Fine Tools for Fine Work. The Form and Function of ‘Small Craft Tools’ from Bronze Age Kaymakçı (Türkiye)

Fine Tools o Fine Wo k. The Fo m and Func ion o ‘Small C a Tools’ om B onze Age Kaymakçı (Tü kiye) Ka hleenC. Schaupp– Magda Pieniążek– Tunç Kane – Ch is ophe H. Roose el ABSTRACT Tools ha e always played an ex emely impo an , de ining ole in human li e. Aclose look a Small C a Tools (SCTs), such as d ills, awls, punches, and small chisels, no only allows us an insigh in o he exac p oduc ion echniques o a e ac s bu can also p o ide in o ma ion on egional exchanges o goods and c a specializa ions in indi idual se lemen s. Ne e heless, hese a e ac s ha e been la gely neglec ed in p e ious s udies, and he e seems o be no ag eemen among he ew au ho s who ha e desc ibed such small b onze ools in mo e de ail. The la ge numbe o middle and la e B onze Age SCTs ound a Kaymakçı (Tü kiye) was used as an oppo uni y o s udy hei ypology, cha ac e is ics, and use -wea . A o al o 31 SCTs we e ound in only six yea s o exca a ion (2014–2021). In ela ion o he yea s o exca a ion, his is compa able o he numbe o SCTs ound a Ha usa. This indica es he impo ance o Kaymakçı as apo en ial lea he / ex ile p oduc ion cen e . This s udy desc ibes and cha ac e izes he SCTs om Kaymakçı in de ail. The au ho s a e able o iden i y dis inc di e ences be ween hese ools and make sugges ions o amo e uni ied classi ica ion, unde lining ha such i ems a e wo hy o close conside a ion in u u e s udies. KEYWORDS B onze age; wes e n Ana olia; Kaymakçı; c a manship; lea he ; small c a ools; ypology; use wea DOI h ps://doi.o g/10.14712/23368144.2025.1.7 INTRODUCTION The making o o namen s, he d illing o gems one beads, he ca ing o bone o i o y objec s, and he in ica e wo k o cobbling– all hese a isanal and echnical c a s played a e y sig- ni ican ole in e e yday household ac i i ies as well as in specialized manu ac u e in eli e- -sponso ed wo kshops. Undoub edly, ine ools and ine c a manship we e impo an ields o B onze Age p oduc ion o bo h mundane and luxu y goods. Howe e , his ype o ool has been neglec ed in p e ious s udies o a leas has no ecei ed he ea men i su ely dese es. This pape ocuses on b onze ‘Small C a Tools’ (SCTs) such as awls, d ills, small chisels, and punches. These a e classi ied he e as small ools o abou 5.0 o 15.0 cm in leng h, usually (bu no always) composed o an edge (wo king head) and asha . The wo king head should no be wide han ca. 1 cm.1 Excep ions wi h wo wo king heads a e also known om Kaymakçı and o he si es 1 De ailed analysis o all known SCTs would be necessa y in o de o de ine he a e age dimensions mo e p ecisely. The longes SCT om Kaymakçı (awl 108.522.13.7) is 9.2 cm, he wides wo king head is 0.9 cm (chisel 99.526.185.1). Awls longe han 10 cm a e known om Ha usa (e.g. He - bo d – Van Wickede 2021, Bo 79/89; Bo 86/413). The e o e, he leng h limi was se a 15 cm. STUDIA HERCYNIA XXIX/1, 95–119 96 STUDIA HERCYNIA XXIX/1 (see below). These ypes o objec s ha e ne e been he subjec o aspeci ic publica ion, al hough hey a e common a chaeological inds. The cu en s a e o esea ch does no p o ide acon incing classi ica ion bu a he o e laps and con uses whole classes o ools. Awls and d ills ha e o en been de ined simply as poin ed pins o s icks, some imes dis inguished by hei c oss -sec ion o he posi ion o he sha shoulde , while punches ha e been de ined simply as ‘blun e ’ awls and small chisels by hei ypical cu ing -edge. P e ious ypologies a ied acco ding o each se o el- e an esea ch ques ions, so ce ain cha ac e is ics we e some imes included and some imes no . Typology should be seen as a ool in scien i ic analysis, howe e , aiming o g oup a e ac s by shape as objec i ely as possible, balancing accu acy wi h aminimum numbe o ypes (c . B ew 1946). The pape begins wi h agene al e iew o SCTs, ollowed by he p esen a ion and classi ica- ion o small b onze ools ound a he B onze Age ci adel o Kaymakçı (cen al wes e n Ana olia, Tü kiye). Typological assignmen s a e based on shape, speci ic mo phological ea u es, and aces o use, depending on he s a e o p ese a ion and whe e possible, he con ex ual si u- a ion. Finally, new de ini ions o speci ic b onze ools and hei unc ions a e p oposed, con- ibu ing o ongoing and u u e esea ch on ine ools used o ine wo k in B onze Age socie ies. STATE OF RESEARCH As men ioned abo e, SCTs made o b onze ha e ne e been ea ed in acomp ehensi e way. Ins ead, hey ha e been included in b oade discussions o me alwo king and ela ed equipmen . As a esul , hei classi ica ions lack consis ency. J. Deshayes (1960, 39–44), o example, de ined poin ed pins as awls and classi ied ou ypes acco ding o he posi ion o he ang and shoulde . R. M. Boehme (1972, 115) ollowed simila logic bu desc ibed he same objec s as chisel -like ools, dis inguished om eal chisels only by hei ips. Bo h de ini ions p e en sepa a ion o awls om d ills o e en poin ed punches. K. B anigan (1974, 27) added he c oss -sec ion as acha ac e is ic ea u e, which should be angula in awls and punches bu ound in d ills. C oss -sec ion de ails we e no ed by A. Mülle -Ka pe (1994, 166–167) oo, bu because he o- cused on me alwo king in gene al, he did no ocus on awls a all, e en hough his chisel ypes 8a and 9b, and pe haps e en 7e and 7h, migh ha e been used as awls. R. D. G. E ely (1993, 86) dis inguished be ween awls, poin s, and punches, de ining hem by hei sha p o blun ips, hei slee es and hei sizes, bu did no go in o u he de ail. A e y de ailed desc ip ion was gi en by S. He bo d and A. Van Wickede (2021, 109–113). They used he gene al size, c oss sec ion, and shape o he ips o de ine and desc ibe in de ail se en main ypes o awls, pa ly based on Boehme ’s ypology and wi h compa ison o Mülle -Ka pe’sde ini ions. Howe e , hey also men ioned he g ea di icul y o dis inguishing awls om d ills (He bo d – Van Wickede 2021, 105). As he e we e many di e en opinions on he de ini ion o awls in his case, N. G. Blackwell (2011, 33) decided o call all poin ed ools used in ex ile and lea he wo k awls. He was also he i s o in oduce he e m ‘Small C a Tool’, which is used he e also as agene ic e m. As b ie ly ou lined abo e, p e ious esea ch used a ying app oaches o in es iga e SCTs. Di e en classi ica ions we e de eloped o Ana olia and he Aegean. Fu he mo e, wo c ucial s udies o bo h egions appea ed almos simul aneously and did no e e o each o he : ha o E ely (1993) and Mülle -Ka pe (1994). Ne e heless, ega dless o he ype o classi ica ion, de ailed desc ip ion and illus a ion o he inds, e en o hose ha appea less sophis ica ed and/o unimpo an , a e essen ial o any kind o esea ch aiming o poin ways o wa d. E en i he way in which hese SCTs a e e e ed o in he li e a u e is inconsis en , i is he unc ion o he awl ha mos au ho s ag ee is o be ound in lea he wo kshops o p oduce 97KATHLEENC. SCHAUPP– MAGDA PIENIĄŻEK– TUNÇ KANER– CHRISTOPHER H. ROOSEVELT objec s such as shoes, clo h, bags, o saddles, in pu poses o which i con inues o be used oday (c . Jacobi 1974, 54–55; Blackwell 2011, 107; He bo d – Van Wickede 2021, 109). Illus a ions o awls used in his con ex , o example by shoemake s (Fig. 1), a e known om he House Books o he Twel e B o he s Founda ion (Nu embe g, Ge many, 15 h–19 h cen u y CE). In abook om 1706 an awl smi h is explici ly men ioned (Saue 2023). In addi ion, some au ho s ha e sugges ed he use o awls in me al and woodwo king o pe o a ing o ma king con ou s (c . Ma yon 1938, 245; Un ach 1968, 55; Jacobi 1974, 54; E ely 1993, 93). O he s ha e sugges ed ha his ype o ool was used as acosme ic u ensil (Hochs e e 1987, 27), o wax modelling (A mb us e 2000, 151), o unc ioned as aspu o a a oo needle (Zimme mann 2009, 146). Fig. 1: Illus a ion o an awl, used by ashoemake . Twel e B o he s Founda ion Nu embe g, 1595. (Saue 2023, Amb. 279.2° Folio 64 e so– Landaue I). D ill bi s, which a e usually he only p ese ed pa o d ills, can be di ided in o solid, and hollow d ills (E ely 1993, 77). While he o me g inds in o he d illed ma e ial, he la e pe o a es aci cle and lea es acha ac e is ic d ill co e2 (c . E ely 1993, 77; Seehe 2005, 14; Lud ike al. 2015, 13). Some au ho s de ined d ills by hei ound c oss sec ion, size, and weigh (B anigan 1974, 26; Mülle -Ka pe 1994, 174), while o he s conside he shape o he ip (B epohl 1980, 218, ig. 178; E ely 1993, 77–78), al hough his should no be he p ima y ea u e used o cha ac e iza ion (E ely 1993, 86). Mülle -Ka pe (1994, 174) men ions he dange o con usion wi h o he ools and encou aged sea ching o use -wea ma ks (ab asi e ma ks), which should un c osswise o he sha (Fig. 2a); hese ma ks come om he use o ab asi e ma e ials such as eme y o qua z. This addi i e was pa icula ly necessa y o a leas ad an ageous o d illing ha de ma e ials such as ha d s ones, which could no be d illed wi hou hese ab asi es by a‘so ’ b onze d ill. 3 Howe e , so e s ones o i o y a e also 2 See o example he SEM image o aca nelian bead om he Aigina easu e in he B i ish Museum, illus a ing an abandoned d illing made using ahollow d ill (Fi one al. 2009, 24, ig. 107). 3 Fo expe imen al wo k ela ed o his opic, e e o Go elick– Gwinne 1983; Gwinne – Go elick 1987 and Lud ike al. 2015. 98 STUDIA HERCYNIA XXIX/1 likely o ha e been ea ed using ab asi es o make he p ocess mo e e ec i e (c . Un ach 1968, 399–400; Go elick– Gwinne 1983, 41; Gwinne – Go elick 1987, 20; E ely 1993, 84, 158; Mülle -Ka pe 1994, 174–175; Lud ike al. 2015, 4–6; He bo d – Van Wickede 2021, 105). He bo d and Van Wickede (2021, 105; e.g., Bo 85/120, Bo 85/290) men ioned some d ills wi h use -wea om d illing, bu did no desc ibe he ma ks in de ail, excep o he ac ha hey we e spi ally h eaded up he sha . In hese pa icula cases, he use as ad ill is clea ly isible. I is usually no possible o di e en ia e be ween simple -poin ed solid d ills and awls wi hou any aces o use. The shape o he ip has also been used as adis inc i e ea u e o punches. In mos cases, punches a e desc ibed as poin s wi hou ahandle, and wi h hamme -blow ma ks, so called bu s o bea ds, and wi h speci ic names gi en o hem acco ding o hei ip shapes (c . B aun -Feldweg 1968, 68, 184; B epohl 1980, 230; B epohl 1999, 52; E ely 1993, 86; Mülle - -Ka pe 1994, 160). These ools we e used o chasing and punching pa e ns in o gold, sil e , and b onze pla es4 o lea he (c . Lowe ye al. 1971, 173; He bo d – Van Wickede 2021, 85). The e o e, hey we e used o chip -less (non - emo al) de o ma ion o he ma e ial, whe eas chisels we e used o pe manen cu ing ( emo al) o he ma e ial, which is he mos impo - an dis inguishing ac o be ween hem (c . Ma yon 1938, 243; B aun -Feldweg 1968, 177; Lowe ye al. 1971, 172; B epohl 1980, 213). Some au ho s ha e used he e m chisel -shaped punch o punching chisel o desc ibe ools ha esemble chisels bu we e used o chip -less shaping, also known as chasing (Ma yon 1938, 243; B epohl 1980, 231; A mb us e 2000, 56; He bo d – Van Wickede 2021, 85; a.o. no: Bo 85/181, Bo 86/151). Such punches, also called ace s,5 we e used o c ea e lines o o he linea designs. Acco ding o G. Jacobi (1974, 24) hey can be ecognized by he asymme ical 4 D esche (1968) ques ioned he use o b onze punches on b onze shee s due o hei simila ha d- ness. Howe e , expe imen al s udies ha e shown ha i is possible o use hem by using di e en alloy pe cen ages and aking ad an age o hei a ying deg ees o ha dness (Lowe ye al. 1971, 173; A mb us e 2000, 116). 5 Punching chisel by He bo d and Van Wickede (2021, 85, a. o. No.: Bo 85/181, Bo 86/151). Fig. 2: Schema ic explana ion o use wea ma ks desc ibed by Mülle ‑Ka pe 1994, 174. a– ans e se o c osswise o he sha ; b– pa allel o he sha . G aphic by E. Kane and K. C. Schaupp; ©Gygaia P ojec s. 99KATHLEENC. SCHAUPP– MAGDA PIENIĄŻEK– TUNÇ KANER– CHRISTOPHER H. ROOSEVELT shape o he cu ing edge (Fig. 3). Mülle -Ka pe (1994, 160) and A. Hänsel (2014, 140) obse ed he same pa e n in SCTs. This asymme ic shape is due o ‘ acing’ aline, whe e only one side o he cu ing edge imp esses new ma e ial and he o he side uns in he p e ious imp ession, esul ing in less wea . The di icul y o dis inguishing be ween ace s and chisels has led some schola s o classi y punches as belonging o he chisel - amily (Jacobi 1974, 24; B epohl 1980, 230), which has con ibu ed o he gene al con usion in de ining SCTs. Finally, he las g oup o SCTs, he small ‘ eal’ chisels, we e desc ibed in de ail by Mülle -Ka pe (1994). Chisels a e ypically iden i ied by hei a iable size, cu ing edges, and comp ession ma ks, also known as bu s o bea ds (c . Jacobi 1974, 19; E ely 1993, 11; Mülle -Ka pe 1994, 162–170; A mb us e 2000, 56). The cu ing -edges a e he mos dis inc i e and simul ane- ously he mos sensi i e pa o chisels in e ms o p ese a ion. E ely (1993, ig. 2) desc ibed di e en shapes– wi h la e, wi hou la e, cu ed, and s aigh – o dis inguish be ween s aigh chisels and punches o poin ed chisels and d ills/awls o punches. Mülle -Ka pe highligh ed he impo ance o use -wea aces in ool iden i ica ion. Fo chisels, use -wea ma ks should un pa allel o he sha and ollow he di ec ion o hamme blows (Fig. 2b) (Mülle -Ka pe 1994, 174). The case o ‘ ine b onze ools’ becomes e en mo e complex when conside ing speci ic implemen s such as mand els, bol -shaped a ow ips, o s yli, which can look e y simila o he a o emen ioned ools. Ap ope de ini ion h ough use -wea analysis should assis in dis inguishing be ween hem, a leas in heo y. SMALL BRONZE TOOLS FROM ANATOLIA AND THE AEGEAN One o he mos in iguing si es ega ding SCTs is Ha usa (Fig. 4). Wi h mo e han 600 SCTs om he 2nd millennium BCE egis e ed o da e, his si e has p oduced a mo e SCTs han any o he B onze Age Ana olian o Aegean si e, based on a ailable publica ions. The SCTs ound a Ha usa consis mos ly o awls, bu possible d ills and punches a e also ep esen ed (Boehme 1972; 1979; He bo d – Van Wickede 2021). Fig. 3: Asymme ic wea on he cu ing edge o a ace . G a‑ phic by E. Kane and K. C. Schaupp. 100 STUDIA HERCYNIA XXIX/1 Fewe SCTs, e en in ela ion o he size o he si e, ha e been ound in wes e n Ana olia. Fo ins ance, in T oy, less han 20 SCTs belonging o he Middle B onze Age (MBA) and La e B onze Age (LBA) we e documen ed (Blegene al. 1953; 1958; Pieniążek 2020a; 2020b). The de ini ion o such ools a T oy emains p oblema ic in some cases. Blegene al. did no p o- ide ade ailed desc ip ion o he awls, excep o wo small ones om he LBA. These awls we e ound inside bone handles, one comple e and one agmen ed (Blegene al. 1953, 22; Blegene al. 1958, 15, no. 37:425, 37:494). Abou adozen addi ional SCTs, ala ge d ill, achisel, h ee awls, and some poo ly p ese ed, unde inable ools we e desc ibed in de ail by Pieniążek (2020a, 605–606). Fig. 4: Map showing he loca ions o si es men ioned in he ex , wi h inse showing gene al loca i‑ on. Backg ound om ESRI opo map da a. The published in en o y om he olde exca a ions a Beycesul an, one o he la ges si es in wes e n Ana olian, only o e ed a ound nine SCTs (Mellaa – Mu ay 1995, 115–117, pl. O.5–O.11). Du ing he new exca a ions, howe e , addi ional examples ha e been disco e ed (E dem 2015, 64, ca . no. 9, 11, 22). F om Kocabaş Tepe only nine SCTs ha e been published (Ayku 2021, 420, ig. 6k–ö), and o he si es ha e yielded only a ew SCTs each.6 Addi ionally, six ools iden i ied as chisels by C. Pulak we e ound in he Ulubu un ship- w eck nea Kaş (Bachhube 2006, 352; Pulak 2008, 301). Mülle -Ka pe (1994, 174) desc ibed wo o hese objec s as la ge d ills, while Blackwell (2011, 295) e e ed o hem as chisels o d ills. One o he d ills has an angula (diamond -shaped) ip and is simila o ad ill ound in T oy (c . Mülle -Ka pe 1994, 175, pl. 76:24, 25; Pieniążek 2020a, 602, no. A07.0606). 6 Addi ional ind si es in Ana olia included: ou SCTs om Çine -Tepecik (exhibi ed in he A chae- ological Museum in Aydın); h ee SCTs om Panaz epe (E kanal -Ök ü 2018); h ee SCTs om Liman Tepe (Ayku 2020); and one SCT om Seyi öme Höyük (Bilgen– Bilgen 2015). 101KATHLEENC. SCHAUPP– MAGDA PIENIĄŻEK– TUNÇ KANER– CHRISTOPHER H. ROOSEVELT On he Aegean side, he numbe o SCTs seems o be lowe in ela ion o he in ensi y o a chaeological wo k. Among he la ge si es in Mainland G eece, a ound 53 SCTs appea ed in Ti yns (Kilian 1982; Rahms o 2008; Blackwell 2011) and 40 SCTs ha e been epo ed om Mycenae (S ubbings 1954; Shea 1987; Blackwell 2011). Howe e , he numbe o SCTs published om o he si es is much lowe .7 The pic u e is simila in C e e. Rega ding he la ge si es, a ound 60 SCTs we e ound a Knossos, mos ly de ined as chisels, awls/punches, o awls/punches/poin s (E ans 1906; Ca ling– Jones 1977; B anigan 1974; Popham 1984; E ely 1993); a ound 40 in Malia (Cha- pou hie – Joly 1936; Dema gne– DeSan e e 1953; Deshayes– Dessenne 1959; Chapou hi- e e al. 1962; Van E en e e– Van E en e e 1969; Amou e i 1970; Van E en e e 1980; E ely 1993); and 28 a Zak os (Hoga h 1901; Shaw 1973; E ely 1993; Pla on 1966a; 1966b; 1966c; 1968; 1969; 1973; 1981; Pla on 1988). As elsewhe e, hese small ools a e much less ep esen ed a o he si es.8 Conside ing he o al numbe s o p e iously published SCTs om hese a chaeological si es in he Aegean and wes e n Ana olia, he impo ance o Kaymakçı as asou ce o new in o ma ion becomes clea . As desc ibed below, he si e has p oduced anumbe o SCTs sim- ila o ha known om T oy, Mycenae, and Malia, bu in only six yea s o exca a ion and in amuch smalle o al exca a ed a ea. THE SITE OF KAYMAKÇI The a chaeological si e o Kaymakçı is loca ed in cen al wes e n Ana olia, nea he mode n own o Gölma ma a on he wes e n ma gin o he cu en ly desicca ed Lake Ma ma a in he Gediz Ri e alley (Roose el 2014, 33). I is one o six oughly con empo a y ci adels a ound Lake Ma ma a and is si ua ed a he end o amoun ain ange in as a egic posi ion (Roo- se el – Luke 2017, 136; Roose el e al. 2018, 646). Kaymakçı is he la ges o hese ci adels (8.6 ha); oge he wi h he nea by ceme e y and ex amu al sac ed and se lemen a eas, i s o al buil en i onmen p obably co e ed abou 25 ha (Luke– Roose el 2017; Roose el – Luke 2017, 137). Al hough Kaymakçı was al eady se led in he local MBA, he si e’s heyday was in he ea ly local LBA. The co e a ea o he se lemen a ound an inne ci adel was o i ied mos p obably al eady wi hin he local LB 1 phase (ca. la e 18 h/ea ly 17 h–16 h cen u ies BCE). I was du ing he i s pa o he ollowing local LB 2 phase (la e 16 h–15 h cen u y BCE) ha he si e seems o ha e expanded a chi ec u ally ac oss he ull 8.6 ha o i s ci adel, wi h mos o he ou e o i ica ions and blocks o building complexes on he sou he n e ace ini ially da ing o his pe iod (Roose el 2024). 7 O he si es in Mainland G eece included: 18 SCTs om Midea (Walbe g 1998; 2007; Blackwell 2011); 17 SCTs om Nicho ia (Blackwell 2011); 11 SCTs om Le na (Blackwell 2011); 10 om Pylos (Blegen– Rawson 1966; Blegene al. 1973; Blackwell 2011) and nine SCTs om Spa a (Blackwell 2011). 8 Fu he collec ions o C e e include: 15 SCTs om Phais os (Pe nie 1935; Pe nie – Ban i 1951; Le i 1976; Le i– Ca inci 1988; E ely 1993); 10 SCTs om Mochlos (Soles– S os -Gale 2004; Soles– Giumlia -Mai 2022); 10 SCTs om Palaikas o (Bosanque 1901–1902; Dawkingse al. 1904–1905; Bosanque – Dawkins 1923); ou SCTs om Kommos (Bli ze 1995) and only wo SCTs om Psei a (Be ancou 1995; 1998). Hakulin 2013 summa ised 118 SCTs om B onze Age C e e, excluding chisels. 102 STUDIA HERCYNIA XXIX/1 Fig. 5: Si e plan o he Kaymakçı ci adel, showing he exca a ion a eas men ioned in he ex (Roo‑ se el e al. 2018, 649, ig. 2). Du ing exca a ions be ween 2014 and 2021, se en exca a ion a eas (EAs) we e opened so as o gain insigh s in o di e en pa s o he se lemen (Fig. 5). EAs 81.551 and 95.555 p o ided in o ma ion abou he o i ica ion sys ems. The co e a ea including he inne ci adel and su - ounding slopes we e in es iga ed in EAs 93.545, 97.541, and 98.531, while he adjoining sou h- e n e ace was examined in EAs 99.526 and 108.522/109.523 (Roose el e al. 2018, 648–661). The highes numbe o awls and d ills was documen ed in con ex s om he LB 2 phase. These inds add o he pic u e o an in ense in e na ional exchange wi h he Aegean and cen- al Ana olia, as documen ed by o he a e ac s om his pe iod (Roose el e al. 2018, 682; Pieniążeke al. 2019, 199). As has been sugges ed elsewhe e (e.g., Roose el e al. 2018, 646), based on he si e’sloca ion, a chi ec u e, size, and ma e ial cul u e, Kaymakçı was undoub edly an impo an egional cen e in he LBA Gediz Ri e alley, i s likely apa o he A zawa Lands, and la e iden i ied as he co e o he Seha Ri e Land in Hi i e ex s. TOWARDS ANEW DEFINITION OF ‘SMALL CRAFT TOOLS’: BASIC GUIDELINES As demons a ed abo e, use -wea aces a e he mos eliable a gumen s o de ining he unc ion o p ehis o ic ools, including SCTs (c . Lowe ye al. 1971, 172; Mülle -Ka pe 1994, 174). Tool shape is also e y impo an , bu no decisi e. He e we p o ide some basic guide- lines wi h he hope o p esen ing amo e s anda dized app oach o u u e s udies (Fig. 6). 103KATHLEENC. SCHAUPP– MAGDA PIENIĄŻEK– TUNÇ KANER– CHRISTOPHER H. ROOSEVELT Fig. 6: Idealised examples o SCTs. a– Punches; b– D ills; c– Awls; d– Chisel. G aphic by E. Kane and K. C. Schaupp. I can be concluded ha awls we e used p ima ily o pie ce and widen holes in lea he , bu also in o he ma e ials such as hicke clo hes, hin me al shee s, and wooden panels. These ac ions can be pe o med by ba e muscle powe o ca e ul hamme ing. These small ools, some imes only a ew cen ime e s long, could be i ed wi h abone o wooden handle o make hem easie o handle. I was also possible o w ap he awl wi h aco d wi hou aspecial ang (He bo d – Van Wickede 2021, 113). In bo h cases o ope a ion, he use -wea aces should be pa allel o a asligh angle o he sha , due o he wis ing mo ion o making ahole wi hou ahamme . All hese ma ks should also be dis ibu ed ai ly symme ically a ound he wo king ip. I ha de ma e ials a e pie ced wi hou asuppo unde nea h he ma e ial being pie ced, he use ma ks should ex end beyond he o emos ip, because he awl may ha e slipped h ough he ma e ial du ing he blow and mus ha e been pulled ou again. Con e sely, equen wo king wi h lea he and he associa ed o a ing mo emen o he awl, would esul in asmoo h, polished, a he asymme ic ip. 110 STUDIA HERCYNIA XXIX/1 THE POTENTIAL USE OF SCTS Wi h ega d o he c a ac i i ies in which he SCTs om Kaymakçı we e used, i is possible o make some gene al sugges ions based on he ool iden i ica ions abo e, o he inds om he si e, and he s a e o esea ch in wes e n Ana olia. Awls (like 97.541.511.1 o 108.522.13.7, Pls. 1/1b, 1/2h) we e mos p obably used o lea he wo king. Rich zooa chaeological ma e- ial con i ms he impo ance o animal husband y a Kaymakçı (Roose el e al. 2018, 679; Slim e al. 2020; Ma s one al. 2021; Fındıkla e al. 2024; I inee al. 2024), suppo ing his p obabili y. Addi ionally, SCTs we e undoub edly also used o he deco a ion o objec s made o o he ma e ials, such as an le (95.555.137.1– Roose el e al. 2018, 671, ig. 21: 6). Small d ills could ha e been used o d ill s one, ce amic, o wooden objec s such as pendan s and beads, o o ix b oken ools (e.g. Roose el e al. 2018, ig. 21). Ca e ully d illed holes a e isible on se e al small inds om Kaymakçı made o bone, shell, ce amic, and s one (e.g. 93.545.301.1– Roose el e al. 2018, 671, ig. 21:7). Fo ins ance, in addi ion o acalci e bead ha was pe o a ed om each side wi h he help o asolid d ill (108.522.18.10, Fig. 10, le ), a agmen o anspa en aw ma e ial has also been ound a he si e, sugges ing he possi- bili y o local p oduc ion (Fig. 10, igh ).10 Fig. 10: Example o bead ypes and ma e ials– shown he e wi h acalci e bead (108.522.18.10) and aw ma e ial om Kaymakçı– possibly wo ked using d ills and/o o he SCTs. ©Gygaia P o‑ jec s. Small chisels (such as 99.526.172.1; 99.526.185.1, Pl. 1/2e, 1/2 ) may ha e been used p ima ily wi h wood and s one wo king. Because o hei size and delica e design, hey a e e en mo e likely o ha e been used o he de ailed shaping and/o deco a ion o objec s by emo ing some kind o so e ma e ial. The lea -shaped chisel (99.526.185.1, Pl. 1/2 ) is aspecial case. I is e y likely ha he chisel was used a an acu e angle, as indica ed by i s p onounced use- -wea ma ks. The o ien a ion o he cu ing edge, pe pendicula o he wides pa o he sha , makes hese chisels sui able o making mo ises (as amo ise chisel) in bo h wood and s one, al hough o he ypes o ca ing canno be uled ou (c . Mülle -Ka pe 1994, 168). 10 The p elimina y iden i ica ion o ma e ial by C. O’G ady and M. Pieniążek. 111KATHLEENC. SCHAUPP– MAGDA PIENIĄŻEK– TUNÇ KANER– CHRISTOPHER H. ROOSEVELT Asimila bu sligh ly di e en use can be assumed o punches (such as 108.522.7.9, Pl. 1/2 g). Mainly o deco a i e pu poses, punches we e used o ‘p in ’ hei head shape in o ano he ma e ial, like me al o lea he . This can be seen, o example, on ab onze kni e om Kaymakçı, he handle o which was gi en ahe ingbone pa e n by indi idual punch ma ks (Pieniążeke al. 2019). This deco a ion mus ha e been made wi h apunch wi h a chisel-like head. Punch 108.522.7.9 could ha e been used o make o al inden a ions, ei he as adeco a ion on shee me al o du ing p oduc ion p ocesses. Again, aspecial use migh apply o he small double chisel (98.531.23.6, Pl. 1/1c); because o i s size, i is likely o ha e been held be ween he humb and he index o middle inge o do ine wo k in so e ma e ials o e en ually o be used o o he kinds o ine wo k, o example ela ed o he p epa a ion o cosme ics. CONTEXTUALIZING THE FINDS The majo i y o he SCTs ound so a a Kaymakçı come om ills and o he seconda y deposi s. Howe e , con inui y in he spa ial dis ibu ion o SCTs can be obse ed o e ime. O he six SCTs ound in con ex s secu ely da ed o he local LB 1 phase, i e we e ound in he sou he n e ace, a om he co e a ea o he ci adel (in EA 99.526 and 108.522/109.523). This suppo s he idea ha his pa o he se lemen was used o a ious small -scale indus ial ac i i ies al eady du ing he ea lie s ages o he local LBA, as sugges ed p e iously (e.g., Roose el e al. 2018; Roose el 2024) (Fig. 11). One awl (99.526.112.1) was ound oge he wi h spindle who ls and aneedle, possibly indica ing sewing, ex ile p oduc ion, and lea he wo king in his a ea. The numbe o SCTs clea ly inc eased du ing he local LB 2 phase, bu he spa ial dis ibu ion seems o ollow he pa e n known om he p e ious pe iod: he majo i y o ools we e ound again on he sou he n e ace (11 o 18 LB 2 SCTs we e eco e ed in EAs 99.526 and 108.522/109.523). Asimila pic u e eme ges when we include he o al numbe o small ools ound a Kaymakçı, including ones ha canno be p ecisely da ed: ou o 31 SCTs coming om he si e, 21 we e eco e ed om exca a ion a eas loca ed on he sou he n e ace. This sugges s ha he sou he n e ace was he main a ea o a leas some b anches o p oduc ion om he 18 h o he 15 h cen u y BCE. Fi e o hese SCTs we e ound on o nea he s ee in EA 108.522/109.523 (Fig. 12), ou o hem we e comple e and e y well p ese ed. Mos p obably he s ee was used as adis- posal a ea, especially gi en ha he SCTs we e eco e ed om he seconda y con ex s o ills. Howe e , i is easonable o expec ha ac i i ies in ol ing SCTs ook place somewhe e in he icini y. In e es ingly, ou SCTs we e also ound in he inne ci adel (EA 97.541), mainly in he ills o a ious pi s o he local LB 2 phase. Consequen ly, i seems ha some o he ‘ ine wo k’ ook place also in he co e o he ci adel. I may be signi ican ha he iny SCT ha could be used o he d illing o small beads (97.541.213.1, Pl. 1/1a), as well as he piece o aw calci e men ioned abo e (97.541.205.5), we e ound in he same exca a ion a ea in he inne ci adel. This kind o calci e could heo e ically be used o he p oduc ion o beads such as 108.522.18.10. The nea comple e absence o SCTs om he no he n exca a ion a eas associa ed wi h he o i ica ion sys em is also elling, addi ionally highligh ing he di e en unc ions o he no he n pa s o he se lemen . This spa ial dis ibu ion may indica e acen ally con olled o ganiza ion o p oduc ion, wi h ce ain c a ac i i ies being delega ed o he sou he n e ace. The high numbe o SCTs ound a Kaymakçı in only six seasons o exca a ion may be com- pa ed o he si ua ion in Ha usa in cen al Ana olia o ace ain deg ee. A his Hi i e cen e , se e al hund ed SCTs we e ound o e many seasons o exca a ion, bu hey we e sp ead o e amuch la ge a ea han a Kaymakçı. In e es ingly, o he la ge si es wi h long exca a ion his- o ies, such as T oy, Beycesul an, Mycenae, and Knossos, ha e signi ican ly lowe numbe s o 112 STUDIA HERCYNIA XXIX/1 Fig. 11: The dis ibu ion o SCTs in EA 99.526. ©Gygaia P ojec s. SCTs ela i e o hei sizes and pe iods o exca a ion. One possible eason o hese di e ences could be ap e ious lack o in e es in such small b onze ools, especially in olde exca a ion publica ions. On he o he hand, i is also possible ha some o he ac i i ies in which SCTs we e in ol ed, such as lea he wo king, ook place elsewhe e, ou side he main cen e s. The e o e, i lowe owns, sa elli e se lemen s, and o he di ec pe iphe ies o he main a eas o se lemen cen e s a e mo e in ensi ely explo ed, he pic u e could change. Ha usa s ands ou in his espec , clea ly indica ing ha lea he wo k was an ex emely impo an b anch o local p oduc ion (He bo d – Van Wickede 2021). This is demons a ed by he shee numbe o objec s, hei di e si y, and is also indica ed by he w i en sou ces (Bu gin 2022). As shown by He bo d and Van Wickede (2021, 399, 400), he highes concen a ions o ools, including lea he wo king implemen s such as awls, ha e been documen ed in he side wings o emples, as well as in he emples hemsel es, in con ex s da ing o he 13 h cen u y BCE. Acco ding o hem (He bo d – Van Wickede 2021, 476), his high numbe o mundane ools sugges s ha c a ac i i ies and wo kshops mo ed o emple a eas, wha migh be ela ed wi h pa ial secula iza- ion o he dis ic du ing his la e pe iod o he Empi e. On he o he hand, c a ac i i ies using 113KATHLEENC. SCHAUPP– MAGDA PIENIĄŻEK– TUNÇ KANER– CHRISTOPHER H. ROOSEVELT Fig. 12: The dis ibu ion o SCTs in EA 108.522/109.523. ©Gygaia P ojec s. SCTs may ha e o med an impo an segmen o he emple economy. We canno ule ou ha lea he wo k was one o i s mos impo an ocuses, especially gi en ha he numbe s o SCTs eco e ed in o he a eas o he si e we e lowe (Boehme 1972; 1979). On he o he side, because he ou e a eas a ound Ha usa ha e no been exca a ed ye , he use o SCTs on ala ge scale in he pe iphe y, in he sa elli e se lemen s su ounding he capi al, also canno be uled ou . I seems ha no only in Ha usa bu p obably also in Kaymakçı, he b anches o p oduc- ion in ol ing SCTs, such as lea he wo k, played impo an oles in he local economy. As men ioned abo e, in Ha usa his c a smanship migh ha e been especially connec ed o he 114 STUDIA HERCYNIA XXIX/1 emples. No such e idence pe ain in he case o Kaymakçı: lea he wo king appea s o ha e been p ac iced p edominan ly (bu no exclusi ely) in he pe iphe al domes ic and wo king spaces o he se lemen such as sou he n e ace. The same may be ue o ‘ ine ’ wo k, such as he manu ac u e o jewel y and o he o namen ed objec s. The inc easing numbe o ools o e he cou se o he LBA is also signi ican . Asimila endency was obse ed by Mülle -Ka pe (1994, 161, ig. 101) o o he Ana olian si es du ing he 2 nd Millennium BCE. This could be due o inc easing popula ion sizes, as well as o he ising impo ance o c a ac i i ies in ol ing SCTs. Lea he wo k mus ha e been an impo an economic ac i i y no only in Ha usa and Kaymakçı, bu h oughou Ana olia. In he ea y o Mu sili II wi h Ta gasnalli o Hapalla, i is said ha he king o Ha i is no obliged o e u n ugi i es who come o his land om he assal s a es, bu specialized wo ke s a e excluded om his ule: ‘Bu [i ] he is acul i a o , o awea e , aca pen e , o alea he wo ke [sic]– wha e e so o c a sman, and he does no [deli e ] his assigned wo k, [bu ] uns o and comes o Ha i, Iwill a es him and gi e him back o you’ (Beckman 1999, 71). I emphasizes he impo ance o his c a by speci ically men ioning lea he wo ke s.11 I is no su p ising ha hese ou p o essions we e especially aluable o Ana olian economies, since hey ep esen c ucial and i al indus ies: cons uc- ion o houses and p oduc ion o ood, clo hes, and ex iles. Linea B ex s, oo, highligh he impo ance o hese b anches o local economies in he Aegean. One Pylos able (PY Ub 1318), which ep esen s he ea lies documen in G eece e- ga ding he p ocessing o hides, con ains in o ma ion no only abou he manu ac u e and ade o his ma e ial bu also abou he di e en uses o hides, some acco ding o he animal species (Tan alidou 2001, 285). This able , o he a chaeological emains, and e hnog aphic pa allels and la e es imonies make clea ha lea he was used o ab oad a ie y o p oduc s and pu poses in many a eas o wo k and li e: ga men s (e.g., clo hing, oo wea ); anspo a- ion (e.g., sacks, lasks, saddles, shipsails); suppo ing ma e ials (e.g. hongs, bald ics, opes); weapon y (e.g., shields, helme s, bows, bellows o me al cas ing); u ni u e, housing, and p o ec ion (e.g., olding s ools, beds, en s, doo s); and a is ic and adminis a i e a eas (e.g., musical ins umen s, oys, w i ing ma e ials, book binding) (Tan alidou 2001). This e idence p o ide aclea pic u e o he impo ance o lea he and lea he wo k in he li e o he B onze Age peoples o he Medi e anean and Ana olia. Lea he was used in almos e e y aspec o li e; he e o e app oaching his e sa ile b anch o c a smanship h ough i s bes p ese ed emnan s– he ools– should be awo hwhile ocus o e o and in e es in u u e exca a ions and esea ch. CONCLUSIONS In his a icle, he s a e o esea ch on SCTs has been highligh ed and c i ically analyzed. The SCTs om Kaymakçı we e used as an oppo uni y o ake aclose look a awls, d ills, punch- es, and chisels. Inconsis encies in p e ious de ini ions we e demons a ed, and app op ia e guidelines o new de ini ions we e p oposed. Building on Blackwell’s (2011) o iginal coining o he e m, he au ho s sugges using SCT (‘Small C a Tool’) as a collec i e e m o all such ools, o apply i o ools ha canno be mo e p ecisely classi ied, and o adop he guidelines p oposed he e o iden i ying speci ic ypes o SCT. Al hough SCTs may appea small and inconspicuous, hey can p o ide aluable in o ma ion abou ancien c a smanship. 11 The same is p obably included in he ea y wi h Kupan a -Ku un a o Mi a -Kuwaliya and wi h Alaksandu o Wilusa, bu he ele an pa s o he ex a e no p ese ed (c . Beckman 1999, 80, 91). 115KATHLEENC. SCHAUPP– MAGDA PIENIĄŻEK– TUNÇ KANER– CHRISTOPHER H. ROOSEVELT E en hough all SCTs seem o be e y simila a i s sigh , i is possible o cha ac e ize hem by size, shape, and use -wea aces in o g oups o awls, d ills, chisels, and punches. The ela i ely high numbe o SCTs ound a Kaymakçı in compa ison wi h o he se lemen s in he Aegean and Ana olia, wi h he single excep ion o Ha usa, sugges s ha lea he wo k and o he ine c a s may ha e been an impo an local economic b anch. The speci ic uses o hese ools appea o include he p oduc ion o deco a i e o e en luxu y objec s, such as me al essels, bel s, i o y objec s, s one seals, beads, and pendan s, and, especially, he p oduc ion o lea he goods, such as clo hing, shoes, bags, saddles, and en s, o name jus a ew possibili ies. We hope ha ongoing and u u e esea ch will shed mo e ligh on con ex ual and ch onological signi icances, u he highligh ing he impo ance o his p e iously neglec ed class o objec no only a Kaymakçı, bu ac oss Aegean and Ana olian B onze Age si es. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Resea ch a Kaymakçı is conduc ed wi h hanks o pe missions and assis ance om he Gene al Di ec o a e o Cul u al He i age and Museums o Tü kiye’sMinis y o Cul u e and Tou ism and i s annual ep esen a i es, as well as om he di ec o and s a o he Manisa Museum Di ec o a e. Field esea ch o his s udy was suppo ed by Koç Uni e si y, he Me ops Founda- ion, and p i a e dono s, o all o which we acknowledge ou deb o g a i ude. We would like o hank all membe s o he Kaymakçı A chaeological P ojec o hei suppo and coope a ion, wi h special g a i ude o Ch is ina Luke, o p e ious discussion o p oduc ion a Kaymakçı, Cai lin O’G ady, o ad ice on a ious aspec s o me al ools, Pe e Pa úk, o discussions o po e y and ch onology, and Eb u Kane , who p epa ed all ini ial hand illus a ions. Las bu no leas we wish o hank he Ge man Science Founda ion (DFG) o i s suppo (p ojec no. 391366721), as well as he anonymous e iewe s who helped imp o e he quali y o he a icle. BIBLIOGRAPHY Amou e i, M.C. 1970: Fouilles exécu ées aMallia. Le cen e poli ique ii. La c yp e hypos yle (1957–1962). É udes C é oises 18. Pa is. A mb us e , B.R.2000: Goldschmiedekuns und B onze echnik. S udien zum Me allhandwe k de A lan ischen B onzezei au de Ibe ischen Halbinsel. Monog aphies Ins umen um 15. Mon agnac. Ayku , A. 2020: Liman Tepe i -ii. O a unç çağı se amiği e küçük bulun ula ı. Bilgin Kül ü Sana Yayınla ı 145. Anka a. Ayku , A. 2021: Kocabaş Tepe’de o a unç çağı’nda me alu ji aaliye le i. Hace epe Üni e si esi Edebiya Fakül esi De gisi 38/2, 414–428. Bachhube , Ch. 2006: Aegean In e es on he Ulubu un Ship. Ame ican jou nal o a chaeology 110, 345–363. Bass, G.F. 1967: Cape Gelidonya. AB onze Age shipw eck. T ansac ions o he Ame ican philosophical socie y 57/8. s.l. Beckman, G. 1999: Hi i e diploma ic ex s. Geo gia.2 Be ancou , P.P. 1995: O he a caloged objec s, building AD cen e . In: P.P. Be ancou – C. Da a as eds.: Psei a i. The Minoan buildings on he wes side o A ea A. Uni e si y museum monog aph 90. Pennsyl ania, 127–129. Be ancou , P.P 1998: The b onze o coppe pin, building AO. In: P.P. Be ancou – C. Da a as eds.: Psei aII. Building AC ( he ‘Sh ine’) and o he buildings in A ea A. Uni e si y museum monog aph 94. Philadelphia, 101. 116 STUDIA HERCYNIA XXIX/1 Bilgen, A.N– Bilgen, Z. 2015: Middle B onze Age se lemen (laye i ). In: N. Bilgen ed.: Seyi öme Höyük i. s.l., 61–118. Blackwell, N.G. 2011: Middle and La e B onze Age me al ools om he Aegean, Eas e n Medi e anean, and Ana olia. Implica ions o cul u al/ egional in e ac ion and c a smanship. B yn Maw . Blegene al. 1958 = Blegen, C. W.– Boul e , C. G.– Caskey, J. L.– Rawson, M.: Se lemen s iia, iib, and iii. T oy i . New Je sey. Blegen, C.W.– Caskey, J.L.– Rawson, M. 1953: The Six h Se lemen . T oy iii. New Je sey. Blegen, C.W.– Rawson, M. 1966: The buildings and hei con en s. The Palace o Nes o a Pylos in Wes e n Messenia 1. New Je sey. Blegene al. 1973 = Blegen, C.W.– Rawson, M.– Taylou , W.– Dono an, W.P.: Ac opolis and Lowe Town holoi, g a e ci cle, and chambe ombs disco e ies ou side he Ci adel. The Palace o Nes o a Pylos in Wes e n Messenia 3. New Je sey. Bli ze , H. 1995: Minoan implemen s and indus ies. In: J. Shaw– M. Shaw eds.: KommosI. The Kommos egion and houses o he Minoan own i:i. New Je sey, 403–536. Boehme , R.M. 1972: Die Klein unde on Ḫa uša. Aus den G abungskampagnen 1931–1939 und 1952–1969. Boǧazköy -Ḫa ušaVII. Be lin. Boehme , R.M. 1979: Die Klein unde aus de Un e s ad on Ḫa uša. G abungskampagnen 1970–1978. Boǧazköy- -Ḫa uša. E gebnisse de Ausg abungen 10. Be lin. Bosanque , R.C. 1901/1902: Exca a ion a Palaikas oI. The Annual o he B i ish School a A hens 8, 286–316. Bosanque , R.C.– Dawkins, R.M. 1923: The Unpublished Objec s om he Palaikas o Exca a ions 1902–1906. The B i ish School a A hens 1.1. London. B anigan, K. 1974: Aegean me alwo k o he Ea ly and Middle B onze Age. Ox o d. B aun -Feldweg, W. 1968: Me all. We k o men und A bei sweisen. Ra ensbu g. B epohl, E. 1980: Theo ie und P axis des Goldschmieds. Leipzig. B epohl, E. 1999: Die mi elal e liche Goldschmiedekuns und Me allges al ung. Theophilus P esby e : De Di e sis A ibus. Übe die e schiedenen Küns e (und Handwe ks echniken) 2. Köln. B ew, J.O. 1946: The use and abuse o axonomy. The a chaeology o Alkali Ridge U ah. Pape s o he Peabody museum o a chaeology and e hnology 21, 44–66. Bu gin, J.M. 2022: S udies in Hi i e economic adminis a ion. Anew edi ion o he Hi i e palace - emple adminis a i e co pus and esea ch on allied ex s ound a Ḫa uša 2. S udien zu den Boğazköy -Tex en 71. Wiesbaden. Ca ling, H. 1964: Cyp io b onzewo k in he Mycenaean wo ld. Ox o d. Ca ling, H.W.– Jones, R.E. 1977: Analysis o coppe and b onze a e ac s om he Unexplo ed mansion, Knossos. A chaeome y 19, 57–66. Chapou hie , F.– Joly, R.1936: Fouilles exécu ées aMallia. Deuxième appo . Explo a ion du Palais (1925–1926). É udes C é oises i . Pa is. Chapou hie , F.– Dema gne, P.– Dessenne, A. 1962: Fouilles exécu ées aMallia. Qua ième appo . Explo a- ion du palais. Bo du e mé idionale e eche ches complémen ai es (1929–1935 e 1946–1960). É udes C é oises xii. Pa is. Dawkins, R.M.– Hawes, C.H.– Bosanque , R.C. 1904/1905: Exca a ion a Palaikas o i . The annual o he B i ish School a A hens 11, 258–308. Dema gne, P.– De San e e, H.G. 1953: Fouilles exécu ées aMallia. Explo a ion des maisons e qua ie s d’ habi- a ion (1921–1948). É udes C é oises ix. Pa is. Deshayes, J.– Dessenne, A. 1959: Fouilles exécu ées aMallia. Explo a ion des maisons e qua ie s d’habi a ion (1948–1954). É udes C é oises xi. Pa is. Van E en e e, H. 1980: É ude de syn hèse i. Le palais de Mallia e la ci é minoenne. Roma. Van E en e e, H.– Van E en e e, M. 1969: Fouilles Exécu ées aMallia. Le Cen e Poli ique ii. L’Ago a (1960–1966). É udes C é oises x iii. Pa is. 117KATHLEENC. SCHAUPP– MAGDA PIENIĄŻEK– TUNÇ KANER– CHRISTOPHER H. ROOSEVELT E dem, Y.M. 2015: Yeni dönem Beycesul an Höyük kazıla ında espi edilen Geç Tunç Çağ dönemi me al bulun ula ı. Yüksek Lisans Tezi (Mas e ’sThesis). Izmi . E kanal -Ök ü, A. 2018: Panaz epeI. Die F iedhö e on Panaz epe i -ii. Anka a. E ely, R.D.G. 1993: Minoan c a s. Tools and echniques 1. S udies in Medi e anean A chaeology 92/1. Gö ebo g. Fi on, J.L.– Meeks, N.– Joyne , L. 2009: The Aigina easu e. Ca alogue and echnical epo . In: J.L. Fi - on– N. Meeks eds.: The Aigina easu e. Aegean B onze Age jewelle y and amys e y e isi ed. London. Fındıkla e al. 2024 = Fındıkla , S.– Slim, F.G.– Luke, Ch.– Çakı la , C.: Conspicuous ca le. Zooa chaeolog- ical e idence o eli e consump ion in 2 nd Millennium BCE Wes e n Ana olia. In: P.Pa úk– M. Pieniążek– C.H. Roose el eds.: WANAT. Wes e n Ana olia in he Second Millennium BCE. Recen de elopmen s and u u e p ospec s. Resea ch cen e o Ana olian ci iliza ions (ANAMED) se ies. İs anbul, 91–105. Geyken, A.– Lemni ze , L. 2023: „Ahle“. In: Be lin -B andenbu gische Akademie de Wissenscha (ed.): DWDS– Digi ale Wö e buch de deu schen Sp ache [online]. Accessed on Juni 30 h 2021 om URL: h ps:// www.dwds.de/wb/Ahle Go elick, L.– Gwinne , A.J. 1983: Ancien Egyp ian s one -d illing. An expe imen al pe spec i e on aschola ly disag eemen . Sp ing 25/3, 40–47. G ác, J. 2023: Pe Ha dwa e. Ih e sa el es en Beschläge -Expe en [online]. Accessed on May 28 h 2021 om URL: h ps://www.pe ha dwa e.com/de/s echahlen/gebogene -nahahle -c a ool -p o-3353/ G oz -Becke 2023 = Sewing. Maschinennadeln und Ahlen ü die He s ellung on Schuhen [online]. Ac- cessed on Ma ch 14 h 2023 om URL: h ps://g oz- becke .com/mm/media/de/web/pd /Machine_nee- dles_and_awls_ o _shoemaking.pd Gwinne , A.J.– Go elick, L. 1987: The change om s one d ills o coppe d ills in Mesopo amia. An ex- pe imen al pe spec i e. Expedi ion 29/3, 15–24. Hakulin, L. 2013: Me al in LBA Minoan and Mycenaean socie ies on C e e. Aquan i a i e app oach. Unpublished PhD. hesis, Uni e si y o Helsinki. Hänsel, A. 2014: Un e suchungen zu den Scha z unden, den Silbe - und B onzea e ak en, de Guss ech- nik, den Ge äßma ken und den Bleigewich en. In: M. Wemho – D. He el – A. Hänsel eds.: Hein ich Schliemanns Sammlung T oianische Al e üme 2. Be lin, 129–322. He bo d , S.– Van Wickede, A. 2021: Klein unde aus de Obe s ad on Ḫa uša. Das zen ale Tempel ie el und die Tempel ie el am Köngis- und Löwen o . Boğazköy -Ḫa uša. E gebnisse de Ausg abungen 29. Wiesbaden. Hochs e e , A. 1987: Kas anas. Ausg abungen in einem Siedlungshügel de B onze- und Eisenzei Makedoniens 1975–1979. Die Klein unde. P ähis o ische A chäologie in Südos eu opa 6. Be lin. Hoga h, D. 1901: Exca a ions a Zak o, C e e. The Annual o he B i ish School a A hens 7, 121–149. I inee al. 2024 = I ine, B.– Luke, Ch.– Çakı la , C.– Kane , T.– Özbal, R.– Fındıkla , Ş.– Roose el , Ch.H.: S able iso ope analysis o aunal emains om B onze Age Kaymakçı, Wes e n Ana olia. The Holocene 1/1. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/09596836241297077 Jacobi, G. 1974: We kzeug und Ge ä aus dem Oppidum on Manching. Die Ausg abungen in Manching 5. Wies- baden. Kilian, K. 1982: Ausg abungen in Ti yns 1980. Be ich zu den G abungen. A chäologische Anzeige , 393–430. Le i, D. 1976: Fes òs e la Ci il à MinoicaI. Incunabula g aeca 60. Roma. Le i, D.– Ca inci, F. 1988: Fes òs e la ci il à minoica II. L’a e es ia nell’e à p o opalaziale. Ce amica ed al i ma e iali. Incunabula g aeca 77. Roma. Lowe y, P.R.– Sa age, R.D.A.– Wilkins, R. L. 1971: Sc ibe , G a e , Sco pe , T ace : no es on Expe imen s in B onzewo king. In: J. Coles ed.: P oceedings o he P ehis o ic Socie y 37, 167–182. Lud ik 2015 = Lud ik, G.– Kenoye , J.M.– Pieniążek, M.– Aylwa d, W.: New Pe spec i es on S one Bead Technology a B onze Age T oy. Ana olian S udies 65, 1–18. Ma s on 2021 = Ma s on, J.M.– Çakı la , C.– Luke, C.– Ko áčik, P.– Slim, F.G.– Shin, N.– Roose el , C.H.: Ag opas o al economies and land use in B onze Age Wes e n Ana olia. En i onmen al a chaeology 27/6, 539–553. 118 STUDIA HERCYNIA XXIX/1 Ma yon, H. 1938: Some p ehis o ic me alwo ke s’ ools. The an iqua ies jou nal being he Jou nal o The Socie y o An iqua ies o London 18, 243–250. Mellaa , J.– Mu ay, A. 1995: Beycesul an. La e B onze Age and Ph ygian po e y and Middle and La e B onze Age small objec s 3/2. Occasional publica ions o he B i ish ins i u e o a chaeology a Anka a 12. Anka a. Mülle -Ka pe, A. 1994: Al ana olisches Me allhandwe k. Neumüns e . Pe nie , L. 1935: Gli s a i più an ichi e il p imo palazzo. Sca i e s udi della Missione a chaeologica i aliana aC e a dal 1900 al 1934. Il palazzo minoico di Fes òsI. Roma. Pe nie , L.– Ban i, L. 1951: Il secondo palazzo. Sca i e s udi della Missione a chaeologica i aliana aC e a dal 1900 al 1950. Il palazzo minoico di Fes òs ii. Roma. Pieniążek, M. 2020a: Klein unde– Funde aus Me all. In: M. Pieniazek– P.Pa úk– D. Thumm -Doğ ayan– E. Pe nicka eds.: T oia 1987–2012. G abungen und Fo schungen iii. T oia i bis T oia ii. Ausgehende mi le e und spä e B onzezei 2. S udia T oica 7. Bonn, 582–681. Pieniążek, M. 2020b: The small inds om he 1987–2012 exca a ions. T oy i and iii. In: M. Pieniazek– P.Pa úk– D. Thumm -Doğ ayan– E. Pe nicka (eds.): T oia 1987– 2012: G abungen und Fo schungen iii. T oia i bis T oia iii. Ausgehende mi le e und spä e B onzezei 2. S udia T oica 7. Bonn, 978–1025. Pieniążeke al. 2019 = Pieniążek, M.– Roose el , C.H.– Luke, C.– Pa úk, P.: O ne wo ks and kni es. Ab onze kni e wi h he ingbone deco a ion om he Ci adel o Kaymakçı (Manisa İli / TR). A chäologisches Ko - espondenzbla 49, 197–214. Pla on 1966a = Πλaτων, N.: Άνασκαφη Ζάκρου. P ak ika es en A henais A chaiologikes He ai eias 1962, 142–168. Pla on 1966b = Πλaτων, N.: Άνασκαφη Ζάκρου. P ak ika es en A henais A chaiologikes He ai eias 1963, 160–188. Pla on 1966c = Πλaτων, N.: Άνασκαφη Ζάκρου. P ak ika es en A henais A chaiologikes He ai eias 1964, 142–168. Pla on 1968 = Πλaτων, N.: Άνασκαφη Ζάκρου. P ak ika es en A henais A chaiologikes He ai eias 1966, 139–173. Pla on 1969 = Πλaτων, N.: Άνασκαφη Ζάκρου. P ak ika es en A henais A chaiologikes He ai eias 1967, 162–194. Pla on 1973 = Πλaτων, N.: Άνασκαφη Ζάκρου. P ak ika es en A henais A chaiologikes He ai eias 1971, 231–275. Pla on 1981 = Πλaτων, N.: Άνασκαφη Ζάκρου. P ak ika es en A henais A chaiologikes He ai eias 1979, 282–322. Pla on, E.M. 1988: The wo kshops and wo king a eas o Minoan C e e. The e idence o he Palace and own o Zak os o acompa a i e s udy. Diss. Uni e si y o B is ol. Popham, M.R.1984: The Minoan Unexplo ed mansion a Knossos. Ox o d. Pulak, C. 2008: The Ulubu un shipw eck and La e B onze Age ade. In: J. A uz– K. Benzel– J.M. E ans eds.: Beyond Babylon. A , ade, and diplomacy in he Second Millennium B.C. New Yo k, 298–385. Rahms o , L. 2008: Klein unde aus Ti yns. Te ako a, S ein, Bein und Glas/Fayence o nehmlich aus de Spä - b onzezei . Ti yns. Fo schungen und Be ich e 16. Wiesbaden. Roose el , C.H. 2014: Mapping si e -le el mic o opog aphy wi h Real -Time Kinema ic Global Na iga ion Sa elli e Sys ems (RTK GNSS) and Unmanned Ae ial Vehicle Pho og amme y (UAVP). Open A chaeology 1, 29–53. Roose el , C.H. 2024: Spa ial s uc u e and s a ig aphy a Second -Millennium BCE Kaymakçı. In: P.Pa úk– M. Pieniążek– C. H. Roose el eds.: WANAT. Wes e n Ana olia in he Second Millennium BCE. Recen de elop- men s and u u e p ospec s. Resea ch cen e o Ana olian ci iliza ions (ANAMED) se ies. İs anbul, 295–319. Roose el , C.H.– Luke, C. 2017: The s o y o a o go en kingdom? Su ey a chaeology and he his o ical geog aphy o Cen al Wes e n Ana olia in he Second Millennium BC.Eu opean jou nal o a chaeology 20/1, 120–147. Roose el e al. 2018 = Roose el , C.H.– Luke, C.– Ünlüsoy, S.– Çakı la , C.– Ma s on, J. M.– O’G ady, C.R.– Pa úk, P.– Pieniążek, M.– Mok išo a, J.– Sco , C.B.– Shin, N.– Slim, F.G.: Explo ing space, economy, and in e egional in e ac ion a aSecond Millennium B.C.E. ci adel in Cen al Wes e n Ana olia. 2014–2017 Resea ch a Kaymakçı. Ame ican jou nal o a chaeology 122, 645–688. Saue , Ch. 2023: Die Hausbüche de Nü nbe ge Zöl b üde s i ungen [online]. Accessed on June 21s 2023 om URL: h ps://hausbueche .nue nbe g.de/index.php?do=page & mo=2 Schae e , C.F.A. 1952: Enkomi -Alasia. Nou elles missiones en Chyp e, 1946–1950. Pa is. 119KATHLEENC. SCHAUPP– MAGDA PIENIĄŻEK– TUNÇ KANER– CHRISTOPHER H. ROOSEVELT Seehe , J. 2005: Boh en wie die He hi e . Rekons uk ion on Boh maschinen de Spä b onzezei und Beispiele ih e Ve wendung. Is anbule Mi eilungen 55, 13–32. Shaw, J.W. 1973: Minoan a chi ec u e. Ma e ials and echniques. Annua io della Scuola a cheologica di A ene e delle Missioni i aliane in O ien e 1971. Roma. Shaw, J.W.– Ha lan, D.K. 2000: B onze and i on ools and weapons. In: J. Shaw– M. Shaw eds.: Kommos i . The G eek Sanc ua y i:i. New Je sey, 336–414. Shea , I.M. 1987: The Panagia houses a Mycenae. Uni e si y museum monog aph 68. Philadelphia. Slim, F. – Çaki la , C. – Roose el , C.H. 2020: Pigs in Sigh . La e B onze Age Pig Husband ies in he Aegean and Ana olia. Jou nal o Field A chaeology 45, 315–333. Soles, J.S.– Giumlia -Mai , A. 2022: Me al objec s, ma e ials, and sou ces. In: J.S. Soles– C. Da a as eds.: Mochlos i A. Pe iod iii. The House o he me al me chan and o he buildings in he Neopala ial own. P ehis o y monog aphs 68/1, Pennsyl ania, 223–276. Soles J.S.– S os -Gale, Z.A. 2004: The me al inds and hei geological sou ces. In: J.S. Soles– C. Da a as eds.: Mochlos iC. Pe iod iii. Neopala ial se lemen on he coas . The a isans’ gua e and he a mhouse a Chalinomou i. The small inds. P ehis o y monog aphs 9. Pennsyl ania, 45–59. S ubbings, F.H. 1954: Mycenae 1939–1953. Pa ii. B onze Founde ’sHoa d. The annual o he B i ish school a A hens 49, 292–296. T an alidou, K. 2001: P oducing and eco ding lea he and o he animal p oduc s. In: A. Michailidou ed.: Manu ac u e and measu emen . Coun ing, measu ing and eco ding. C a i ems in ea ly Aegean socie ies. Μελετήματα 33. A hens. 266–317. Un ach , O. 1968: Me al echniques o c a smen. Abasic manual o c a smen on he me hods o o ming and deco a ing me als. London. Walbe g, G. 1998: The exca a ions on he lowe e aces 1985–1991. Exca a ions on he Ac opolis o Midea 1/1. Sk i e u gi na a S enska ins i u e iA hen 4– 49/1. S ockholm. Walbe g, G. 2007: Midea. The mega on complex and sh ine a ea. Exca a ions on he lowe e aces 1994–1997. P ehis o y monog aphs 20. Pennsyl ania. Yalçın, Ü.– Pulak, C.– Slo a, R.2005: Das Schi on Ulubu un. Wel handel o 3000 Jah en. Deu sches Be gbau -Museum Bochum 138. Bochum. Zimme mann, Th. 2009: Zu möglichen Ta auie bes eck und T eibs acheln (S imuli) in ühb onzezei lichen P unkg äbe n aus Alaca Höyük, Tü kei. P ähis o ische Zei sch i 84, 141–150. Ka hleenC. Schaupp Ins i u e o P ehis o y and P o ohis o y Tübingen Uni e si y Tübingen, Ge many kc [email p o ec ed] Tunç Kane Resea ch Cen e o Ana olian Ci iliza ions (ANAMED) Koç Uni e si y, Is anbul, Tü kiye kane [email protected]. , unckane @gmail.com Magda Pieniążek Ins i u e o P ehis o y and P o ohis o y, Tübingen Uni e si y Tübingen, Ge many magda.pieniazek@i u.uni - uebingen.de Ch is ophe H. Roose el Resea ch Cen e o Ana olian Ci iliza ions (ANAMED) and Depa men o A chaeology and His o y o A , Koç Uni e si y, Is anbul, Tü kiye. ch oose el @ku.edu.