Etwas tierisch: the chaîne opératoire and animal studies
László Bartosiewicz
Osteoarchaeological Research Laboratory, Department of Archaeology and Classical Studies, Stockholm University, SE-106 91 Stockholm, Sweden; E-mail: laszlo.bartosiewicz@ofl.su.se; ORCiD: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1588-4406
Cite as: Bartosiewicz, L. (2023). Etwas tierisch: the chaîne opératoire and animal studies. In A. Király (Ed.), From tea leaves to leaf-shaped tools. Studies in honour of Zsolt Mester on his sixtieth birthday (pp. 49–63). Lithic Research Roundtable & Institute of Archaeological Sciences, ELTE Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary. https://doi.org/10.23898/litikumsi02a02
Abstract: The concept of chaîne opératoire has provided a framework for interpreting lithic technologies. How is it being used in archaeozoology? Consuming animals is at the end of a series of tasks that follow a sequence: some steps in carcass processing cannot precede others. This lies at the core of the chaîne opératoire approach. Discrepancies in epistemological and linguistic communication, however, have impeded the adaptation of the chaîne opératoire approach to animal studies, although technological analysis, experimentation, and social anthropology provide excellent tools for the interpretation of animal remains. This paper is a review of similarities and differences between reconstructing production sequences for stone artefacts and animals. It is a summary of the potentials and limitations of using the chaîne opératoire concept on various levels in animal studies.
Keywords: Archaeozoology, Taphonomy, Butchery, Bone manufacturing, Animal studies
Grateful thanks are to Attila Király for the invitation to this volume and his editorial corrections in and thought-provoking comments on the original version of this manuscript. I am also indebted to Anna Biller, who took and supplied the photograph shown in Fig. 3.
Data availability statement: Data sharing does not apply to this article as no new data were created or analyzed in this study.
Disclosure statement: No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
Funding statement: The author received no financial support for the research and/or the publication of this article.
Copyright: This is an open access article distributed under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike International Public License (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). You are free to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format, and transform the material, under the following terms: You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may not use the material for commercial purposes. If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.
Literature cited
Armstrong Oma, K. (2010). Between trust and domination: social contracts between humans and animals. World Archaeology, 42(2), 175–187. https://doi.org/10.1080/00438241003672724
Ascher, R. (1961). Analogy in Archaeological Interpretation. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology, 17(4), 317–325. https://doi.org/10.1086/soutjanth.17.4.3628943
Averbouh, A. (2001). Le concept de chaîne opératoire appliqué au travail des matières premières osseuses. Cahier des thèmes transversaux ArScAn CNRS, 2001, 91–93.
Audoin-Rouzeau, F. (1987). Medieval and early modern butchery: evidence from the monastery of La Charite-Sur-Loire (Nievre). Food and Foodways, 2, 31–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/07409710.1987.9961903
Audouze, F., & Karlin, C. (2017). La chaîne opératoire a 70 ans: qu’en ont fait les préhistoriens français (70 years of Chaîne opératoire: What French prehistorians have done with it). In Y. A. Gómez Coutouly (Ed.), La notion de “chaîne opératoire” dans le monde: 50 ans d’études technologiques en préhistoire. Journal of Lithic Studies, 4(2), 5–73. https://doi.org/10.2218/jls.v4i2.2539
Bar Yosef, O., Vandermeersch, B., Arensburg, B., BelferCohen, A., Goldberg, P., Laville, H., Meignen, L., Rak, Y., Speth, J. D., Tchernov, E., Tillier, A-M., & Weiner, S. 1992. The Excavations in Kebara Cave, Mt. Carmel. Current Anthropology, 33(5), 497–550. https://doi.org/10.1086/204112
Bartosiewicz, L. (1988). Biometrics at an Early Medieval butchering site in Hungary. In E. A. Slater, & J. O. Tate (Eds.), Science and Archaeology (pp. 361–367). Archaeopress.
Bartosiewicz, L. (1997). This little piggy went to market… An archaeozoological study of modern meat values. Journal of European Archaeology, 5(1), 170–182. https://doi.org/10.1179/096576697800703610
Bartosiewicz, L. (2001). Archaeozoology or zooarchaeology? A problem from the last century. Archaeologia Polona, 39, 75–86.
Bartosiewicz, L. (2006). Mettre le chariot devant le boeuf: Anomalies ostéologiques liées à l‘utilisation des boeuf pour la traction. In P. Pétrequin, R.-M. Arbogast, A.-M.- Péterquin, S. Van Willigen, & M. Bailly (Eds.), Premiers chariots, premiers araires : La diffusion de la traction animale en Europe pendant les IVe et IIIe millénaires avant notre ère (pp. 259–267). CNRS Editions.
Bartosiewicz, L. (2009). Skin and Bones: Taphonomy of a Medieval Tannery in Hungary. Journal of Taphonomy, 7(2–3), 95–111.
Bartosiewicz, L. (2012). Show me your hawk, I’ll tell you who you are. In D. C. M. Raemaekers, E. Esser, R. C. G. M. Lauwerier, & J.T. Zeiler (Eds), A Bouquet of Archaeozoological Studies, Essays in honour of Wietske Prummel (pp. 181–190). Bakhuis & University of Groningen Library. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt227285m.20
Bartosiewicz, L. (2021). Herding cats. Current Swedish Archaeology, 29, 56–71. https://doi.org/10.37718/CSA.2021.07
Bartosiewicz, L., & Choyke, A. M. (1994). Taxonomie und Typologie der Knochenartefakte von St. Blaise. In M. Kokabi, & J. Wahl (Eds.), Beiträge zur Archäozoologie und Prähistorischen Anthropologie (pp. 263–268). Landesdenkmalamt Baden-Württemberg, Theiss Verlag.
Bartosiewicz, L., Mérai, D., & Csippán, P. (2011). Dig up-Dig in: Practice and Theory in Hungarian Archaeology. In L. R. Lozny (Ed.), Comparative Archaeologies: A Sociological View of the Science of the Past (pp. 273–337). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-8225-4_11
Berranger, M., & Fluzin, P. (2007). Organisation de la chaîne opératoire en métallurgie du fer aux iie-iersiècle av. J.-C.,sur l’oppidum d’Entremont (Aix-en-Provence, Bouches-du-Rhône): la circulation du metal. Archeosciences, 31, 7–22. https://doi.org/10.4000/archeosciences.547
Binford, L. R. (1978). Nunamiut Ethnoarchaeology. Academic Press Inc.
Binford, L. R. (1981). Bones: Ancient Men and Modern Myths. Academic Press Inc.
Binford, L. R. and Bertram, J. B. (1977). Bone frequencies and attritional processes. In L. R. Binford (Ed.), For Theory Building in Archaeology (pp. 77–153). Academic Press Inc.
Birke, L., Bryld, M., & Lykke, N. (2004). Animal performances: an exploration of intersections between feminist science studies and studies of human/animal relationship. Feminist Theory, 5(2), 167–183. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464700104045406
Boisvert, M.-È. (2018). Méthodologie appliquée aux déchets de fabrication en os. Canadian Journal of Archaeology, 42(2), 210–239. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48583380
Broderick, L. G. (2017). Social Taphonomy: Agency, Biography and Chaîne Opératoire of Cattle Bones in a Mediaeval European City (PhD thesis). University of York.
Burkert, W. (1972). Homo Necans: Interpretationen altgriechischer Opferriten und Mythen. Walter de Gruyter.
Choyke, A. M. (1997). The Bone Tool Manufacturing Continuum. Anthropozoologica, 25/26, 65–72.
Choyke, A. M. (1998). Bronze Age red deer: case studies from the Great Hungarian Plain. In P. Anreiter, L. Bartosiewicz, E. Jerem, & W. Meid (Eds), Man and the Animal World. Studies in memoriam Sándor Bökönyi (pp. 157–178). Archaeolingua Kiadó.
Choyke, A. M. (2010). The Bone is the Beast: Animal Amulets and Ornaments in Power and Magic. In D. Campana, P. Crabtree, S. D. deFrance, J. Lev Tov, & A. M. Choyke (Eds.), Anthropological approaches to zooarchaeology: complexity, colonialism, and animal transformations (pp. 197–209). Oxbow Books.
Csippán, P. (2010). Az állati nyersanyagokat feldolgozó műhelyek azonosítási lehetőségei (Identification markers for workshops producing goods from animals raw materials). In J. Gömöri, & A. Kőrösi (Eds.), Csont és bőr: Az állati eredetű nyersanyagok feldolgozásának története, régészete és néprajza (Bone and Leather: History, Archaeology and Ethnography of Crafts Utilizing Raw Materials from Animals) (pp. 31–37). MTA VEAB Iparrégészeti és Archaeometriai Munkabizottság és Kézművesipar-történeti Munkabizottság.
Daróczi-Szabó, M., Kovács, Zs. E., Raczky,P., & Bartosiewicz, L. 2020. Pending danger: Recent Copper Age lion (Panthera leo L., 1758) finds from Hungary. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology, 30(4), 469–481. https://doi.org/10.1002/oa.2875
D’Errico, F., Julien, M., Liolios, D., Vanhaeren, M., & Baffier, D. (2003). Many awls in our argument. Bone tool manufacture and use in the Châtelperronian and Aurignacian levels of the Grotte du Renne at Arcy-sur-Cure. In J. Zilhão, & F. D’Errico (Eds.), The Chronology of the Aurignacian and of the Transitional Technocomplexes: Dating, Stratigraphies, Cultural Implications (pp. 247–270). Instituto Português de Arqueologia.
Efremov, I. A. (1940). Taphonomy: a new branch of paleontology. Pan-American Geologist, 74, 81–93.
Farkas N., & Bartosiewicz L. (2009). Állati erővel működtetett malmok (Animal powered mills) In L. Bartosiewicz, E. Gál, & I. Kováts (Eds.), Csontvázak a szekrényből. Válogatott tanulmányok a Magyar Archaeozoológusok Visegrádi Találkozóinak anyagából 2002–2009 (Skeletons from the cupboard Selected Studies from the Visegrád Meetings of Hungarian Archaeozoologists 2002–2009) (273–286). Martin Opitz Kiadó.
Franklin, A. (1999). Animals and Modern Cultures: A Sociology of Human-Animal Relations in Modernity. Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446217764
Gifford-Gonzalez, D. (1993). Gaps in zooarchaeological analysis of butchery: is gender an issue? In J. Hudson (Ed.), From Bones to Behavior: Ethnoarchaeological and Experimental Contributions to the Interpretation of Faunal Remains (pp. 181–200). Southern Illinois University.
Gifford-Gonzalez, D. (2018). An Introduction to Zooarchaeology. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65682-3
Holló, Zs., Lengyel, Gy., & Mester, Zs. (2001). Egy pattintott kőeszköz életútja. Magyar kifejezések a technológiai vizsgálatokhoz 1 [The life course of a chipped stone tool. Hungarian terms for technological analyses 1]. Ősrégészeti levelek, 3, 51–57.
Holmes, W. H. (1894). Natural history of flaked stone implements. In C. S. Wake (Ed.), Memoirs of the International Congress of Anthropology (pp. 120–139). Schulte.
Horard-Herbin, M.-P., & Vigne, J.-D. (2005). Animaux, environnements et sociétés. Collection Archéologiques, Editions Errance.
Jones, P. R. (1980). Experimental butchery with modern stone tools and its relevance for palaeolithic archaeology. World Archaeology, 12(2), 153–165. https://doi.org/10.1080/00438243.1980.9979789
Kjällquist, M. (2020). Kulturkontakter i Sydskandinavien under mesolitikum. Hantverks-traditioner, råmaterialval och mobilitet för 9000 år sedan, med utgångspunkt från Norje Sunnansund i Blekinge [Cultural contacts in Southern Scandinavia during the Mesolithic. Craft traditions, choice of raw materials and mobility 9,000 years ago, starting from Norje, Sunnansund in Blekinge]. Uppsala University.
Kleindienst M. R., & Watson, P. J. (1956). ‘Action archaeology’: the archaeological inventory of a living community. Anthropology Tomorrow, 5, 75–78.
Kreiter, A., Marton, T., Gomart, L., Oross, K., & Panczél, P., (2017). Looking into houses: analysis of LBK ceramic technological change on a household level. In L. Burnez-Lanotte (Ed.), Matières à Penser: sélection et traitement des matières premières dans les productions potières du Néolithique ancient. Actes de la table ronde de Namur, Belgique, 29 et 30 mai 2015 (pp. 111–132). Société préhistorique française.
Kristiansen, K. (2014). Towards a New Paradigm? The Third Science Revolution and its Possible Consequences in Archaeology. Current Swedish Archaeology, 22, 11–34. https://doi.org/10.37718/CSA.2014.01
Larsson, Å. M. (2009). Breaking and Making Bodies and Pots. Material and Ritual Practices in Sweden in the Third Millennium BC. Department of Archaeology and Ancient History, Uppsala University.
Leroi-Gourhan, A. (1964). Le geste et la parole I, technique et langage. Albin Michel.
Leroi-Gourhan, A. (1993). Gesture and Speech. MIT Press.
Lignereux, Y., & Peters, J. (1996). Techniques de boucherie et rejets osseux en Gaule Romaine. Anthropozoologica, 24, 45–98.
Lyman, R. L. (1994). Vertebrate Taphonomy. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139878302
Magnell, O. (2011). Sacred Cows or Old Beasts? A taphonomic approach to studying ritual killing with an example from Iron Age Uppåkra, Sweden. In A. Pluskowski (Ed.), The Ritual Killing and Burial of Animals. European Perspectives (pp. 192–204). Oxbow Books. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv13pk7nt.18
Magnell, O. (2013). The taphonomy of ritual bone depositions An approach to the study of animal bones and ritual practice with an example from Viking Age Frösö, Sweden. In G. Ekroth, & J. Wallensten (Eds.), Bones, behaviour and belief: the zooarchaeological evidence as a source for ritual practice in ancient Greece and beyond (pp. 117–118). Skrifter utgivna av Svenska Institutet i Athen. https://doi.org/10.30549/actaath-4-55-10
Miracle, P. (2002). Mesolithic meals from Mesolithic middens. In P. Miracle, & N. Milner (Eds.), Consuming Passions and Patterns of Consumption (pp. 65–88). McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research.
O’Connor, T. P. (1993). Process and terminology in mammal carcass reduction. International Journal of Osteoarchaeology, 3(2), 63–67. https://doi.org/10.1002/oa.1390030202
O’Connor, T. P. (1996). A Critical Overview of Archaeological Animal Bone Studies. World Archaeology, 28, 5–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/00438243.1996.9980328
Pelegrin, J., Karlin, C., & Bodu, P. (1988). “Chaînes opératoires” un outil pour le préhistorien. In J. Tixier (Ed.), Technologie préhistorique (pp. 55–62). CNRS.
Perkins, D., & Daly, P. (1968). A hunters’ village in Neolithic Turkey. Scientific American, 219(5), 97–106. https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican1168-96
Price, N. 2010. Passing into Poetry: Viking-Age Mortuary Drama and the Origins of Norse Mythology. Medieval Archaeology, 54(1), 123–156. https://doi.org/10.1179/174581710X12790370815779
Rašková Zelinková, M. (2010). Reconstructing the “Chaîne Opératoire” of Skin Processing in Pavlovian Bone Artifacts from Dolní Vestonice I, Czech Republic. In A. Legrand-Pineau, I. Sidéra, N. Buc, E. David, & V. Scheinsohn (Eds.), Ancient and Modern Bone Artefacts from America to Russia. Cultural, technological and functional signature (pp. 191–200). Archaeopress.
Ritvo, H. (2007). On the Animal Turn. Daedalus, 136(4), 118–122. https://doi.org/10.1162/daed.2007.136.4.118
Rowley-Conwy, P. 2007. From Genesis to Prehistory. The Archaeological Three Age System and its Contested Reception in Denmark, Britain and Ireland. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199227747.001.0001
Schiffer, M. B. (1983). Toward the Identification of Formation Processes. American Antiquity, 48(4), 675–706. https://doi.org/10.2307/279771
Sellier, P. (2016). Différents types de sépulture ou différentes étapes d’une même séquence funéraire ? Un exemple démonstratif de chaîne opératoire mortuaire chez les anciens Marquisiens. Bulletins et mémoires de la Société d’anthropologie de Paris, 28, 45–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13219-016-0147-8
Sherratt, A. (1983). The secondary products revolution of animals in the Old World. World Archaeology, 15, 90–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/00438243.1983.9979887
Shott, M. J. (2003). Chaîne Opératoire and Reduction Sequence. Lithic Technology, 28(2), 95–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/01977261.2003.11721005
Seetah, K. (2007). The Middle Ages on the block: animals, guilds and meat in medieval Britain. In A. Pluskowski (Ed.), Breaking and Shaping Beastly Bodies: Animals as Material Culture in the Middle Ages (pp. 18–31). Oxbow Books. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvh1dqx6.5
Seetah, K. (2008). Modern Analogy, Cultural Theory and Experimental Replication: A Merging Point at the Cutting Edge of Archaeology. World Archaeology, 40(1), 135–150. https://doi.org/10.1080/00438240701843652
Seetah, K. (2019). Humans, animals, and the craft of slaughter in archaeo-historic societies. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108553544
Smith, S. (1856). Way Down East; or, Portraitures of Yankee Life. Derby & Jackson.
Thomsen, C. J. (1836). Ledetraad til Nordiske Oldkyndighed [A Guide to Northern Antiquities]. S.L. Møllers Bogtrykkeri.
Varela, S. L. L., Vangijn, A., & Jacobs, L. (2002). De-mystifying pottery production in the Maya Lowlands: detection of traces of use-wear on pottery sherds through microscopic analysis and experimental replication. Journal of Archaeological Science, 29, 1133–1147. https://doi.org/10.1006/jasc.2002.0760
Verly, G., Rademakers, F. W., Somaglino, C., Tallet, P., Delvaux, L., & Degryse, P. (2021). The Chaîne Opératoire of Middle Kingdom smelting batteries and the problem of fuel: Excavation, experimental and analytical studies on ancient Egyptian metallurgy. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports, 37, 1–16, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2020.102708
Vitelli, K. D. (2007). The Neolithic pottery from Lerna. American School of Classical Studies at Athens.
Wallaert-Pêtre, H. (2001). Learning how to make the right pots: apprenticeship strategies and material culture, a case study in handmade pottery from Cameroon. Journal of Anthropological Research, 57(4), 471–479. https://doi.org/10.1086/jar.57.4.3631356
