‘Artefacts-that-aren’t’

Press, 18 May 1984, Page 14

‘Artefacts-that-aren’t’

Staff working in the Prehistory department at Canterbury Museum are often called upon to examine and identify material found by the public. The most common objects are adzeheads and other stonemade tools of Maori origin. Artifacts such as these are durable and survive indefinitely in the ground until they are dug up and rediscovered, often many centuries later. The finders of such objects are usually very excited about their discovery and one of the more depressing jobs for a Museum employee is telling a visitor that the treasure they have brought in is not an artifact at all — actually nothing but a naturally shaped piece of rock, or other material. The two most common types of “artifacts-that-aren’t” brought in to the Museum are stones with holes through them, usually thought to be fishing sinkers, or sometimes anchors, and stone pieces that have been fashioned by natural processes into a shape that resembles the Maori adzehead. Sometimes these naturally-shaped stones do not resemble any particular artifact but are sufficiently unusual, or perhaps regular, in form that the finder is sure they must be manmade.

Stones with holes in them are, in fact, relatively common among the greywacke cobbles of Canterbury’s immense areas of braided river bed where material is constantly subjected to the action of water and the associated grinding and tumbling action of other stones. Squared off or flattened stone shapes resembling adzeheads are more common closer to the rock source, perhaps split away by the action of frost, and not yet rounded off by the rolling river currents. The Otago schists are particularly prone to forming into adze or clublike shapes.

One of the more unusual and misleading of the “artifacts-that-aren’t” to be brought into Canterbury Museum was actually bequeathed as part of the substantial collection of Louis Vangioni and was retained for many years as genuine. Made of bone in this case, Vangioni’s original catalogue describes it as a “rare bone artifact made from the vertebrae of some fish, some form of Tiki in good order of preservation.” Vangioni’s confusion is understandable — it could certainly be described as tiki-like in form — but an examination indicates that it shows no signs at all of human manufacture; even the finest carving or cutting marks are impossible to hide under a modern microscope.

Nor is it fish vertebrae, being a bone (probably part of the sternum or breast-bone) of a marine mammal such as a seal or small whale, shaped by the action of water, and deposited by the same agency into

the sea cave where it was found. Of course, early Maori people picked up interesting, naturallyshaped pieces of material as they moved about the country, just as we do today, and carried them back to their villages and living areas. Some such, which are found on archaeological sites, can undoubtedly be accounted for in this way. People who learn from the

By

BEVERLEY McCULLOCH

Museum that the treasure they found on holiday is not an artifact after all, but one of these “arti-facts-that-aren’t,” should not be too disappointed. Many experts have been, and are still being, fooled by the efforts of nature in this direction.

Unusual and interesting objects are no less unusual or interesting just because they are the work of nature and not of man.