted. It was broadly possible to distinguish different activities, but a particularly important conclusion from our point of view was that dehusking and grinding of grain could be distinguished by the surface texture. This work is immensely important as for the first time it provides a means of determining the extent to which querns were used as part of the dehusking process. Another field which seems to have beenlittle studied is the rate at which querns wear. It would obviously depend on rock type and usage, but someindication of how old a quern might be before discard would be invaluable. This might be tackled experimentally, at least in part.

130

8 FROM QUARRY TO USER: THE SOCIAL SETTING AND ORGANISATION OF PRODUCTION AND DISTRIBUTION In previous chapters, brief mention has been made of quarries, production methods and

distribution, both from an archaeological and ethnographic point of view. The object of this chapter is to develop the theme and to consider social as well as technical aspects. The extraction, shaping and, aboveall, the transportation of these often complex and invariably

heavy artefacts is no mean achievement and can seldom berealised by a lone individual, so social collaboration and organisation 1s normallyto be anticipated. This leads to consideration of matters such as organisational structures and the extent to which production and transportation might have been effected by the same or different individuals. Equally, it is desirable to understand how quern and millstone-making related to other aspects of the economy. For example, wasit a full-time activity or was it practiced alongside other trades and crafts, and what wasthe balance between these activities? Introductory remarks: the role of the quarry The quarryis the key to understanding quern or millstone production and distribution and yet, despite this, it remains one of the least studied and most enigmatic aspects of our subject. The quarry is an essential source of information on the choice and selection of material, on production technology and production organisation. It also furnishes evidence of rock variation and characteristics, vital in understanding trade and exchange. Location Perhaps the most intriguing and yet the most basic problem is the location of a quarry: what are the parameters which determine whyone rock was exploited in preference to another? Obviously, there are a limited number of rock types that can be used, and amongthesethere are some which are more desirable than others (chapter 1). Some regionsare rich in suitable rocks and in others they are scarce. In eastern England, for example, rocks suitable for

quern making are few, but there are sporadic outcrops of a very hard puddingstone which was exploited in Hertfordshire, whence, in the Roman period,it was exported all over East Anglia and beyond. Before this industry was established, puddingstone was imported from Normandyand even in the hey-day of Hertfordshire production, it was supplemented by imports from outside the region, the most notable of which were the lava grind stones of Mayen in Germany. Elsewhere in England, north and west of a line from the Wash to Dorset, hard rocks abound and the quern maker would often have a choice of suitable stone. In an area such asthis, other factors might comeinto play. For example, a distinctive red Millstone Grit was used for some Iron Age querns in South Yorkshire andit is almost certain that these emanated from Brimham Rocks in Yorkshire, although archaeological confirmation in the form of quarry evidenceis lacking (Heslop 2008, 44). A dearth of evidence does not mean that the attribution is wrong because later quarrying, erosion debris or soil cover may destroy or mask 131

THE STONEOF LIFE early working, Alternatively raw material may have been removed to be processed elsewhere. Heslop (2008, 44) claims that querns,like the Neolithic axes, may have had a special valueif obtained from an exotic location. Hestates that: The weird rock forms of the Brimham Grits, some of which resemble tall beehive querns must surely have had resonance to the symbolic connotations of the objects, making quernsfrom such locations more desirable and valuable. This is an interestingg thought significance of g and relevant when considering g the symbolic j gni querns, to be discussed further in chapter 9.

However, there are other factors which might affect quarry location. Outcrops located near to roadsorrivers would be accessible and might be preferred to those located in inhospitable terrain. At first sight, it might seem desirable to locate them on tribal or administrative boundaries where they could be accessed bydifferent communities, in the manner of local peasant markets (Berry 1967, 88). In practice, querns are so vital to human subsistencethat, in mostcases, it is more probable that quarries would be controlled and ownedbya person, groupor authority. In Wessex, there are three major quern quarries: Upper Greensand, which was extracted at Pen Pits, Lower Greensand from Lodsworth and Old Red Sandstone from

the Forest of Dean and the Bristol area. As Lyn Cutler (2012) has shown, the quarries for each lie in the heartland of Iron Agetribal areas as defined by pottery and coin distributions. Perhapssignificantly, they were all located well away from the contact zone, where different groupsare likely to intermingle. It seems that, in the middle andlate Iron Age, Pen Pits was controlled by the Durotriges, the Old Red Sandstone by the Dobunni and Lodsworth by the Atrebates. If this is the case, perhaps Folkestone wasoriginally the quarry of the Cantii, which might explain why these querns do not appear in assemblages from Boulogne,despite its proximity. All of these quarries continue into the Roman period, when the distribution shadow widens due to improved maritime and terrestrial communication. It seems therefore that the choice of rock to quarry is not dependentsolely on the quality and availability of a suitable material, but maybe influenced bypolitical, logistical and even religious factors. Production technology Quarries are a major source of evidence for the study of production technology,particularly those used in the preliminary stages of extraction and shaping the rock. There are a variety of quarrying techniques which might be employed and these are usually dictated, to some extent, by geology and topography, but the practice and experience of the quarryman may also play a part. The rock type and geomorphologywill suggest how the stoneis best extracted and different methods will be employed, depending on whether a scarp face is being exploited or whetherpits, trenches, or underground mines are appropriate. Sometimes,

no excavation is needed as surface boulders of the correct size and shape mayfurnish raw

material preforms, ready to work.

Onevery efficient method of extraction was preferred for rotary querns and millstones: they were created by marking out a compass circle, cutting a circular trench andsplitting off discs. This method was favouredas it producedless extraction waste and yielded preforms of the 132

FROM QUARRYTO USER

correct size and shape. A majority of quern and millstone quarries of all ages andinall parts of the worlddisplaythe distinctive voids left in the rock face whenthis technique was employed(Fig. 8.1; 8.9). If this was not possible, a column of rock might be isolated which

couldthenbe sliced into discs — salami style. Alternatively, the natural jointing or bedding of the rock maymeanthat extraction yields rough blocks of differing size and shape which

would require preliminary dressing. The next stage, the shaping process, might start with a natural preform, with a disc or with rough blocks fromthe quarry, and the shaping might

take place either outside or within the quarry. The dressing and finishing of the artefact might be done at the quarry, but in manycases, after the weight had been reduced by removing surplus stone, the quern would be transported to the home or workshop forthe

final stages. Throughout the process a clear typological pattern would be in mind, which

wouldrelate to the intended use. The progression from raw material to finished artefact is part of what Leroi-Gourhan (1971; 1993) aptly called the chaine opératoire or production sequence.

Extraction in the quarry is the start of a process whichleads naturally to the problem of distribution through marketing or other exchange mechanisms. When dealing with material found away from the quarry on consumersites, it is necessary to ascertainits point of origin. This will inevitably involve ‘characterisation’ of the material, or, in other

words, the isolating properties which will distinguish it from similar rocks extracted from other quarries. As quern and mill rocks are generally coarse-grained, characterisation can often be adequately achieved byeye, but sometimes scientific analysis is required to define distinguishing traits (chapter 10).

F7g. 8.1: Recent working inside the Grottes d’Hercules, 14 km west of Tangiers,Morocco, today a museum of quern quarrying (photo: author). Curwen (1956) witnessed quarrying in progress andthese arethe voids

OO

ty

left in the rock face

THE STONE OF LIFE With this information it should be possible to determine where the material originated and conversely, by whom the products were being used. This is a first step in understanding the social setting of quern production andevaluating its economic importance. In this chapter,

we will examine the archaeological evidence for the organisation of production and distribution, comparing archaeological evidence for the prehistoric and Roman quarries and the distribution of their products in the light of theory and ethnography. Selected quarries and rock types will illustrate the above themes, without pretence at a complete

catalogue. Ethnographic evidence for quarrying and production

Modern quern production has not been well documented, but there 1s some evidence, the

most detailed of which concerns the production of metates and manos in Mesoamerica. One of the most interesting studies is that of Hayden (1987) who recorded production at Malacatancito in the Guatemalan Highlands in the 1970s. Surprisingly, even aslate as this, stone tools were still occasionally used to extract and fashion the metates, a process which began by searching river beds for a suitably shaped natural stone to act as a pick. Hayden records that, after a fruitless search, the mefatero demonstrating this tradition resorted to

extraction from the bedrock using steel picks and chisels, although in earlier times these would not have been available. It appears that normally half a day would be spentcollecting suitable stone picks from riverbeds and it would take half a day to split a basalt boulder from which two metates could be fashioned. These would then be roughed out using the one-handled stone picks and taken homefor the process of thinning and finishing. These stages would involve pulverisation and few recognisable flakes would result. More orless the same process would be used to produce the mano. Travel to the quarry and roughing out would usually take one day and the longest process (taking over ten hours) was the thinning and finishing. Cook (1982) recorded a similar process among the Zapotec of the Oaxacavalley of Mexico.

Here metal tools and explosives were employed, but the time budget was muchthe same:

one day for quarrying, one day for shaping and one dayfor finishing. A working week might run Monday:blast stone, Tuesday: blast again if needed, Wednesday and Thursday: work in quarry shaping stones, Friday (and possibly Thursday): finish stones at home, Saturday: take to market. However, mefateros usually had anotherjob, often in construction, and stone work was onlypart of their livelihood. More recently, Searcy (2011) has recorded, in detail, production methods amongst the modern Maya of Guatemala. Here suitable boulders are found by digging awaythe soft soil in which they are embedded. Theyare split using metal tools and explosives, although previously, in the era before explosives, fire setting would have been used. A hot fire was lit on the rock surface and this would be dowsed with cold water to thermally induce cracks. The blocks would then be taken to a specific work-area nearby where they would be dressed in three stages. Firstly, the grinding face would be roughly formed, the sides would then be shaped after which thinning and finishing would take place — the last stage usually being done at home. Each stage would demanda specific set of tools. Again, time

is divided between growing maize and making metates. The production rate seems to have been about onea day, with Mondaydevoted to the production of blanks in the quarry and Sundaya dayof rest. 134

FROM QUARRY TO USER

Thereis verylittle evidence available outside Mesoamerica, but Hamon and Le Gall (2011, fig. 16) describe modern production of saddle querns in the Minyanka region of Mali. The rawblocks from the quarry would firstly have the sharp corners trimmed, followed byparingthe sides working from the active surface. The quern would then be turned over and the dorsal surface trimmed along the edges andfinally the bottom would be smoothed. The quern was finished bycarefully retouching the edges of the active surface. The hand-stone would then be made and matchedto the active surface. Thefinal finishing process would bethe responsibility of the purchaser. The production process would take ten to twenty minutes, excludingfinishing of the grinding surface. The same process seems to have been a common,if fairly self-evident, approachin the prehistoric

past (e.g. Jaccottey 2011, 299).

The scant ethnographic evidence suggests that the production of saddle querns wasa relatively simple and quick process. Rotary querns might be expected to take longer, but the process is even less well documented. At Beni Farah in the Aures Mountains of north-eastern Algeria, it seems that the stones were quarried as needed bythe Berbers. It supposedly took 15-20 days to quarry and roughly fashion the stonein the quarryand a further three to four days in the maker’s house to

dress and perforate the stone, while at the same time fixing the pivot peg in the lower stone (Hiltonsimpson 1922, 151). These figures are difficult to understand, but they suggest that the quarrying

Operation was concentrated into a two to three week period and that a number of rough-outs would be produced,as it is hard to imaginethat the extraction of a single quern would take so long, However,clearly, quern making involved a considerable investmentin time andit would therefore be a highlyvalued tool. This is confirmed bythe selling price, because a pair of stones would sell for as muchas 25 francs, a considerable sum,as the average wagesin the 1920s mightbefive tosix francs a dayfor an Algerian worker and obviously much less for a Berber countryman (Bennoune 2002). ‘The price of a quern would be roughlyequivalent to a week’s pay, contrasting strikingly with the evidence for the saddle variety which could be produced much mote quickly. Rotary querns would thus be high value items in the society which produced and used them. Archaeological evidence for quarrying Theliterature is dominated by post-medieval millstone quarries which have been well documented by writers such as Belmont (2006) or Hockensmith (2009). Roman and prehistoric quern and mill quarries lag far behind and are comparatively poorly known both in Britain and on the Continent, possibly because manyhave been destroyed bylater working, In Britain, for example,it is possible to point, with certainty, to only five pre-Roman localities: Pen Pits in Somerset, Lodsworth in Sussex, Worms Heath in Surrey, Folkestone in Kent and Wharncliffe Rocks in South Yorkshire (Barford 1984; Pitt-Rivers 1884; Peacock 1987; Crawford 1953; Keller 1989; Butcher 1957; Wright

1988; Pearson and Oswald 2000). Another potentially prehistoric quarryis located at Coles Pits Oxfordshire, but it maybe later. The quarries are verydifferent in typology: Pen Pits, Lodsworth, Coles Pits and Worms Heath are superficiallypits, although trenching mayhave also beenpracticed at Lodsworth and PenPits (¢f Heslop 2008, 46). Wharncliffe is a scarp quarry and Folkestone was based,at least partially, on the exploitation of beach boulders. All of these quarries were found during the course of normal archaeological fieldwork, with the exception of Lodsworth, which is unique as it was found as a result of a deliberate search strategy. During the 1970s and 1980s, the writer was asked to examine numerous assemblages of Greensand querns from sites on the Wessex Downland. While there were several varieties of rock, one type wasparticularly prevalent and recurred on manydifferent Iron Age and Romansites well 135

THE SoONE (1) LIFE away from the Greensand formation from whichit evidently dertved. The rock comprised hard

siliceous sandstone with prominent encrusted fossil worm burrows picked out in glauconite (Fig. 10.5). The problem of sourcing was approached geologicallyin the first instance. The work began by examining collections of Upper and Lower Greensand samples from widespreadlocalities in southern Britain, which immediately suggested that the source should be sought in the Lower rather than the Upper Greensand, the main outcrops of whichlay in western Sussex and Surrey. A

careful study was made of the geologicalliterature and a note made of places where harder rock, potentially suitable for querns, was to be found: these were visited and samples collected. ‘The

closest, if not identical matches, were in the Midhurst-Petworth area of West Sussex. It was clear

that this area was a potential source, but to get more detailed information on the geology would require re-mapping of the target area involving excavation to expose the bedrock, todaylargely dominated by woodsand fields. However, a quarry operating over more thaneight centuries would have left sometraces in the landscape andpossiblythe historical record. The next step was to search

the Sussex tithe map apportionments for suggestive field names, 27x. those containing elements

such as ‘pit’, ‘quarry’, ‘quern’ or ‘mill’ after whichlikely localities were systematicallyvisited. This led, eventually, to a wooded area knownas the “Pits Copse’ in the parish of Lodsworth. Here a

matching rock was foundwithall the required attributes, but at first no querns were seen (Fig. 8.2). However, one of the pits which gave the copse its name was being destroyed by a bulldozer andthis revealed much debitage within which was a single quern rough-out; withoutthis it would have been difficult to know the purpose of the quarries. It was evident that the Pits Copse had

considerable potential and so the area was carefully scoured by a group of University students, whosystematically field-walked the area. This resulted in the recovery of more querns in varying states of manufacture andthe collection was supplemented byothers whichthe farmer hadpulled

off adjacentfields during ploughing, These simple, but very time consuming, techniquesledto the discovery of a major productionsite supplying much of Wessex from the Neolithic to the Roman period. It is important to note that the known quern distribution would not have pointedto this as a source and without the chance bulldozing the site might have been relegated to the status of possibly, rather thancertainly, a quern quarry, a point clearly evident in Fig, 8.2.

Fug. 8.2: The topography of the Lodsworth quarry site, showing oneof the shallowpits. Withoutfurther verification it would not be evident that this was a quern quarry (photo: author) 136

FROM QUARRYTO USER

Field names seem to be a good wayof locating ancient quarries as the Lodsworth example demonstrates, but there are other indications which might prove useful. Quarrying often leaves a hummocky terrain with pits and mounds, sometimes called locally by names such as ‘hills and holes’, as in the famous building stone quarries called ‘Barnack hills and holes’ in Northamptonshire. There are other potential indications: in the nineteenth centuryit was thought that our rude ancestors were so primitive they could not build houses, but lived

instead in pit dwellings. The early six inch Ordnance Survey maps are littered with gothic script indicating the presence of an ‘Ancient British Village’ or of ‘Pit Dwellings’. Many of these may be quarries, andat least two, Coles Pits in Oxfordshire and Worms Heath in

Surrey, have proved to be quern quarries.

However, there is a problem in distinguishing a quern quarry from one for building stone and the fortuitous bulldozing at Lodsworthis relevant when considering other sites which

have been proposed on simplylithological grounds. We know, for example, that querns were made of Jurassic sandstone, such as that from Spilsby, Coal Measures sandstone and Yoredale sandstone, but no quarries are known. In some cases the source can be predicted

with someprecisionas is the case with Brimham Rockscited above (p. 132). It was once thoughtthat, in pre-Romantimes, as querns were heavy and whentransportation may have been difficult, they would have been madeat or near the place where they were used. Thus, a rock would be geologically identified and it was assumed that the quern would come from the nearest outcrop. It is nowclear that the choice of rock was highly deliberate, possibly in remote or particularly significant spots with specialist production close to the source being the rule. The concept of home production using the local rock is nowseen as untenable, particularly for rotary querns. As Lyn Cutler (2012) has shown in Wessex, where local production had been commonly assumed, there may have been no more than three large quarries and a handful of less important ones. By no means

Fig. 8.3: Wharnchffe Crags, a quern quarry near Sheffield, S Yorkshire (photo: C Green)

137

THE STONE iP LEve ~ 7

td

& oe

.

© .

?

*

NGS

.

u

sof Qo

9

/

Vf OF

%.

Be

te oer “ > 0 3ff

=

oe

:

x

. °

Ae . » ea

a

“By

*Veesce

oo

QUER

=

SCALE

ee

©

ue

7

é

8

Ne

a gybid §i THYATakyy } dy

PSrah ag ma

44 3

eS

—

In Britain, lava querns are very commonInforts andtheir association with the military seems agreed. However, interestingly, small quantities of othertypes are also foundbothinthefort

ZEEE. SINE Co Le

Fig. 8.13: A group of quernsfrom Newstead, Scotland, mainly Mayen lava (from Curle 1911) themselves andits zzevs, as noted by the above authors. This suggests that the army was not averse

to supplementingits supplies from local sources. No doubt this practice led to Curwen (1937) isolating a “Roman Legionary’ type, which, in fact, comprises a mix of local types from different sources.

While the armymight have initiated the use of lava querns, they became very popular and their use was by no means restricted to the military. They are present in some quantity in almost every Roman townin Britain and a large number of rural establishments as well. Thus, 15 %of all the querns foundat Silchester are of lava (Shaffrey 2003) and, in

London, excavations at No 1 Poultry led to a remarkable discovery of over 1,000 rotary fragments, dating to c. 75 AD, which had been reused to form an external cobbled

surface and might indicate a large mill or bakery nearby (Hill and Rowsome 2012, 349). The huge quantity suggests that London could have been a major port of arrival for lava querns. In Colchester, they predominate over the local puddingstone, possibly because this was also a favoured point of importation (Buckley and Major 1983, 75), Lava is also present on late sites althoughit is often hard to know whether this was residual from earlier importation or a continuation of trade. Conventional wisdom suggests that the trade was concentrated in the first two centuries AD and, bythe third, it had fallen away, but late Romanfinds are so numerous that continuity nowbegins

to appear more probable. Examples fromdistantly separated sites include the Rudston villa, Yorkshire, Kestonvilla, Kent and the Folkestone villa, but these are just the tip of

the iceberg (Stead 1980, 123; Philp ef a/ 1999, 99; K Parfitt pers. comm.). 4) French lavas. Lavas suitable for quern making are available in manyareas of France, principallyin the Chane des Puys north of the Massif Central and in the Languedoc. Those to the south of the Massif have beenparticularly well studied, ona site bysite basis, byJeanLouis Reille (1995; 1998; 1999; 2000a-d; 2001a-b; 2002). He used thin-section petrography

and micro-texturalappearance, supplementedby geochemistry, tocharacterise the different lavas in the area. The flows utilised comprised principally the lavas of Agde on the coast

154

FROM QUARRY TO USER

Coirons @

Avignon

ToL]

Montpellier

St Thibéry “4

A¢

12

as!

ce

Ix

a, Agde Ay

La Courtine a.

|

P’pignan al

Fig. 8.14; Southern French sources (sohd) and querns (open) according to Reille. Find sites: 1 Pech Maho; 2 Montlaures, 3 Cayla de Matlhac; 4 La Ramasse; 5 Lattes; 6 Ambrussum; 7 Nages; 8 Le Marduel: 9 Martigues; 10 La Cloche; 11 Aix-en-Provence; 12 Entremont; 13 Olbia

and an inland outcrop in the Hérault valley centred on St Thibéry, 15 km to the north. Other rocks used on a smaller scale were lavas from Coirons, on the southern fringe of the Massif Central, those from the hinterland of Toulon and a flowat Lacoste, near Clermont

PHerault. At the oppidum of Montlaurés, just north of Narbonne, granites, gneisses and sedimentary rocks comprised over half the assemblage, the remainder being lava, but this was an exception and, overall, lavas were the preferred material.

Thesites analysed byReille are shown on Fig, 8.14 and his results can be briefly summarised as follows: one of the earliest sites is the oppidum of La Ramasse near Clermont |’Hérault occupied between the sixth and third centuries BC. The Olynthusstyle mills were made from the Lacoste lava flowless than three km to the north, but the rotaries were imported from the St Thibéry flow 25 km south. Anotherearly site is Montlaurés and it appears that in the initial phases a great variety of sources were used, but with the introduction of the rotary quern the numberis halved with most of the lavas coming from St Thibéry or the Cap d’Agde. At Le Marduel, occupied between the fourth and first centuries BC, 77% 155

THE STONE OF LIFE of the lava came from Coirons, 75 km to the north and the remainder derived from Cap d’Agde, while at nearby Nages (third-first century BC), 66% came from Cap d’Agde. At Cayla de Mailhac, near Narbonne, Olynthusstyle mills came from St Thibéry, while the later rotaries from Pech Maho were of lava from Cap d’Agde. At La Cloche, near Marseille, a small proportion of querns came from volcanicsin the hinterland of Toulon, but most came from Cap d’Agde. The sameis true for the oppidum of Entremont andfor the town of Aix in the first century BC. At Martigues, most of the saddle querns (sixth-third centuries BC) derive from the hinterland of Toulon but, in second-first centuries BC, both Olynthus and

rotary types came from the Herault valley, principally St Thibéry. At the site of Ambrussum (third-first centuries BC) most come from either St Thibéry or Cap d’Agde with a majority from thelatter. Analysis of 110 pieces from second century BC Olbia shows that about 25% came from the hinterland of Toulon, while most of the remainder derive from Cap d’Agde. The most important site in the area is the town of Lattes, the subject of manyyears of excavation by Michel Py. From the fourth century BC the most important source supplying the site was St Thibéry. The Agde lava also seems to have been used for rotary mills on the Romaniron working site at Les Martys in the Montagne Noire of the Languedoc, 100 km to the west (Oliva, e¢ a/ 1999). To sum this complex evidenceis difficult, but it appears that the earlier mills were made from a greater variety of more local materials. An important early source was St Thibéry material which must have been exported through the port of Agde. It is possible that the lava flow

was within the chora of the Greek colony or it may have been operated bynatives wishing to trade with the colony. Interestingly, the products were essentially eastern types, and this applies to both the Olynthus mill and the deeply hoppered rotaries (af pp. 48, 70). No evidence for production has yet been found at St Thibéryandit is possible that the material was taken elsewhere, perhaps even to Agde, for working. Later, perhaps during the later third century BC, the centre of the industry transferred to the Agde area. Here it achieved wide distribution, largely because of the ease of maritime transport. Inland areas were harder

to reach and the demand continued to be met, at least in part, from Coirons. It seems that

overland transport was limited to about 60 km, which ethnography leads us to expect, but once maritime transportis involved the range shoots up to more than 200 km. Another important source seems to have been in the Chaine des Puys on the northern flank of the Massif Central and, in particular, the trachyandesite which has long been exploited at Volvic. No Roman quarries are known, but this is hardly surprising as the rock was widely used in local buildings from the medieval period onwards. The cathedral of ClermontFerrand andthe basilica of St Amable at Riom, are two remarkable buildings in this sombre rock. It is hard to gauge the importance of this source in the Roman period asit has yet to be subjected to the detailed treatment which Mayen has andis receiving, R6der (1953), whobriefly visited Volvic, could find no evidence of Romanactivity and hence this source has been largely ignored by Romanists until recently. However, it now seems probable that the rock was distributed widely over northern France, as indicated on the schematic map of Gluhak and Hofmeister (2008, fig, 1; 2011) shown here as Fig, 8.12. Hard evidenceis in short supply, but Polinski (2009) has reviewed the Roman mills in trachyandesite from the départment of Loire-Atlantique, many of which appear to be watermills. He suggests that a number of sources could have been involved;all located in the Chatne des Puys. The fourth century AD querns from Les Fontaines Salée in Burgundywerealso ascribed to this source 156

FROM QUARRY TO USER

suggesting a wide distribution (Lacroix 1963). Gluhak and Hofmeister (2011) found querns from this source at Bassou and Besancon and, most importantly, on the site of Bibracte in Burgundy. Furthermore, two Pompeian mills, from London and Corfe Mullen in Dorset,

have been ascribed to Volvic (Williams and Peacock 2011; Williams-Thorpe and Thorpe 1988). Serneels (1994) studied the petrography and geochemistry of the watermills from Avenches and concluded that different rocks were represented. These included: - basalts with phenocrysts of pyroxene and plagioclase - basalts with phenocrysts of pyroxene and olivine - andesites - a single fragmentof alkali basalt. There are obviously several quarries involved but he originally concluded that the two most important types came from different quarries in the Chazne des Puys, confidently excluding

Agde.

Even more surprising is the claim that the millstones from the industrial milling site at Barbegal originated in this source, inconveniently located on the opposite side of the Massif Central (Peacock 1980; Williams-Thorpe 1988). The question was re-opened by Leveau (2006) who was justifiably sceptical of this attribution. However, Reille was unable to find a match in the lavas of ’Hérault. After consulting geologists such as Serneels and De Goér de Herve, Leveau acknowledged that among the mulls from Avenches, type 3 might come from the recent volcanics of the Chaine des Puys, but suggested that the remainder might emanate from quarries on the south-eastern fringe of the Massif Central or northern Languedoc. If this is correct, it throws open the question of the origin of the Barbegal millstones and even an Italian source cannot be disregarded. It is interesting to note that the quarries of the Chaine des Puys were involvedin long distance trade to both Britain and Avenches. There is thus no real problem in Barbegal stones coming from this area of recent vulcanism. The stones would be carried over 100 km or more from the quarry to the Rhone, but after that, the journey southwards would be long, albeit very easy and thus economical. The evidencesofar available points to Chaine des Puys being a major production area for millstones and possesses the fresh lava desirable for top quality mills: it cannot be readily dismissed as a source without more careful analytical and archaeological work. Wilhams-Thorpe has found matching petrographic and chemical signatures and this has yet to be demonstrated for the other potential outcrops. 5) Itahan lavas. Work on Italian lavas has recently been reviewed by Antonelli and Lazzarini (2010). The most important quarries were at Orvieto and at Mulargia on Sardinia and these have been discussed elsewhere (pp. 87-9). However, there were other lavas which were exploited in Roman orearlier times, although on lesser scale. These include the Euganean Hills, Monte Vulture, the trachyandesites of Somma-Vesuvius, the older flows of Etna and

the island of Pantelleria. The most northerly source, in the Euganean hills, may have supplied much of the Veneto and adjacent regions and examples have been found further south in the Marche, at Fossombrone 157

THE STONE OF LIFE and Urbisaglia, the movement of which may have been facilitated by the river systems and the Adriatic (Antonelli and Lazzarini 2010; Renzulli e¢ a/ 2002). The leucite basaltic trachyandesites from Somma-Vesuvius account for 40% of the local mills at Pompeii (Buffone ef a/ 2003). The Pompeian-style seems to have been used locally, but rotary querns mayhave reached Aquileia. The tephrite foidites of Monte Vulture seem to have been exploited from the Bronze Age. Saddle querns and Olynthus mills were produced,the latter distributed throughout southern Italian provinces of Basilicata, Molise and Apulia (Lorenzonief a/, 2000a-b). The hawaiite-mugearite lavas of Mongibello-Etna, were more widelyused. Mills and querns in this rock are known from central and southern Italy (Apulia, Campania), but also in Tripolitania, Cyrenaica, Tunisia and Spain. Renzulli ef a/ (2002) have found examples at Fossombrone, in the Marche. The products include rotary querns, Pompeian mills and Olynthus mills. This was clearly a major source, particularly in the Roman period, andit is tempting to connect the African distribution with African grain. Perhaps mills would be a suitable cargo for unladen shipssailing to Africa to collect consignments. The lavas of Etna and those of Iblean fields also in Sicily seem to have been important in Albania where they are known from Apollonia and Butrint (Gerke et a/ 2006). Pantellerian basalt was exploited on lesser scale from the Bronze Age to the Roman period and was used for local saddle querns and Olynthus mills. Later it was a source of rotary querns, some of which reached North Africa. The wide distribution of Pantellerian pottery (Tomber forthcoming) suggests that the island may have been a stopping point for shipping between North Africa and manydestinations in the Western Mediterranean. 6) Puddingstone. Puddingstone is a distinctive rock type which takes its name from its resemblance to an old fashioned plum pudding. It comprises rounded pebbles of flint set in quartz sand cemented with silica. It is an immensely tough rock, a conglomeratic facies of sarsen and, whenstruck, will tend to fracture across the pebbles rather than round them.

It was formed in the Palaeogene, about 55 million years ago, when this part of the world was very muchhotter. The best known British puddingstone is that of Hertfordshire, which occurs as hard lumpsor doggers in gravelly Tertiary deposits. It was used for quern making in the Romanperiod and, while tough to work, the resultant artefacts would be resistant to

wear and mightlast through manygenerations. Only one potential quarrysite is known,that at Bowl’s Dell near Puckeridge (Fig. 8.15), but there must be others (Lovell and Tubb 2006). The distribution of querns in this material was studied in the sixties by Ernest Rudge (1964; 1968), a retired industrial chemist. He sent a questionnaire to East Anglian museumsenabling him to compose a distribution list which revealed how widely this material was distributed. Healso noted,as an aside,that the largest collection of puddingstone anywhere was in Rouen Museum where he counted 44 querns, but he did not considerit likely that British querns were imported from Gaul. About 20 years ago the writer visited Rouen and noted that the French querns looked different. Hertfordshire puddingstone generally has large brownish

158

Fig. 5.15: Presumed puddingstone quarry site at Bowls Dell, Puckeridge, Hertfordshire (photo: author) pebbles, the French are usually smaller and black; but there are areas of overlap as some of the British puddingstones, such as that from Radlett, also have small black pebbles. It is possible to 5 differentiate the two in thin-section or bythestatistics of the size distribution, but generally the French pebbles have white cores while the English are black throughout (Cutler 2012). There are oO oO | also differences in quern technology: in France the handles pierce the hopper, whilst in England | g. . g

they do not. In addition, the French stones sometimes contain Tertiary fossils which are never

present in the British. As a result of detailed study, it is possible to distinguish the two industries with confidence. Four quarry areas are known in Normandy: the Bois-des-Hogues (St-Léonard, Fécamp), St-Saéns, the Foret de La Londe in the départment Seine-Maritime and Avrilly, south of Evreux in Eure

(Rogeret 1997; Guillier e¢ a/ 2005). One supposed quarry at Vattetot-sur-Mer (Chaussat 2010) may be a chalk pit as no puddingstone was found whenvisited in the summer of 2011, but there may be others between the church andthe Bois-des-Hogues. The rocks of Avrilly, a flint breccia, and La Londe, with whiter pebbles, are distinctive, but it is difficult to differentiate between St-Saéns and the Bois-des-Hogues. However, the latter is on the coast andit is more likely to be the main exporter. French puddingstone querns seem to begin earlier than the British and are found in late La Tene contexts in Normandy. A fine example displayed in the Caen museum was found in

the late La Tene grave at Mondeville, while another, dating between La Téne D2 andthefirst century AD, came from unpublished excavations at Saint-Vigor-d’Ymmonville (BesnardVauterin 2009, 115; Chaussat 2010). Pommepuy (1999; 2003) recorded puddingstones from late La Tene sites in Picardy, but it is not certain that they are from Normandy, althoughthis

is probable. In England, French puddingstone was found in a pit at Rowbury Farm, which

might date to the fifth century BC (see above p. 56), and it is known from pre-Roman contexts dating 25 BC-c AD 50 at Folkestone (Parfitt 2012). Further unpublished pre-conquest examples come from Elms Farm, Heybridge and Brisley Farm, Ashford (Atkinson and Preston

1998; Sealey 2009; Stevenson 2012). It appears, therefore, that French puddingstone querns 159

TE SINE OP LIFE

] 2+ 5+

+

examples Normandy yw ae.

Worms Heath

unknown

=

> Gr r

Hertfordshire

CHS

rock sources open symbols general county or uncertain records

100 km grid

160

FROM QUARRY TO USER were being imported into southern England in the late Iron Age and possiblyearlier. Even more remarkable are finds of French puddingstone from East Anglia (Fig. 8.16). These occur in some quantity, particularly in the southern half of the county where they are even found at Turnershall Farm, near the Hertfordshire outcrops. At first sight this seems to be a classic case of ‘coals to Newcastle’. Unfortunately, they are usually found in veryearly Roman contexts or undated, but at the unpublished site of Elms Farm they were found in Augustan contexts. Similarly, at Pairview, Baldock, they were associated with a Dressel 1B

amphora, implying a first century BC date, probably after 25 BC (Sealey 2009), but again the site has yet to be fully published. Given the longevity of these querns it seems probable that the Roman finds were being imported prior to the conquest, before the Hertfordshire industry had been established. A strong case can therefore be made for a pre-Romantrade between France and the Trinovantes. They mayhave arrived on the same commercial current that brought this tribe Mediterranean luxuries such as amphorae of fine Italian wine and Spanish fish sauces. The technology of French and British puddingstone querns is so similar it is tempting to suggest a migration of French quern makers to Britain on the eve of the conquest, presumably to be near to their most lucrative markets. Crawford (1953) claimed there was a quern quarry at Worms Heath, near Caterham, and this seems to have been the earliest British source to be worked, beginning in the Iron Age, although it continued into the Roman period as the evidence from Springhead in Kent demonstrates (Shaffrey 2010; 2011). Two pieces are known from pre-Roman contexts. One from Danebury dates to 300-100 BC and another was recently found at Silchester in Iron Age deposits (information MG Fulford). It seems, on current evidence, that an attempt was made to

set up an industry south of the Thamesin a rather poor type of puddingstone before moving to the superior stones of Hertfordshire very soon after the Roman conquest. If this analysis is correct, it demonstrates how water transport can facilitate the long distance movement of querns and how marketing can lead to the transfer of an industry to a new place. Once established in Hertfordshire, Roman querns achieved a wide distribution across eastern England and sometimes south of the Thames, into the territory once favoured by French puddingstones (Fig. 8.16). One example was even found ontheisland of Jersey, near to the Normandycoast. These querns seem to date from early in the Roman occupation to perhapsthe later second century AD. We knowlittle of the French industryat this time, but it seems to have continued because a millstone in French puddingstone found in the villa at Rock, on the Isle of Wight, can be dated to the fourth century AD (Tomalin 1987, 88).

Opposite. Fig. 8.16: The distribution of Hertfordshire, French and Worms Heath puddingstone querns in France and Britain (Green and Peacockforthcoming). Datafor Seine-Maritimefrom Rogeret 1997 161

9 A MATTER OF LIFE AND DEATH: SYMBOLISM AND THE WIDER SIGNIFICANCE OF QUERNS AND MILLS From the material to the spiritual: mythology, religion and querns In the modern western world the secular and the sacred have been almost completely separated. All that remains in general circulation are superstitions such as avoiding the numberthirteen or not walking undera ladder. Religious practices are performed on one day a week and havelittle impact on the secular sphere. However, this is a very recent view and in simpler pre-industrial societies the two are generally inextricably intertwined: everydaylife interacts seamlessly with the supernatural and the tools employed in daily tasks become, in some measure, sacred. We might expect that querns and mills, concerned with the support of life, would be particularly important. Their vital role is stressed in the Bible which states that if you lend a man something you must not take his millstones as security since this would be equivalent to taking his life: No man shall take the nether or the upper millstone to pledge:for he taketh a man’ life to pledge (Deuteronomy24, 6).

The relationship between quernsandreligious practice is well exemplified in the Maharashtra state of central India, where hand querns arestill made and used. Each morning at dawn the

women of the household will rise to grind the flour needed for the day and while theyare doingit, they sing (Poitevin 1997). The songs are not just rhythmic chants, but a peculiarly feminine oral traditional canon, which is addressed to gods such as Vitthal (Vithoba) or his avatar Krishna, his wife Rukmini, the Hindu poetess Janabai, and so on. The songs comprise an act of religious devotion or bhak#, and through them an everyday household chore becomesan act of worship. The quernitself becomes the earthly instrument aiding communication with the deity just as in Christianity everyday bread and wineis sanctified and used to commune with God. It is not surprising that Hindu temples sometimes show a woman at the quern being assisted by a deity and Poitevin (1997, figs 10-14) illustrates some striking examples (Fig, 9.1). The quern seemsto have had a special role in other societies. Makilam (2007), herself Berber, gives a first-hand accountof its magical place in the Berber communities of the Kabyle mountains of Algeria, where in the 1970s the Tissrt or rotary quern wasstill in use. The quern was symbolic of the cosmos andits three worlds: the celestial sphere above, the lower beneath and the world of humans in between. The first use of a mill wasritual, involving the grinding of salt with seven rotations, followed bythe grinding of seven fistfuls of grain. The dough from this flour was believed to possess magical powers and some was daubed on door posts and the heads of domestic animals in order to connect the spirit of the mill with the household and the animals within it. The quern was a magical tool because, like other household objects, a guardian spirit inhabitedit, living particularlyin the recess of the mill, so a few grains of corn would alwaysbeleft in the central hole as food for the mill and it was forbidden to sit on the grinding mill or to useit on holy days. Many ceremonies were performed using the quern,including wind-procuringrituals as well as the curing of stomachailments. 162

SYMBOLISM

Fig. 9.1: Mural painting in a small temple near Pandharpur, Maharashtra, India, showing the god Vitthal/ Krishnaassisting the poetess and saint Janabat with milling (from Poitevin 1997) Again, in a typical shamanicrite of passagefor the young pubescent Kabyle girl, she is made to sit astride the mill. By mounting andplacing herself on the mill, which symbolises the cosmos, the nubile womanis linking herself to supreme creation andits celestial origins. (Makilam 2007, 70) Mills are less in evidence in the Christian religion, but it 1s possible to see a connection. A number of saints were martyred by having a millstone tied aroundtheir neck and being thrownintoariver, lake or the sea. The tormentors could, in their misguided way, have been trying to emulate Christ’s exhortation recorded by Matthew(18, 6): Bat whoso shall offend one

of these little ones which believe in me, it were betterfor him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drownedin the depth of the sea. Whatever the reason, martyrdom bymillstone seems to have been an international phenomenon. A list, by no means exhaustive, includes St Hallvard Vebjornsson of Oslo who was drowned in Drammensfjord, St Florian of the Romanprovince of Noricum, who was thrown into the River Enns for refusing to sacrifice

to Romangods, St Quirian, Bishop of Siscia (Croatia), St Anastasius of Salona, St Vincent of Zaragoza, St Christina of Bolsena and St Piran of Cornwall. Some tared better than others: Christina was martyred by her father who tied a millstone aroundher feet and threw

her into the Lake of Bolsena, but she managed to use the millstone as a stepping stone and struggled ashore only to suffer even more horrendous torture and death at the hands of her tormenters. St Piran, like other particularly holy saints, was most fortunate of all. 163

THE STONE OF LIFE

He wastrying to convert the Irish, but theytired of his efforts and threw him into the sea

with a millstone around his neck. However, God was on his side and the millstone floated,

enabling him to sail to Cornwall where he landed at St Piran’s port (Perranporth) whence he proselytised the Cornish. St Victor was also fortunate. On beinglet out of prison he kicked a statue of Jupiter. The offending foot was cut off and the saint was ground undera millstone, which happily broke while he wasstill faintly breathing (Gallonio and Allinson 1930, 100). An even stronger connectionis to be found in other religions and in Scandinavian myth. A recutring conceptis that of the cosmic mill, no doubt suggested bythe rotational movement of the heavens. In the Sanskrit epic the Mahabharata, the milk ocean is churned to produce the soma of immortality and guarantors of the world’s well-being such as the sun and the moon,along with destructive forces such as the poison Kalakuta and the goddess of misfortune (Tolley 1995, 63). The Norse equivalent wouldbe the story of Mundilfceri (Tolley 1995, 75): Hets called Mundilferi, Thefather of the Moon And also the sun;

They are to turn heaven Fxvery day Forthe reckoning of theyears of men.

The same idea is found in the Finnish national epic the Kakvala, compiled in 1835 from ancientoral tradition (Tolley 1995). The central theme to the Kalevala is the sampo, a magical instrument whichis never closely defined but seems, in manyrespects, to be a mill. Crawford (1888) translates as follows: On one side the flour is grinding, on another salt is making,

on a third is moneyforging, and the lid is many-colored. Well the Sampo grinds when finished, to andfro the ld 1s rocking, grinds one measure at the day-break, grinds a measure fitfor eating, grinds a secondfor the market, grinds a third onefor the store-house. Here we have a concept resembling that in the Mahabharata, something which grindsoutall aspects oflife, bringing wealth and prosperity as well as misfortune. The epic has three main episodes: the creation of the world, the forging of the sampo and thetheft of the sampo in whichit is destroyed and the fragments are lost in the sea. Some of these are eventually washed up onthe shore andit is these fragments that imbue both land andsea with fertility. The same theme appearsin a different guise in Norse mythology, in the Groffasongr, Grotti’s song (Tolley 2008). This story concerns two daughters of a giant, Fenja and Menja, who grew up on the millstone mountain. They were captured by king Frdd6i and set to work in his 164

SYMBOLISM mill, the Grotti of the myth being the mill. They work with a will and grind out wealth and prosperity for Frooi, whois able to sleep in the lap of luxury. Far from being grateful, being unaware of their lineage, he demands even more of them, not permitting them to sleep for

longer than the cuckoo stops singing or the time it took him to sing one song. Thegirls tire of this treatment and resolve to destroy him. They grind even more furiously until the mill frame cracks and the stones split asunder. Let us grind evenfurther: Yrsas son will for Halfdan’s slaughter Take vengeance on Prodi. he will come to be called her son and brother — ‘both of us Rnowthat.’ Lhe girls ground on, gave proof of their strength — thoseyoung ones were in giant wrath. The timberframes shuddered, the mill-crib shot to the ground, the cumbrous stone cracked in two.

And the crag-giants’ consort had her say: We have milled so, Fred,

that we shall mill no more. They have stood long enough, these ladies, at the milling.’ (trans. Clive Tolley 2008) Clearly of the same genre, is the Norse legend explaining whythe sea is salt (Webbe Dasent1969). The story concerns two brothers, one rich, the other poor. The rich one offered the poor a flitch of bacon if he would do anything he asked. The poor brother agreed and was then told he must go to Hell. On arriving hesold his flitch for a magic quern which would grind out anything he asked: food, gold — anything, It brought wealth and luxuryto its once poor owner. It was then seen by a sea captain who askedif it could grind salt. On being assured it could, he boughtit and tookit to sea on his boat where it began to grind and grind and grind. Unfortunately,in his haste, the mariner had failed to ask howto stopit, so the ship became overladen with salt and sank to the bottom of the sea, but the quern grinds on keepingthe sea salty, a process which also accounts for whirlpools and currents. An alternative version has the sea king, Mysingr, slaying Fro0i, taking the quern and making it grind salt on his ship until its sinks (Dorson 1968, 579; Tolley 2008). Once again we see a magic quern that grinds out wealth and evil and explains observed natural phenomenain terms which could be readily understood by a simple peasant. 165

THE STONE OF LIFE Celtic mythologyis relatively impoverished in comparison, but there are tales of people not going to the mill at night because that was when the dark (evil) fairies did their grinding. One rather charming tale concerns the high king Cormac mac Art, who mayhavelived in the third century AD. A beautiful Pictish maiden captured in battle was sent to him as a present. Cormac gave theslave girl to his wife who then set her to work grinding corn with the hand quern. One day Cormac sawthe girl at her work, weeping as the toil was heavy and she was unusedto it. This moved Cormac to do something to help the women who grind corn and he set up the first watermill on a stream at Tara, so that the womenneed toil no more (Rolleston 1910). It matters not whetherthe storyis true or even whether Cormacactually existed. Here was an explanation of the watermills, which must have dotted the medieval Irish countryside,

in terms of goodness andaltruism — a link between the material and spiritual world. Querns, mills and fertility

The quern and the mill can be seen as a metaphor for the cosmic mill continually grinding out wealth and poverty, fortune and misfortune. However,it is possible to look at them from a different angle - as representing the enduring cycle of death, regeneration and new life. The corn fed to the mill is killed but it emerges metamorphosed into something new, flour, which

sustains and nourishes newlife. This is basically the theoretical position adopted by Fendin (2000), but it is a thread that runs through folklore as well. It recurs for example, in the old English folk song John Barleycorn. Three menset outto kill Sir John Barleycorn: they buried him in the soil and left him for dead, butafter the rain he sprang up. Theyleft him to wither in the heat of mid-summer and then cut him down and threshed him until he was ‘cut from skin and bone’, after which he was even more cruelly treated by the miller who ground him between two stones. Even after that he lived on, stronger than ever — in an alcoholic drink. Hereis the version according to Vaughan Williams and Lloyd (1959): There was three men came out of the west, Therfortunesfor to try, And these three men made a solemn vou

John Barleycorn should die. Lhey ploughed, they sowed, they harrowed him in, Throwed clods upon his head, And these three men made a solemn von, John Barleycorn was dead. Then they let him hefor a very long time Till the rainfrom heaven didfall, Then little SirJohn sprung up his head, And soon amazed them all They let him stand till midsummer Till he looked both pale and wan, And little SirJohn he growed a long beard And so became a man.

Lhey hired men with the scythes so sharp To cut him off at the knee, 166

SYMBOLISM Theyrolled him and tied him by the waist, And served him most barbaroushy.

They hired men with the sharp pitchforks Who pricked him to the heart, And the loader he served him worse than that,

For he bound him to the cart. They wheeled him round and round the field Till they came unto a barn, And there they made a solemn mow Of poorJohn Barleycorn. They hired men with the crab-tree sticks Lo cut him skinfrom bone, And the miller he served him worse than that,

For he ground him between two stones. Here's little SirJohn in a nut-brown bowl, And brandy in a glass; And little SirJohn in the nut-brown bowl Proved the stronger man at last. And the huntsman he cant hunt thefox, Norso loudly blow his horn, Andthe tinker he cant mend kettles orpots Without a hittle of Barleycorn. The same themerecurs in other cultures. A good exampleis that of Mot, the Canaanite god of death and adversity in the natural world, who is knownprincipally from the Ras Shamra, Ugaritic texts (Jordan 2004). He lived in a pit in the earth and was responsible for its annual drought and death. In a confrontation,he killed the god Baal who was avenged by Anat, Baal’s twin sister. She slew him, cleaved, winnowed, burnt him and groundhis remainsin a millstone,

scattering pieces on the fields. An almost identical story recurs in the pagan worship practiced at Haran in southern Turkey. The fertility god Tammuz was believed to have beenslain byhis master who groundhis bonesin a millstone and winnowed them in the wind (Dodge 1970, 758). Both Mot and Tammuz seem to be somewhat analogous to the Egyptian god Osiris, chthonic god of the underworld, but also the god of corn and vegetation. The Norse mythsalso describe something similar. The giant Bergelmir waslain on a mill frame and as Tolley (1995, 73) states he can only have been there for one reason - to be groundup. It will never be easy to identify such a process in the archaeological record, but Connolly (1994, 32) notes that saddle querns are sometimes associated with late Bronze Age burials in Ireland and she suggests that some mayhave been used for grinding down cremated bone prior to deposition in thecist. Interestingly, the song about the sampowassungat the spring ploughing and sowing. Clearly 167

THE STONE OF LIPE

related is the old Swedish custom of plough bread practicedatfirst ploughing evenaslate as the early twentieth century: three furrows were ploughed and some ofthe soil was rubbed into the horse’s forelock, while the ploughmanate bread from the Christmas bake (Almgren Ley,

From quernto cult: the evidence of the artefacts It will be apparent from the above that querns have a rather special place in society, once bread becomes the staple. In the days before the roller mill, reliance on bread meantreliance

on the millstone and before that the domestic quern. The quern can therefore be reasonably expectedtoplayits part in ritual as well as in secularlife. It is particularly striking to note the link between the soil and the underworld, the grain andlife, and the quern as the agent of

metamorphosis. The major problem in archaeological analysis is recognising a ritual context with any degree ofcertainty. A recently excavated millstone from the Southern Park and Ride area, just outside Winchester, bears a phallic symbol (Fig, 9.2) and must illustrate the relationship between the mill andfertility. It came from a small pit cutting an Iron Age one, but is certainly Romanin date. A rather similar stone, in Millstone Grit, was found near the

Fig. 9.2: Roman millstonefrom Itchen Farm (Southern Park and Ride), Winchester, original diameter about 65 cm. Excavated by Thames Valley Archaeological Services (photo: L. Cutler and courtesy TVAS) 168

SYBOLISM

Rochester Romanfort, Staffordshire (Frere e¢ a/ 1983). The phallus 1s associated with breadmaking at Pompeu where, for example, a representation can be seen onthe outer wall of the

bakery of Modestus, perhaps to advertise the life-giving property of his product. The Christian religion provides only scant evidence of ritual use. Fragments of millstone or quern are frequently built into the walls of churches, but whether this is fortuitous or symbolic is far fromclear. Fig. 9.3 shows an example: fragments of a mill in Millstone Grit, built into Westbere Church, Kent. However, cross-marked millstones are less ambiguous.

Campbell (1987) described a pre-Viking quern from Dunadd which bore an incised cross (Fig. 9.4a). He was able to establish a link with the Columban monastery on Iona. A much more elaborate cross is to be found on a quern found somewhere in Munster, Ireland,

possibly the monastery of Lismore (Fig. 9.4b). It was described and analysed in detail by Power(1939) who interpreted the cross in terms of Eucharistic symbolism. A similar quern from Balmaclellan, Galloway, is held by the National Museum of Scotland. Bennett and Elton (1898, 143-4)illustrate two others of rather similar design, one from CountyClare the other from Rathlin. A cross also occurs on a quern from Glendalough, which was reused

as a gravestone andbears the name of the deceased, a certain Sechnasach (Watts 2011, fig. 5; here Fig. 9.4c).

Cross marks are not limited to the Celtic world. Fig, 9.5a shows a miniature Pompeian mill on display in the Aleppo museum. The cross 1s what might be called in heraldry a Cruxfourchee which is not far removed from the Cruxmoleor millers’ cross. Another simpler example is known from

.

Fig. 9.3: Millstonefragments built into Westbere Church, Kent (photo: author) 169

Pe B

THE STONE OF LIFE Musti in Tunisia (Peacock 1989, fig. 4f). At St Simeon’s monastery, Aswan, a large millstone bears three small raised roundels with Maltese type crosses within them (Fig, 9.5b). While this might be an oil mill, there is a large oven adjacent suggesting bread production. The significance of such crossesis hard to gauge, buteither theysignify ownership by the church or, more probably, that the stones ate particularly blessed, perhaps because they were usedto grind flour for the Eucharistic bread. This would seem to be highly probable in the case of the Munster quern. Rather better evidence of ritual use is furnished by pre-Christian cultures. One of the most intriguing, if not controversial, pieces of evidence takes the form of a Neolithic house model from Popudnia, western Ukraine, assigned to the Tripolye culture, dating to around 4500 BC (discussed by Makkay (1978) and Gimbutas (1982)). The model comprises a building which contains a bread oven, storage jars for grain and female figurines, one grinding grain, the other with her hands uponherbreasts. Near the centre is a cross-shaped platform and such features are found in late Neolithic houses of this region where they are known to have been places for votive offerings. The model is regarded not as a dwelling house, but as a temple showing the preparation of bread for ritual ceremonies. Support for this comes from the excavation of temples at Sabatinovka in the lower Bug valley. At the end of one of the

Fug. 9.4: Cross-marked querns: a, Dunadd, Argyll, Scotland (diameter 40 cm); b, Lismore, Munster,

Ireland; ¢, Glendalough, County Wicklow, Ireland (not to scale) (after Campbell 1987, Power 1939, Bennett and Elton 1898) 170

ed he

SYMBC ) LISM

Bi

Les> 2 da, miniature Aswan, Egypt (photos 10

.

c

*

P

ompeian mill, Alepp OLViuseum, Syria; b, millstone in St Simeon’s Monastery,

author

)

1

7

1

THE STONE OF LIFE

buildings was a bull’s skull complete with horns on which were placed small female figurines. The other building was even morecertainly a temple. It was rectangular with a 70 m* ground surface. In front of the entrance lay a stone slab in the middle of which was a bone amulet of human form. The inner part of the temple was divided into three sections. Thefirst produced few finds, in the second near the wall was an oven and on the floor was a female figurine, while behind the oven was a bow! full of bulls’ bones some showing traces of burning. Bythis was a fluted vessel which contained small miniature pots. Between the oven and the south wall was a rowof five querns andfive seated female figurines each near a quern stone. The final part of the building contained a bank of clay which was interpreted as an altar. Beside this was a large armchair made out of clay. Clearly this is not a normal dwelling and for the excavator, Movsa, there could only be one interpretation. In Gimbutas’ word for word translation: The assoaation of quern and grindstones nith figurines portrayed in a seated position suggests magicalgrinding of grain and thenperhaps baking of sacred bread. There was an overseer in control of theproceedings, probably apriestess orpriest, seated on thefull-size chatr nearthe altar. Whatever we are to make of these remarkable discoveries they must implya sacred role for the humble saddle quern. This ts vitally important if we are to understand other finds. Equally intriguing is the remarkable Iron Age temple at Uppakra in southern Sweden dating between third century AD and the Viking age. Near to it was a straight row of shallow pits filled with quern stones, both fragmentary and intact. Larsson (2007, 21) suggests they may have been hollows to accommodate a row of special poles. However, querns are often found buried in special or structured deposits which have no obvious associations with religious structures. Structured deposition can also result from hoarding or disaster as well as ritual, but there are indications, particularly when the same pattern recurs many times over. Bruck (2001, 151) has argued thatcritical points in the life of a settlement may have been commemorated by event-marking deposits. She also suggests that quern stones may have been seen as having lifecycles similar to that of their owners and suggests that they may have been smashed and burntas part of funeraryrituals. This same phenomenon seemsto recur in early medieval Ireland. O’Sullivan and Kenny(2008) discuss the way in which broken querns were deposited in early medieval houses within wall slots, in front of the door or in under-floor pits presumably to mark someevent. Fragments also seem to have been deliberately incorporated in the structure of corn drying kilns. It is suggested that these fragments of an instrument concerned with cereal processing were there to ensure safe drying of the harvest. On the site of a ring-fort at Lisnagun, County Cork, broken fragments of querns made of shale were found. As these could not have functioned they must have played a purely symbolic role. Also of interest is the island of Helgd on Lake Malaren in central Sweden. While this has been regarded as an ordinary community, dating between the Roman Iron Age and the Viking period, it now seems to have a ‘special’ holy function (Zachrisson 2004). Bread seems to be an important componentof the lowestlayers. In addition to bread, a total of 38 saddle querns and 43 hand-stones were found built into the foundations of a longhouse, mainly in connection with roof supports. Rotary querns were present on the site but not used in the same way. 172

SYMBOLISM Quernsalso appearin funerary contexts. In somecases 1n the Linearbandkeramik {1LBK] or the Irichterrandbecherkultur [TRB] they were used as pillows in inhumations and sometimespits dug within cemeteries contained piles of querns (Graefe et a/ 2009, 93). From quernto cult: the pit phenomenon Belief in chthonic gods controlling the world beneath our feet leads to certain inevitable conclusions. Firstly, the god or goddess will be associated with death because that is where people are buried. Secondly, they will be associated with fertility and the growth of crops because new growth results from the burial of seed in the soil. The best way to contact these gods in order to placate or please them, must be to enter their realm. Thus, an intrusion into the subsoil will facilitate access, with a result that wells, shafts and pits have a new

significance on top of any function they mayhave hadoriginally. Pits are the bread and butter of archaeologyand over the years countless thousands have been excavated all over Europe dating from the Neolithic to the Greek and Roman periods. Many contain domestic debris and have been regarded simply as rubbish pits. However, this is to impose today’s ideas of tidiness and hygiene: as Thomas (1999, 62) reminds us the modern western view of what constitutes dirt or rubbish does not applyin all cultures and need not applyto prehistoric societies. Of course, pits may have been originally dug for storage and subsequentlylevelled, butit is unwise to suggest a single reason for such a widespread andinherentlysimple activity. In somepits the contents seem to have been carefully selected. Thomas (1991, 72; 1999, 6474) sums up the complex arguments with respect to the Neolithic: Pit-digging, and the deposition of objects and substances within pits, was a set of actions which brought meaning to a locahty over and above the importance of whatever activities generated the matertal concerned. Once these actions had beenperformed the location became aplace of significance, andfor this reason it ts not surprising that pits or groups of pits have been found on sites where monuments of one kind or another were later constructed. Anne Ross (1968) was one of the first archaeologists to recognise that shafts, pits and wells were sanctuaries. She listed numerous British examples, mainly of Iron Age date and presented a tabular analysis of their contents. However, it was J] D Hill’s (1995) meticulous observation and brilliant analysis of Iron Age pits in Wessex that established, without reasonable doubt, that these deposits were ‘special’ or ‘structured’ and not just rubbish dumps, a term first employed by Richards and Thomas(1982). Later Simon Clarke was able to show that this tradition persisted into the Roman period (Clarke 1996; Clarke and Jones 1996). The pits at Newstead in southern Scotland contained a remarkable assemblage of artefacts which had previously been explained as the residue of a disastrous military encounter or as straightforward rubbish disposal. Clarke’s critical analysis led to their reassessment in terms of ritual. Later Fulford (2001) expanded the picture to include a wider spectrum of Roman evidence: similar pits were present at Silchester, London, Verulamium,Portchester, Baldock

and Neatham,suggesting a widespread continuation of Iron Age traditions in RomanBritain. A chronological perspective The phenomenon seems remarkably long-lived and can be traced from the Neolithic until at least the end of the Roman period. In addition most Greek sanctuaries had a bothros (B00e0¢) or pit to accommodatesacrifices, libations and other offerings to the chthonic gods. Odysseus seems to have madehis sacrifices to the them: 173

THE STONE OF LIFE

Here Perimedes and Exurylochus held the victims, while 1 drew my sword and dug the trench a cubit each way. I made a drink-offering to all the dead, first with honey and milk, then with wine, and thirdly with water, and I sprinkled white barley meal over the whole, praying earnestly to the poor Jeckless ghosts, andpromising them that when Igot back to Ithaca I would sacrifice a barren heifer for them, the best I had, and would load the pyre with good things. I also particularly promised that Teirestas should have a black sheep to himself, the best in all my flocks. When I hadprayed sufficiently to the dead, I cut the throats of the two sheep and let the blood run into the trench, whereon the ghosts came trooping upfrom Erebus - brides,young bachelors, old men worn out with toil, maids who had been crossed in love, and brave men who had been killed in battle, with their armour still smirched with blood; they camefrom every quarter andflitted round the trench nith a strange kind of screaming sound that made me turn pale withfear. Homer, Odyssey, trans. Samuel Butler 1900. Ferrara (2009) describes two bothroi from the sanctuary of Hera near Paestum. They comprised rectangular stone-lined shafts 1 m square and 3.5 m deep, the bottom half of which was filled with a rich pottery deposit. However, these somewhat sophisticated structures translate into pits in the non-Greek world. Querns occurin such pits with some frequency, but in many theyare absent, begging the question ‘why?’ What part did the quern play in the complex rituals being enacted? Unfortunately the pit fills are very complex and most were excavated on the assumption that the deposits were mere landfill, and so the question is hard to answer. A few examples from Britain and abroad will help illustrate the problem and hopefully elucidate the matter a little further, although no pretence of completeness is made. Neokthic Pits with Neolithic querns are known from a numberof sites in Britain. At Barford (Oswald 1969) seven complete saddle querns were found in a pit, while at Etton causewayed enclosure three complete querns were placed in small pits, one upside down the other on its side. Fragments showing deliberate breakage came from small pits in the interior of the causewayed enclosure, while more fragments, less heavily utilised, came from the enclosure

ditch (Pryor 1998). As Pryor states it is entirely possible that these differences were significant. At Maiden Castle, Dorset a complete saddle quern imported from Normandy was deliberately set at the bottom of a pit. Clearly this was a special quern both in terms of its origin and its deposition (Peacock and Cutler 2010). Its position in the pit is shown in Fig. 9.6. One of the mostintriguing finds from Britain is the querns from Flag Fen which were deposited not in a pit, but in the waters of the Fens (Buckley and Ingle 2001). Pit burial also occurs on the Continent and Hamon (2008) draws attention to seven Linearbandkeramtk hoards in the Paris Basin and Hainaut. Theywere in pits near to houses and the stones in the pits carefully arranged either in a circle or in a pile. These may be hoards hidden for future use, but Hamon was in no doubt of the symbolic significance; used querns had been taken outof life and buried in the ground. Interestingly, in this region querns are not found in burials as was the LBK practice elsewhere. Graefe e¢ a/ (2009) have studied quern deposits from selected regions in Europe: LBK and post-LBK,early and

174

SYMBOLISM MAIDEN CASTLE Trench CXXX! west side

Chalk Neolithic Pit T9

Fig. 9.6: Neokthtcpit section excavated by Wheeler at Maiden Castle, and the saddle quern, 28 cm across, Jound ‘firmly bedded on the bottom’ (after Peacock and Cutler 2010) middle Neolithic in Scandinavia, Neolithic Britain, and the late Neolithic of northern Greece. In all these areas querns were deposited in organised and structured ways. Closed deposits and the deliberate fragmentation of querns were seen as the result of commemorative acts of deposition (foundation offerings, abandonmentrituals or acts of commemoration) or social andterritorial acts of deposition — symbolic claims of space and place. Hoards of complete artefacts were regarded as stores of utensils or even as treasure, although sometimes they might mark out a specific house or space either socially or symbolically. This certainly may be the case with the LBK hoards which were placed near houses, but when considered in the context of later period finds,it is possible that the explanation might be more complex. The Bronze and Iron Ages The practice of burying quernsin pits continued in the Bronze Age and examples are known from Winnall near Winchester where a pair of complete sarsen saddle querns were found ina middle Bronze Age pit (Hawkes 1969). Other Bronze Age examples of the samepractice are known from Thorney Down and Martin Down in Hampshire, Farnham and Wrecclesham in Surrey, and Itford Hill in Sussex (Hawkes 1969). At the South Rings enclosure, Mucking, three fragments of saddle querns from the inner enclosure ditch have been interpreted as ritually deposited (Buckley and Ingle 2001, 327). However, it is in the Iron Age andits continuation in the Roman period that pits become particularly common and afford the best opportunity of studying the practice. At Mont

Lassois a circular pit 1 m in diameter contained an ox horn and four flat saddle quern fragments, one face-up, the others face-down. It seems to date from the construction of the Hallstatt rampart and if so, could be a foundation deposit (Jaccottey ef a/, 2011b). 175

THE STONE OF LIFE It is comparatively rare for querns to be buried alonelike this and they are almost always accompanied by domestic rubbish: pottery, seeds and animal or sometimes human bones. Only comparatively few of such pits have querns in them. At Newstead, for example, over 100 pits were found, but only fourteen contained querns and of these only four had whole querns (Clarke 1996, table 2). Newstead apart, Ross (1968) tabulated 83 other pits, wells,

or shafts, but only four had querns and of these only one was apparently unbroken. The quern is only one element in a much more complexritual. The British evidence has now expandedradically with massive excavations on Iron Age sites in Wessex, and much of the evidence has been synthesised by Hill (1995). Querns are found in some numbers on sites such as Gussage All Saints or Danebury, butstill in diminutive quantities compared with animal bones or pottery. At Danebury complete or substantially complete querns were deposited, but neither upper and lower rotaries nor saddles and rubbers were ever deposited together, which argues against storage or hoarding. However, most querns were fragmentary and clearly out of use. Hill notes that in the later Iron Age, querns were the only type of find which showeda statistically significant correlation with articulated animal bone groups. However, there is also a positive correlation with human remains and as he says “Putting quern stone fragments and human remains in the same pit seems to have been a particularly important association to make’ (Hill 1995, 61, 55). The subject of querns could now beusefully revisited at an even greater depth of detail, but their special status is abundantlyclear. Pit rituals are known over wide areas of the Continent. For example, Justyna Baron (2011) discusses the evidence from pits at Magnice in south-west Poland. She makes the interesting point that querns were probably used in some form ofclosing ritual performed for example when changingpit functions: ‘unbroken quern stones and animal skulls found in the bottom layers of wells have been interpreted as offerings made to close or change the pit function from a well to a rubbish pit’. Nekhrizov and Tzvetkova (2012) emphasise their frequencyin Iron Age Thrace and make the important distinction between differentloci: -pits under tumuli -pit fields -pits within a settlement -pits within a sanctuary At Svilengrad, they consider a large pit field outside a settlement and thus probably of titual significance. The commonestfind type in the complex, after clay discs, comprises grinding stones: Fragments of grinding stones occurred in 40 pits, mostly as single finds. There is again no regularity in terms of the chronology orpreferencefor depositing this type of artefact. Asidefrom the common saddle-shapedgrinding stone, somefragmentsfrom lever mills of the type ‘Olnthos mill’ were alsofound. The practice of placing quernsin pits has been noted in Alsace at Wiwersheim and Saverne, where complete rotary querns with upper and lower stones were placed in late La Ténepits. 176

SYMBOLISM In both cases the upper and lower stones were distinctly separated and placed right at the bottom. Similar deposits are numerous and Jodry and Féliu (2009, 73) also cite examples from Agen, the hill of Mormontin the canton of Vaud, Switzerland, and Bruyéres-sur-

Oise. Comparison can also be made with the ‘funerary’ shafts from Vieille-Toulouse (Vidal 1986). About 100 shafts have been discovered dating from the early second to late first centuries BC. Some, but notall, have complete quernsplaced right at the bottom, followed

by layers of amphorae and other debris. They look like wells, but as they do not reach the water table this is unlikely and the most probable explanation is that they served some ritual purpose. Vidal claims that religious criteria suggest that the shafts were burial pits: the typology and position of the goods within them, the occurrence in groups of three and the presence of burnt human bones. Quernsare also found in wells either complete or in fragments. In some cases they may be there as hard-core to backfill a defunct structure, which may have been poisoned or have become dry, but equally they could be there as part of a closing ritual to mark a change of use. Chris Green (fers. comm.) suggests that the fragments of six querns found in an Augustan well at Fairview, Baldock, all burnt, might mark the natural death of the owner; or a violent death with the destruction of all belongings and the poisoning of his well; or they could result from an accidental fire; but they are unlikely to be meaningless. Therole of quernsin pit and shaft rituals has yet to be fully defined, butit begins to appear that they cannot be simply seen as a metaphor for birth, death and reproduction (Graefe 2009, 167); the matter is considerably more complex and there maybe differences between the meaning of complete and fragmentary ones. Intact querns might indicate an act of propitiation, whereas fragments could indicate death, perhaps of the user. Here it 1s worth making comparison with glass bangles commonly worn by womenin India. They seem to have been favoured as a mark of married status, like the wedding ring in Europe (Russell and Lal 1995, 193), and a married woman would haveseveral on her arm. Apparently the

tighter the fit, the less the likelihood of breakage and efforts might be madeto lubricate a bride’s hands so that she could take the smallest size possible. On the death of a husband, a wife might deliberately break her bangles (Dikshit 1969), and this seems to have been a widespread symbol of mourning. Thus, Blank (2001, 84) describes the ritual of bangle breaking in commemorating the death of the Prophet’s grandson, Imam Husain. Recently, Garrow (2012) has rightly pointed out that structured deposition need not imply ritual deposition and that everyday processes maylie behind the patterns we uncover in the ground. It has been too readily assumed that structure implies symbolic or ritual activity. Certainly, querns might be placed in pits to hide or hoard them, and fragments of querns might be explained in terms of rubbish disposal. However, given the special role of the quern in supporting life and the use of pits ditches, wells and shafts to reach the chthonic gods, it is reasonable to suggest that in manycases a ritual rather than everyday explanation is more than likely. Only a much morecareful and detailed analysis of circumstances of burial will lead to an interpretation which is nearer to the truth. In particular we need to know with more rigour than is currently customary: 177

THE STONE OF LIFE -the position of the quernin thepit -associated artefacts and ecofacts -whether the quern is complete or fragmentary -the size of the fragments -whetherthere are traces of burning -the differences between pits with and without querns With such data we maybegin to comea little closer to understanding the intriguing role of these everyday tools in early belief systems.

178

10 METHODS AND APPROACHES: INTO THE FUTURE Like all artefacts, a quern or mill has two fundamentalattributes, the most obvious of which is its form, comprised of two elements, shape and surface. The shape can hold clues to the way in which the device was made, its intended purpose, the way it was used and, perhaps, the period of use. The surface is particularly important as the wear pattern will give further suggestions of use and will indicate whether the quern is fresh and new or, perhaps, nearing the end of its usefullife. Also, as it wears, inclusions mayberetained in cavities and these can

provide evidence of what minerals or plants were being processed. The other fundamental attribute is the material of which the quern is made which provides information of a different genre. The source of the rock may have a bearing on trade and exchange,butit will also reflect cognitive issues affecting the choice of rock, such as taste, need, availability and

the ability of the maker. Further attributes may be acquired at the end of a quern’s use-life. The method used to dispose of an old quern can be of considerable interest. Breakage patterns and mode of disposal may help understand its significance to the people that used it (chapter 9). The final parameter which has a bearing on our understanding is the contemporarydiscovery and interpretation of the artefact. How a quern was recovered will affect what we are able to observe and what we are unable to see. Together, these elements combine to comprise what has been called the ‘biography’ of the artefact — its life history. The concept goes back to Kopytoff (1986) whofelt that things could not be fully understood at just one point in their existence: Cycles of production, exchange and consumption had to be looked at as a whole. Not only do olyects change through their existence, but they often have the capability of accumulating histortes, so that the present significance of an olyect derives from the persons and events to which it ts connected. (Gosden and Marshall 1999) Obviously, one of our aims should be to unravel the complete biography, which of course incorporates the chaine opératoire. The degree to which this is possible will depend on the methodologyadopted.It is, therefore, pertinent to consider how querns should be studied and what methodsare available, or need to be developed, to further our goals. The most basic need is to record and report information which can be understood byothers, but currently, in contrast to pottery, there are no agreed norms and querns are recorded and illustrated in manydifferent ways. They may be shownin photographs, which can be helpful or sometimesreveallittle, as a perspective drawing,or in section andelevation, with or without a cross-section. Dimensions are sometimes omitted, or reliance placed on the scale in the illustration. Technology of production is usually ignored andit is not clear what instruments were used to shape the quern. Similarly, use-wear 1s also a significant trait which is customarily ignored, thickness or asymmetrywill relate to the degree of use while surface striations mayindicate how a quern was used. Traits acquired at the end of life, including breakage patterns, burning and mode of burial, are almost invariably ignored. There is nothing newin this neglect as even Curwen, the 179

>

s split nn atural (cortex)

J flaked

h hammered

7 rough-dre sse d p peck ed

d drilled éf

aye *. ch

hese

any meres} © ORASAt..

,

ne Sey am med ROSS PN aS coe 3SIE SS RASS ke Pepa

SET MAREa ONENY ofa,

Me.

ct

Ai

{

“s

33%

PN

REC KL,

oa

eeayxsoS Ss >

Fate

Sginn,t eee ayy. —

eS ¥ «

Be1

ee

4" Ag saee: oA Bysarnlhe atest wats aes Wea BREE RG

ta

iiaoat

Ar a CBAeR SMEG 46

Yo

a

Aisa

a MPa oy] ay a Mem Ie! fy BenISIN 5 ha Re :

anes ys

irs

Boone WySe pes ; RESTA be tee! ete aS eae

ys

f

2h ee: :

2

Le Y

=

‘

is

“i

“y ' uty

=—*

VE

2

aes &“.

aiei%,of

22 £,

oFA

4

Ae

€

METHOD great pioneer of quernstudies in Britain was, from time to time, capable of writing reports to the effect that ‘a few saddle querns were foundin the excavations’. Field collection and retention Querns and millstones may be acquired through excavation or through field survey. They are importantartefacts andit is vital that small fragmentsare retained,notjust the larger pieces, as they mayreveal crucial informationto the specialist. There is a serious lack of firm dating for querns and a stratified fragment may, for example, fill an important gap. This may seem self-evident, but is difficult to gauge how much information has ended up on the dump heap because of the unprepossessing nature of quern fragments. However, casual finds are also important, and the records, such as those emerging from the British “Portable Antiquities Scheme’, also have

enormouspotential, particularly for understanding distributions. A lack of systematic field work in a region maysuggest, perhapsfalsely, a dearth of querns, butcasual finds havethe potential tofill

such /acunae. The presence or absence of quernshas implications for understanding the regional diet and economy. The problem of retention is further exacerbated when the material reaches the museum as few curators find broken lumpsofstone inspiring andif there is a shortage of space they can end up in the garden or on rockeries and in even hard-core.It is only a matter of timebefore the labelling disappears and the stone becomes an unprovenanced encumbrance. Otherartefacts are seldom subjected to outdoor storage, but too many querns have suffered this fate with a result that they have been effectively lost to serious scholarship. No names, no packdrill, but this is a situation all too frequently encountered. Examining form In very recent years a major step forward has been made bythe French Groupe Meule who have attempted to establish a typological methodology. They have proposed some useful standards which,if universally adopted, would lead to the unification of what are currently very disparate data sets. Their schemeincludes drafting conventions, such as how thick lines should be and what sort of shading should be adopted, butthis is perhaps too prescriptive. Atthis stageit is perhaps best to concentrate on what should be observed rather than how it should be represented. Most printers’ and publishers’ standards are not high enoughtoreliably distinguish the various polishes, and the use of tone to achievethis limits the illustration to half-tone reproduction. Line work is far more capable ofillustrating objects at small scale, manyto a page. The net result of adopting the French conventions might be moreillustrationsstuckin greyliterature and fewerin print. However, the importance of the French proposal lies in reminding us what can and should be observed. Fig, 10.1 a shows a schemefor a saddle quern, based in part on that proposed by Hamonef a/ (2011). Such an illustration would indicate all the typological characteristics of a saddle quern and, together with a description of the rock type, would comprise a near complete record. However, although this is a useful ade mémoire to observation, in practice there can be real problems; for example, in deciding the direction in which flake is removed, particularlyif as is usual in quern rocks,thereis no visible bulb of percussion.

Opposite. Fig. 10.1: a, the diagnosticfeatures of a saddle quern (unusually in tabularflint); b, rotary quern in Folkestone Greensand 181

*, aaes ae~%,

THE SsTONEAOP LIP

S - meta socket details

0 - hopper orifice d mount

dimensions

slots and sockets

milling pattern

~~

Fig. 10.2: The diagnosticfeatures of a Pompeian-sthyle mill abor and, below, an Olynthus mill ©? 12

METHOD This scheme would, of course, be immensely expensive to apply if such detailed treatment were affordedto all stone fragments foundin the average excavation, but it is certainly worth considering for particularly significant stones, such as complete ones or those foundin

special deposits. Jaccottey and Farget (2011) have proposed a scheme for rotary querns and Fig. 10.1b sums thesalient points to be observed. Pompeian mills are more complex and they suggest some drafting conventions. However,it

Is necessaryto identify and record the component parts and the scheme adoptedfor the mills of Pompeii is proposed(Fig, 10.2 above, based on Peacock 1989, fig. 1). This was originally intendedas a guide to the measurements taken in analysing these mills, but here it is used to define terminology andthe sionificant parts of the Pompeian mill. No such scheme exists for the Olynthus mill and so an attempt to fill this lacuna in nomenclature is otven in Fig. 10.2 below. The lower stone 1s a flat slab and it is only necessary

to record its shape, the milling pattern and any curvature deviation from the horizontal. In an ideal world there are other parameters that should be considered. One aspect that is often overlookedts the texture of the interior of the feed-pipe where there maybe indications

of whether it was drilled or pecked. It can be difficult to examine but, if a silicone rubber cast is made, detailed study becomes feasible. Alternatively, careful close-up photographycan be a useful way of both examining and recording technological traces (Pig, 10:3).

Fig. 10.3: Traces of drilling in thefeed-pipe of a quernin Hertfordshire Puddingstone (photo: C Green)

183

LHe STONE Or LIBRE

All querns wearas they are used andwhat 1s recovered may be a palimpsest of the original. If possible, it would be useful to have an assessment ofthe original appearance, by comparison with similar, but less worn, querns. It would also be invaluable to have an assessment of the rate of loss, but this 1s usually an intractable question which cannot be satisfactorily discussed. Surface textures

Surface textures are important in the study of querns. In the case of saddle querns it may be difficult to distinguish a hand-stone from a lower stone, but the surface striations can be indicative showing 1n whichdirection the stone moved. It was argued above (chapters 2 and 3) that these may have particular significance in understanding saddle querns and the Olynthus mill, as the stones are able to move in a variety of ways. Striations may be difficult to see, particularly in an ill-lit museum store, and photographs may show nothing unless lit in the correct way. A newtechnique, currently being

developed, Reflectance Transformation Imaging (RTI), seems to point the way ahead (af Earl et al. 2011a, b).

It 1s essentially an interactive photographic recording technique which

allows the production of images within which the light can be movedandaltered. This

virtual relighting of the object means that details, which are not visible to the naked eye or in a conventional photograph, can be enhanced and‘developed’. The apparatus, inits simplest form, can be inexpensive, comprising a conventional digital camera connected to

a computer, and a variable light source. The latter can comprise a light able to move at a fixed distance fromtheartefact but, in practice, a dome oflights is placed above the object, which is a more sophisticated and, of course, expensive option. These are lit in sequence,

F2g. 10.4: Iron Age saddle quern from Easton Lane, Winchester, showing a conventional photograph compared with an RIT image, scale 10 cm (photo: N Beale and H Paez) /

CO

|

oO

184

METHOD

and multiple, typically 50, photographs are taken. These are processed in the computer using software freely available online. This work is very new in the study of querns, but a preliminaryresult is presented as Fig. 10.4. The illustration shows the active surface of a saddle quern from a middle Iron Age pit at Easton Lane, Winchester. It has been carefully shaped with a hemispherical profile bearing traces of being worked with a point (our type 4a, chapter 2). It is very difficult to decide whetherit is an upper or lower stone and the excavators simply published it as an ‘almost complete saddle quern’ in Greensand (which we can nowassign to the Lodsworth quarries) (Fasham ef a/. 1989, fig. 100, 3). The upper picture is taken with ordinaryflat illumination and showsverylittle, but it is a fair representation of what can be seen when inspecting the artefact. The lower image is selected by computer from multiple pictures in differing lights. It clearly showsstriations running across rather than along the quern, showingthat it is probably a very large hand-stone. The alternative explanations, thatit is a lower stone rubbedtransversely, or that these were deliberately carved milling ridges on a stone designed to be rubbed longitudinally, are less convincing. Examining material The rock of which a quern is madeis significant and some form of geological assignation is required. Obviously a general term such as ‘sandstone’is helpful, but it is even better to be more specific eg. Coal Measures sandstone or Lower Greensand.It is also useful to note any special characteristics (such as fossils) visible in the hand specimen. To go much further may require a comparative collection and a measure of geological expertise, which maynot be available. If possible, the rock should be related to a parent outcrop, but this may not always be achievable, even by a geologist. Sarsen, an indurated Tertiary sandstone which occurs as blocks lying on the chalk of southern England, is a good example of a problematic rock. It was regularly used for querns in the Neolithic and Bronze Ages and even in the subsequent Iron Age, but it is usually impossible to define sources precisely, as one sarsen is indistinguishable from another. In the huge blocks used for megalithic monuments, there maybe large-scale sedimentary structures which will permit discrimination, but in small pieces, the rock appears uniform throughout most of southern England. In other rocks the gross texture of the hand specimen can be diagnostic, enabling the material to be recognised by eye without recourse to scientific methods. Thus, Lodsworth Greensand is characterised by fossil worm burrows picked Out as glauconite concentrations and, when these are present, scientific methods such as thin-section petrographywill tell us little more. Similarly, the products of the other known Greensand quarries in the south of England can be distinguished by eye as they have characteristic traits. (cf Fig. 10.5). One of the pitfalls besetting provenance studies is the common assumption that these heavy artefacts would not travel great distances. There is thus a tendency to examine the geological map for the nearest outcrop of the right formation and suggest this as the source without further field verification. This problem is well illustrated by the Iron Age Greensand querns of southern England as theliterature suggests that each site had its own local quarry a short distance away. In fact, it is becoming apparent that very few Greensandsare suitable for quern-making and, as Lyn Cuttler has shown, the region was 185

Fig. 10.5: Digitalphotomicrographs of quern surfaces; a, Upper Greensand, showing quartz and dark glauconite grains, b, Lodsworth rock, showing the cross-section ofafossil worm burrow; c, Millstone Grit, showing quartz, pinkfeldspar and white kaohnisedfeldspar; d, Hertfordshire Puddingstone, showing a brownpebble with a dark surface in a quartz matnx; e, Frenchpuddingstone, showing black pebbles nithpale cores. The bright white patches are chalk encrustation (from Rowbury),;f, Worms Heath puddingstone, showing decayingfunts (white) and Jerruginous sand matrix. Scale bar 5 mm(photos: author) 186

METHOD probablyserved bya limited number of quarries, three of which are known, with perhaps two or three more awaiting discovery. Rock description and characterisation, fundamentalto the study of querns, have always been a problem for the archaeologist without geological training, but there is now an uncomplicated wayahead. The recent availability of cheap digital microscopes offers a new wayof tackling what was an intractable problem. It is possible to capture the surface appearance and diagnostic features of a quern rock accurately and quickly in a form that supersedes other media. It is best to obtain a geological interpretation, but without this, comparison becomes feasible even with limited geological knowledge. These images can be transmitted between specialists and either published in hard copyor on the web. The great advantageis that details of the appearance of the stone can be transmitted without the need to transport the stone itself. Some examples are shownin Fig, 10.5. A digital image is worth a thousand words of description. Scientific methods of rock characterisation While many mill rocks can be characterised adequately by eye, scientific analysis is sometimes necessary. Thus, basalts and kindred volcanic rocks were greatly sought after because they often contain gas vesicles which retain sharp edges and continue to cut the grain as the stone wears. However, one basalt maybe veryclosely similar to another from a different location. One approachis to examine the mineralogical composition and structure under a petrological microscope, and this approach was long ago successfully used by Zirkl (1963), who was able to showthat a stone from the Magdalensburg, in Carinthia, was in Mayen lava. He (Zirkl 1955), and more recently Draganits (2002), were able to demonstrate petrographically that the La Téne mills from Lower Austria were derived from the younger volcanics of Austria. While petrology can be useful in somecases, it is often of less value as there can be considerable variation in texture between the top and bottom of a lava flow. Unless distinctive minerals are present this variation may be greater than that between flows and outcrops. If this is the case, other characterisation criteria must be sought and the usual method is chemical analysis. All basalts will have much the same content of major elements suchassilica, aluminaor iron oxide, but we can reasonablyanticipate variations in

minor and particularly trace elements,dictated byslight chemical differences in the original magma and its modeof crystallisation. Not all elements are of equal value, as some vary wildly within a single outcrop, but the more stable minor elements and sometrace ones can be used. Part of the art of the geochemist is to determine which are diagnostic of source and which are not. Often it will be found that, for example, the rare earths are of little use whereas the more stable elements such as titanium and barium varysystematically, but there are no hard andfast rules. Usually it is a laborious matter of trial and error until suitable candidates are found. Burial conditions mayalso affect the chemical composition as some elements are mobile in the soil and maybe deposited in the vesicles and some may be leached out. This is a particular problem in pottery, where manganese and calcium are notorious, butit is less of a problem in rock analysis as they are generally less permeable and, providing the rock is fresh and carefully cleaned before analysis, there is no reason to anticipate significant contamination. 187

THE STONE OF LIFE There are many methods of chemical analysis, but that favoured today by most geochemists is Inductively Coupled Plasma Atomic Spectroscopy (ICPS) in its two versions, emission spectrometry (OES) and mass spectrometry(MS); the first is for major and minor elements, the second for trace elements. Essentially, the sample is dissolved in liquid and injected into a flame. The spectrum of light created will be composed of different electromagnetic wavelengths which will indicate what elements are present and the intensity of these characteristic wavelengths will relate to quantity. The method has been developed so thatit is now extremelysensitive and accurate. It is quite normal for analysis to produce data on 40 elements and this mass of data can be processed bylaboriously plotting one element against another or by Principal Componentanalysis. The method was used successfully to characterise and compare basalt ballast from Quseir al-Qadim and Berenike, on the Egyptian coast, with potential sources around the Red Sea, showing that most came from Qana with lesser quantities from Aden, both in Yemen (Peacock ef a/ 2007). It was also used on basalt millstones from Quseir and demonstrated that they were from a different, and as yet, unidentified source. However, the analytical method normally adopted in quern and mill provenancing is X-ray fluorescence spectrometry (XRF), which is currently a standard method in most geology departments across the world. It involves exciting the atoms in the target sample with a beam of X-rays or gammarays, so that they emit secondaryor fluorescent radiation. The spectrum will indicate what elements are present and in what quantities. It can be analysed either by sorting the energies of the photons (energy-dispersive analysis) or by separating the wavelengths of the radiation (wavelength-dispersive analysis). In theory, the method can be non-destructive, giving the chemical composition of the surface of the sample. It thus has considerable potential in examining precious museum specimens. In practice, however, it is normal to powder the sample and create an artificial pellet, the surface of which is examined. These pellets can of course be retained for further examinationat a later date. This method was used extensively in the 1980s and early 1990s by Olwen WilliamsThorpe and her late husband, Richard Thorpe, whostudied basalt mills throughout the Mediterranean. While they worked on manyperiods from the Neolithic onwards, much of their effort focused on Roman mills. Their great achievement was to show how millstones were traded far and wide and to demonstrate unsuspected connectivity within the eastern, central and western Mediterranean, and sometimes between these regions. All this was, of course, facilitated by the sea which made long distance transport of these heavyartefacts feasible. The work continues in several laboratories and Antonelli and Lazzarini (2010) have conveniently summarised recent work. In contrast with this broad approach, the method can be used to discriminate closelyrelated rocks within a single volcanic province. An outstanding example is the detailed analysis of the Eifel lava field with a viewto isolating the individual outcrops used for mills. Gluhak and Hofmeister (2008; 2009; 2011) were able to demonstrate that, while Mayen remains the most importantarea, other outcrops in the East and West Eifel were not totally ignored. At Mayen they were able to pinpoint the Bellerberg volcano as a major rock source, whence querns and mills were widely distributed. 188

METHOD It is clear that XRF remains a powerful tool and a first line of attack in geochemical characterisation. It must be stressed, however, that chemistry is usually only effective when applied on a large scale, preferably linked to petrographic and macroscopic studies. Organic residues Science is also able to help us study what was being ground in querns and mills, as

particles can get trapped in the cavities of the active surface. If a quern is being

used to grind ore, these will be inorganic and can be identified by a mineralogist. Organic matter will perish except in very wet or dry conditions, which are, of course, the exception rather than the rule. However, while plants decay, they havea siliceous skeleton of phytoliths which is resistant to decay and preserved in manysoil conditions. When a plant is ground, organic matter and hence phytoliths, may become trapped in the irregularities of the quern surface. If these can be extracted we have a wayof examining what was being ground. Identification is not usually possible at species level and genera are the best that can be expected. In the case of querns, this need not be a problem as usually it will suffice to distinguish genera such as wheat, oats, barley, rye, acorns, etc.

Compared with other scientific approaches the method is relatively simple and inexpensive, but identification is a skilled art which needs experience and a good

comparative collection. The phytoliths can be dislodged by washing the surface or by immersion in an ultrasonic tank. The residue can then be concentrated bycentrifuging and drying, after which it may be ready for mounting on a microscope slide. However, it is sometimes necessary to separate the phytoliths from quartz and other unwanted contaminants and this can involve floatation on a heavy liquid such as sodium polytungstate (SPT). Therole of phytoliths in archaeologyhas been discussed by Dolores Piperno (2006), who has almost single-handedly put the study on the map. Phytolith research in the area of stone tools has focused on two aspects. Thefirst is wear study because phytoliths create a polish when used to cut plants (e.g. Veth et a/ 1997). The secondis the identification of the crops ground on grind stones. The work has concentrated on artefacts from the Neotropics, Australia and New Guinea, and led to the identification of phytoliths and starch grains attributable to maize, squashes, yams, etc, all of which have distinctive signatures (Piperno 2006, 164). It should be noted that maize is particularly distinctive and easy to recognise, so work in these regions has a head start over areas whereitis not indigenous. In very recent years the pace has quickened with an explosion of interest in widely separated parts of the world, producing some interesting results. Work on European querns has dragged far behind. The potential was suggested by Ross (2004). Although her conclusions were somewhat inconclusive, she was able to demonstrate that phytoliths can be recovered, in this case from a Greenlandic Norse quern stone. The most sustained work, however, has been in Spain, where J

Juan Tresserras (2002) has pursued phytoliths systematically on material from the 189

THE, SLONE, oP LICE

Fzg. 10.6: Phytohth of Triticumfrom an Iron Age quernfound at Owslebury, 30 microns long [0.03 mm, the thickness of a human hair] (photo: R Scaife and 1’ Bishop) sixth century BC site at Barranc de Gafols. He was able to suggest the processing

of hulled and naked barley and of bread wheat. In addition, he was able to identify leoumes, lentils, beans and acorns, the flour of which makes an acceptable bread. The writer, with Dr Rob Scaife, has begun to investigate this approach to British querns. This work init its early stages, but Fig, 10.6 shows a phytolith of Inteum ¢aestivum, bread wheat, recovered from an Iron Age quern found at Owslebury, Hampshire. Two samples are taken from each quern, one fromthe active surface, the other from an unusedsurface. This acts as a control and enables contributions fromthe burial soil to be taken into account and subtracted.

Another category of plant remains that can be well-preserved are starch grains, which can be extracted and identified in a similar manner to phytoliths. It may seem surprising that a substance which is subject to microbial decay should survive, but Langejans (2010) has reviewedthe reasons for preservation. Among the circumstances favouring this, he suggests that the starch is inaccessible to microbial action in ‘indigested partly-milled grains and

seeds’. Starch has been recorded from a number of very early grinding stones. Piperno ef al. (2004) were able to recover it from an Upper Palaeolithic grind stone found at Ohalo II, in Israel, suggesting the processing of wild grain in this early period. Arangurenef a/, 120

METHOD

(2007) have recovered starch from an Upper Palaeolithic grinding stone, suggesting that the Gravettian hunter-gatherers of the Bilancino (Florence) campsite were collecting and grinding wild plants some 15 millennia before the agricultural revolution. A similar study of starch has been conducted in Australia on grind stones from north-east Queensland (Field ef al, 2009). Early maize agriculture has been identified in Peru, on the basis of both phytoliths and starch recovered from the soil as well as stone tools (Perrye¢ a/, 2006). More recently, starch recovered from early Neolithic grinding stones from China suggests that they were predominantly used for acorns, millet and beans (Liu e¢ a/ 2010). Study of the organic component of querns has a long way to go compared with chemical analysis of the rock, but the potential is great. Millstones and human pathology The use of a stone mill or quern to grind flour inevitably leads to the incorporation of small rock and mineral fragments in foodstuffs prepared in this way. These might have a detrimental effect on human health, particularly on dental wear. While dental pathologies have been the subject of considerable study, the impact of stone-ground flour has been neglected. However, Herrscheret a/ (2006) have examined oral lesions of 125 inhabitants of late medieval Grenoble which they have attemptedto relate to the use of millstones. They observed a reduction of wear during the fifteenth century which would fit with historical evidence for the introduction of better quality millstones. On the other hand, strongly worn teeth occur in the eighteenth century, but this might be due to health or economic problems. This is clearly a field which deserves further investigation. Conclusion This brief chapter has drawn attention to some of the methods being used or developed to progress the study of querns. Some are well-established but others are in their infancy. Together, they promise to transform our understanding of these importantlife-giving stones. This, with the burgeoning interest both in Europe andacross the world, augurs well for the future.

191

BIBLIOGRAPHY Ad, U,, al-Salam Sa’id, A., and Frankel, R., 2005. Watermills with Pompetan-type millstones at Nahal Tanninim. Israe/ Exploration Journal, 55, 156-71.

Adams, J.L., 1999. Refocusing the role of food-grinding tools as correlates for subsistence

strategies in the US southwest. Amencan Antiquity, 04, 465-98.

Adams,J.L., 2002. Groundstone analysis: a technical approach. Salt Lake City. Akerraz, A., and Lenoir, M., 1982. Les huileries de Volubilis. Bu/etin archéologique maroccaine, 14,

69-101. Akerraz, A., and Lenoir, M., 2002. Instruments de broyage en Maurétanie tingitane a ’€poque romaine. In Procopiou and Treuil (2002), 197-207. Allason-Jones, L., and Miket, R., 1984. The catalogue of smallfindsfrom South Shields Roman fort. Newcastle. Allix, A., 1922. The geographyof fairs illustrated by old-world examples. Geographical Remew, 12, 532-69. Almgren, O., 1927. Hallnstningaroch kultbruk. Bidrag tillbelysning av de nordiska bronsaldersristningarnas innebord. Stockholm. Alonso-Martinez, N., 1995. Les premiéres meules rotatives manuelles dans le nord-est de

la péninsule tbérique. In M.-C. Amouretti, and G. Comet, (eds). La Transmission des connaissances techniques. Lables rondes Aix-en-Provence April 1993 - Mat 1994. Cahier Hist. Technique, 3, 15-23. Alonso-Martinez, N., 1997. Origen y expansion del molino rotattvo bajo en el mediterraneo occidental. In D. Meeks, and D. Garcia (eds) Techniques et Economie Antiques et Médiévales: Le temps de l'innovation. Colloque internationalAix-en-Provence 21-23 Mai 1996. Paris, 15-9. Alonso-Martinez, N., 2002. Le moulin rotatif manuel au nord-est de la péninsula ibérique: une innovation technique dans le context domestique de la mouture de cereals. In Procopiou and Treuil 2002, 111-28. Amelung, W,, 1903. Die sculpturen des Vaticanischen museums: im auftrage und unter mitnirkung des Katserhch deutschen archaologtschen Instituts (romische Abteilung). Berlin. Amourett, M-C., 1986. Lepain et 'huile dans la Gréce antique. De laraire au moulin. Paris. Anderson, T.J., Agustoni, C., Duvauchelle, A., Serneels, V., and Castella, D., 2003. Des artisans a

la campagne: carniére de meules, forge et voie gallo-romaines a Chables. Fribourg, Anderson, T\J., Grenner, T., and Fernandez Soler, J.M., 2011. Volcanic quern and millstone quarries in the Cabo de Gata (Almeria) and the Campo de Calatrava (Ciudad Real), Spain. In Willams and Peacock 2011, 151-67.

Anfimov, N.V., 1951. Zemledelie u meoto-sarmatskikh plemen Prikubaniya. Matenah u issledovaniyapo arkheologit SSSR, 23, 145-54. Anon, 1923. _Anuaninshtut d’estudis Catalans, 6, 647. Antonelli, F, Nappi, G., and Lazzarini, L., 2001. Roman millstones from Orvieto (Italy):

petrographic and geochemical data for a new archaeometric contribution. Archaeometry, 43, 167-89. Antonelli, F, and Lazzarini, L., 2010. Mediterranean trade of the most widespread Roman volcanic millstones from Italy and petrochemical markers of their raw materials. Journal of Archaeological Science, 37, 2081-92. Aranguren, B., Becattini, R., Lippi, M.M., and Revedin, A., 2007. Grinding flour in Upper Palaeolithic Europe (25,000 years bp). Antiquity, 81, 845-55. 192

BIBLIOGRAPHY Arribas, A., Trias, M.G., Cerda, D., and de la Hoz, J., 1987. E/ Barco de E/ Sec. Mallorca.

Aschmann, H., 1949. A metate maker of Bajo California. American Anthropologist NewSeries, 51, 682-6. Atkinson, M., and Preston, S.J., 1998. The late Iron Age and Roman settlement at Elms Farm, Heybridge, Essex, excavations 1993-5: an interim report. Britannia, 29, 85-

110. Avitsur, S., 1960. On the history of the exploitation of water power in Eretz-Israel. Israe/ Exploration Journal, 10, 37-45. Avitsur, S., 1969. The way to bread. The example of the land of Israel. Tools and Tillage, 2,

228-41,

Baatz, D., 1994. Die Handmuhlen. In G. Hellenkemper Salies, H.H. von Prittwitz und

Gaffron and G. Bauchhenss (eds) Das Wrack. Der antike Schiffsfund von Mahdia. Koln, 97-103. Baatz, D., 1995. Die Wassermuhle bei Vitruv X 5,2. Ein archaologische Kommentar. Saa/burg Jahrbuch, 48, 5-18.

Bakker, J.T., 1999. The Mz/ls-Bakeries of Ostia. Description and Interpretation. Amsterdam. Barbaro, D., 1556. I dec kbri dell’architettura tradotti et commentati. Venice.

Barford, P.M., 1984. Some possible quern quarries in the Bristol area — a preliminarysurvey. Bristol and Avon Archaeology, 3, 13-7. Baron,J., 2011. Ritual contexts of animal bone deposits from the Roman Iron Agesettle-

ment at Magnice, SWPoland. In J. Baron and B. Kufel-Diakowska (eds) Written in bones. Studies on technological and soctal contexts of pastfaunal skeletal remains. Uniwersytet Wroctawski Instytut Archeologi, 285-94. Bass, G.F., 1972._A historyof seafaring based on underwater archaeology. NewYork. Baudais, D., and Lundstrom-Baudais, K., 2002. Enquéte ethnoarchéologique dansunvillage

du nord-ouest du Népal. In Procopiou and Treuil 2002, 181-210. Baum, N., 1982. Die Effectivitat von Sattelreibsteinen. Festschrift zum 100jabrigen Bestehen der Abteilungfir Vorgeschichte. Naturhistorische Gesellschaft Nurnberg e.V. Nurnberg, 309-13. Beaune, S.A.de, 2003. Du grain a moudre sur les néandertaliens. La Recherche, 360, 56-9.

Beaune, S.A.de, 2004. The invention of technology. Prehistory and cognition. Current Anthropology, 45, 139-62. Beckensall, S., 1986. Rock carvings of northern Britain. Aylesbury. Beckwith, M., no date. Fre/d notes. Hawaiian Sources Collection, Bishop Museum. Honolulu,

384-97, Bede, C., and Mackay, J., 1902. Argy//’s Highlands: or,Mac Cailein Mor and the Lords of Lorne;

with traditionary tales and legends of the County of Argyll and the Campbells and Macdonalds. Glasgow. Bedwin,O., and Holgate, R., 1985. Excavations at Copse farm, Oving, West Sussex. Proceedings

of the Prehistoric Soctety, 51, 215-45. Bell, M., 1994. An Imperial flour mill on the Janiculum. In Le ravitaillement de Rome et des centres urbains des débuts de la Républiquejusqu’au Haut Empire. Naples, Rome, 73-89. Belmont, A., 2006. La pierre a pain. 2 vols. Grenoble.

Belmont, A., 2011. Why dig a millstone quarry? The case of Claix in the south-west of France (5 — 19" centuries). In Williams and Peacock 2011, 1-18. Belmont, A., and Mangartz, F., 2006. Les meuléres. recherche, protection et valorisation d'unpatrimoine industriel Européen. Mainz. Beltrame, C., and Boetto, G., 1997. Macine da relittt. Archeologia Subaquea, 2, 167-96. 193

THE STONE OF LIFE Bennett, P., Riddler, I., and Sparey-Green, C., 2010. The Roman watermills and settlement at

Ickham, Kent. Canterbury. Bennett, R., and Elton,J., 1898. Hestory of corn milling. Vol 1. Hand-stones, slave and cattle mills. London. Bennett, R., and Elton,J., 1899. Hestory of corn milling. Vol. 2. Watermills and windmills. London. Bennoune, M., 2002. The making of contemporary Algeria, 1830-1987. Cambridge. Beranova, M., 1980. Zemédelstud starch Slovann. Prague. Beranova, M., 1981a. Pokusy s mletim pSenice dvousknkyna laténském mlynku. Praehistonica, 8,

225-8. Beranova, M., 1981b. Zur Frage des Ernahrungseinflusses auf den Gesundheitzustand der Bevolkerung. Anthropologie, 19, 165-70. Beranova, M., 1986. Origins of agricultural production in the light of coordinated experiments. In Archaeology in Bohema 1981-1985. Prague, 307-24. Beranova, M., 1987. Manual rotation grain mills on Czechoslovak territory up to the incipient 2°4 millennium AD. Ethnologia Slavica, 19, 15-41.

Beranova, M., 1993. Versuche zur vorgeschichtlichen und frihmittelaltlichen Landwirtschaft. Pamatky archeologické, 74, 97-119. Berry, B.J.L., 1967. Geography of market centers and retail distnbuton. Englewood Cliffs. Besnard-Vauterin, C-C., 2009. Finplaine de Caen. Une campagne gauloise et antique. L’occupation du site de l'Etoike a Monaeville. Rennes. Biskowski, M., 2003. Supplementaryreport of the groundstonetools. In Elster and Renfrew 2003, 196-203. Blank, J., 2001. MaMahs on the mainframe: Islam and modernity among the Daudi Bohras. Chicago. Bloxam,E., 2011. Visualising the invisible: re-discovering the ancient grinding stone quarries of the Aswan West Bank, Egypt. In Williams and Peacock 2011, 43-54. Blumner, H., 1875-87. Technologie und Terminologie der Gewerbe und Kiinste bei Greichen und Rémern. Leipzig. Bomann, W., 1941. Bauerliches Hauswesen und Tagewerk im alten Niedersachsen. Weimat.

Borges, N.C., 1978. Mos manuais de Conimbriga. Conimbniga, 17, 113-32. Boughey, K.J.S., and Vickerman, E.A., 2003. Prehistoric rock art of the West Riding. Cup and-ring marked rocks of the valleys of the Aire, Wharfe and Nidd. Leeds. Boyer, EZ, Buchsenschutz, O., Hamon, C., Jaccottey, L., Lagadec,J.-P, Milleville, A., Thomas, E., and Triboulot, B., 2006. Productionet diffusion des meules du Néolithique a ?Antiquité:

quelques exemples francais. In Belmont and Mangartz 2006. Bruck, J., 2001. Body metaphors and technologies of transformation in the English middle and late Bronze Age. In J. Bruck (ed) Bronze age landscapes: tradition and transformation. Oxford, 149-60. Brunet, M., 1997. Les meules rotatives en Gréce, exemple délien. In D. Garcia and D, Meeks

Techniques et économie antiques et médiévales. Le temps de l'innovation. Paris, 29-38. Brun, J-P., 2011. Les meules. In H. Cuvigny(ed.) Didymor. Une garnison romaine dans le désert Orientale

d’Fgypte. IEAO,Cairo, 243-9.

Brun, J-P, and Borréani, M., 1998. Deux moulins hydrauliques du Haut-empire romaine en Narbonnaise. Galia, 55, 297-362. Bruyére, B., 1966. Fouzlles de Chsma-Qolzoum (Suez) 1930-1932. IFAO Cairo. Buchsenschutz, O., and Boyer, F, 1999. Les meules. In O, Buchsenschiitz, J-P. Guillaumet, and I.

Ralston (eds) Les remparts de Bibracte. Collection de Bibracte 3, Glux-en-Glenne. Buchsenschutz,O., Jaccottey, L., Jodry, F, and Blanchard,J-L., 2011. Evolution typologique et technique des meules du Neéokthique a lan mille. Aquitania Supplément23. 194

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Buckley, D.G., and Ingle, C.J., 2001. The saddle querns from Flag Fen. In F. Pryor The Flag Fen basin. Archaeology and environment of a Fenland landscape. London, 322-9. Buckley, D., and Major, H., 1983. Quernstones. In N. Crummy(ed.) The Roman smallfindsfrom Colchester 1971-9. Colchester Archaeological Report 2, 73-6. Buckley, D., and Major, H., 1998. The quernstones. In H.E.M. Cool and C. Philo (eds) Roman CasHeford. excavations 1974-85. Volume 1. The smallfinds. York, 240-7. Bucur, C., 1983. Moara de minain istoria civilizatiei tehnice a pdporului Roman. Czbinium, 138, 63-90. Buffone, L, Lorenzoni, S., Pallara, M., and Zanettin, E., 2003. The millstones of ancient Pompeu: a

petro-archaeometnric study. Ewropean Journal of Mineralogy, 15, 207-15. Busch, R., 1975 Die spatbronzezeithche Siedlung an der Walkemiihle in Gottingen. Neumunster.

Butcher, L.H., 1957. Archaeological remains on the Wharncliffe-Greno upland, S. Yorks.

Transac-

tons ofthe HunterArchaeological Soaety, 7, 38-9. Buzea, D., Cotruta, M., and Bnewig, B., 2008. Experimental archaeology. The construction of a fire installation (hearth) on the model of those discovered at Pauleni Cuic — Coimortan ‘Dambul Cetatw’, Hargita County. Ada Terrae Septemcastrensis, 7, 217-32.

Cabezuelo, U., 2006. Le site de la ZAC des ‘meules’ a Vic-le-Comte (Puy-de-Dome). In Belmont and Mangartz 2006, 109-14. Campbell, E., 1987. A cross-marked quern from Dunadd andotherevidencefor relations between

Dunadd and Iona. Proceedings of the Society of Antiquanes of Scotland, 117, 105-17. Cardoso, M., 1959. A mo e a farinha, o forno e 0 pao. Trabalbos de Antropologia e Etnographia, 17,

235-48. Castangia, G., 2011. Continuity and change i| n the Nuragic rrural landscape: the case of Sa Osa.

vendeentit= 38leemid=28 (Accessed May 20012). Castella, D,, 1994. Le mouhn lydraukque Gallo-romain d’Avenches Ten Chaphx’ Fouilles 1990-1997.

Cahiers d’archéologie romande 62. Lausanne. Caton-Thompson,G., and Gardner, E.W., 1934. The Desert Fayum. London.

Caulfield, S., 1977. The beehive quern in Ireland. Journal of the Royal Soaety of Antiquanes of Ireland, 107, 104-38. Chaussat, A., 2010. Les meules 4 main rotatives. h (accessed June 2012). Chausserie-Laprée, J., 1998. Les meules des habitats protohistoriques de Martigues. Documents @’Archéologe Méndionale, 21, 211-35.

Childe, V.G., 1942. What happened in history. Harmondsworth. Childe, V.G., 1943.Rotary querns on the Continent and in the Mediterranean Basin. Antiquity, 17, 19-26. Childe, V.G., 1956. Precing together thepast: the interpretation of archaeological data. London. Cizmat, M., 1990. Zwei frihlaténezeitliche Drehmahlsteine aus Mahren. Casopis moravského muxed,

75, 53-6. Cizmat, M., and Leichmann,J., 2002. Laténské zernovy ze Starého Hradiska. Pamatkyarcheologické, 93, 259-71. Cizmat, M., and Leichmann, J., 2007. Pozdné laténské zernovy na Moravé. Pamatkyarcheologické, 98, 109-28. Clarke, S., 1996. Abandonment, rubbish disposal and ‘special’ deposits at Newstead. TRAC 96, 73-81. 195

THE STONE OF LIFE Clarke, S. and Jones, R.FJ., 1996. The Newstead pits. In C. Van Driel-Murray (ed.) Military equipment in context. The Journal of Roman Miktary Equipment Studies, 5, 109-24. Clay, R.C.C., 1927. An inhabited site of La Téne I date on Swallowcliffe Down. Wiltshire

Archaeological and Natural History Magazine, 43, 59-93. Close-Brooks,J., 1983. Some early querns. Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, 113, 282-89.

Collard, M., Edinborough, K., Shennan,S., and Thomas, M.G., 2010. Radiocarbon evidence

indicates that migrants introduced farming to Britain. Journal of Archaeological Science, 37, 866-70. Connolly, A., 1994. Saddle querns in Ireland. UdsterJournal of Archaeology, 57, 26-36. Constantin, C., Farruggia, J.P, and Plateaux, M., 1978. Fouille d’un habitat néolithique a Irchonwelz (Hainaut occidentale). Revue archéologique de I’Oise, 13, 3-20. Cook, S., 1976. The ‘market’ as location and transaction: dimensions of marketing in a

Zapotec stoneworking industry. In S. Cook and M. Diskin (eds) Markets in Oaxaca. Austin and London, 139-68.

Cook, S., 1982. Zapotec stoneworkers: the dynamics of rural simple commodity production in modern Mexacan capitahsm. Washington D.C. Cooney, G., 1981. A saddle quern from Baltinglass Hill, county Wicklow. Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland, 111, 102-6. Crawford,J.M., 1888. The Kalevala. The epicpoem of Finland into English. New York. Crawford, O.G.S., 1953. Quern quarries. Archaeology in the field. London. Crawford, O.G.S., and Roder,J., 1955. The quern-quarries of Mayen in the Eifel. Antguiny, 29, 68-75 Ctverak, V., Holodnak,P., and Sigl, J., 2007. Zernovtzv. teckého typu z Chrudimi. Archeologe ve strednich Cechach, 11, 313-33. Cunliffe, B., 1971. Excavations at Fishbourne. Volume 2: The finds. London.

Cunliffe, B. 1984. Danebury: An Iron Age hillfort in Hampshire. Volume 2: The excavations 19691978: the finds. CBA Research Report 52. Cunliffe, B.W., 2005. Iron Age communities in Britain. London. Cunliffe, B. and Poole, C. 1991. Danebury: An Iron Age hillfort in Hampshire Vol. 5 The excavations 1979-1988:the finds. CBA Research Report 73. Cunliffe, B. and Poole, C., 2008. Rowbury Farm, Wherwell, Hants, 2003. Oxford Archaeology

Monograph,71. Cunnington, M.E., 1923. The early Iron Age inhabited site at All Cannings Cross Farm, Wiltshire. Devizes. Cunnington, M.E., 1931. The ‘Sanctuary’ on Overton Hill, near Avebury. Wi/tshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine 45, 300-35. Curle, J., 1911.4 Roman frontierpost and its people: the fort of Newstead in the parish of Melrose. Glasgow. Curwen, E.C., 1934. A late Bronze Age farm and a Neolithic pit-dwelling on New Barn Down, Clampham, nr. Worthing, Sussex Archaeological Collection, 75, 137-70. Curwen, E.C., 1937. Querns. Antiquity, 11, 133-151. Curwen, C., 1941. More about querns. Antiquity, 15, 15-32. Curwen, E.C., 1944. The problem of early watermills, Aniiguity, 18, 130-46. Curwen, E.C., 1956. A Tangier quern quarry. Antiquity, 30, 174.

Cutler, L., 2012. Between a rock and a hardplace — the development of querns in IronAge Wessex. PhD thesis, University of Southampton. 196

BIBLIOGRAPHY Dal Ri, L., 1994, Le macine come problemaarcheologico. Alcuni considerazione.In S. de Rachewitz,

L. Dal Ri, and C. Marzoli (eds) I/ Grano e ke Macine. Bolzano.

Daremberg, C., Saglio, E., and Pottier, E., 1904. Dictionnaire des antiquités grecques et romaines. Tome

3. Paris.

Dakaris, S., 1960. Anaskafi tou nekumantaiou tou Acherontoskai tholontou tafoupinsiontis Pargas. Prakitka tés Akadémias Athénon, 116, 114-24.

Dautheil, Dr, 1930. Meule néolithique trouvée a Villers-sous-Saint-Leu (Oise). Bulletin de la Soaété Prebistorique de France, 27, 126-8. Davidson Weinberg, G., 1988. Excavations at Jalame. Site of a glass factory in Late Roman Palestine. Columbia. Déjean, L., Gourdiole, R., and Landes, C., 1985. Les sites miniers et métallurgiques du Mont-Faulat (Haut-Vallée de ?Orb, Heérault) In Actes du 110° Congres National des Soaétés des Savantes (Montipelher 1985), Archéologie. Paris, 115-32. Delougaz, P., and Haines, R.C., 1960..A Byzantine church at Khirbat al-Karak. Chicago. Deonna, W,, 1938. Exploration archéologique de Délos. Le mobiker Déken. Paris. Destexhe-Jamotte, J., 1951. Communication sur les meules omaliennes de la Hesbaye Liégeoise. Bulletin de la Soaété Préhistorique Francaise, 48, 474-8. Dikshit, M.G., 1969. Hastory of Indian glass. Bombay. Divis-Cistecky, V., 1893. Starobyla dilna ruénich ml¥nkt na Hote Kunéticé. Cesky Lid, 2, 708-11. Dodge, B., 1970. The Fihrist of al-Nadim:a tenth-century survey of Muslim culture. NewYork. Domergue, C., Béziat, D., Cauuet, B., Jarrier, C., Landes, C., Morasz,J-G., Oliva, P, Pulou,R., and

Tollon, F., 1997. Les moulinsrotatifs dans les mines et centres métallurgiques antiques. In Garcia and Meeks 1997, 48-61. Donner, M., and Marzoli, C., 1994. La macinazione. Evoluzione delle tecniche e degli strumenti. In S. de Rachewitz, L. Dal Ri, and C. Marzoli (eds) I/ Grano e ke Macine. Bolzano, 73-98.

Dorson, R.M., 1968. Peasant customs and savage myths: Selectionsfrom the Britishfolklorists. Chicago. Drachmann, A.G., 1961. Heron’s windmill. Centaurus, 7, 145-51. Draganits, E., 2002. Petrologische Untersuchung eines r6mischen Mahlstein-fragmentes aus Zwingendorf, Niederdsterreich. In N. Doneus Die Ur und Frithgeschichtliche Fundstelle von Zwingendor,, Niederdsterreich. Vienna, 273-8. Drewett, P, 1982. Late Bronze Age Downland economyandthe excavation at Blackpatch, East

Sussex. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Sowety, 48, 321-400. Dubreuil, L., 2004. Long-term trends in Natufian subsistence: a use-wear analysis of ground stone tools. Journal of Archaeological Saence, 31, 1613-29. Earl, G., Basford, P. J., Bischoff, A.S., Bowman, A., Crowther C., Dahl, J., Hodgson, M., Isaksen, L., Kotoula, E., Martinez, K., Pagi, H., and Piquette, K.E., 2011a. Reflectance

Transformation Imaging Systems for Ancient DocumentaryArtefacts. In S. Dunn,J.P. Bowen, and K.C.NS (eds) Ekctromec Visuaksation and the Arts, London, BCS. (http://ewic. Earl, G,, Beale, G., Pagi H., and Smith, N., 2011b. Reflectance transformation: an approach for imaging archaeological finds. The Archaeologist, 81, 36-7. Ebert, F., 1932. Molaris lapis. In Pauly-Wissowa, Rea/Exncyclopadie der classischen Altertumsnissenschaft,

15. Stuttgart, 2517. Ellis, W., 1826. Narrative of a tour through Hawaii or Owhyhee : with remarks on the history, traditions, manners, customs, and language of the inhabitants of the Sandwich Islands. London. Elster, E.S., and Renfrew, C., 2003. Prehistoric Sitagroi. Excavations in northeast Greece 1968-70.

Los Angeles.

197

THE STONE OF LIFE Equipe d’Alorda Park, 2002. Les meules rotatives du site iberique d’Alorda Park (Calafell, Baix Penedeés, Tarragone). In Procopiou and Treuil 2002, 155-76. Fasham, PJ., 1985. The prehistoric settlement at Winnall Down, Winchester. Hampshire Field Club

Monograph,2. Winchester.

Pasham, PJ., Farwell, DE., and Whinney, R.J.B., 1989. The archaeological site at Easton Lane,

Winchester. Hampshire Field Club and Archaeological Society Monograph,6. Winchester. Fendin, T., 2000. Fertility and the repetitive partition. Land Archaeological Review, 6, 85-97. Ferla, P., Alaimo, R., Falsone, G., and Spatafora, F., 1984. Studio petrographico della macine

di eta arcaica e classica da Monte Castellazzo di Poggioreale (Sicilia Orientale). Stcha Archeologica, 56, 25-52.

Ferrara, B., 2009. Ipoxzi votivi nel santuario di Hera allafoce del Sele. Pozzuoli. Field, J., Cosgrove, R., Fullagar, R., and Lance, B., 2009. Starch residues on grinding stones in private collections: a study of morahs from the tropical rainforests of NE Queensland. In M. Haslam, G. Robertson, A. Crowther, S. Nugent, and L.

Kirkwood (eds). Archaeological science under a microscope: studies in residue and ancient DNA analysis in honour of Thomas H. Loy. Chapter 17. Terra Australis, 30. Finlayson, B. and Warren, G.M., 2010. Changing natures. Hunter-gatherers, farmers and the modern world. London. Fitzpatrick, A.P., 2011. The Amesbury archer and the Boscombe bowmen: Bell Beaker burials at Boscombe Down, Amesbury, Wiltshire. Salisbury. Fosbrooke, H.A., 1954. Further light on the rock engravings in northern Tanganika. Man, 54, 101-2. Frankel, R., 2003. The Olynthus mill, its origin, and diffusion: typology and distribution. American Journal of Archaeology, 107, 1-21. Frere, S.S., Hassall, M.WC., and Tomlin, R.S.O., 1983. Roman Britain 1982. Britannia, 14, 302.

Frohlich, J., and Waldhauser, J., 1989. Piispévky k ekonomice Ceskych kelta (kamenictvi a distribuce zernovu). Archeologické rozhledy, 41, 16-58. Fulford, M., 2001. Pervasive ‘ritual’ behaviour in Roman Britain. Britannia, 32, 199-218. Fullagar, R.J., and Field, H., 1997. Pleistocene seed-grinding implements from the Australian arid zone. Antiquity, 71, 300-7. Gaertringen, von, KEH., and Wilski, P., 1904. Stadtgeschichte von Thera. Berlin. Gahwiler, A., and Speck,J., 1991. Die romische Wassermuhle von Hagendorn bei Cham ZG. Helvetia Archaeologica, 22, 34-75.

Galili, E., and Sharvit, J., 2002. Millstone Quarry on the coast of Acre. Atgot, 42, 73-8. Galili, E., Sharvit, J., and Rosen, B., 2007. Herliyya Beach Final Report. HadashotArkheologzyot, 119. Gallonio, A., and Allinson, A.R., 1930. Lortures and torments of the Christian martyrs. Paris.

Garrow, D., 2012. Odd deposits and average practice. A critical history of the concept of structured deposition. Archaeological Dialogues, 19, 85-115. Gerke, T., Stocker, S.R., Davis, J.L., Maynard, J.B., and Dietsch, C., 2006. Sourcing volcanic

millstones from Greco-Romansites in Albania. Journal of Field Archaeology, 31, 13746. Gimbutas, M., 1982. The goddesses andgods of old Europe. London. Gluhak, T.M., and Hofmeister, W., 2009. Provenance analysis of Roman millstones: mapping of trade areas in Roman Europe. In R.I. Kostov, B. Gaydarska, and M. Gurova

(eds) Geoarchaeology and archaeomineralogy. Sofia, 111-5. 198

BIBLIOGRAPHY Gluhak, T-M., and Hofmeister, W., 2011. Geochemical provenance analyses of Roman lava

millstones north of the Alps: a study of their distribution and implications for the beginning of Roman lava quarrying in the Eifel region (Germany). Journal of Archaeological Science, 38, 1603-20.

Gosden, C., and Marshall, M., 1999. The cultural biography of artefacts. World Archaeology, 31, 169-178. Graefe, J., 2008. Trade and use of raw materials for Neolithic querns in north-western Germany. In Hamon and Graefe 2008, 23-32. Graefe,J., 2009. Neokthische Mablsteine zwischen Weserbergland und dem Niederrhein. Bonn. Graefe, J., Hamon,C., Lidstrom-Holmberg, C., Tsoraki, C., and Watts, S., 2009. Subsistence,

social and ritual practices: quern deposits in the Neolithic societies of Europe. In S. Bonnardin, C. Hamon, M. Lauwers, and B. Quilliec, (eds) Du matériel an spirituel.

Réahtés archéologiques et historeques des ‘depots’ de lapréhistoire a nosjours. Antibes, 89-98. Grakov, V.N., 1954. Kamenskoje gorodishche na Dnepre. Materialy7 isseldvaniia po archeologii SSSR, 36, 5-238. Green, C., 2011. Hertfordshire puddingstone querns: working with a difficult rock. In Williams and Peacock 2011, 123-30.

Green, C., and Peacock, D. (forthcoming). Iron Age and Romanpuddingstone querns in Britain and France. In preparation.

Gronenborn, D., 1994, Ethnoarchaologische Untersuchungen zur rezenten Herstellung und Nutzung von Mahlsteinen in Nordost-Nigeria. Experimentelle Archaologie in Deutschland, 8, 45-55. Guillier, G., Biard, M., and Cherel, A-F., 2005. Un atelier augustéen de taille de meules en

poudingue au ‘Clos des Forges’ a Avrilly (Eure). Revue Archéologique de l’Ouest, 22, 199-220. Gunda, B., 1961. Altertumliche Mahlsteine in der Karpaten. Acta Ethnographica Hungaricae, 10, 41-65. Haaland, R., 1997. Emergence of sedentism: new ways of living, new ways of symbolizing. Antiquity, 71, 374-85. Halama,J., and Zeman, T., 2009. Nalezy zernovu z kontextu doby timské v Cechach a na

Moravé. In M. Karwowski and E. Droberjar (eds) Archeologia Barbarzyncéw 2008. Rzeszow, 479-350.

Hamon, C., 2008. The symbolic value of grindingstone hoards: technical properties of Neolithic examples. In C. Hamon and B. Quilliec Hoardsfrom the Neokthic to metal ages. BAR Internationalseries 1758. Hamon,C., 2008a. Lifecycle of a Neolithic quern: limits and contribution of a technical and functional analysis on grinding tools. In Hamon and Graefe 2008, 45-54. Hamon,C., 2008b. Functional analysis of stone grinding and polishing tools from the earliest Neolithic of north-western Europe. Journal of Archaeological Science, 35, 1502-30. Hamon, C. 2009. The functional and symbolic value of grinding stone tools from the Late Bandkeramik of North-Western Europe. Internet Archaeology, 26. Hamon,C., and Graefe,J., 2008. Newperpectives on querns in Neohthic societies. Bonn. Hamon,C., Farget, V., Jaccottey, L., Milleville, A., and Monchablon, C., 2011. Propositions

de norms de dessin et d’unegrille d’analyse pour l’étude des meules va-et-vient du Néolithique a l’age du Fer. In Buchsenschutz, ef a/ 2011, 39-50.

Hamon,C., and Le Gall, V., 2011. Les meules en pays Minyanka (Malt): étude descarriéreset techniques de production. In Williams and Peacock 2011, 19-28.

199

THE STONE OF LIFE Hampl, F., 1976. Museum fur Urgeschichte des Landes Neiderosterreich mit urgeschichtlchem Frethchtmuseum in Asparn an der Laya. Vienna. Harsema, O.H., 1979. Maalstenen en handmolens in Drenthe van het neolithicum tot ca

1300 AD. In A. Bicker Caarten, J. Heringa and G. Smit (eds) Molens in Drenthe. Zwolle. Hartuche, N., 1981. O moara neolotica descoperita la Medgidia. Studusi comunicari de istorie a civiltzatielpopulare in Romania (Sibiu), 79-86. Hawkes, S.C., 1969. Finds from two middle Bronze Age pits at Winnall, Winchester,

Hampshire. Proceedings of the Hampshire Field Club andArchaeological Society, 26, 5-18. Hayden, B., 1987. Lithic studies among the contemporary Highland Maya. Tucson. Heeringen, R.M. van, 1985. Typologie, Zeitstellung und Verbreitung der in die Niederlande importierten vorgeschichtlichen mahlsteine aus Tephrit. Archdologisches Korrespondenxbatt, 15, 371-83. Hennig, E., 1966. Beobachtung zum Mahlvorgang an ur- und frtihgeschichtlichen

Getreidemuhlen. Evhnographische-Archaologischhe Zeitschrift, 7, 71-87.

Herrscher, E., Colardelle, R., and Valentin, F, 2006. Meuliéres et pathologies humaines: un

rapporteffectif? Analyse d’une documentation bucco-dentaire entre le XI1Ieetle XVIIle siécle a Grenoble. In Belmont and Mangartz 2006, 99-108. Heslop, D.H., 1987. The excavation of an Iron Age settlement at Thorpe Thewles, Cleveland, 19801982. CBA Research Report65. Heslop, D.H., 2008. Patterns of quern production, acquisition and deposition. A corpus of beehive quernsfrom northern Yorkshire and southern Durham. Yorkshire Archaeological Society occasional paper, 6. York.

Hill, J.D., 1995. Retwal and rubbish in the Iron Age of Wessex. A study of theformation of a specific archaeological record. BAR 242. Hill, J., and Rowsome, P., 2012. Roman London and the Walbrook Stream Crossing: excavations at 1 Poultry and vicinity, City of London. London. Hilton-Simpson, M.W., 1922. The Berbers of the Aures Mountains, Algeria: a study of a

primitive people. Scottish GeographicalJournal, 38, 145-63. Hockensmith, C.D., 2009. The millstone industry. Jefferson and London. Hodge, A.T., 1960. A Roman factory. Swentefic American, 263 (5), 58-64. Holodnak, P., and Mag, M., 1999. Vyvoj mlechich zatizeni a provenience surovin drtidel a

zernovu v Sobésukach (Okt. Choumotov, SZ Cechy). Mikrosonda do ekonomiky jednohosidlisté. Pamatky archeologucké, 90, 398-441.

Holodnak, P., 2001. Experiment s mletim obilnin na Zzernovech tzv. teckého typu. Arrcheologické Roxhledy, 53, 31-44. Holt, R., 1988. The walls of medieval England. Oxford.

Horter, F, 1994. Getredereiben und Mihlsteine aus der Eifel. Ein Beitrag zur Steinbruch und

Miahlengeschichte. Mayen. Hurlimann, F, 1965. Neolitische Handmthlen von einer Ufersiedlung am Greifensee. Jabrbuch der Schweizerischen Gesellschaftfiir Ur- und Friihgeschichte, 52, 72-86. Husselman, E., 1979. Karanis excavations of the University of Michigan in Egypt 1928-1935, Topography and Architecture. Ann Arbor. Hume,D., and Stafford, W.C., 1868. The history of Englandfrom the earliestperiod to the present time. Compiledfrom the most authentic sources. London. Ingle, C.J., 1989. Characterisation and distribution of beehive querns in eastern England. Unpublished PhDthesis, University of Southampton. 200

BIBLIOGRAPHY Ingle,

C., 1994. The quernstones from Hunsbury Hillfort, Northamptonshire. Northamptonshire Archaeology, 25, 21-33. Isserlin, B.S.J., and du Plat Taylor, J., 1974. Motya: a Phoeniaan and Carthaginian city in Sicily: a report of the excavations undertaken during theyears 1961-65 on behalf of the University of Leeds, the Institute of Archaeology of London University, and Fairleigh Dickinson University, NewJersey. Leiden. Jaccottey, L., and Labeaune, R., 2010. Découverte d’un moulin hydraulique antique 4 Longvic (Cote d’Or). Revue archéologique de l'Est, 59, 665-8. Jaccottey, L., 2011. Seven thousand years of millstone production in the Serre mountain range of the French Jura. In Williams and Peacock 2011, 293-308. Jaccottey, L., and Farget, V., 2011. Les norms de dessin des meules rotatives. In Buchsenschutz

et al, 2011, 51-68. Jaccottey, L., Farget, V., Maerten, M., Fronteau, G., and Beuchot, S., 2011a. Le site du Portus a Collonge-en-Charollais (Sadéne-et-Loire), exemple d’une chaine opératoire de fabrication de moulinsrotatifs antiques. In Buchenschutz ef a/ 2011, 163-98. Jaccottey, L., Milleville, A., Fronteau, G., and Boyer, F, 2011b. Les meules de Mont Lassois a

Vix. In B. Chaume and C. Mordant(eds) Le complexe anistocratique de Vix. Dijon, 673-98. Jaccottey, L., and Longepierre, S., 2011. Pompeian millstones in France. In Williams and Peacock 2011, 97-116. Jacobi, G., 1974. Werkzeug und Gerat aus dem Oppidum von Manching. Wiesbaden. Jacobi, H., 1912. Romische Getreidemuhlen. SaalburgJahrbuch, 3, 75-95. Jarrett, M.G., and Wrathmell, S., 1981. Whitton. An Iron Age and Romanfarmstead in South Glamorgan.

Cardiff. Jasny, N., 1944. Wheatprices and milling costs in Classical Rome. Wheat Studies of the Food Research Institute, 20, No 4.

Joachim, H-E., 1985. Zu eisenzeitlichen Reibsteinen aus Basaltlava, den sog, Napoleonshiten. Alrchaologisches Korrespondenzbatt, 15, 359-69. Jobey, G., 1959. Excavations at the native settlement at Huckhoe, Northumberland, 1955-7.

Archaeologia Aehana, 37, 217-78. Jodry, F, 2011. First century querns of the Roman army, in the light of moderntexts. In Williams and Peacock 2011, 85-92.

Jodry, F, and Feliu, C., 2009. Nouvelles données sur les dépdts de meules rotatives. Deux exemples de La Téne finale en Alsace. In S. Bonnardin, C. Hamon, M. Lauwers, and

B, Quilliec, (eds) Du maténel au spinttuel. Réahtés archéologiques et historiques des ‘depots’ de la prebistotre a nosjours. Antibes, 69-76. Jones, G., and Rowley-Conwy, P., 2007. On the importance of cereal cultivation in the British Neolithic. In S. Colledge and J. Conolly (eds) The origins and spread of domestic plants in Southwest Asia and Europe. Watnut Creek and London. Jones, G.D.B., Thompson, F-H., and Wild, J.P., 1966. Manchester University excavations at

Brough-on-Noe (Navio), 1966. Derbyshire ArchaeologicalJournal, 86, 99-101. Jones,J.E., 1984. Ancient Athenian silver mines, dressing floors and smelting sites. Journal of the HistoricalMetallurgy Society, 18/21, 65-81. Jones, M., 1981. The development of crop husbandry. In M.. Jones and G. Dimbleby(eds) The environment and man: the Iron Age to the Anglo-Saxonperiod. BAR, 87, 95-127. Jordan, M., 2004. Dictionary of gods andgoddesses. New York. Jorgensen, A.B., 2002. Investigations of Danish rotary querns from the Iron Age: archaeological evidence and practical experiments. In Procopiou and Treuil 2002, 183-96. 201

THE STONE OF LIFE

Jost, C.A., 2001. Die spathallstatt- undfriihlatenexeithche Siedlung von Waerschem, Kreis MayenKoblenz. Ein Beitrag zur eisenzeithchen Besiedlung an Miuittelrhetn und Untermosel. Berichte zur Archaologie an Mittelrhein und Mosel, 7. Juan Tresserras, J., 2002. Resultados de los analisis de residuos. In Procopiou and Treuil

2002, 145-54. Junkelmann, M., 2006. Panis Mihtaris. Die Ernahrung des romischen Soldaten oder der Grundstoff der Macht. Kulturgeschichter der antiken welt, 75. Mainz, 110-27.

Kas, S., 2006. Enkering-Gatzdcker. Eine Stedlung der spaten Urnenfelder- und der Hallstattzeit mit

Grabenanlage. Arbeiten zur Archaologie Suddeutschlands.

Katzev, M.L., 1972. The Kyrenia ship. In G.F. Bass A Aistory of seafaring. London, 50-2. Kegler-Graiewski, N., and Zimmermann, A., 2003. Exchange systems of stone artefacts

in the European Neolithic. In L. Burnez-Lanotte (ed.) Production and management of lithic materials in the European Linearbandkeramik. BAR Int. Ser. 1200, 31-5. Keller, F., 1866. The lake dwellings of Switzerland and otherparts of Europe. London. Keller, P.T., 1989. Quern production at Folkestone, south-east Kent: An interim note. Britannia, 20, 193-200.

Koch, H., 1991. Die Reltischen Secdlungen vom Frauenberg tiber Kloster Weltenburg, Stadt Kelheim, und von Harting (Neuaugeliet Sid), Stadt Regensburg. International Archaologie 3. Kol-Yaakov, S., 2000. Various objects from the Hellenistic, Roman, and Byzantine periods.

In Y. Hirschfeld Ramat Hanadiv Excavations. Jerusalem, 473-9. Kopytoff, I., 1986. The cultural biography of things: commoditization as process. In A.

Appadurai (ed.) The soczal hfe of things: commodities in culturalperspective. Cambridge, 64-91.

Kotigoroshko, V.G., 1989. Gorodishcha rubekha nasheit ery v verchnem potise. S/ovenska Arrcheologia, 37.1, 21-68.

Kourouniotes, K., 1917. Kivatdor podAw0eor. Ephemerts Archeologihe, 151-7. Kuster, H., 1984. Neolithic plant remains

from Eberdingen-Hochdorf, southern

Germany. In W. van Zeist and W.A. Casparie, (eds) Plants and ancient man. Studies in palaeoethnobotany. Rotterdam, 307-11. Kuster, H., 1985. Neolithische Pflanzenreste aus Hochdorf, Gemeinde Eberdingen (Kreis Ludwigsburg). In H. Kuster and U. Korber-Grohne (eds) Hochdorf I Forschungen und Berichte zur Vor- und Fruhgeschichte in Baden-Wurttemberg 19, 15-83. Lacroix, B., 1963. Les moulins domestiques du [Ve siecle aux Fontaines Salées (Commune

de Saint Pere-sous-Vezelay, Yonne). Revue Archéologique de l'Est et du Centre Est, 14, 301-14. Lancel, S., 1982. Byrsa I. Rapports pretiminaries sur les foutlles 1977-1978: niveaux et vestiges puniques. Collection de Ecole Francaise de Rome 41. Langdon,J., 2004. M7//s in the medieval economy, England 1300-1540. Oxford. Langejans, G.H.J., 2010. Remains of the day- preservation of organic micro-residues on stone tools. Journal of Archaeological Science, 37, 971-85. Larsson, L., 2007. The Iron Age ritual building at Uppakra, southern Sweden. Antiquity, 81, 11-25. Leroi-Gourhan, A., 1971. L’Hommeet la matiére. Paris. Leroi-Gourhan, A., 1993. Gesture and speech. Cambridge, Mass. Leveau, P., 1996. The Barbegal water mill in its environment: archaeology and the

economic and social history of Antiquity. Journal of Roman Archaeology, 9, 137-53. 202

BIBLIOGRAPHY Leveau, P., 2006. Les moulins de Barbegal 1986-2006. http://www.trainvs.net (accessed January 2012). Lewis, M.J.T., 1997. Mcl/stone and hammer. The origins of waterpower. Hull. Lies, H., 1963. Die vor- and fruhgeschichtlichen Drehmihlensteine im Bezirk Magdeburg. Jabreschift. middetdt. Vorgesch., 47, 287-323. Liddle, D., 1935. Report on the Hampshire Field Club’s excavation at Meon Hill. Proceedings of the Hampshire Field Club and Archaeological Society, 13, 7-54. Lidstrom Holmberg, C., 2004. Saddle querns and gendered dynamics of the early Neolithic in Mid Central Sweden. In H. Knutsson (ed.) Coast to coast: arrival: results and reflections. Coast to coast books, 10. Uppsala, 199-231. Lilliu, C., 1999. Cereahe macine della Sardegna antica. Guida all’esposizione. Villanovafortu.

Lindet, L., 1899. Les origines du moulin a grains. Revue Archéologique, 35, 413-27. Liu, L., Field, J., Fullagar, R., Bestel, S., Chen, X., and Ma, X., 2010. What did grinding stones grind? New light on early Neolithic subsistence economyin the middle Yellow River Valley, China. Antiquity, 84, 816-33. Logan,J., 1900. Mclan’s Highlanders at home or Gaelic gatherings. Glasgow. Longepierre, S., 2007. L’apport des meules a la connaissance des moulins hydraulique romains en Languedoc. In J-P. Brun and J-L. Fiches (eds) Energie hydraulique et machines élévatrices d'eau dans l’Antiquité. Naples, 167-83. Longepierre, S., 2011. Moulins manuels, a sang et hydrauliques durant I‘Antiquité dans le Sud-Est de la France: essai de definition. In O. Buchenschutz, L. Jaccottey, F. Jodry and J-L. Blanchard (eds) Evolution typologique et technique des meules du Néolthique a lan mille. Aquitania Supplément23. Longepierre, S., 2012. Meules, moulins et meulieres en Gaule méridionale du II av. J.-C au VIEap. J.-C. Montagnac. Lorenzoni, S., Pallara, M., and Zanettin, E., 1996. Archaeometric preliminary study of

volcanic rock millstones from Neolithic-Roman archaeological sites of Altamura area (Apulia, Southern Italy). Secence and technologyfor cultural heritage, 5, 47-55. Lorenzoni, S., Pallara, M., and Zanettin, E., 1997. Le macine in rocce vulcaniche della

Puglia e della Basilicata e la loro importanza nella riconstruzionedelle antiche vie di communicazione. Le scenze della terra e archeometria. Napoli. Lorenzoni,S., Pallara, M., and Zanettin, E., 2000a. Volcanic rock Bronze Age millstones

of Apulia, Southern Italy. Ewropean Journal of Mineralogy, 12, 877-82. Lorenzoni, S., Pallara, M., Venturo, D., and Zanettin, E., 2000b. Studio archeometrico delle

macine in rocce vulcaniche della Puglia e zone limitrofe dall’eta romana. Rassegna a Archeologia, 17, 225-52.

Lovell, B., and Tubb,J., 2006. Ancient quarrying of rare in situ Palaeogene Hertfordshire Puddingstone. Mercian Geologist, 16, 185-9.

Lucas, R.N., 1993. The Romano-British uilla at Halstock, Dorset. Excavations 1967-1985. Dorset Natural History and Archaeological Society Monograph,13. Maciejewski, F., 1950. Outils en pierre de l’enceinte fortifiée de la culture Lusacienne de Biskupin. In J. Kostrzewski (ed.) II Sprawozdanie x prac wykopaliskowych w grodzie kultury Luzyckie) w Biskupinie wpowiecie sninskim. Poznan, 110. Mackie, E., 1971a. Some new quernstones from brochs and duns. Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, 104, 137-46. MacKie, E., 1971b. English migrants and Scottish brochs. Glasgow ArcheologicalJournal, 39, 39-71. 203

THE STONE OF LIFE Macreth, D.F,, 1996. Orton Hall Farm: a Roman and Early Anglo-Saxonfarmstead. East Anglian Archaeology Report 76. Magen, Y., 1993. Mount Garizim and the Samaritans. In F Manns and E. Alliata (eds) Early Christianity in context. Jerusalem, 91-147. Makilam, 2007. The magical life of Berber women in Kabyha. New York.

Makkay,J., 1978. Mahlstein und das ritual Mahlen in den prahistorischen Opferzeremonien.

Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientarum Hungaricae, 30, 13-30. Manby, T., and Fenton-Thomas, 2009. The lava quern. In C. Fenton-Thomas A place by the sea. Excavations at Sewerby Cottage Farm, Bridlington. On-site Archaeology Monograph, no. 1, York, 185-6.

Mantoux, P., 1927. The industrial revolution of the eighteenth century. London. Marsden, P., 1994. Ships of the Port of London, first to eleventh centuries AD. English Heritage Archaeological Report,3. Mason, S., and Nesbitt, M., 2009. Acorns as food in southeast Turkey. Implications for

prehistoric subsistence in southwest Asia. In A.S Fairbairn and E. Weiss (eds) Fromforagers tofarmers: papers in honour of Gordon C. Hillman. Oxford, 71-85. McBryde, FW, 1945. Cultural and historicalgeography of southwest Guatemala. Washington. McCarthy, ED., 1976. Austrakan Aboriginal stone implements including bone, shell and tooth implements. Sydney. McErlean, T., and Crothers, N., 2007. Harnessing the tides. The early medieval tide mills at

Nendrum monastery, Strangford Lough. Belfast. Mcllwain, A., 1980. Quernstones. In D.M. Jones and M. Rhodes Excavations at Billingsgate Buildings ‘Triangle’, Lower Thames Street, 1974. London and Middlesex Archaeological

Society Special Paper No 4. McOmish, D., 1996. East Chisenbury: ritual and rubbish at the British Bronze Age — Iron Age transition. Antiguity, 70, 68-76.

Meeks, D. 1997. Les meules rotatives en Egypte, datation et usages. In D. Garcia and D. Meeks Techniques et économie antiques et médiévales. Le temps de l'innovation. Paris, 20-8. Melont, P., 1975. La Sardegna romana. Sassati. Menasanch, M., Risch, R., and Soldevilla, J.A., 2002. Las tecnologias del procesado de cereal en el sudeste de la peninsula ibérica durante el HI y el II milenio A.N.E. In Procopiou and Treuil 2002, 81-110.

Meurers-Balke, J., and Luning, J., 1992. Some aspects and experiments concerning the processing of glume wheats. In P.C. Anderson (ed.) Prehistory of agriculture. New experimental and ethnographic approaches. Los Angeles, 238-53. Meyer, C., 1982. Chapter 7. Large and small storerooms of the Roman villa. In DS.

Whitcomb and J.H. Johnson. Quseir al-Oadim 1980. Preliminary report (American Research Centre in Egypt, Volume 7, Cairo). Malibu, 201-13. Mikkelsen, E., 1984. Neolitiseringen 1 Wst-Norge. Oslo Umiversitetets Oldsaksamling Arbok, 1982/3, 78-128. Milleville, A., 2007. ‘De /a pierre a la meule’ durant le néolthique. Circulation et gestion des matiéres

premieres entre Rhin et Rhone. Doctoral Thesis. Université de Franche-Comté, Besancon. Moffet, L., Robinson, M.A., and Straker, V., 1989. Cereals, fruits and nuts: charred plant

remains from Neolithic sites in England and Wales and the Neolithic economy. In A. Milles, D. Williams and N. Gardner (eds) The beginnings of agriculture. BAR International Series 496, 243-61.

204

BIBLIOGRAPHY Monah,D., 2002. Découvertes de painset de restes d’aliments céréaliers en Europede l’est et centrale. Czviftsations, 49, 67-76.

Mongez Aine, A., 1818. Mémoire sur les meules de moulins employée par les anciens et les modernes,et sur les meules a bras antiques, trouvée prés d’Abbeville. Histoire et mémoires de institut royal de France, classe d’listoire et de la littérature ancienne, 3, 479.

Monnier, M., 1894. The wonders of Pompei. New York. Morel, J-P., 1969. Kerkouane,ville punique du Cap Bon. Médanges Ecok Francais Rome, 81, 473-518. Morel, J-P., 2001. Aux origines du moulin rotatif? Une meule circulaire de la fin du Vesiécle avant notre ére a Carthage. In J-P. Brun and P. Jockey (eds) Techniques et sociétés en Méditerranée. Collection Atelier Méditerranéen. Paris, 241-9. Morris, R.W:B., 1989. The prehistoric rock art of Great Britain: a surveyofall sites bearing motifs

more complex than simple cup-marks. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, 55, 45-88. Moritz, L.A., 1958. Grain mills andflour in ClassicalAntiquity. Oxford. Moritz, L.A., and Jones, C.R., 1950. Experiments in grinding wheat in a Romano-British quern.

Milking, June 24, 594-6.

Motykova, K., and Holodnak, P., 2005. Polykulturni sidlisté u obce Straky na Nymburska s nalezem zernovu tzv. Reckého typu. Archeologie ve strednich Cechach, 9, 321-8.

Nasz A., 1950. Zarna wezesnodzig. Stadia wezesnodziejowe.Seria Archeologiczna; 1. Neal, DS., 1974. The excavation of the Roman villa in Gadebridge Park, Hemel Hempstead. Rep. Res. Comm.Society of Antiquaries, 31. Neal, DS., 1996. Upper storeys in Romano-British villas. In. P. Johnson and I. Haynes (eds) Architecture in Roman Britain. CBA Research Report, 94, 33-43.

Needham,S., 1991. Excavation and salvage at Runnymede Bridge, 1978: the late Bronze Age waterfront site. London. Needham, S., and Spence, T., 1996. Refuse and disposal at area 16 east Runnymede. Runnymede Bridge research excavations, Volume 2. London.

Nekhrizov, G., and Tzvetkova,J, 2012. Ritual pit complexes in Iron Age Thrace: the case study of Svilengrad. In Altan Gjlingiroglu (ed.) Amatohan Iron Ages 7. Ancient Near Eastern Studies Supplement Series, 39, 177-209.

Nelson, M., 1987. Contemporaryspecialization and marketing of manos and metates in the Maya Highlands. In Hayden 1987, 148-59. Nesbitt, M., and Samuel, D., 1996. From staple crop to extinction? The archaeology and history of hulled wheats. In S. Padulosi, K. HammerandJ. Heller (eds) Huded wheats: Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Hulled Wheats 21-22 July 1995 Castelvecchio Pascoh, Tuscamy, Tfaly. Framuicino, 40-99, Netzer, E., 1991. Masada II. The Yigael Yadin excavations 1963-1965. Final reports. The buildings, stratigraphy and architecture. \erulsalem. Nicotera, P., 1950. Sade rocce laviche adoperate nellantica Pompeu, in Pompetana: raccolta distudiper il secondo centenario deghscavt dt Pompeu. Naples, 396-424. Nierlé, M-C., 1982. Mureybet et Cheikh Hassan (Syrie): Outilage de mouture et de broyage (IX¢ et VII‘ millénaires). Cahiers de /FEuphrate, 3, 117-216. Nowakowski, J.A., 1991. Trethellan farm Newquay: The excavation of a lowland Bronze Age settlement and Iron Age cemetery. Cornish Archaeology, 30, 5-242. Noy, T., 1979. Stone cup-holes from Gilgal I, a pre-pottery Neolithic A site in Israel. Pakoreent, 5, 233-8, Odak, O., 1989. Figurative and schematic rock art of Kenya: animal representation and tentative interpretation. In H. Morphy(ed.) Ammaks into Art. London, 16-78. 205

THE STONE OF LIFE

Odak, O., 1992. Ethnographic context of rock art sites in East Africa. In M.J. Morwood and DR. Hobbs(eds) Rock art and ethnography. Melbourne.

Oswald, A., 1969. Excavations at Barford, Warwickshire. Transactions and Proceedings of the

Birmingham Archaeological Society, 83, 1-64. Oleson, J.P. 1983. A Roman water mill on the Crocodilion river near Caesarea. Zeztschrift des deutschen Paldstinavereins, 100, 137-52. Oliva, P., Béziat, D, Domerge, C., Jarrier, C., Martin, F, Pieragei, B., and Tollon, F, 1999.

Geological sources and the use of rotary millstones from the Roman iron-makingsite of Les Martys (Montagne Noire, France). European Journal of Mineralogy, 11, 757-62. O’Sullivan, A., and Kenny, N., 2008. A matter of life and death? Archaeology Ireland, 22, 8-11. Palfreyman, A., and Ebbins,S., 2007. A Romano-British quern manufacturingsite at Blackbrook,

Derbyshire. Derbyshire ArchaeologicalJournal, 127, 33-48. Parfitt, K., 2012. Folkestone, East Wear Bay Roman villa: Interim report on excavations 2011, Canterbury Archaeological Trust. Parsons, A.W., 1936. A Roman watermill in the Athenian Agora. Hesperia, 5, 70-90. Peacock, D.PS., 1980. The Roman millstone trade: a petrological sketch. World Archaeology, 12,

43-53.

Peacock, D.PS., 1986. The production of Roman millstones near Orvieto, Umbria, Italy. Antiquaries Journal, 66, 45-51.

Peacock, D.PS., 1987. Iron Age and Roman quern production at Lodsworth, West Sussex. Auntiquanies Journal, 67, 61-85. Peacock, D.PS., 1989. The mills of Pompeu. Anaguity, 63, 205-14. Peacock, D.PS., 1997. Wadi Barud (Tibertane). In D.P.S. Peacock and V.A. Maxfield (eds) Survey and excavation at Mons Claudianus 1987-1993. Volume 1 Quarnes and topography. IFAO Cairo, 275-9. Peacock, D., 2007. Stone artefacts. In D. Peacock and V. Maxfield Te Roman Imperial quarries. Survey and excavation at Mons Porphynites 1994-1998. Volume 2. London. Peacock, D., and Cutler, L., 2010. A Neolithic voyage. InternationalJournal of NauticalArchaeology, 39, 116-34. Peacock, D., and Cutler, L., 2011. The earliest rotary querns in southern England. In Williams and Peacock 2011, 77-80. Peacock, D., and Willams, D., forthcoming. Pompeian-style mills in Jordan and Syria.

Proceedings of the 2011 Bergen Conference. Peacock, D., Williams, D., and James, S., 2007. Basalt as ships’ ballast and the Roman incense trade. In D. Peacock and D. Williams (eds) Foodforthe gods. New light on the ancent incense trade. Oxford, 28-70.

Pearson, T., and Oswald, A., 2000. Quern manufacturing at Wharnchffe Rocks, Sheffield, South Yorkshire. English Heritage Report. Perry, L., Sandweiss, D.H., Piperno, D.R., Rademaker, K., Malpass, M.A., Umire A., and de la Vera, P., 2006. Early maize agriculture and interzonal interaction in southern Peru. Nature, 440, 76-9.

Philips, J.T., 1950. A survey of the distribution of querns of the Hunsburyandallied types. Transactions ofthe Leuestershire Archaeological and Historical Society, 26, 75-82. Philp, B., Parfitt, K., Willson, J., and Williams, W., 1999. The Roman villa site at Keston Kent. Kent Archaeological Research Monograph,8. Piperno, D.R., Weiss, E., Holst, I., and Nadel, D., 2004. Processing of wild cereals in the Upper

Palaeolithic revealed bystarch grain analysis. Nature, 430, 670-3. 206

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Piperno, DR., 2006. Phytokths..A comprehensiveguidefor archaeologists andpaleoecologists. Lanham.

Pitt-Rivers, A.H.L.F, 1884. Report on excavations in the Pen Pits, near Penselwood, Somerset. London.

Pleinerova,I., 1986. Experiments with building old Slavonic houses andliving in them. Pamatky archeologické, 77, 104-76. Poitevin, G., 1997. Le chant des menles. Paris and Pondicherry. Polinski, A., 2009. Note sur des meules en trachy-andésite d’époque romaine découvertes en Loire-Atlantique. Revue archéologique de l'Ouest, 26, 189-204. Pommepuy, C., 1999. Le matériel de mouture dela vallée de l’Aisne deAge du Bronze a La Tene finale: formes et matériaux. Revue archéologique de Picardie, 3-4, 115-41. Pommepuy, C., 2003. Le matériel de mouture, un marqueurterritorial, les meules Rémeset Suessionnes. Habitats, mobiliers et groupes régionaux a l’age de Fer. Actes du XXe colloque de PAFEA. Revue archéologique de l'Est, 20¢me supplément, 365-75.

Popovic, P., and Kapuran, A., 2007. Millstones from Kale in KrSevica (Southeastern Serbia).

Godisnjak Akademija nauka i umpetnosti Bosne t Hercegovine, 36, 83-96. Power, P., 1939. A decorated quern-stone and its symbolism. Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy, 45C, 25-30. Procopiou, H., and Treuil, R., 2002. Moudre et broyer. 2 vols, Paris.

Pryor, F., 1998. Exton: excavation at a Neolithic causewayed enclosure near Maxey, Cambridge. London

Pulak, C., and Townsend, R.F, 1987. The Hellenistic shipwreck at Serce Limani, Turkey:

preliminary report. American Journal of Archaeology, 91, 31-57. Py, M., 1992. Meules d’époque protohistorique et romaine provenant de Lattes. Latvara, 5, 183-252. Py, M., 2009. Lattara, Lattes, Hérault. Comptoirgaulois méditerranéen entre Etrusques, Grecs et Romains. Paris. Quinnell, H., 2010. The prehistoric and Roman stonework. In A.M. Jones and S.R.Taylor Scarcewater, Pennance, Cornwall. Archaeological excavation of a Bronze Age and Roman landscape. BAR 516, 113-30.

Racob, F., 1993. Der Neufund einer roémischen Turbinenmihle in Tunisien. Antike Welt, 24, 2806-7. Rachewitz,S. de, 1994. Le macine a mano di Castel Tirolo. In S. de Rachewitz, L. Dal Ri, and C. Marzoli (eds) I/ Grano e le Macine. Bolzano, 131-6. Rackwitz, M., 2007. Travels to Terra Incognita. The Scottish Highlands and Hebrides in early modern travellers’ accounts. Munster. Rahtz, P., and Greenfield, E., 1977. Excavations at Chew Valley Lake, Somerset. London. Rahtz, P., and Meeson, R., 1992. An Anglo-Saxon watermill at Tamworth. CBA Research Report

83. Ramminger, B., 2008. Quern requirement and raw material supply in Linearbandkeramik settlements of the Morlener Bucht, NW Wetterau, Hesse. In Hamon and Graefe

2008, 33-44.

Ratcliffe-Densham, H.B.A., and Ratcliffe-Densham, M.M., 1961. An anomalous earthwork

of the late Bronze Age on Cock Hill. Sussex Archaeological Collections, 99, 78-101. Reille, J-L., 1995. La diffusion des meulesdansla vallée de l’Hérault l’é€poqueprotohistorique et Pidentification microtexturale des basalts. Documents d’Archéologie Méridionale, 18, 197-205. Reille, J-L., 1998. L’importation des meules en basalte dans le secteur de Martigues au deuxiéme age du Fer. Identification pétrographique des sources. Documents d’Archéologie Méridionale, 21, 237-44. 207

THE STONE OF LIFE Reille, J-L., 1999. Agde et le commerce des meules a grains en Gaule méditerranéenne a la fin de Page du Fer (Ile-Ier siécles av. n.é.). In R. Buxo and E. Pons (eds) Eds productes alimentaris d’origen vegetal at ewtat del Ferro de ‘Europa occidental : de la produccio al consum. Girona. Reille, J-L., 2000a. L’importation des meules 4 grains en Languedoc occidental au deuxeme age du Fer surles sites de Pech Maho(IIe s. avJ.-C). et du Cayla de Mailhac (Ve au Ile s. av J.C.) Documents d’Archéologie Méridionale, 23, 273-8. Reille, J-L., 2000b. L’origine et Pimportation des meules a grains dans un village de la Chora marseillaise aux Ile et ler s. av J.-C. (oppidum de la Cloche, Les Pennes-Mirabeau, B-du-Rh.) Documents d’Archéologie Méndionak, 23, 279-82.

Reille, J-L., 2000c. Détermination pétrographique de l’origine des meules du site d’Ambrussum a Villetelle, Hérault. Reome Archéologique Narbonne, 33, 381-6.

Reille, J-L., 2000d, L’apparition des meules rotatives en Languedoc Orientale (IVe s. avant J.-C.) d’aprés l’étude du site de Lattes. Gala, 57, 261-72.

Reille, J-L., 2001a. Lrorigine des meules a grains dans ’oppidum protohistorique de Montlaurés (Narbonne, Aude) du Vle au ler s. av. n.e. Documents d’Archéologe Mérdtonale, 24, 201-6. Reille, J-L., 2001b. L’importation des meules domestiques dans la forteresse grecque d’Olbia (Hyéres, Var) entre le Ile s. av. n. é. et le haut empire. Documents d’Archéologe Méndionake, 24, 207-11. Reille, J-L., 2002. Meules 4 grains de provenance septentrionale (Coirons, Massif Central) sur deux sites protohistoriques du Languedoc orientale: Le Marduel (IVe-Ier s.) et Nages (le-Ler s.). Documents d’Archéologie Méndionale, 25, 225-32. Reinach,S., 1893. Moulin a grain découvert a Saint-Charles. Budetin archéologique du comité des travaux

historiques et scientifiques, 149-50. Renzulli, A., Santi, P., Nappi, G., Luni, M., and Vitali, D., 2002. Provenance and trade of volcanic

rock millstones from Etruscan-Celtic and Roman archaeological sites in central Italy. Exuropean Journal of Mineralogy, 14, 175-83. Reynolds, PJ., 1995. Food of the prehistoric Celts. In J. Wilkins, D. Harvey and M. Dobson(eds) Food in Antiquity. Exeter. Richards, C., and Thomas,J., 1982. Ritual activity and structured deposits in later Neolithic Wessex. In R. Bradley andJ. Gardiner (eds) Neohthic studies. A review of some current research, Oxtord, 189-218. Ritchie, A., 1983. Excavation of a Neolithic farmstead at Knap of Howar, Papa Westray, Orkney. Proceedings of the Socety of Antiquanes of Scotland, 113, 40-121. Robinson, D.M., and Graham,J.W., 1938. Excavations at Olynthus. Part vut The Hellenic house. Baltimore. Roder,J., 1953. Zur Lavaindustrie von Mayen und Volvic (Auvergne). Germamia, 31, 24-7. Roder,J., and Réder, G., 1993. Die antike Turbinenmiihle in Chemtou. In F. Racob (ed.) Szztthus, Band 1. Die Steinebriicke und die antike Stadt. Mainz, 95-102.

Roe, F, 2009. Corn grinding in southern England: what can quernstell us? In K. Brophy and G. Barclay (eds) Defining a regionalNeolithic: the evidencefrom Britain and Ireland. Oxtord, 26-34. Rogeret, I., 1997. Carte archéologique de la Gaule 76. La Seene-Mantime. Paris.

Rolleston, TW, 1910. The high deeds of Finn and other bardic romances of ancient Ireland. London Ross, A., 1968. Shafts, pits, wells — sanctuaries of the Belgic Britons? In J.M. Coles and D.D.A.

Simpson (eds) Studies in Ancient Europe. Essays presented to Stuart Piggott. Leicester, 255-85. Ross,J.M., 2004. Phytoliths froma Norse Greenlandic quern stone: a preliminaryinvestigation. EnvironmentalArchaeology, 9, 99-106. 208

BIBLIOGRAPHY Ross, L., 1843. Rezsen auf den griecheschen Inseln des agaischen Meeres. Bd 2, Stuttgart. Rostovtzeff, M., 1937. Two Homeric bowls in the Louvre. American Journal of Archaeology,

41, 86-96. Runnels, C.N., 1981.4 diachronic study and economic analysis of millstonesfrom the Argolid, Greece. PhD thesis Indiana University. Runnels, C., 1990. Rotary querns in Greece. Journal of Roman Archaeology, 3, 147-54. Rudge, E.A., 1964. The maker of querns. Essex Countryside, 13.1, 26-8. Rudge, E.A., 1968. Interim report on the distribution of the puddingstone quern. Transactions of the Essex Archaeological Society, 1, 247-9. Russell, R.V. and Lal, R.B.H., 1995. The tribes and castes of the centralprovinces of India. London.

samuel, D., 2000. Brewing and Baking, In P.T. Nicholson and I. Shaw(eds) Ancient Egyptian materials and technology. Cambridge, 537-76. samuel, D., 2009. Experimental grinding and ancient Egyptian flour production. In S. Ikram and A. Dodson (eds) Beyond the horizon: studies in Egyptian Art, Archaeology and History in honour of Barry ]. Kemp. Cairo, 456-77. Sass, B., 2004. Tools, personal objects, figurative art and varia. In Ussishkin 2004, Vol 4,

chapter 28.

Schioler., T., 1989. The watermills at the Crocodile river: a turbine mill dated to 345-380

A.D. Palestine Exploration Quarterly, 121, 133-43. Schiodler, T., 2007. An old archaeological problem butstill not solved. http://kattler.dk/

Schioler., T., and Wikander, O., 1983, A Roman watermill in the baths of Caracalla. Opuscula Romana, 14, 47-64.

Schmidt, E.F., 1931. Anatolia through the ages: discoveries at Alishar mound 1927-1929. Chicago. Schmidt, E.F., 1933. The Alshar Hiiyiik seasons of 1928 and 1929. Chicago. Schon, W. and Holter, U., 1988. Zum Gebrauch von Reib- und Mahlsteinen in der Ostsahara. Archdologische Informationen, 11, 156-60. Schon, W. and Holter, U., 1990. Grinding implements from the Neolithic and recent times

in desert areas in Egypt and Sudan. Beitrage zur Allgemeinen und Vergleichenden Archaologie, 9-10, 359-79. Schroth, A.B., 1996. An ethnographic review of grinding, pounding, pulverising and smoothing with stones. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly, 32, 55-75. Schultz, P.N., 1957. Istoriya ¢ arkheologiya drevnego Krima. Kiev. Scott Garrett, C., 1938. Chesters Roman villa, Woolaston. Archaeologia Cambrensis., 93, 93-

125. Seager Smith, R., 2000. Worked stone. In A.J. Lawson Potterne 1982-5. Animal husbandryin later Prehistoric Wiltshire. Salisbury. Seager Thomas, M., 1999. Stone finds in context. A contribution to the studyof later

prehistoric artefact assemblages. Sussex Archaeological Collections, 137, 39-48. Sealey, P.R., 2009. New light on the wine trade with Julio-Claudian Britain. Britannia, 40, 1-40. Searcy, M.T., 2005. Mayan metate ethnoarchaeology. MA thesis Brigham Young University. Searcy, M.T., 2011. The “ife-giving stone. Ethnoarchaeology of Maya metates. Tacson. Sebesta, G., 1977. La via dei mulini. Dallesperienza della mietitura all’arte di macinare. S. Michele

all’Adige. Segal, I., 2006. Chemical study of basaltic hopper-rubber (Olynthus) mills from Nahal Tut and ‘En Hofez. Avgot, 52, 197-200. 209

THE STONE OF LIFE Seifert, M., 2004. Die spatbronzezeitlichen Ufersiedlungen von Zug-Sumpf. Band 3/1 Die Funde der Grabungen 1923-37. Lug. Serneels, V., 1994. Analyse pétrographique. In D. Castella Le mouln hydraulique Gallo-romain d’Avenches Tn Chaphx’Fouilles 1990-1991. Cahiers d’archéologie romande 62. Lausanne. Shaffrey, R., 2003. Rotary querns from the Society of Antiquaries’ excavationsat Silchester, 18901909. Brtanma, 34, 143-74. Shaffrey, R., 2006. Grinding and milling. A study of Romano-British rotary querns and millstones madefrom Old Red Sandstone. BAR 409, Oxford.

Shaffrey, R., 2010. The workedstone. In P. Andrews, E. Biddulph, and A. Hardy Setting the Ebbsfieet Valey. CTRL excavations at Springhead and Northfleet, Kent — the late Iron Age, Roman, Saxon and medieval landscape. Volume 2 Late Iron Age and Romanfinds reports. Oxford.

Shaffrey, R., 2011.The querns. In A. Boyle and R. Early, Excavations at Springhead Roman town, Southfleet, Kent. OAU Occasional Paper Number1. Oxford.

Shaffrey, R., and Roe, F, 2011. The widening use of Lodsworth stone: Neolithic to RomanoBritish quern distribution. In Williams and Peacock 2011, 309-24.

Sharples, N., 2010. Soczal relations in laterprehistory: Wessex in thefirst millennium BC. Oxford. Shennan,S., 1995. Bronze Age copperproducers of the Eastern Alps: Excavations at St. Veit-Klnglbers. Bonn. Sheridan, A., 2010. Neolithic Britain and Ireland: are we nearly there? Antiquity, 84, 884-9. Sievers, S., 1984. Dze Keinfunde der Heuneburg. Heuneburgstudien V. Mainz. Simpson, G., 1976. Watermills and mihtary works on Hadnan’s Wall. Kendal.

Smerdel, I., 2006. Les pierres, les hommeset les beeufs. In Belmont and Mangartz 2006, 115-27. Smith, N.A.F,, 1983. The origins of water power: a problem of evidence and expectations. Transactions of the Newcomen Society, 55, 67-84. Soper, R.C., 1966. Cup marks and grinding grooves. Axania, 1, 155. Spain, R., No date. A possible Roman tide mill. www. (accessed July 2012). Spain, R.J., 1984. Romano-British watermills. Archaeologia Cantiana, 100, 101-28.

Spain, R.J., 1987. The Roman watermill in the Athenian Agora: A new view of the evidence. Hesperia, 56, 335-53. Spain, R.J., 2008. Thepower andperformance of Roman watermills. BAR, 1786. Sparey-Green, C., 1987. Excavations at Poundbury, Dorchester, Dorset 1966-1982. Dorset Natural History and Archaeological Society Monograph,7. Sposito, A., 2007. Le macine nell’Antichita. In A. Sposito (ed.) Tecnologia antica. Palermo, 193220. Stanciu,I., 1992. Descoperiri din a doua jumatate a mileniului i I.H. si mileniul i DH.in Judetul Maramures. Ephemens Napocensts, 2, 169-91. Staubitz, H-J., 2007. Dze Miblsteine des spatkeltischen Heidetrank-Oppidums im Taunus. Univesitat Marburg Kleine Schriften 56. Stead, I.M., 1976. Excavations at Winterton Roman villa and other Roman sites in North Lincolnshire,

1958-1967. London. Stead, I.M., 1980. Rudston Roman villa. Leeds.

Steensberg, A., 1952. Bondehuser og vandmoller 1 Danmark gennem 2000 ar. Copenhagen. Steensberg, A., 1978. The horizontal mill. A contribution to its early history. Prace 7 material museum archeologicxnego 1 etnograficznego w Lodz. Serta Archeologiczna 25, 345-506. Stevenson,J., 2012. Swords, settlement and sacred places: The archaeology of Brisley Farm, Ashford, Kent. Archaeology International, 15, 87-98.

210

BIBLIOGRAPHY Stipcevi¢, A., 1977. The Idynans. History and culture. Park Ridge, NJ. Stone, D., and Balser, C., 1957. Grinding stones and mullers of Costa Rica. Journal de la Société des Ameéricanistes, 46, 165-80. Storck, J., and Teague, W.D., 1952. Flourfor man’s bread. St Paul and London.

Takaoglu, T., 2005. Coskuntepe: An early Neolithic quern production site in NWTurkey. Journal of Field Archaeology, 30, 419-33. Takaoglu, T., 2008. Archaeological evidence for grain mills in the Greek and Roman Troad. In E. Schwertheim (Festschrift) om Euphrat bis zum Bosporos. Kleinasien in der Antike. (Asia Minor Studien 65). Bonn, 673-9. Tepper, Y., 2007. Tamra. Final report. Hadashot Arkheologiyot, 119. Thomas, H.H., 1931. Niedermendig lava. In M.E. Cunnington. The ‘sanctuary’ on

Overton Hill near Avebury. Wa/tshire ArchaeologicalMagazine, 45,332. Thomas, J.S., 1991. Rethinking the Neolithic. Cambridge. Thomas,J.S., 1999. Understanding the Neolithic. London and NewYork. Tolley, C., 1995. The mill in Norse and Finnish mythology. Saga Book, 24, 63-82. Tolley, C., 2008. Grottasongr. The song of Grotti. Viking Society for Northern Research, London. Tomalin, D.J., 1987. Roman Wight. Isle of Wight. Tomber, R., Forthcoming. Household production and the long-distance trade of ceramics:

a case study from the Indian Ocean. Papergiven at American Institute of Archaeology, Philadephia 2012. Troitzsch, U., and Weber, W., 1996. Die Technik. Von den Anfangen bis zur Gegenwart. Remseck. Turney, C.S.M., and Brown, H., 2007. Catastrophic early Holocene sea level rise, human migration and the Neolithic transition in Europe. Ouaternary Science Review, 26,

2036-41.

Ussishkin, D., 2004. The renewed archaeological excavations at Lachish (1973-1994). Tel Aviv. Valla, F., Khalaily, H., Samuelian, N., Bocquentin, E., Delage, C, Valentin, B., Plisson, H., Rabinovich, R., and Belfer-Cohen, A., 1999. Le Natufien final et les nouvelles

foulilles a Mallaha (Eynan), Israel, 1996-1997. Journal of the Israel Prehistoric Society, 28, 105-76. Vaughan Williams, R., and Lloyd, A.L., (eds) 1959. The Pengiun Book of English Folk Songs, London. Veiga de Oliveira, E., Galhano, F., and Pereira, B., 1983. Sistemas de Moagem. Lisbon. Verbaas, A., and van Gijn, A., 2007. Querns and other hand stone tools from Geleen-

Jankampfeld. In P. van der Velde Excavations at Geleen-Jankampfeld 1990/1991. Anatlecta Praehistorica Leidensia, 39, 191-204.

Veth, P., Fullagar, R., and Gould, R., 1997. Residue and use-wear analysis of grinding implements from Puntutjarpa Rockshelter in the Western Desert: Current and proposed research Australian Archaeology, 44, 23-5. Vidal, M., 1986. Note préliminaire sur les puits et fosses funéraires du Toulousain aux II‘ et I‘ siecles av. J.-C. Revue Aquitania, 4, 55-63. Volpert, H.P., 1997. Die romische Wassermiihle einer villa rustica in Mtinchen-Perlach. Bayerische Vorgeschichtsblatter, 62, 243-78. 211

THE STONE OF LIFE Vos, M. de, Attoui, R., and Andreoli, M., 2011. Hand and ‘donkey’ mills in North African

farms. In Williams and Peacock 2011, 131-50. Wainwright, G. J., 1979. Gussage AH Saints: an Iron Age settlement in Dorset. London. Waldhauser,J., 1981. Keltské rotaéni mlyny v Cechach. Pamdtky Archeologické, 72, 153-221. Watts, M., 2002. The archaeology of mills and milling. Stroud. Watts, S., 2011. The function of querns. In Williams and Peacock 2011, 341-8.

Webb Hodge, F., 1912. Handbook of American Indians north of Mexico. Washington. Webbe Dasent, G., 1969. Popular talesfrom the Norse. London. Weffers, S., 2009. Neue Muhlen aus em Osten: ‘Olynthische Muhlen’ auch in Thuringen

und Bayern. In Bettrdge zur Hallstatt- und Laténexeit in Nordostbayern und Thiringen. Naturhistorische Gesellschaft Nurnberg e.V. Abteilung fir Vorgeschichte. Bettrage zur Vorgeschichte Nordostbayerns, 7, 149-58.

Wefers, S., 2011. Still using your saddle quern? A compilation of the oldest known rotary querns in Western Europe. In Williams and Peacock 2011, 67-76.

Wefers, S., 2012. Latéenezeithche Mihlen aus dem Gebiet zwischen Steinbruchrivieren Mayen und Lovosice. Mainz. Wefers, S., and Gluhak, T., 2010. Eifel lava — the provenance of two Late Iron Age

rotary querns discovered in Bohemia. Archeologické Roxhledy, 62, 3-16.

Welfare, A.T., 1985. The milling-stones. In P.T. Bidwell The Roman fort of Vindolanda at Chesterholm, Northumberland, London, 154-64. Wendorf, F., and Schild, R., 1976. Prehistory of the Nile Valley. New York.

Whitaker, J.S., 1921. Motya, a Phoenician colony in Sicily. London. White, D., 1963. A survey of millstones from Morgantina. American Journal of Archaeology, 67, 199-206. Whittle, A., Healy, F., and Bayliss, A., 2011. Gathering Time: dating the early Neolithic enclosures of Southern Britain and Ireland. Oxford. Wiegand, T., and Schrader, H., 1904. Priene: Ergebnisse derAusgrabungen und Untersuchungen in den Jahren 1895-1898. Berlin. Wikander, O., 1980. Vattenméllor och millare i det romerska riket. Lund. Wikander, O., 1981. Watermills in ancient Rome. Opuscula Romana, 12, 13-34.

Wikander, O., 1985. Archaeological evidence for early watermills — an interim report. History of Technology, 10, 151-79. Wikander, O., 2000. The watermill. In O. Wikander (ed.) Handbook of ancient water technology. Leiden. Williams, D., and Peacock, D., (eds) 2011. Breadfor the people: the archaeology of mills and milling. Oxford. Williams, D., and Peacock, D., 2011. A note on Pompeian-style mills in Britain. In Williams and Peacock 2011, 117-22.

Williams-Thorpe, O., 1988. Provenancing and archaeology of Roman millstones from the Mediterranean area. Journal of Archaeological Science, 15, 253-305. Wailliams-Thorpe, O., and Thorpe, R.S., 1988. The provenance of donkey mills from

RomanBritain. Archaeometry, 30, 253-305. 212

BIBLIOGRAPHY Williams-Thorpe, O., and Thorpe, R.S., 1989. Provenancing and archaeology of Roman

millstones from Sardinia (Italy). Oxford Journal of Archaeology, 8, 89-113. Williams-Thorpe, O., and Thorpe, R.S., 1990. Millstone provenancing used in tracing the route of a fourth-century BC Greek merchant ship. Archaeometry, 32, 11537, Williams-Thorpe, O., Thorpe, R.S., Elliott, C., and Xenophontos,C., 1991. Archaeology, geochemistry, and trade of igneous rock millstones in Cyprus during the late Bronze Age to Roman periods. Geoarchaeology, 6, 27-60. Williams-Thorpe, O., and Thorpe, R.S., 1993. Geochemistry and trade of Eastern Mediterranean

millstones from the Neolithic to Roman periods. Journal of Archaeological Science, 20, 263320. Wilmott, T., and Rahtz, S.P.Q., 1985. An Iron Age and Roman settlement outside Kenchester

(Magnis) Hereforshire. Excavations 1977-1979. Trans. Woolbope Naturalists Field Club, 45, 36-185. Wilson, A., 1995. Water-power in North Africa and the development of the horizontal water-

wheel. Journal of Roman Archaeology, 8, 499-510. Wilson, A.I., 2001. The watermills on the Janiculum. Memoirs of the American Academyin Rome, 45, 219-46. Wilson, A., 2002. Power and the ancient economy. Journal of Roman Studies, 92, 1-32. Woodward, P.J., Davies, S.M., and Graham, A.H., 1993. Excavations at the old Methodist Chapel and Greyhound Yard, Dorchester, 1981-1984. Dorset Natural History and

Archaeological Society Monograph, 12. Wright, K., 1992. A classification system for ground stone tools from the Prehistoric Levant. Pakorent, 18, 53-81.

Wright, M.E., 1988. Beehive quern manufacture in the south-east Pennines. Scottish Archaeological Review, 5, 65-77. Wuerpel, C.E., 1974. The Algarve, province of Portugal: Europe’s south-west corner. Newton Abbott. Zachrisson, T., 2004. The holiness of Helgo. In H. Clarke and K. Lamm (eds) Exotic and sacralfindsfrom Helgé. Excavations at Helgd XV. Stockholm, 143-75. Zimmer, G., 1982. Rémische Berufsdarstellungen. Berlin. Zimmerman, A., 1988. Steine. In U. Boelicke, D. von Brandt, J. Luning, P. Stehli, and A.

Zimmerman (eds) Die Bandkeramische Seidlungsplatz Langweiler 8, Gemeide Aldhoven, Kreis Diiren. Rheinische Ausgrabungen, 18, 569-785. Zingboym, O., and Avshalom-Gorni, D., 2009. Fakhura. Preliminary report. Hadashot Arkheologiyot, 121. Zirkl, F., 1955. Zur Herkunft einiger laténezeitlicher Handmuhlen. Archaeologia Austriaca, 18,

90-2. Zirkl, E., 1963. Uber die Herkunft eines romischen Muhlsteins vom Magdalensburg in Karnten. Carinthia, 153, 287-90.

Zvelebil, M., 1994. Plant use in the Mesolithic and its role in the transition to farming, Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, 60, 35-74.

213

GENERAL INDEX A acorns 31, 120, 130, 189, 190, 204 Aegean vil-vil, 15-16, 20-1, 46-7, 50, 70 Agde 154-7, 208 Albania 55, 158, 199 All Cannings Cross 36-7 Alorda Park viii, 70, 198 animal mills x, 80, 116, 129

Apulia 48, 158, 203 army, Roman

72, 153-4

arubah type 103 Avenches 1x, 102, 108, 110, 157, 195, 210 Avlaki, Nisyros vit, 47, 49

B bakeries vu, 43, 77, 79-80, 91, 97, 117, 154 Ballochmyle 33-4 Barbegal 109-10, 157, 203 beehive querns 60-1, 74, 195, 201

Belgium vu, 15, 152 Bibracte

68, 157, 195

Bois-des-Hogues, Normandy 56, 159 Bonn

199-200, 210-11

bran 120, 123-7, 129-30 bread xiii-xiv, 1-2, 19, 21, 26, 30, 37, 54, 120, 123, 126, 168, 170, 172-3, 190, 193, 211, 213 bread wheat x, 120-1, 190 Bronze Age v, xl, 26, 28, 30-1, 35, 37, 152, 158, 175 C Carthage vii, 44, 55, 57-8, 80, 89, 205 catillus ii,vii, 77, 80, 83, 92, 94-6 Celtic quern 66, 72, 141 chaine opératotre vi, x, 10, 133, 141, 179

Chemtou ix, 102-4, 201 Citania de Briteiros vi, 72-3 Coirons

155-6, 208

Conimbriga 72 cosmic mill 164, 166 cross-marked querns x1, 170, 195 Cucuteni culture vii, 20

cup marks 31, 34, 210 214

INDEX Czech Republic x,xiii, xv, 48, 50, 52, 58, 145, 149, 151-2 D Dacian querns Danebury

viti, 70

54, 56-7, 149, 161, 176, 196

Dafur 9 dehusking vi, 125-6, 130 Delos vu, 1x, 38, 40, 71, 96-7 dished querns 14-15, 17-19, 23, 28, 30, 126 donkey mills ix, 77, 84, 91, 212-13 drilling =x, x1, 3, 142, 183 Dunadd_

x1, 169-70, 195

E Egypt vii, xi-xu, 1, 25, 39, 46, 48, 50, 71, 97, 171, 194, 209 Etna 46-8, 157-8 F Fakhura 39-40, 43, 46, 213 Fishbourne 114, 118, 196 flat mills

111,117

flat querns

14, 17, 28, 30, 60

flat watermill stones

ix, 112

floating mills vi, 111 flour xiti, 1-2, 10-11, 16, 19, 21, 28, 30, 37-8, 50, 54, 79, 85, 98, 102, 105-6, 114, 118, 12230, 162 modern

124, 129

stone-ground white

1,191

2,125

flour catcher ix, 80, 85

Folkestone viii, 63-5, 73, 132, 135, 139, 141, 202, 206 forts, Roman 46, 48, 97, 118, 153, 196 France viii, xi, xv, 1, 41, 65, 68-9, 72, 88, 104, 152, 154, 159, 161, 193, 197, 199, 203, 205-6 frumenty 30, 122 G Gamla vit, 39-40, 43-4, 94 germ, wheat 1, 123-5 gods, chthonic 173,177 Greece 46, 50, 54-5, 71, 88, 97, 209 rotary querns of 209 grinding rocks vii, 32 Gurukperu 31-2 215

THE STONE OF LIFE H

Hagendorn 107-9, 198 Haltwhistle Burn 108, 110 hammer-stones

36-7

hand-stones vii, 3, 7, 12, 14, 18, 20, 27-8, 37, 126-7135, 172, 184, 194 Hérault 91, 155, 157, 197, 207-8 Highland quern vit, 74, 76 hill-forts 54 56-7

horizontal mill (Curwen) 100 horizontally-wheeled mill tx, 98-100, 102, 104, 111 Hunsbury viii, 59-60, 63, 65, 69, 207 I Iberian quern vil, 38, 70 Ickham, Kent ix, 105, 107-12, 118

Illyria 55, 211

Indian grinding rock vu, xvi, 31, 32

Inductively coupled plasma spectroscopy (ICPS) 187 Ireland xi, 8, 18, 32, 65-6, 69, 167, 169-70, 195-6, 209 iron tools

54, 58

Israel 16-17, 34-5, 39, 46-7, 80, 92, 94, 122, 145, 190, 193, 206, 211 Italy vii-viti, 1, 8, 16, 38, 56, 66, 72, 83, 192, 205-6, 213

J Janiculum 109, 111, 193, 213 Johnson, Dr 76, 129,

K Kent ix, xi, 63, 65, 105, 135, 139, 154, 161, 169, 194, 210-11 L Langweiler vu, 20 Lattes xi, 41, 43, 45, 55, 66, 68, 155-6, 207-8 LBK 19-21, 173-4 Levant 17, 50, 88, 92, 95, 103 lever mills 43, 45, 176 lightening tree 4 Linearbankeramik 16, 19, 130, 173-4, 202, 207 Lodsworth viii, x, 4, 63-5, 73, 132, 135-7, 149, 150, 206 Lodsworth quarries, discovery of 135-6 Lower Greensand vin, 4, 63-5, 132,185

216

INDEX M magic querns 165 Maiden Castle

xi, 148, 174-5

Mandraki, Nisyros viti, 48-9 mano 7, 10, 134, 147-8, 205 Martigues vit, xi, 44-5, 155-6, 195, 208 Massif Central

154-7, 208

Matera, Italy vu, 8 Mayen x, 10, 36, 72, 131, 145, 151-3, 156, 187, 188, 196, 200, 209 Mesolithic

xii, 17, 19, 214

metate xii, 1, 3,7, 10, 11, 12, 52, 134, 147, 148, 193, 205, 210 metatero

134, 147

Millstone Grit viii, xi, 33, 63-5, 110, 149, 168-9, 186 millstone, definition of 3 millstone quarries xiii, 88, 133, 193, 198 post-medieval 135

millstones vi, xi, xiv, 1-2, 38, 47, 56, 77, 86, 100, 110, 114, 117, 132, 140, 157, 161-4, 167-9 191-2, 209-10 Modestus, bakery of, Pompeii viii, 78, 81, 169 Mons Porphyrites, Egypt 46, 48, 97, 206 Montlaurés xi, 155 Moravia

7, 52, 57-8, 68

Morgantina ix, 45,55, 71, 80, 82, 90-2, 128, 212 Morocco 1x-x, 88, 94, 133

Motya, Sicily 55, 90-2, 201, 212 Mulareia, Sardinia ix, 82-4, 88, 89, 90, 92, 157 Munchen-Perlach

107-11, 212

N Neolithic diet

19

Neolithic querns vy, vii, 13, 18, 20-1, 24-6, 28, 174, 199 exchange of v, 23 Newstead x, 153-4, 173, 176, 196 Nisyros viii, 46-8, 91 unfinished mills on viii, 49 nomads 9-10, 147 North Africa

85, 88, 91, 103, 158, 213

Nuraghic querns vii, 28-9 O Old Red Sandstone vii, xiii, 24, 64-5, 72, 118, 132, 149 Olynthus mills v, vit-viti, x1, 3-4, 38-9, 41, 43, 45, 47-9, 51-3, 55, 57, 71, 86, 90-1, 127, 156, 158, 182-4, 198 barbarised viii, 50-1

217

9

THE STONE OF LIFE

Orvieto ix, 48, 56, 86-9, 92, 157, 192, 206 oscillating motion, viii, 4, 38-9, 43-4, 55 Ostia ix, 77, 80, 83-5, 117-8 P Pantelleria 48, 90-2, 157 Paris basin 19-20, 22-4, 26, 174

peddling 146-7 Pen Pits viii, 63-5, 132, 135, 140, 207 phytoliths 16, 126, 189-90, 207, 209 Pliny 56, 86, 91 Pompeian mills v, 61, 77, 85-6, 88, 91-2, 157, 183 miniature x1, 169,171 unfinished ix, 87 in France 201

Pompeii viii, 72, 77-8, 80-1, 83, 85-6, 93, 117-18, 158, 169, 195, 205-6 pot querns 60 Potterne 36,37 pounders vu, 2, 8, 12-13, 36, 127

power mills 3, 6, 99, 101, 103, 105, 107, 109, 111, 113, 115, 117, 119 production technology 131-2, 179 puddingstone vii, 56, 59, 131, 158-9, 161, 203, 209 French xi, 57, 63, 159, 161, 186 Hertfordshire viii, xi, 63-4, 73, 144, 158, 183, Worms Heath xi, 63, 135, 137, 161, 186, 199

Q Qasr Ibn Wardan,Syria ix, 93, 95 quarrying vi, 47, 86, 131, 134-5, 137, 151 quern quarries

x, xii, 4, 136-7, 140, 161, 196

Quseir al-Qadim, Egypt 46, 50, 71, 204-5 R reflectance transformation imaging xvi, 184, 197 ring mills v, 1x, 92, 94-7 rock mortars v, 7,9, 11, 13, 15, 17, 19, 21, 23, 25, 27, 29, 31, 33, 35, 37 Roman millstones x-xi, 117, 168, 192, 199, 206, 213 Roman querns_ v, 72, 74, 105, 161

late 72,74 Roman watermills vi, 102, 104-5, 111, 194, 206, 210 Romania

vii-viii, xii, xv, 7, 20-3, 52, 70, 200

Rome xiii, 77, 79, 91, 102, 109, 111, 113, 193, 202 rynd 3, 4, 62, 66, 70, 72, 110, 117, 118, 126, 153

218

INDEX S saddle querns classification vii, 14, 15 northern Dafur 9 Sardinia vii, ix, xv, 28-9, 55, 83-4, 88, 90-2, 97, 157, 213 sarsen 23-4, 158,185

Scotland x-xi, 18, 28, 33, 60, 65-6, 69, 154, 170 segmented mills ix, 96-7 Shetland 4

Sicily xv, 41, 46, 48, 56, 71, 80, 86, 88, 90-3, 158 Spilsby Sandstone viii, 64-5 St Thibéry 155-6 starch

123, 126, 190

surface textures vi, 130, 184

Sussex viii, 4, 59-60, 63, 65, 69, 135 Sussex style quern 4, 57, 60, 127

symbolism vi, 1, 146, 162-3, 165, 167, 171, 173, 175, 177, 207 Syria 1x, xi, 17, 88, 92-3, 171, 206 T tentering 4, 62, 74, 85, 110

tide mills vi, 111 to-and-fro motion 12, 17, 21, 38, 41 trachyandesites 156-7 Inncum x, xi, 120, 121, 123, 124, 125, 189, 190 trough querns 14, 16 turbine ix, 98, 102-3, 207, 209 TRB (funnel beaker) 20 Turkey vii, 21, 23, 25, 41, 88, 92, 167, 204, 207, 211

U Ukraine vili, 19, 21, 43, 50, 52, 71, 122 Unfinished mills ix, 48, 87

Vv vertical mill (Curwen) 100 vertical wheels ix, 100-1, 106

Vitruvian mill ix, 100, 105, 106, 113 Vitruvius ix, 100, 102, 104-6, 110, 113, 193 Volubilis ix, 94-5, 192 Volvic 156-7, 209 219

THE STONE OF LIFE

W watermills vi, ix, xii, 8, 76-7, 80, 98, 100, 102, 105, 110-14, 117-18, 129, 156-7, 166, 192,194, 210, 212-13 waterwheels

100, 102, 109, 113

wells 9,173, 176-7, 209 Wessex viii, 23, 56-7, 59-60, 63, 65, 132, 136-7, 152, 173, 208, 210 Wharncliffe Crags x, 137, 139 wheel, horizontal 102, 105-6 Winchester xi, xv, xvi, 29, 337 7, 168, 175, 184-5, 198, 200 windmills 98, 194 >

X X-ray fluorescence (XRF)

188

220