keryn walshe â€“ pointing bones and bone points pointing bones and

Keryn Walshe – Pointing Bones and Bone Points

167

Journal of the Anthropological Society of South Australia Vol. 33 - 2008

Pointing Bones and Bone Points in the Australian Aboriginal Collection of the South

Australian Museum Keryn Walshe

South Australian Museum

Abstract This paper investigates the categorisation of bone objects as ordinary bone points used as tools or fasteners and pointing bones or death-pointers, the objects of sorcery. The South Australia Museum lists over 700 bone objects on its database and 65% of these are listed as sorcery objects. This ratio is in clear contrast to the archaeological record of bone finds across Australia. Classifying bone objects appears to have been a largely subjective process in museums and yet assigning sorcery status adds a further layer of complexity and uncertainty. It is not possible to provide a set of criteria for distinguishing a bone point from a pointing bone at this stage of study and it is clear from this investigation that until critical ethnographic research is undertaken on bone objects, it will be difficult to do so. This paper makes clear that descriptive traits such as the presence of resin, ochre and incisions and physical traits such as length are not reliable indicators of a pointing bone. The only reliable trait identified so far, is the addition of hair string and to a lesser extent, but perhaps as significant, gnawing of the point.

Introduction The South Australia Museum (SA Museum hereafter) lists over 700 bone objects on its database. These are sub-categorised under a wide list of fields including pins, tools, ornaments and death-pointers. The ‘death-pointers’ are by far the largest sub-category comprising about 65% of the bone objects. Death-pointers or pointing bones are sorcery material and related to projective magic. The image of a medicine man setting out on a revenge killing in emu feathered slippers and carrying a pointing bone often stirred popular imagination in early to mid 20th century Australian fiction writing. The death-pointer or pointing bone has consequently enjoyed popular status and


168


has to some extent, overwhelmed ordinary bone objects in Aboriginal Australian ethnographic collections.

The collection of SA Museum bone objects presents a preponderance of sorcery related bone objects over functional and ornamental bone objects. This ratio is in clear contrast to the archaeological record of bone finds across Australia whereby the most commonly identified bone object is the bone point, also known as an awl or a pin for working and fastening animal skins as cloaks.

This paper investigates the categorisation of ethnographic bone objects with particular focus on death-pointers as objects of sorcery. Such an assignment transposes the object in question to a sacred and eventually physically separate realm compared to their profane counterparts such as tools and ornaments. Assigning sorcery status to objects has implications for museums in presenting public displays and for research of cultural artefacts. SA Museum maintains a secure room for identified men’s ‘secret-sacred’ objects and it has become standard practice for sorcery related material to be placed there. Access to these objects is only allowed after consultation with and permission received from appropriate Indigenous authorities. Universally museums have had mixed experiences in attempting to govern access to particular collections or objects. Those experiences are not the purpose of this paper. The aim here is to highlight the complexities at a much earlier step; the categorisation of bone objects.

The categorisation of bone objects held in the SA Museum Australian Indigenous ethnographic collection as mundane or sorcery related readily suggests a subjective and inconsistent


169


approach over time. The need for a rigorous code in sorting mundane from sorcery bone objects is apparent. It is highly unlikely that such inconsistency has been exclusive to SA Museum or to this category of Indigenous material culture. National codes for categorising objects would minimise subjective and inconsistent approaches and in turn provide objects of more than ordinary status with agreed levels of security.

As noted above, the SA Museum archaeology collection of bone finds from various sites and regions reflects the national trend toward a predominance of bone points or awls rather than death-pointers. Bone points have been demonstrated to allow a wide range of actions from procuring food to piercing skins (Brockwell & Akerman 2007; Webb 1987; Webb & Allen 1990) and the polish and wear on some strongly suggest long term ownership. Burial sites are also known to yield bone points amongst grave goods and these have been consistently interpreted as ‘awls’ (in the case of burials these are more correctly termed ‘shroud fasteners’ but the archaeology literature tends toward the term awl) rather than death-pointers or pointing bones. Grave goods are generally understood to include objects highly familiar to the deceased and afford them particular status (Akerman 1995; Brockwell & Akerman 2007; Feary 1996; Pretty 1977).

In view of the significant contrast between the archaeology and ethnographic records, an obvious question arises: are archaeological bone objects being misidentified as tools rather than sorcery objects and are ethnographic bone objects being misidentified as death-pointers rather than tools? This paper


170


will address this critical issue in light of the implications for assigning specific status to a bone object.

Terminology of Bone Objects Apart from the problem of categories and sub-categories, an additional problem needs to be acknowledged. Bone objects are variously termed as shown in the SA Museum collection which lists 20 sub categories of ‘bone object’ in common use. This confusion of terminology is reduced in this paper to four categories relating to use: bone points; ornaments; charms and pointing bones. Bone points cover the sub categories of: archaeology; awl; bone; digging tool; implement; knife; pin and tool. This latter sub-category includes spear points, pressure flaking tools, fabricators, chisels and gouges. The archaeology sub-category here is not the archaeology collection but merely a few specimens transferred from archaeology into ethnography at some stage. Ornaments and charms as a sub-category are comparatively uncluttered with multiple terms. There are only two records of sorcery/medical ornaments with the remaining 155 covering nose bones and nose pegs. The two former records are excluded from this discussion as their categorisation appears even more fraught with subjective and uncertain methods. (These types of objects will be the focus for future study). Charms are unremarkable cut lengths of mostly bird bone plugged at each end with resin and intended to increase success in food gathering and hunting. Pointing bones include death-pointers, sorcery objects and blood-letting and medical objects.


171


Image 1 - Bone points manufactured from kangaroo bones. Top to bottom: fine point with resin wad at proximal end; fibula bone point with transverse incisions down shaft to tapered point; fibula bone point with spatula end and ulna bone point with broad spatula end. (SA Museum collection, unaccessioned items).

Table One below presents the breakdown of category types for bone objects.

Table 1: Sub-categories for bone objects in SA Museum Collection

Archaeology 9

Awl 5

Bone 1

Death-pointer; Awl; Sorcery 91

Death-pointer; Human; Sorcery 3

Death-pointer; Medical-object; Sorcery-object; Blood-letting 1

Death-pointer; Sorcery 348

Death-pointer; Spear; Sorcery 1

Digging Tool 1


172


Implement 2

Knife 1

Material 2

Material; Ornament 2

Medical-material; Bloodletting-tool 1

Ornament 156

Ornament; Sorcery-object 1

Ornament; Sorcery-object; Medical-object 1

Pin 23

Sorcery object 4

Tool 52

TOTAL 706

Summary of Sub-categories

Pointing Bones 450 64%

Bone Points 94 13%

Ornaments 156 22%

Other 11 1%

Since most ornaments and charms appear to be easily distinguished the following analysis will focus on distinguishing bone points (awls and tools) from pointing bones (death-pointers) in ethnographic and archaeology collections by using the SA Museum collection as a case study.

Bone Points 94 bone objects listed on the SA Museum database fall into the sub category of bone points. Closer analysis of 61 of the bone points has allowed recognition of general trends useful for characterising this sub category. These are outlined below followed by results and discussion of the general trends


173


against public knowledge of bone points. Comprehensive findings are given in Appendix 1 of this paper along with description, provenance, collector and collection date for each object.

61 specimens of bone points were selected at random for greater analysis. Attribute fields were established:

• faunal type

• skeletal element type • length (mm)

• end shape as: uni-point, bi-point, spatula, irregular or broken

• presence or trace of hair string, ochre, resin or incisions

• taphonomic traits such as teeth marks or pitting on the surface.

By far the most common faunal and element type was found to be a macropod (kangaroos and wallabies) fibula. Length ranged from 37 to 280mm with an average of 174mm. Uni-points dominate over spatula and bi-point end shapes with a distribution of 67%, 24% and 10% respectively. No bone point was found to have hair string attached either as a complete or fragmented cord but one does have a few reddish coloured fibres attached. 29% have a resin wad and this is uniformly at the proximal end, 25% are incised and 13% have ochre applied to some or all, of the fibula shaft. Teeth marks and pitting along the shaft or on one or both ends were recorded on only 10% of the points.

The observations indicate that bone points in this sample are without hair string but a strong correlation is demonstrated


174


between the presence of resin and incisions. To a lesser extent bone points are ochred. Some of the bone points have been chewed or gnawed, probably by humans, and presumably whilst still covered with meat in view of the shape and depth of depressions. This latter feature is worthy of further investigation.

McCarthy states that:

“The rib, leg and wing bones of many kinds of birds and mammals were used throughout the continent as awls. The joint was left on one end as a rule, the other end broken off at the required length and then rubbed on a stone to a sharp point. They are from 5-30cm long…used to peg out possum and other skins on bark and wood to dry them for cloaks and rugs and to perforate their edges in sewing them together….” (McCarthy 1976: 86)

It is apparent from the SA Museum collection that a very narrow range of fauna and skeletal element type are employed. The macropod fibula is an almost preordained canvas requiring little modification to become the perfect bone point. Akerman (1995) records the common use of a macropod fibula for manufacturing bone awls due to its convenient natural form but does also note the use of split long bones as points and scrapers as made evident from research by Bird and Beck (1980) and Webb and Allen (1990). McCarthy also records the use of the ‘strong leg bone’ such as the ulna of a kangaroo or emu sharpened at the distal end and used as a fabricator whilst the tibia (larger of the lower leg bones) was split lengthwise and the sides smoothed flat for use as a gouge or chisel. But it is the macropod fibula which


175


reigns across both ethnographic and archaeology collections. This may simply reflect an inherent bias as this object is easier to recognise visually in archaeology contexts and is highly collectable ethnographically due to its greater aesthetic qualities compared to say, a gouge prepared from a piece of long bone shaft. Additionally, the confusion between pointing bones and bone points may well have fuelled enthusiasm for acquiring such objects in the early 20th century. However, it is difficult to reconcile the fact that fibulae simply make perfect blanks for manufacturing bone points, against any suggested bias.

Uni-points are the most common archaeology and ethnographic bone finds and were used for a variety of purposes (Webb 1987; Webb & Allen 1990). Because of their wide range of functions, uni-points have been found in a broad range of occupation sites including coastal and inland (Brockwell & Akerman 2007). Uni-point fibula bone points are also known from burial sites where they appear to have been used to fasten cloaks around the deceased (Pretty 1977) or be part of a suite of grave goods representing the deceased’s most familiar, personal objects (Cohen 1993; Feary 1996). Bi-points or fusiform points, previously referred to as ‘muduk’ points by Hale and Tindale (1930), are generally associated with fishing due to ethnographic observations by Roth (1909). Fusiforms were fastened to the spear head (Akerman 1995; McCarthy 1976) and could also be used as barbs. McCarthy and Akerman (1995) note that ‘muduks’ can also be single pointed, varying in length from 3cm up to about 25cm but are usually stout objects subject to breakage during use and thus


176


have a higher probability of being missed in archaeological contexts and overlooked in ethnographic contexts.

Pointing Bones 448 bone objects listed on the SA Museum database fall into the sub category of pointing bones and these are tabled in Appendix 2 of this paper (which also gives description, provenance, collector and collection date).

Closer analysis of 83 of the pointing bones revealed some general trends useful for characterising this sub category. As with bone points, by far the most common faunal and element type was found to be a macropod (kangaroos and wallabies) fibula. Length ranged from 10 to 335mm with an average of 177mm. Of the 83 specimens only two were less than 105mm and two greater than 300mm in length. Excluding these, the average length is approximately 180mm. Uni-points make up 77% and bi-points 11% of the sample. Interestingly 50% of the uni-points are shaped into a spatula end at the proximal end. Thus pointing bones are more likely to be shaped into a point at the narrower, distal end but shaped into a spatula end at the broader, proximal end.

19% of the sample had hair string attached either as a complete cord or as a few fibres. 8% have an ochre tinge and 24% have resin in a wad or as a trace. Interestingly three specimens appeared to have been burnt evenly across the surface in a high temperature fire. 21% are incised with all but two being incised transversely across both upper and lower surfaces of the shaft. 33% have damage consistent with chewing or gnawing. This damage is fairly evenly distributed at


177


either end of the point but rarely at both ends, or isolated to a mid point on the shaft. Only one had chewing concentrated at one end and extending down the shaft. Table 2 below summarises the trends for both pointing bones and bone points.

Table 2: Bone Points versus Pointing Bones- common attributes

Attribute Most Common Bone Points (% of sample)

Pointing Bones (% of sample)

Fauna type Macropod 94 99

Skeletal element

Fibula 84 99

End shape Uni-point Spatula Bi-point

67 24 10

77 30 (of total sample) 11

Modification Hairstring Ochre Resin Incision Pitting/Gnawing

0 13 29 15 10

19 8 24 21 33

Macropod fibulae are also the most frequently selected skeletal element amongst identified bone sorcery objects. The presence of ochre, resin wads and hair string is clearly an identifiable trait. Interestingly chewing or gnawing is strongly represented as a trait and this deserves further investigation. The origin of assigning an object as a death-pointer/sorcery bone was investigated by referring to the earliest registration entry for each of the 83 bones and also searching available associated documentation. It was found that only 16 of the 83 entries were originally recorded as ‘pointing bones’ and all


178


others as awls, pins or bone points. The 16 entered as pointing bones all have resin and hair string attached.

Sorcery objects include a wide variety of mediums with an equally wide variety of powers, but all are united by the use of projective magic and the intent to harm and even kill their victim. Pointing bones and projective magic are described in published accounts such as those by Spencer and Gillen (1927), Elkin (1974), Berndt and Berndt (1964) and McCarthy (1952, 1957, 1976). Bone pointing as projective magic is a symbolic or magical way of spearing the victim and it has been claimed by McCarthy (1957) to be the ‘most powerful, direct and best known method employed’. McCarthy describes the pointing bone as usually the ‘fibula arm-bone of a dead man’ but can also be of a wallaby, kangaroo or emu. The term fibula arm bone is slightly confusing, the fibula being the lesser of the two lower leg bones whilst an arm bone could be the radius, ulna or humerus. Howitt (1904) had earlier referred to the use of a fibula from a dead man’s leg which is scraped, polished and ornamented with ochre and a cord made from the dead man’s hair. This dramatic rendition was presumably sourced by McCarthy who made a slight error but his oversight was rectified in a later publication (1976:89), where he clearly refers to a death-pointer ‘usually made from the leg bone of a kangaroo or emu and sometimes that of a dead man’. The sub categories in SA Museum database referring to death-pointer/human/sorcery refers to the presence of human hair string rather than human bone as the primary material. The SA Museum collection includes objects made from human bone but these were not included in this study.


179


McCarthy (1957:147) notes that the fibula bone pointer “..may be painted red, incised with a simple design or decorated with down. On the butt is a blob of gum which secures a length of human hair string to the bone”. This object is then used in various ways such as jerking the point at the victim or tying the string onto the victim’s arm for blood letting. Practices differed regionally as did the disposal of the bone after pointing, which may involve wrapping in emu feathers and leaves and burying for some months. One practice recorded for South Australia involved soaking the bone (neilyeri) in a putrefying corpse then wrapping it in putrescent matter and pointing it at, or pricking the intended victim with the neilyeri (McCarthy 1957; Taplin 1879). The hair string cord was also believed by some to drain the blood from the victim and become trapped in the bone. A wad of resin at one end prevented the blood from draining out of the bone. The health of the victim could then be tampered with by the perpetrator heating the bone over a fire, and consequently heating his blood at periodic intervals until great sickness or death occurred (Berndt & Berndt 1964:321). This is interesting in light of two of the specimens from SA Museum exhibit exposure to an even degree of burning from temperatures above 350C. Chewing or gnawing on the bone may also have been carried out with similar intent- to harm the victim by aggravating the enchanted bone.

The ‘death-bone’ is known as ‘gundila’ in the Great Victoria Desert and as ‘injilla’ by the Arrernte according to Berndt (1964), citing from Spencer and Gillen (1938). A variant of the death-bone was the ‘ullinka’ which has a hooked end and a hole at the other through which hair string was passed. An


180


object donated by Kym Akerman to the SA Museum collection in 1970, fits this description and is also worthy of further investigation.

The ‘werpoo’ is an unusual object, held with the Australian Museum, but recorded from the Adelaide Plains (McCarthy 1952). No similar object exists in the SA Museum collection. The needle like point tapers upwards, to apparently slide without notice to the victim, downwards from the neck or upwards from the chest and into the heart.

The use of a bone from a ‘dead man’ was assumed by Elkin (1938) to be more powerful than animal bones. There is no actual evidence of this in the literature or amongst the physical objects when comparing numbers of animal bones to human bones. The most powerful ingredient of the entire exercise appears to be the chanting accompanying all steps in the process of bone pointing, rather than the actual bone or its adornment.

Chanting was a vital ingredient for the success of pointing and far more secrecy and taboo have existed around the content and tone of the chant than around the object itself. Indeed the power of chanting and singing in pointing a bone was such that the magic was equally capable of harming the perpetrator as the intended victim, or even a bystander. Informants for some anthropologists wanting to elicit sorcery information remarked on the fear held by their informants if merely imitating an act of bone pointing (Berndt 1964).


181


Bone Points as Pointing Bones Traits identified above for pointing bones include the presence of resin and hair string but unfortunately these are not always retained over time. Resin has volatile molecules highly subject to fluctuating humidity and ambient temperature, resulting in cracking and splitting if not kept in a consistent environment. Hair string is particularly susceptible to insect attack but will also fall away with the resin which holds it to the object. Ochre is a lesser trait but this can rub off with handling over time, leaving only a faint trace.

Ordinary bone points may well have been used as pointing bones after the addition of ochre, resin and in particular hair string. A bone point in the SA Museum collection was retrieved by C. Reid in 1931 from Yapma Jack, who had it secreted in his hut. The registration entry notes that after its revelation, hair string was added but the entry does not state why it was added and if the bone became a sorcery object. As noted earlier, a strong correlation exists between resin and incisions on bone points. Resin enables hair string to be attached to the point. The string becomes of greatest significance as a seemingly physical manifestation of the victim’s circulatory system, now extended beyond the body and into the sorcerer’s control. The hair string then is integral to the pointing process more so than decorative elements such as ochre and incisions. Incision patterns replicate the patterns on incised nose bones from Central Australia and therefore may offer overt means of identifying geo-social affiliations. The average lengths for the SA Museum sample of bone points and pointing bones is almost identical at 174 and


182


177mm respectively. Chewing or gnawing is an interesting element and is more likely to be present on pointing bones than bone points.

What is not clear in the literature is the potential for bone points to transfer from mundane to sorcery status. There seems to be some anecdotal evidence for an ordinary bone awl to be given hair string and chanted into sorcery but it is not known if a sorcery object can return to an ordinary existence. McCarthy (1976:88, Fig. 66-1) depicts a bone awl, a bone point and a pointed bone implement. These objects need only have resin and hair string attached to become visually at least, a pointing bone. Similarly, pointing bones need only to lose their resin and hair string over time, to become visually, a benign bone point. Further research on a microscopic level to identify evidence for use wear may assist in addressing the question of pointing bones evolving from bone points. This would also account for the same patterns of incision being observed on Central Australian nose bones and pointing bones.

As demonstrated above for bone tools, nose bones are also highly variable for faunal type, skeletal element, uni or bi-point and degree of decoration. Nose bones from central to northern Australia are however more likely to be manufactured from the ulna or radius of large birds, pelican bones in particular but also the bush turkey. These bones are broad in circumference and hollow with a clean white smooth surface. The proximal and distal ends are typically cut through to leave a length of approximately 200mm with open ends. The ends are then available for totemic feathers or tail tips to be


183


inserted, or plugged with resin. Some nose bones measure over 300mm in length. Numerous bone objects were collected by tourists to Hermannsburg in the 1960-70s and many of these have since been donated to SA Museum. These have been generally manufactured from the broad ‘shovel’ mid-section of a macropod fibula and measure about 150-200mm. Some are rubbed with ochre and most carry three or more series of transverse incisions in the shaft’s concavity. The ends are abraded to a rounded, spatula shape and some have a wad of resin at one or both ends. Their shape and style match earlier records of nose bones. Fibula uni-points, the classic awls, also doubled as nose bones and long bi-points manufactured from the proximal end of a fibula were worn as nose bones without any other purpose (McCarthy 1976, Akerman 1995). Thus the cross over of function and style or category and description is apparent for all bone objects in the broad categories of bone tools, bone ornaments and sorcery objects of bone. As stated earlier in this paper the implications for museum collections and public display is one for topical and critical discussion.

Conclusion Available documents and informal commentary from various collectors and published works suggests that the presence of hair string and resin are more reliable traits for identifying pointing bones than traits such as uni versus bi-point; faunal or skeletal element type, length and the presence of ochre and incisions. Within the SA Museum sample of 83 death-pointers, there is a strong correlation between traits such as hair string, resin, incisions on macropod fibula uni-points that are


184


approximately 177mm in length and have been chewed or gnawed. Reviewing the original registration entries for the bone objects in the collection, those clearly entered as bone pointers or pointing bones, as opposed to bone points, awls and nose bones or pegs all have the traits identified here- hair string, resin and ochre or incisions. Extrapolating across the collection of over 700 SA Museum bone objects, only 20% rather than 64% are likely to be pointing bones. This conforms to the archaeological data which has consistently identified bone tools, particularly awls and muduks or spear points rather than sorcery related pointing bones. These finds are generally associated with coastal occupation sites although burials across Australia have also yielded bone points presumed to have pinned skin cloaks around the deceased.

Distinguishing sub-categories of bone objects appears to have been a largely subjective process in museum collections. It is unlikely that this situation is exclusive to bone objects but it is obvious that the association of bone with sorcery practices adds a further layer of complexity and uncertainty. This paper has not attempted to provide a set of criteria for distinguishing a bone point from a pointing bone as at this stage there is a lack of critically evaluated information to do so. However, the complexities and uncertainties of dealing with bone objects have been highlighted and further study of bone collections is recommended.


185


Appendix 1 Note:

‘x’ refers to no observation, including a trace. If a trace was present this would be recorded as such. A trace means that the resin or ochre was present in greater quantity but has since been lost, so it is important to record the trace as an observation.

Anth.No.

Cat. Description Animal Element LxW (mm)

Bi-/Uni- point

Spatula Hairstring Ochred Resin Incised Chewed

632 Tool Tool, bones, for stone chipping (3)

Macropod Fibula 170x6 X x x x x x proximal end

1068 Tool Tool, implement, stone; used for making glass spear-heads

Macropod Fibula 242x7 X Spatula x x x incised X

3978 Tool Tool, bone, used for extracting splinters

Macropod Fibula 156x7 Unipoint x x x x x proximal end

4297 Tool Tool, gouge, bone

Macropod Fibula 265x20 Unipoint x x x x x x


Macropod indet. 238x25 X Spatula x ochre x incised x


Macropod indet. 235x28 X Spatula x x resin incised x


Macropod indet. 180x25 X Spatula x x resin incised x


Macropod Fibula 215x25 X Spatula x ochre x x x

11713 Pin Pin, bone indet. Fibula 180x15 Unipoint x x x x x x 11714 Pin Pin, bone Macropod Fibula 280x10 Unipoint x x x x x x 11715 Pin Pin, bone Macropod Fibula 268x8 Unipoint x x x x x distal end


186


Anth.No.


Bi-/Uni- point


11717 Pin Pin, bone Macropod Fibula 250x10 Unipoint x x x x x x 11719 Pin Pin, bone Macropod Fibula 225x8 Unipoint x x x x x x 11721 Pin Pin, bone Macropod Fibula 205x7 Unipoint x x x x x x 11723 Pin Pin, bone Macropod Fibula 190x7 X Spatula x x x x x 11727 Pin Pin, bone Macropod Fibula 155x7 Unipoint x x x x x x 11728 Pin Pin, bone Macropod Fibula 230x5 Bipoint x x x x x x 11730 Pin Pin, bone Macropod Fibula 215x7 Bipoint x x x x x x 13858 Digging

-tool Digging-tool, implements for gathering lily roots

Macropod Fibula 70x23 X Spatula x x x x x

17477 Tool Tool, bone implement

Macropod Fibula 214x6 Unipoint x x x resin incised x








Macropod Fibula 185x5 Unipoint x x x resin incised distal end

17482 Tool Tool, implement, bone



Macropod Fibula 215x6 X Spatula x x resin incised x






Macropod Fibula 237x6 X Spatula x x resin incised x





17776 Tool Tool, implement,

Fibula 195x5 Unipoint X x x resin x x


187


Anth.No.


Bi-/Uni- point


bone 17777 Tool Tool,

implement, bone

Fibula 176x5 x Spatula x x x x x

21323 Implement

Implement, bone

Fibula 174x6 Bipoint X x x x x x

26149 Pin Needle Fish Vertebral 40x3 Unipoint x x x x x x 27215 Knife Knife, bone,

'taraka wakala'

indet. 145x25 Unipoint X x x resin x x

28377 Tool Tool, implement, bone; see Other Information


29300 Arch. Implement, bone

Macropod Fibula 95x7 Unipoint x x x x x shaft










Macropod Ulna 152x15 Unipoint x x ochre x x x


Macropod Ulna 143x20 Unipoint x x ochre resin x x


Macropod indet. 153x18 Unipoint x x x x x x

40629 Tool Tool, implement, bone for

indet. indet. 115x9 Unipoint x x x x x proximal end


188


Anth.No.


Bi-/Uni- point


sewing skins for cloaks

48060 Awl Awl, cassowary bone

Cassowary tibiotarsii 173x8 Unipoint x x ochre x x x

50774 Tool Tool, double ended skewer, bone

indet. Rib 280x5 Bipoint x x x x x x

53330 Tool Tool, bone implement; Register says 'associated in some way with a story of a being called Garaban. The name could be of Lard:l origin'

indet. indet. 182x30 X Spatula x ochre x x x

54503 Tool Tool?, point, bone






61056 Pin Pin, bone Macropod Fibula 214x6 Unipoint x x ochre resin x x 61401 Awl Awl, ornament

for piercing nasal septum

Macropod Fibula 135x5 Unipoint x x Ochre x x x

68059 Tool Tool, spatula, bone, decorated with resin, found in a cave in a gorge

Fibula 212x7 Unipoint Spatula x x Resin x x

69859 Tool Tool, bone point- maker; found unregistered in store;



189


Anth.No.


Bi-/Uni- point


inscribed `Port George IV'

11732 a

Pin Pin, bone Macropod Fibula 105x10 Unipoint x x X x x distal end

11732 b

Pin Pin, bone Macropod Fibula 110x7 Bipoint x x X x x x

11732 c

Pin Pin, bone Macropod Fibula 68x6 Bipoint x x X x x x

11732 d

Pin Pin, bone Macropod Fibula 37x7 Unipoint x x X x x x

11732 e

Pin Pin, bone Macropod Fibula 39x8 Unipoint x x X x x x


190


Appendix 2 Anth. No.

Cat. Description Original registration entry / specimen docs

Animal Element LxW (mm)

Bi-/Uni- point

Spatula Hair-string

Ochred Resin Incised Chewed

612 Death-pointer; Awl; Sorcery

Awl, or carving tool or chipping

Awl or carving tool, or for chipping.

Macropod Fibula 148x6 x Spatula x x x x proximal end

3770 Death-pointer; Sorcery

Pointing, bone, incised

Pointing bone, incised

Macropod Fibula 10x5 Unipoint Spatula x x x on ends x


Pointing-bone, dug from floor of cave

Pointing bone Macropod Fibula 156x5 Unipoint x x x x x proximal end








Pointing-bone, ornamented, dug from floor of cave

Pointing bone Macropod Fibula 270x6 Unipoint x x x Resin shaft hatching

x


Pointing-bone, peg, bone

Macropod Fibula 270x5 Bipoint x x x x x x


Pointing-bone, obtained from Yapma Jack

From Yapma Jack, who secreted it in his hut, cord attached after its first discovery.

indet. indet. 147x8 Unipoint x Hairstring

Ochre tinge

Resin x x


Pointing-bone?, implement, bone; Register says '`Named in the Ouldea

Bone point Macropod Fibula 112x3 Unipoint x x x x x x


191


Anth. No.



Bi-/Uni- point

Spatula Hair-string


language' R.T.M. (no further information with specimen)'


Pointing-bone; Register says 'Magic stick found in a native camp, abandoned on account of sudden sickness.'

Panji, for opening veins, for piercing arms, back, etc, for certain ceremonies in which it was worn.


33137 Death-pointer; Spear; Sorcery

Pointing-bone or spear point?; 'Found in sand dunes'; originally 3 registered with same number - see A44181 & 44182 for other two

Nose-pegs or spear points.

Macropod Fibula 150x10

Unipoint x x x x x mid shaft


Pointing-bone; Register says '16 of 30 implements found on gravelly floor of creek (in one spot) under 3 feet of water. Originally collected by Mr Stafford.',

Bone implements Macropod Fibula 128x6 Unipoint Spatula x x x x mid shaft


192


Anth. No.



Bi-/Uni- point

Spatula Hair-string


'15 made A44199 to A44213'


Pointing-bone?

Bone point Macropod Fibula 115x5 Unipoint x x x x x shaft


Pointing-bone, 'Kutimara'

Macropod Fibula 270x9 Unipoint x x x Trace x x


Pointing-bone, 'Kutimara'

Pointing. Kutimara.

Macropod Fibula 335x12

Unipoint x x Ochred x x x


Awl, point, bone, kangaroo fibula, 'Panji'

Panji, Bone Point, Awl, kangaroo fibula for various uses.


44118 Death-pointer;Awl; Sorcery













Awl?, point, bone


Macropod Fibula 110x5 x Spatula x x x x x


Awl?, point, bone


Macropod Fibula 242x6 Bipoint x x Ochre tinge

x x x


Awl?, point, bone


Macropod Fibula 210x8 x x x x x x x


193


Anth. No.



Bi-/Uni- point

Spatula Hair-string



Awl?, point, bone

Bone point Macropod Fibula 115x10

Unipoint Spatula x x x x x


Awl?, point, bone

Bone point Macropod Fibula 175x7 Unipoint Spatula x x x x distal end


Awl?, point, bone

Bone point Macropod Fibula 195x7 Unipoint Spatula x x x x shaft


Awl?, point, bone



Awl?, point, bone



Awl?, point, bone

Bone point Macropod Fibula 127x6 Unipoint Spatula x x x x proximal end


Awl?, point, bone

Bone point Macropod Fibula 125x6 Unipoint Spatula x x x x x


Awl?, point, bone



Awl?, point, bone

Bone point Macropod Fibula 178x4 Bipoint x x x x x x


Awl?, point, bone

Bone point Macropod Fibula 141x5 x Spatula x Ochre tinge

x x shaft


194


Anth. No.



Bi-/Uni- point

Spatula Hair-string



Awl?, point, bone



Awl?, point, bone



Awl?, point, bone

Bone point Macropod Fibula 175x6 Unipoint Spatula x ashy tinge

x x x


Awl?, point, bone



Awl?, point, bone

Bone point Macropod Fibula 118x5 Unipoint x x Burnt brown

x x x


Awl?, point, bone

Bone point Macropod Fibula 176x7 Unipoint Spatula x Ochre tinge

x x distal end


Awl?, point, bone

Bone point Macropod Fibula 193x4 Unipoint x x x x x shaft


Awl?, point, bone



Awl?, point, bone



Awl?, point, bone

Bone point Macropod Fibula 240x7 Unipoint x x Ochre tinge

x x proximal end


195


Anth. No.



Bi-/Uni- point

Spatula Hair-string



Awl?, point, bone



Awl?, point, bone



Awl?, point, bone



Awl?, point, bone

Bone point Macropod Fibula 122x4 x Spatula x Burnt brown

x x shaft


Awl?, point, bone



Awl?, point, bone

Bone point Macropod Fibula 154x7 Unipoint x x x x x shaft & point


Awl?, point, bone



Awl?, point, bone



Awl?, point, bone



Awl?, point, bone



196


Anth. No.



Bi-/Uni- point

Spatula Hair-string



Awl?, point, bone

Bone point Macropod Fibula 173x5 Unipoint x x x x x distal end


Awl?, point, bone



Awl?, point, bone



Awl?, point, bone



Awl?, point, bone

Bone point Macropod Fibula 138x6 Bipoint Spatula x x x x x


Awl?, point, bone

Bone point Macropod Fibula 154x5 Bipoint x trace x x x shaft


Awl?, point, bone

Bone point Macropod Fibula 166x6 Bipoint x x x x x x


Awl?, point, bone



Awl?, point, bone



Pointing-bone, with hair string

Bone with hairstring

Macropod Fibula 195x6 x Spatula Hairstring

x Resin shaft x

50770 Death- Pointing-bone, Bone with Macropod Fibula 212x6 Unipoint x Hairst x Resin shaft x


197


Anth. No.



Bi-/Uni- point

Spatula Hair-string


pointer; Human; Sorcery

with human hair string

hairstring ring


Pointing-bone Pointing Macropod Fibula 203x5 Unipoint x Hairstring

x Resin shaft x



x Resin shaft x


Pointing-bone Pointing Macropod Fibula 218x10

Unipoint x Hairstring

x Resin shaft x




x Resin shaft x



x Resin shaft x


Pointing-bone Pointing Macropod Fibula 177x8 x Spatula Hairstring

x Resin shaft x



x Resin shaft x




x Resin shaft x


Pointing-bone; Register says 'Central Australian type'

Pointing Macropod Fibula 243x5 Unipoint x x x Trace x x


Pointing-bone Carved by well known aboriginal, probably Jim Kite circa 1916

Macropod Fibula 188x4 Bipoint x x x x both ends

x


Peg, bone, animal; pointing-bone?

Peg Macropod Fibula 183x4 x Spatula x x x x x


198


Anth. No.



Bi-/Uni- point

Spatula Hair-string



Pointing-bone?, hair string attached to one end by resin

Point, bone Macropod Fibula 168x5 Unipoint x Hairstring

ochre Resin x x


Pointing-bone, found inside skeleton

Pointing Macropod Fibula 240x5 x Spatula x x x x x


Pointing-bone, found inside skeleton

Pointing Macropod Fibula 158x6 x x x x x x x

68058 Death-pointer; Human; Sorcery

Pointing-bone, with human hair

Macropod Fibula 315x8 Unipoint x Hairstring

x Resin Shaft x


Pointing-bone; collected Christmas 1943 on trip to Hermannsburg and Palm Valley

Macropod Fibula 190x10 Unipoint

x Hairstring

x Resin shaft x

70697 Sorcery object

Sorcery object, pointing bone, pointed at one end, knob of spinifex resin with fragments of hair string and other cordage attached at other end, transverse scoring for 2/3 of length

Fibula 315x8 Unipoint x Hairstring x Resin shaft x


Sorcery object,


x x x Resin shaft x


199


Anth. No.



Bi-/Uni- point

Spatula Hair-string


pointing bone, pointed at one end, knob of spinifex resin at other end, transverse scoring for most of length. No hair-string attached, otherwise in fair to good condition. Formerly stuck to a hand-drawn label "Nose-bones", has adhesive from tape adhering to it.


Sorcery object, pointing bone, pointed at one end, knob of spinifex resin at other end. No hair-string attached, otherwise in fair to good condition. Formerly stuck to a hand-written label "Nose-bones", has adhesive from tape adhering


x x x Resin x x


200


Anth. No.



Bi-/Uni- point

Spatula Hair-string


to it. 70765 Sorcery

object Sorcery object, pointing bone, pointed at one end, kn ob of spinifex resin at other end. No hair-string attached, otherwise in fair to good condition. Formerly stuck to a hand-written label "Nose-bones", has adhesive from tape adhering to it.


x x x Resin x x


201


References Akerman, K. 1995. The use of bone, shell and teeth by

Aboriginal Australians. In E. Johnson (ed.) Ancient People and Landscapes. Pp. 173-83. Lubbock, Texas: Museum of Texas.

Bird, C. and Beck. C. 1980. Bone points and spatula: salvage ethnography in southwest Australia. Archaeology and Physical Anthropology in Oceania 15(3): 168-171.

Berndt, R.M. and C.H. Berndt. 1964. The World of the First Australians. Sydney: Ure Smith.

Brockwell, S. and K. Akerman. 2007. Bone points from the Adelaide River, Northern Territory. Australian Aboriginal Studies 2007: 83-97.

Cohen, S. 1993. Burial site bones baffle the boffins. GEO 15(1): 52-61.

Elkin, A.P. 1974 (revised edition). The Australian Aborigines. Sydney: Angus & Robertson.

Feary, S. 1996. An Aboriginal burial with grave goods near Cooma, New South Wales. Australian Archaeology 43: 40-42.

Hale, G. and N.B Tindale. 1934. Aborigines from Princess Charlotte Bay, North Queensland. Records of the SA Museum 5(2): 117-172.


202


Howitt, A.W. 1904. The native tribes of south-east Australia. London: Macmillan.

McCarthy, F. D. 1952. A werpoo, or bone dagger from South Australia. Australian Museum Magazine 10(9): 290-292.

McCarthy, F. D. 1957. Australian Aborigines, their life and culture. Colorgravure Publications (Herald & Weekly Times Ltd), Melbourne.

McCarthy, F.D. 1976. Australian Aboriginal Stone Implements, including bone, shell and tooth implements. Sydney: Australian Museum Trust.

Pretty, G.L. 1977. Cultural Chronology of Roonka Flat, a preliminary consideration. In R.V.S Wright (ed.) Stone Tools as Cultural Markers; change, evolution and complexity . Pp. 288-331. Prehistory & Material Studies Series No. 12. AIATSIS, Canberra & Humanities Press Inc, New Jersey.

Roth, W.E. 1909. Fighting weapons. North Queensland Ethnography. Bulletin No. 13. Records of the Australian Museum 7(4): 189-211.

Spencer, B. and F.J. Gillen. 1927. The Arunta: a study of a stone age people. London: Macmillan.

Taplin, G. 1879. The Narrinyeri. In J.D. Woods (ed.). The native tribes of South Australia. Pp. 1-156. Adelaide: E.S. Wigg.


203


Webb, C. 1987. Use wear on bone tools: an experimental program and three case studies from south east Australia. Unpublished BA (Hons) thesis, La Trobe University.

Webb, C. and J. Allen. 1990. A functional analysis of Pleistocene bone tools from two sites in southwest Tasmania. Archaeology in Oceania 25: 75-78.

keryn walshe â€“ pointing bones and bone points pointing bones and

Documents