I now turn to areas concerning the flint tool, where the tool has been enhanced in ways which have no obvious kinetic advantage.
4.3.1 COLOURS/HUES/LUMINOSITY (SELECTION AND
ENHANCEMENT)
Colour selection and colour enhancement are difficult to disentangle. Likewise, ideas of luminosity and colour may well have been undifferentiated in ancient Egypt.
Colour, hue and luminosity clearly had ideological significance, possibly in relation to flint.
Ethnographic studies highlight a significant problem in using western colour terms as a basis for understanding colour generally, as ‘Colour terms have meaning values, not just connotative colourings’ (Chapman 2002, 48). Many colour words refer to all visual qualities (e.g. surface textures, especially shininess) except form and shape. As will be shown below, textual evidence from Egypt shows that the word ‘colour’ was not separately distinguished from ‘texture’ and ‘hue’ and furthermore that colour and luminosity were considered together.
Ethnographic studies of colour symbolism26 (Scarre 2002 and Hovers et al. 2003, 493) often build upon cross-cultural linguistic studies suggesting that languages classify colours at their most basic in terms of black and white and then later red,
26
137 followed by other colours (e.g. Berlin and Kay 1969; Kay and McDaniel 1997 and references therein, though see Chapman 2003 and Young 2006 for critiques of the Berlin and Kay ‘colour paradigm’). Neurological normatives are usually cited as explanation. Turner (1968) proposed a cross-cultural understanding of colour. He indicated that black, red and white tend to have the same symbolism cross-culturally, and that symbolism tends to relate to the human body, to semen and milk, blood, body dirts, excreta and putrefaction. The body connection emotionally charges colour concepts. Black is associated with the inferior, evil, pollution, suspicion; red is
associated with power, wealth, might; and white with purity, light and joy. As tends to be the case with generalising propositions, his ideas have been much criticised (e.g. Boric 2002, 25–26; Young 2006, 178–179). Scarre (2002, 231, 237) however, supports the cross-cultural importance of these three colours.
In many languages black and white refer to dark and light (Wierzbicka cited in Chapman 2002, 50). White is almost universally positive and links with purity, spirits, etc. (Darville 2002, 74). For example, the Yoruba of West Africa associate white with the spirit world (Keates 2002, 116). Indeed, luminosity, brightness and shininess, with which white is closely associated, signifies the otherworld in several societies (Keates 2002, 118–122). The shiny/colourful nature of the celestial is ethnographically well attested (Goebs 1998, 458–459). Shininess is associated with power and is generally valued (Taçon 1999). There are ethnographic parallels for the
particoloured/multicoloured denoting liminality among the Nuer, where skins of spotted felines are among liminal objects used to heal the wounds of initiates
(Beidelman 1968, 121; Turner 1991, 142). The notion of pied Divinity is also common to the Dinka (Lienhardt 1961, 14, 46).
Wierzbicka (cited in Chapman 2002, 50) states that in many languages words for green also refer to vegetation generally. This concurs with Egyptian ideas of green, with its connotations of ‘fresh’, ‘new’, or ‘wet’ linked to fresh plant growth along the Nile following each Inundation (glossary).
Specifically for rock, there is a great deal of ethnographic evidence that white and shiny stones, including rock crystals, are metaphorically associated with purity, the spirit world and insight (Cooney 2002, 97; Keates 2002, 118–119). For example, in western Arnhem Land, Australia, quartz tools were particularly sought as they are bright, a quality also associated with life and Ancestral Beings (Taçon 1991, 198–199). Making and owning bright, shiny objects can be seen as a statement of social prestige, for example among the Amerindian elite, where kings were associated with the
138 celestial qualities of light and used shining jewellery to transmit this message
(Saunders 2002, 216–219; 2003). The celestial connection of flint is well known ethnographically (6.1.1) suggesting that this in part rests upon the physicality of the material (2.2.2.9), and this physicality could well relate to flint’s luminosity.
The problem for archaeologists lies in understanding past colour values. However, Gage (1999, 109) suggests that we may even be able to understand colour symbolism for prehistoric societies by cautious use of universals and consideration of context. Ancient colour symbolism may be understood by examining contexts within which different coloured objects are found (Jones and Bradley 1999, 113). While Jones (2004, 334) writes that archaeologists have rarely examined how colour is selected during artefact production, there are several exceptions: Bradley (1992); Jones and MacGregor (2002); Barfield (2003); Gage et al. (1999) and more recently Gaydarska and Chapman (2008). Bradley et al. (1992) showed that axe use in Neolithic Britain did not correlate with stone quality, therefore stone choice must have depended upon colour and texture. Barfield (2003, 109) stresses the importance of aesthetics, of which one may expect colour to be a part, in the metaphoric importance of stone and
(Barfield 2003, 101) cites Clark and Higgs’ (1960) work on colour preference for red stone in arrowhead and leaf-point manufacture in Neolithic Hurst Fen, Britain,
suggesting that a simplistic interpretation may be that red was the colour of blood. The edited volume by Jones and MacGregor (2002) gives several examples of
archaeological colour symbolism. These publications largely explore salient colours for a given artefact or group of artefacts found in the same context.
Archaeological evidence: colour
The colour range for flint tools in Egypt is subtle, though embraces white to black and shades between, as well as pinks, oranges and browns. At least, that is how they appear in western categorisation terms. I start with white and black, as they appear in several cultures to be diametrically opposed27.
For the Predynastic, researchers have noted a preponderance of pale coloured flint selected for bifacial knives (Harris 1961, 139; Kelterborn 1984, 441; Holmes 1992, 39) and it is in the Pre–Early Dynastic that quartzite implements, notably knives and arrowheads, are best known e.g. the tomb of Djer (Spencer 1980, 100, pl. 79) and from Abydos (map 4; Petrie 1901, pl. 4, no. 14, pl. 6, nos. 6–7).
27I did not use a Munsell colour chart in looking at flint because one piece of flint can have many
139 Later quartzite implements are rarer and usually miniature, e.g. a model of a flint knife from First Intermediate Period el-Ashmunein (maps 3 and 5; Spencer 1993, 61, pl. 96) and quartzite arrowheads from the Thutmoside tomb of Sennemut (Hayes 1968, 212). Arrowheads in quartz, or its copy, glass (early writers tended to identify the material as quartz or rock crystal though McLeod agrees with the original excavators and identifies it as glass), were found in the tomb of Tutankhamun (McLeod 1982, 20).
At the opposite end of the colour spectrum, black flint is largely absent archaeologically (except for burnt pieces). Throughout Egyptian history however, obsidian, is used for amulets, though not for full-size implements. In the late
Predynastic small tools were occasionally made from obsidian (e.g. Scharff 1926, 47– 48, pl. 30.280–281) though greatly outnumbered by flint artefacts. I have found no certain instances of obsidian knives, though UC7570v and UC7570 xxiv from Middle Kingdom Lahun (maps 4 and 5) are black and could possibly be from this material. I now turn to subtler colour ‘shades’.
Beginning at the ‘micro-level’ of assemblage, the arrowheads from New Kingdom tomb D29 at Abydos (map 4; Appendix 1, 9.4; plate 57) exhibit strikingly different colours which must have been selected. They cannot all have been produced from flint mined at one site. However, I have not found any other such obvious examples of selection for colour variation28.
In considering colour variation in relation to tool type, Berlin 22842 (Scharff 1931, 63, pl. 5; Schoske 1990, 116 no. 94; plate 4.1) is an orange/yellow polished flint ‘razor’ or funerary palette. Four other examples of this type of tool, all from the tomb of Tutankhamun (Murray and Nuttall 1963, 32o; plate 4.5) are yellowish in colour. Tillmann (1992, 160) therefore suggests that these parallel metal forms. However, not all ‘razors’ are this colour, for example, UC11771 and UC59564 are both made from a pink/brown flint, and UC59564 from a mid-brown flint (Appendix 2; plate 4).
Examination of flint in British museums shows no strong correlation in the type of flint chosen with artefact form (type)29.
It may be fruitful to compare colour of material from settlements with that from burials. Unfortunately, since there is little settlement material available, either
published, or in museum collections, at least until the Middle Kingdom, this is
28 Patination was disregarded when considering colour.
29 If one includes rock crystal, however, an exception may be made for Early Dynastic rock crystal
140 difficult. After the Middle Kingdom, flint is rarely used in graves and is largely found on settlements, again, making comparison difficult. However, Kromer (1978, 46–47) notes that all ‘razors’ found in the ‘settlement’ at Giza (map 4) were light to dark brown, while those from graves were yellowish grey.
The dominant flint colour is often chronologically and site specific. At Abydos (map 4) evidence from royal tombs shows that the local mid-brown flint with pinkish stripes was preferred during early Dynasty I (Hikade 2000, 15, 18–19; 2004, 58) but by the end of Dynasty I this was usurped by a caramel coloured flint, and from
Dynasty II a chocolate brown variety predominated. This could be attributed to use of different sources rather than any colour ideology. The limited geographical coverage for these traits argues against an ideological explanation (2.2.1).
Early Dynastic preference for light stone and rock crystal seems proven. However, after the Early Dynastic, colour differentiation seems to be limited to a particular site or period. Possible exceptions are polished ‘razors’, and the connection between bifacial arrowheads and either light colours or variation in colours
Archaeological evidence: luminosity/shininess
As shown above, ethnographic parallels suggest that whiteness, brightness and shininess are related. The archaeological evidence now presented suggests
brightness/shininess/luminosity was indeed valued in Egyptian lithics, at least in the Early Dynastic.
Flint is usually a lustrous stone because of its silica content. Polishing enhances natural colour as well as increasing shininess (Cooney 2002, 95). Polishing may not only relate to luminosity but also to increased production costs, aesthetic
considerations, etc. However, if polishing takes place in a period in which other traits of luminosity such as use of light coloured materials is evident, this gives more weight to the equation of polishing with luminosity.
Polishing of artefacts is particularly prevalent in the Pre to Early Dynastic and often equates with finely made items, exhibiting great skill in manufacture. Ripple- flaked knives are the best known Egyptian polished lithics, often polished on one side and polished then flaked on the other (Midant-Reynes 1987). Such items tend to occur in elite Predynastic graves and are found more rarely in the Early Dynastic.
141 fragments of bifacial knives from the tomb of Djer at Abydos30 (map 4). Caton-
Thompson and Gardner (1934, 126, pl. 79.12) describe an Early Dynastic – Old Kingdom type-6 knife which appears to have been polished prior to final flaking. However, one might argue that as its final form is flaked, luminosity was not the desired end effect.
Other Dynastic polished items include ‘funerary palettes’ (Appendix 1; plate