Abstract
In the present paper, the author offers new absolute and contextual dating evidence for Scottish archaeological pitchstone. Much archaeological pitchstone from the Scottish mainland is recovered from unsealed contexts of multi-period or palimpsest sites, and pitchstone artefacts from radiocarbon-dated pits therefore provide important dating evidence for this material group and its associated exchange network. In Scotland, all archaeological pitchstone derives from outcrops on the Isle of Arran, in the Firth of Clyde, and on the source island pitchstone-bearing assemblages include diagnostic types from the Mesolithic, Neolithic and Early Bronze Age period. Off Arran, pitchstone-bearing assemblages never include Mesolithic types, such as microliths, suggesting a post Mesolithic date. This suggestion is supported by worked pitchstone from radiocarbon-dated pits, where all presently available dates indicate that, on the Scottish mainland, Arran pitchstone was traded and used after the Mesolithic period, and in particular during the Early Neolithic period.
Highlights
In 2009, the author concluded the project Archaeological Pitchstone in Northern Britain with the publication of a monograph in which he discussed various issues relating to this topic (Ballin 2009a)
The aim of the present paper is to present new absolute and contextual dating evidence for Scottish archaeological pitchstone
One of the most interesting questions relating to prehistoric pitchstone use is arguably the procurement and exchange of this raw material and of pitchstone artefacts, and what this tells us about the nature of Neolithic society (Ballin 2008)
Summary
In 2009, the author concluded the project Archaeological Pitchstone in Northern Britain with the publication of a monograph in which he discussed various issues relating to this topic (Ballin 2009a). The higher water content frequently gives pitchstone a tar-like lustre ( its name), whereas obsidian generally has a highly vitreous lustre, it may be almost impossible to distinguish (on the basis of hand-samples) between the purest aphyric pitchstones (such as some of the material from the ‘greater’ Corriegills district on the Isle of Arran, Scotland; Ballin & Faithfull 2009) and common obsidian (see Figure 1) As it is the impression of this author that there are more similarities than differences between pitchstone and obsidian, he has recently suggested that pitchstone ought to be perceived as a form of obsidian (Ballin 2014). One of the most interesting questions relating to prehistoric pitchstone use is arguably the procurement and exchange of this raw material and of pitchstone artefacts, and what this tells us about the nature of Neolithic society (Ballin 2008) For this discussion to take place, it was necessary to date archaeological pitchstone, both on the source island Arran, and at locations off this island. Through association in these same pits, for the importation into Scotland of axeheads of tuff (petrological Group VI) from Great Langdale in Cumbria (Bradley & Edmonds 1993)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
