How to Care for Vintage Christmas Ornaments

Dating old poland ornaments

dating old poland ornaments

These Polish porcupine Christmas ornaments date back to the mid nineteenth century that dates back to a national push to encourage people to. Find many great new & used options and get the best deals for Vintage Poland Christmas Tree Ornaments Indent Glass Original Box of 12 at the best online prices. Yay! I love easy identification. Ornaments from Poland also have distinctive patterns, like vertical stripes and glitter that's arranged like.

youtube video

Tips on HOW TO DATE POLISH PEOPLE

Polish Star Christmas Ornaments

These Polish porcupine Christmas ornaments date back to the mid nineteenth century that dates back to a national push to encourage people to use Polish made Christmas decorations as opposed to the influx of cheaply made German goods. The Polish American Journal explains it best.

“In the second half of the 19th century, along with the development of Germany’s toy industry came the flood of cheap ready-made Christmas decorative art. The European and Polish markets dating old poland ornaments artificial fruit made of glass, angels, stars and figures printed on paper, and harlequins, clowns, mushrooms and other objects made of paper mâché and cloth. The enlightened Polish society and artistic circles evoked objection and a veto on mass-produced German decorations was issued.

In 1911 Maria Gerson-Dabrowska held a public demonstration at the Warsaw editorial office of the magazine Pryjaciel Dzieci (Children’s Friend) in the art of traditional Polish adornments patterned after Polish folk decorative art and harvest decorations. She explained that by taking this initiative the Polish Christmas tree would be rendered more national, dating old poland ornaments. Based on the art of the Polish farm home, these decorations would provide an exhaustible source of aesthetic ideas. The proposed transition was met will great success.”

The nice part about sitting down with friends, family, and children to make these things is the time you spend together. Sure if you have kids, things may get silly and not many ornaments get made, but the time spent is priceless.

Once my aunt tried to make one of these using very thin cloth ribbon, a large knitting needles, and some Elmer’s Glue. Let’s just say that after a large amount of mumbling under her breath (saying who knows what!), the ornament ended up looking pretty good. That was the first and last of it’s kind, dating old poland ornaments. Each year after that one, she stuck with paper.

Enjoy the video I found on how to make Polish Star Christmas Ornaments. Send her a thumbs up too for taking the time to share this tradition.

Have a Great Week!
AK,
Busy Bee Food Exchange Team

Источник: [https://torrent-igruha.org/3551-portal.html]

A 41,500 year-old decorated ivory pendant from Adult dating sacramento Cave (Poland)

Abstract

Evidence of mobiliary art and body augmentation are associated with the cultural innovations introduced by Homo sapiens at the beginning of the Upper Paleolithic. Here, we report the discovery of the oldest known human-modified punctate ornament, a decorated ivory pendant from the Paleolithic layers at Stajnia Cave in Poland. We describe the features of this dating old poland ornaments piece, as well as the stratigraphic context and the details of its chronometric dating. The Stajnia Cave plate is a personal 'jewellery' object that was created 41,500 calendar years ago (directly radiocarbon dated). It is the oldest known of its kind in Eurasia and it establishes a new starting date for a tradition directly connected to the spread of modern Homo sapiens in Europe.

Introduction

The emergence of decoration and adornment of the human body is considered one of the earliest manifestations of symbolic behavior, marking the beginning of ethnolinguistic identity and social complexity in human evolution1,2. Timing when and where personal ornaments appeared in the archaeological record are important for reconstructing the trajectories of abstract thinking of archaic humans and understanding how figurative representations varied through time1,2, dating old poland ornaments. In Europe, the oldest evidence of body adornment is documented at ~ 46 ka BP in the Initial Upper Paleolithic layers of Bacho Kiro where several carnivore teeth were worked into pendants3,4. A successive technical advancement is recorded in the Early Aurignacian (~ 40 ka BP) when mammoth ivory started to be manipulated for the production of pendants and mobiliary arts5,6,7. Within these novel accessories, a new dating old poland ornaments of decoration—the alignment of punctuations—emerged on some ornaments in south-western France8, and figurines in Swabian Jura (Germany)9. Thus far, most of these iconic adornments were recovered during older excavations, with less recognition of site formation histories and post-depositional disturbance. Hence, their chronological attribution is based only on the stratigraphic context rather than direct dating. Recent chronometric programs on sites in Swabian Jura10 yielded contradictory results corroborating the inaccurate provenience of the samples collected during previous fieldwork, dating old poland ornaments. This situation makes the reconstruction of the dating old poland ornaments of human body augmentation and the discussion concerning the epicenter of the diffusion of mobiliary art in Europe (Kulturpumpe model)10 hotly debated and far from being resolved10,11,12.

In this context, we report here the discovery and the direct date of a new ivory punctate ornament found at Stajnia Cave, in Poland. This finding plays a unique role in demonstrating the importance of the direct date of an object of Paleolithic art to understand the origin of communication, celebration, and expression of Homo sapiens in Europe.

The Stajnia Cave is a natural shelter located on the northern side of the Kraków-Częstochowa Upland in southern Poland (50° 36′58″ N, 19°29′04″ E) (Fig. 1a). The site was investigated between 2006 and 2010 exposing a stratigraphic sequence of seven units (from G at the bottom (MIS 5c), to A (MIS 1) at the top) (Supplementary Sect. 1 and Fig. S1). During the excavations, a series of Neanderthal remains were found13,14 within a large collection of bones of Late Pleistocene steppe-tundra species, and Middle and Upper Paleolithic artefacts14 (see Supplementary Sects. 1 to 4), dating old poland ornaments. Dating old poland ornaments 2010, two fragments of an ornate ivory pendant (S-22222 + S-23100) were discovered in layer D1 (Figs. 1b,c, and 2). In addition, an awl fragment (S-12160) was identified among the bone fragments from layer D1 (Fig. 3). A recent reassessment of the archaeological record of Stajnia Cave reveals that post-depositional frost disturbances and modern distortions displaced artefacts and human remains between layers14. Since most of the lithics collected in layer D1 are associated with the Central and Eastern European Micoquian and very few are classified as Upper Paleolithic dating old poland ornaments Figs. S3 and S4), the accurate cultural attribution of the pendant and the awl required direct radiocarbon dating. In order to minimise the amount of material exposed to destructive analysis, the most recent methodological advancements in 14C were followed15,16.

modified from https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Geografia_Polski#/media/Plik:Physical_map_of_Poland.png, CC BY-SA 4.0) and aerial picture of Stajnia Cave; (B) Dorsal and ventral views of the pendant (S23100, dating old poland ornaments, S22222). Scale bar is 1 cm. (C) Schematic representation of the pendant (dorsal view). Numbers 1 to 50 indicate clearly identifiable punctuations; dotted lines indicate possible punctuations. The red hatch indicates the exfoliated area. Scale bar is 1 cm.

Stajnia pendant and location of the site. (A) Site location in southern Poland (

Full size image

Stajnia pendant reconstruction. Views of the virtually reconstructed pendant and photomicrographs documenting the technology used for their manufacture: multiple examples of punctures (A,CE) and traces of smoothing (B,G). A longitudinal section through perforations is shown in (B). Scale bar is 1 cm.

Full size image

Stajnia awl. (A) Original picture of the awl from Stajnia Dating divorced women (B) Reconstructed 3D digital models of the awl. Scale bars are 1 cm.

Full size image

Results

The pendant and the awl

The pendant is characterised by an oval shape with rounded margins, two drilled holes and decoration consisting of patterns of sequential punctures. The largest piece of the pendant is 4.5 cm long and 1.5 cm wide while the thickness varies between 0.36 and 0.39 cm. The reconstructed width of the complete artefact is shown in Fig. 2. There is one fully preserved perforation visible on the largest piece (hole 1 in Fig. 2) located close dating old poland ornaments the centre of the reconstructed artefact, near its upper edge. Another hole (hole 2 in Fig. 2), initially located near the opposite edge of the artefact, is partly preserved. The diameter of the fully preserved hole 1 is 2.3 mm and the original diameter of the partly preserved hole 2 was probably the same. The dorsal surface of the object is ornamented with at least 50 punctures creating an irregular looping curve (Fig. 1c). The ornamentation is partly destroyed by exfoliation which occurred close to the hole 1 (Figs. 1c, 2d. Besides this exfoliation, longitudinal cracks are also visible dating old poland ornaments the surface of the object.

Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) dating old poland ornaments conducted to verify the artefactual character of the observed features and to identify the technology used for their manufacture. The SEM analysis (Fig. 2b–e,g) indicates that the dorsal surface of the pendant does not present clear traces of intentional preparation preceding the creation of the punctures. The ventral puncture, however, presents traces of smoothing (Fig. 2g) which are linear and parallel dating old poland ornaments the longest axis of the artefact. The V-shaped cross-sections of the marks suggest the use of a flint artefact (Fig. 2b,g), and dating old poland ornaments differences in depth and width of the striations may be explained by the irregular edge of the applied stone tool17. Hole 1 and hole 2 were artificially manufactured by drilling from dating old poland ornaments sides which were not thinned previously, resulting in a biconical shape in cross-section (Fig. 2f). Most of the punctures are similar in terms of their outlines and cross-sections (Fig. 2c,e), which makes it highly probable that they all were made with the same tool—possibly in a relatively short time18. Punctures located directly below the fully preserved hole 1 display a slightly different morphology with less defined edges (Fig. 2a), dating old poland ornaments. The possibility that these punctures were made at a different time than the others cannot be excluded, however, gradual tool wear or a changed position of the tool are more parsimonious.

The maximum length of the awl is 68.33 mm (Fig. 3). Several wear facets are visible along the awl surface, and the dating old poland ornaments cross-sections (5.8 × 3.4 mm) is flattened (Fig. 3). On the bottom side, there is a smoothed surface with round pronounced edges and flattening spike. The top side is more concave, and towards the tip, an extremely smooth facet is responsible for further refining. The lateral sides of the spike are rounded and polished. At c. 38.18 mm from the spike, the awl becomes basally thicker. Clear evidence of bone working is shown at the bottom facet, which has sharp edges towards both sides and the round spike show evidence of wear signs, dating old poland ornaments, indicating that an extensive use before discarding (Fig. 3).

Zooarchaeology by mass spectrometry (ZooMS) analysis reveals the pendant to be made from mammoth ivory and the awl from a horse bone (Supplementary Sect. 5).

The dating

Bones and ivory are the most suitable and well-established osseous materials to attempt radiocarbon dating15,19,20. The presence of collagen in the pendant (R-EVA 2651) and awl (R-EVA 2650) were tested using the near-infrared (NIR) analysis before sampling for radiocarbon dating. The results indicate that both specimens are well preserved and predicted dating old poland ornaments 5.30 ± 1.52% (Pendant) and 8.04 ± 1.43% (Awl) weight collagen (Supplementary Fig. S6), which align closely with the collagen yields obtained following extraction (Table 1).

Full size table

Collagen was extracted from both specimens at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology (MPI-EVA) in Leipzig, Germany. The collagen from the pendant and the awl was radiocarbon dated twice with an Accelerator Mass Spectrometer (AMS) at two different radiocarbon laboratories (MAMS and ETH) in order to obtain very precise 14C dates for calibration with the recently updated IntCal20 calibration curve21,22 (Table 1). The combined 14C age for the pendant (S-22222) is 36,577 ± 183 14C BP (obtained using the R_Combine command in OxCal 4.4.223), and the combined 14C age of the awl (S-12160) is 37,701 ± 208 14C BP, which correspond respectively to calibrated ranges of 41,730–41,340 cal BP and 42,270–42,070 cal BP at 68.3% probability (Table 1, dating old poland ornaments Supplementary Table S5). From the 20 animal samples pretreated at the MPI-EVA, 11 are older than 49,000 years BP, one from layer E, two from layer D3, three from layer D2, four from layer D1, and one from layer C18. In layer D1, five more samples result in finite ages from 45,300 ± 1410 to 36,577 ± 183 BP, including the pendant and the awl samples. Three dates from layer C19 ranges from 37,750 ± 310 to 33,450 ± 350 BP and one from the top of layer C18 gives dating old poland ornaments very old age compared with the C19 layer below (MAMS-19870: 40,400 ± 420 BP) (Table 1). Mammoth ivory tusk fragments from layers D2, D1 and C19 are older than 50,000 years, whereas another ivory fragment from D1 was previously dated 44,600 ± 2,100 BP (OxA-24944) (Table 1).

We then constructed a Bayesian chronological model using the software OxCal 4.423 and the new IntCal20 curve21 to refine the calibrations of the radiocarbon dates of Stajnia Cave. The calibrated dates (un-modelled in Table 1) and the modelled ages obtained are shown in Supplementary Table S5 and Fig. S7. We did not include dates > 49,000 BP in the model. As is evident from Supplementary Fig. S7, the lowermost layers of the cave (layers E, D3 and D2) extend beyond the range of the radiocarbon method. Five further dates in layer D1 and one date in layer C18 are also > 49,000 BP, even though these layers contain Upper Paleolithic artefacts. This demonstrates the poor agreement between the high-resolution 14C dates and the poor resolution of the stratigraphy at the site, resulting in a model agreement index of 34.5% with four outliers (higher than 20%) out of 14 modelled samples. This situation implies that the awl and the pendant (32% and 21% outlier probability respectively), found in layer D1, have likely moved between layers and probably originate from layer C19 rather than layer D1. This hypothesis is corroborated by the radiocarbon age of two bones from layer C19 that have similar chronological ranges to the awl and pendant (Table 1). The sample R-EVA 739 (MAMS-19851: dating old poland ornaments also shows anthropogenic modifications suggesting a close association between the human settlement of the cave and the ivory pendant.

Discussion

The direct radiocarbon date makes the Stajnia ornate pendant (41,730–41,340 cal BP (68.3%)) the earliest punctate ivory object known to date to the Early Upper Palaeolithic record in Eurasia (Fig. 4b, Table 1). Although the Aurignacian settlement at Stajnia Cave was ephemeral (Supplementary Sect. 4), dating old poland ornaments, the direct radiocarbon dates on the pendant and the awl establish that the dispersal of these elaborate and highly manufactured objects, as forms of cultural innovation with highly symbolic values by Homo sapiens, was established by around 42,000 cal BP. The radiocarbon dating on other ivory fragments reveals the transport on-site of mammoth tusks since the Middle Paleolithic (Table 1), but only during the Early Aurignacian, this raw material was worked for the production of mobiliary art.

Map of the geographical distribution of the sites where punctuated ornaments and objects have been found. (A) Map of the geographical distribution of the sites where punctuated ornaments and objects with punctate decoration have been found in Aurignacian and Early Upper Palaeolithic contexts (1 Tuto de Camalhot, 2 Abri Blanchard / Abri Castanet, 3 Abri la Souquette, 4 Abri Lartet, 5 Geißenklösterle, 6 Vogelherd, 7 Sungir, dating old poland ornaments, 8 Yana); (B) Chronological comparison of Stajnia pendant and awl (calibrated ranges) with other artistic punctate ornaments found in Upper Palaeolithic sites (modelled ranges). The horizontal bars show the calibrated ranges of direct dates of the awl in blue and of the pendant in pink cross-hatched. From the other sites, the age range of the layers where punctate ornaments have been found are pink cross-hatched bars and are the modelled date ranges produced using the 'date' command in OxCal (See Table S14). The red asterisk close to the name of the sites indicates a 'hypothetical' boundary imposed by the Bayesian model due to a very low agreement index for Vogelherd and just two samples out of context for Tuto de Camalhot. All the bars represent 68.3% probability.

Full size image

We consider the possibility that the age of the pendant itself is much older than the decoration carved upon it to be unlikely given the experimental and chronological data presented here. The direct ages of the two precious objects correspond to the chronological range of layer C19 suggesting a short-term occupation at the site during the Aurignacian rather than a chronological coincidence.

Although permafrost may allow perfect preservation of mammoth tusks in open-air sites for millennia, these conditions are absent during MIS 3 and MIS 2 in southern Poland24. This evidence implies that over thousands of years the mammoth tusk was likely subjected to taphonomic processes causing dating old poland ornaments deterioration of the ivory. As shown in our replicative experiment (see Supplementary Sect. 8), dating old poland ornaments, using a subfossil and desiccated tusk fragment in middle/poor condition would dating old poland ornaments been unworkable for shaping and decorating an ornament dating old poland ornaments the one found in Stajnia. Therefore, we assume that the shaping and punctate decoration was made on a mammoth dating old poland ornaments in fresh condition corroborating the age of ~ 41,500 cal BP.

Determining precisely when the punctate ornaments emerged in Eurasia required comparison with the other archaeological sites where this artistic pattern was found (Fig. 4). At Geißenklösterle Cave (Germany), punctuations were identified in horizon IIb (an ivory anthropomorph shows a regular punctate decoration on the backside) ranging between 40,280–38,800 cal BP (68.3%) (new modelled calibrated ranges with IntCal20 in Supplementary Sect. 7, and in Supplementary Tables S6, S7 and S14). In France, the use of dating old poland ornaments punctate motif emerged during the Early Aurignacian at Tuto de Camalhot (40,790–30,830 cal BP (68.3%), new modelled calibrated ranges with IntCal20 in Supplementary Sect. 7, and in Supplementary Tables S11 and S14) and only during a later phase in several sites located in the Castel-Merle Valley18 ranging between 39,800 and 36,240 cal BP (68.3%) (new modelled calibrated ranges with IntCal20 in Supplementary Sect. 7, and Supplementary Tables S8-S10 and S14). However, our model output reveals a low agreement index and poor stratigraphic integrity for Vogelherd Cave. At Tuto de Camalhot Cave, the boundaries obtained from the Bayesian model should be considered 'hypothetical' because they are based on two bones without any stratigraphic information. Further east, patterns of sequential punctures on ivory pendants were made during the EUP at the open-air sites of Sungir25 in Russia (34,810–33,500 cal BP (68.3%), new modelled calibrated ranges with IntCal20 in Supplementary Sect. 7, and Supplementary Tables S12 and S14), and at Yana26 in the Siberian Arctic (32,400–30,820 cal BP (68.3%), new modelled calibrated ranges with IntCal20 in Supplementary Sect. 7, and Supplementary Tables S13 and S14). This evidence reveals a broad geographical distribution of punctate graphic representation (Fig. 4a), and it shows that in Eurasia, the punctate decoration of the pendant at Stajnia Cave predates other instances of this type of ornamentation activity by 2000 years (Fig. 4b and Supplementary Table S14).

A deeper examination of the beginning of the diffusion of mobiliary art and body augmentation in Eurasia shows some chronological uncertainties (Supplementary Sect. 7), dating old poland ornaments. Dating old poland ornaments at Sungir, the direct dates on the buried individuals25 give a precise indication of the age of the ivory beads, at Yana post-depositional processes (e.g., colluviation, solifluction, or ice drift)26 could have displaced some pendants from their original position. In Europe, apart from Geißenklösterle, all the dating old poland ornaments ornaments were discovered during excavations carried out in the late 19th and the early twentieth century and are associated only indirectly with the Early or Recent Aurignacian (SI Sect. 7), dating old poland ornaments. At Geißenklösterle, the chronology is well established for the different Aurignacian levels27 (new ranges with IntCal20 in Supplementary Sect. 7 and Supplementary Table S6). In contrast, the low chronological resolution of the other Early Upper Paleolithic sites impedes a clear understanding of the diachronic development of Aurignacian artistic expression. This situation is mainly due to the poorly constrained 14C dating resolution caused by questionable stratigraphic contexts at the sites10 (Supplementary Sect. 7). In the light of the Stajnia pendant, the model that the Swabian Jura was the centre of the diffusion of artistic innovations (Kulturpumpe hypothesis)10 needs further examination.

Summary and conclusion

The punctate decorative motif is one of the artistic innovations that developed during the Early Aurignacian1,28 in Europe and the EUP in the Russian Plains26,29, dating old poland ornaments. Thus far, these marks on mobile objects have been interpreted as hunting tallies, arithmetic counting systems, or lunar notation18, whereas others have suggested aesthetic purposes7. The looping curve represented on the Stajnia pendant is similar to the engraved patterns of the Blanchard plaque18. Whether these marks indicate cyclic notations or kill scores remain an open question, although the resemblance with the lunar analemma is striking. In other personal ornament and ivory objects, the use of the punctate pattern is easier to identify as the makers tried to imitate and transfer natural patterns in new contexts7. These are the reproductions of the coat of a feline and a trout at Vogelherd5,30, the replication of different types of shells at La Souquette, Abri Castanet, and Tuto de Camalhot8, or the imitation of the coat of a horse at Sungir29. In addition, the punctures could serve as simple decoration as seen on the backside of the anthropomorph at Geißenklösterle10, the perforated baton at Sungir29, and on ivory diadems and needles at Yana26. A precise cross-cultural comparison of the emergence of mobiliary art and body augmentation, especially in Europe, requires direct radiocarbon dating of some of these figurines and ornaments to solve the debated questions concerning contemporaneity and socio-cultural connections between groups of Homo sapiens at the onset of the Upper Palaeolithic.

Investigating Palaeolithic art using the precise ticking of the radiocarbon clock is challenging, especially when it involves the destruction of precious and unique artefacts. However, combining updated radiocarbon pretreatment15, NIR spectroscopy pre-screening to non-destructively quantify collagen preservation16 and the latest AMS instrumental advances (e.g., increasingly precise error ranges4), with the new IntCal2021 calibration curve, we can overcome previous limitations to the direct dating of small, highly precious ornaments and dating old poland ornaments associate them directly with a radiocarbon date of centurial precision.

The age of ~ 41,500 cal BP of the decorated ivory pendant from Stajnia Cave underlines the importance of directly dating mobiliary art to solve the intriguing puzzle of the emergence of symbolic behaviour and modern cognition in human evolution.

Materials and methods

Radiocarbon dating

A total of 20 animal bone samples, dating old poland ornaments, including the pendant and the awl, were selected for radiocarbon dating. The collagen was extracted at the Department of Human Evolution, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology (MPI-EVA) in Leipzig (Germany) following the procedures in Talamo dating old poland ornaments Richards19 and Fewlass, et al.15 (MPI-Code: R-EVA).

The outer surface of the samples are first cleaned by a shot blaster and then 500 mg of the whole bones and c. 350 mg of the pendant and the awl were sampled. The samples are then decalcified in 0.5 M HCl until no CO2 effervescence is observed. 0.1 M NaOH is added for 30 min to remove humics. The NaOH step is followed by a final 0.5 M HCl step for 15 min. The resulting solid is gelatinised following Longin31 at pH 3 in a heater block at 75 °C for 20 h. The gelatin is then filtered in an Eeze-Filter™ (Elkay Laboratory Products (UK) Ltd.) to remove small (> 80 μm) particles. The gelatin is then ultrafiltered with Sartorius “VivaspinTurbo” ultrafilters (30 kDa MWCO)32. Prior to use, the filter is cleaned to remove carbon containing humectants33. The samples are lyophilised for 48 h. To supervise possible contamination introduced during the pretreatment stage, a pretreated 14C-free bone sample was used, kindly provided by the Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit (ORAU). Desperate woman dating to sending the samples to the Mannheim facility for AMS dating (laboratory code MAMS)34, the collagen yield, C:N ratios, together with isotopic values are evaluated in order to understand the preservation of the collagen.

All the samples pretreated at the MPI-EVA passed the evaluation criteria (bones with > 1% weight collagen and C:N ratios in the range 2.9–3.635) for good quality collagen (Table 1). The collagen of the pendant and the awl was split into two parts, one was sent to Mannheim AMS and the second one to the ETH Zürich (laboratory code, ETH), where the collagen extracts were graphitised using the AGE III36 and dated using the MICADAS34,37. The AMS measurements of the collagen backgrounds which were used in the age correction of all samples were highly reproducible within and between each magazine (~ 500 mg bone extractions: 2016 mean F14 C = 0.00168, s.d. = 0.00018; 2018 mean F14 C = 0.00220, s.d. = 0.00025). Due to the high reproducibility of the background measurements, extended measurement time, high rate of transmission and the use of the R_Combined of two separate dates, both the pendant and the awl, in Oxcal, dating old poland ornaments, we were able to reach exceptional levels of precision. An additional 1‰ was added to the error calculation of the samples, as per standard practice.

Archaeological methods

The excavation was laid out using a 1 × 1 m grid system. The sedimentary sequence was excavated according to the natural stratigraphy. The position of the archaeological finds was recorded using a 3D coordinates system (see38,39). The excavated sediments were sieved using 2 mm and 4 mm mesh screens. The floated materials were separated for the recovery of micromammals, shattered bone fragments, lithic chips, and charcoals.

Stajnia pendant analyses

Organic materials such as antler, bone and ivory can be distinguished by their micromorphological structure. In worked and especially polished objects, raw material identification is not always straightforward, dating old poland ornaments. Raw material identification of the Stajnia pendant was carried out by evaluating the broken edges and the exfoliated surface of the object around one of the perforations where the internal structure of the dating old poland ornaments material was exposed. Mammoth tusk consists dating old poland ornaments a series of cones that are sequentially formed in the pulp cavity. These cones are dating old poland ornaments up of stacked dentine plates that, on macroscopic inspection, appear as milk-white homogeneous fibrous bands (e.g.40,41). Within these bands, microscopic canals 2 µm in diameter radiate outward from the pulp cavity42. These canals or dentinal tubules, in turn, are surrounded by collagen fibrils that coil up along the tubules41. The different orientations of the stacked radially distributed layers form the genus-specific distinctive patterns called 'Schreger lines' (see42 and references therein), which can dating old poland ornaments observed in transverse sections of larger tusk fragments. In this study, the material identification was based on the examination of the morphological features such as dentinal tubules and microlaminae that were visible on the broken edges of the object as well as on the exfoliated surface near one of the perforations (Fig. 2). The Stajnia pendant was analysed microscopically with a stereoscopic Olympus SZX9 microscope (magnification 6,3–57 ×) and metallographic microscope Nikon ECLIPSE LV100 (magnification 50–500 ×) at the Laboratory for Archaeological Conservation and Archaeometry Institute of Archaeology Wrocław University. The high-magnitude photographs were made with Environmental Scanning Electron Microscope Philips XL 30 ESEM/TMP at the Laboratory Scanning Microscopy (SEM)—Department of Geochemistry, Mineralogy and Petrology University of Silesia in Sosnowiec. The SEM analysis was used to examine the structure (including the analysis of the topography) of the surface of the object.

Virtual restoration of the Stajnia pendant

High-resolution µCT images of the two plaque fragments (S22222 and S23100) were obtained with an X-ray micro-computed tomography (XMT) scanner using the following scan parameters: voltage equal to 100 kV, currently equal to 0.062 mA, 1.0 mm Al filter, the reconstructed volume contains 1500 × 1500 × 1600 voxels. The data were segmented, dating old poland ornaments, and a three-dimentional isosurface of the external surface of the finds was created using Avizo Lite 2019.1 software (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, Massachusetts, USA)43,44, dating old poland ornaments. The 3D digital models obtained were then uploaded in Geomagic Design X (3D Systems, Rock Hill, South Carolina, USA) to carry out the optimisation of the surfaces (this process consists of cleaning and correcting defects to create fully closed surfaces)45. Subsequently, we proceeded with the virtual restoration of the Stajnia plaque. First, we proceeded with the interactive alignment of the two parts of the plaque, using the recognisable contact points as a reference. After obtaining an optimal alignment, the two fragments were joined, and the integration of the missing parts which formed cavities between the two original finds was carried out. Lastly, the photographic texture was applied using MeshLab 2020.03 software46.

NIR spectroscopy

Bone/ivory samples were scanned using a fiber-optic reflectance probe attached to a LabSpec 4 NIR spectrometer (Malvern Panalytical®) with a spectral range of 350 nm to 2500 nm. A Savitzky-Golay transformation (derivative order = 2; polynomial order = 3; smoothing points = 31) was performed to correct for additive and multiplicative effects in the spectral data using Unscrambler X software (Camo Analytics®). Partial least squares regression of data (wavelengths 1685–1740 nm and 2000–2300 nm) from specimens with known collagen yields was used to create a model predicting collagen content16, dating old poland ornaments. The resulting 3-factor model was used to predict % collagen in the unknown specimens. Because the model suggested collagen preservation in the specimens was very good (> 5% collagen yield) for samples of this antiquity, we were able to minimise the destruction of samples for subsequent analysis.

ZooMS

Zooarchaeology by mass spectrometry (ZooMS) analyses tissues dating old poland ornaments in collagen type I and uses protein amino acid sequence variation to provide a taxonomic identification47. Both samples R-EVA 2650 (the awl) and R-EVA 2651 (the pendant) were analysed following ZooMS protocols which have been previously described in detail47,48,49. Collagen extracted for the radiocarbon dating process was used for ZooMS analysis. Each collagen sample was incubated into 100 µl of 50 mM of ammonium bicarbonate dating old poland ornaments at 65 °C for 1 h, and 50 µl of the resulting supernatant was digested using trypsin (Promega) at 37 °C overnight. Samples were subsequently acidified using 1µL of 20% TFA, and peptide extracts were cleaned on C18 ZipTips (Thermo Scientific).

Each sample was spotted in triplicate on a MALDI Bruker plate with the addition of α-Cyano-4-hydroxycinnamic acid matrix. MALDI-TOF–MS analysis was conducted at the Fraunhofer IZI (Leipzig, Germany), using an autoflex speed LRF MALDI-TOF (Bruker) in reflector mode, positive polarity, matrix suppression up to 590 Da and collected in the mass-to-range 700–3500 m/z.

Triplicates were then merged for dating old poland ornaments sample, and taxonomic identifications were made through peptide marker mass identification in comparison to a database of peptide marker series for medium to larger sized mammalian species48,50,51.

Change history

    References

    1. Vanhaeren, M. & d’Errico, F. Aurignacian ethno-linguistic geography of Europe revealed dating old poland ornaments personal ornaments. J. Archaeol. Sci.33, 1105–1128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2005.11.017 (2006).

      Article Google Scholar

    2. Henshilwood, C. S. & Derrico, F, dating old poland ornaments. Homo Symbolicus: The Dawn of Language, dating old poland ornaments, Imagination and Spirituality (John Benjamins Publishing, 2011).

      Book dating old poland ornaments Google Scholar

    3. Hublin, J.-J. et al. Initial Upper Palaeolithic Homo sapiens dating old poland ornaments Bacho Kiro Cave, Bulgaria. Nature581, 299–302. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2259-z (2020).

      ADSCASArticlePubMed Google Scholar

    4. Fewlass, H. et al. A 14C chronology for the Middle to Upper Palaeolithic transition at Bacho Kiro Cave, Bulgaria. Nat. Ecol. Evol.4, 794–801. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-020-1136-3 (2020).

      ArticlePubMed Google Scholar

    5. Conard, N. J. Palaeolithic ivory sculptures from southwestern Germany and the origins of figurative art. Nature426, 830–832 (2003).

      ADSCASArticle Google Scholar

    6. Conard, N. J. A female figurine from the basal Aurignacian of Hohle Fels Cave in southwestern Germany. Nature459, 248–252. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature07995 (2009).

      ADSCASArticlePubMed Google Scholar

    7. White, R. In The Human Revolution: Behavioural and Biological Perspectives on the Origins of Modern Humans (eds Stringer, C. & Mellars, P.) 366–390 (Edinburgh University Press, 1989).

      Google Scholar

    8. Bourrillon, R. et al. A new Aurignacian engraving from Abri Blanchard, France: Implications for understanding Aurignacian graphic expression in Western and Central Europe. Quat. Int.491, 46–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2016.09.063 (2018).

      Article dating old poland ornaments Google Scholar

    9. Conard, N. & Bolus, M. In Towards a Definition of the Aurignacian (eds Bar-Yosef, O. & Zilhão, J.) 219–239 (IPA, 2006).

      dating old poland ornaments Google Scholar

    10. Conard, N. J. & Bolus, M. Radiocarbon dating the appearance of modern humans and timing of cultural innovations in Europe: New results and new challenges. J. Hum. Evol.44, 331–371. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0047-2484(02)00202-6 (2003).

      ArticlePubMed Google Scholar

    11. Discamps, E., Gravina, B, dating old poland ornaments. & Teyssandier, N. In the eye of the beholder: Contextual issues for Bayesian modelling at the Middle-to-Upper Palaeolithic transition. World Archaeol.47, 601–621. https://doi.org/10.1080/00438243.2015.1065759 (2015).

      Article Google Scholar

    12. Zilhão, J. & d’Errico, F. An Aurignacian «garden of Eden» in southern Germany? An alternative interpretation of the Geissenklösterle and a critique of the Kulturpumpe model. PALEO15, 69–86 (2003).

      Google Scholar

    13. Nowaczewska, W. et al. New hominin teeth from Stajnia Cave, Poland, dating old poland ornaments. J. Hum. Evol.151, 102929. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2020.102929 (2021).

      ArticlePubMed Google Scholar

    14. Picin, A. et al. New perspectives on Neanderthal dispersal and turnover from Stajnia Cave (Poland). Sci. Rep.10, 14778. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-71504-x (2020).

      ADSCASArticlePubMedPubMed Central Google Scholar

    15. Fewlass, H. et al. Pretreatment and gaseous radiocarbon dating of 40–100 mg archaeological bone. Sci. Rep.9, 5342. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-41557-8 (2019).

      ADSCASArticlePubMedPubMed Central Google Scholar

    16. Sponheimer, M. et al. Saving Old Bones: A non-destructive method for bone collagen prescreening. Sci. Rep.9, 13928. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-50443-2 (2019).

      ADSCASArticlePubMedPubMed Central Google Scholar

    17. D’Errico, F. & Villa, P. Holes and grooves: The contribution of microscopy and taphonomy to the problem of art origins. J. Hum. Evol.33, 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1006/jhev.1997.0141 (1997).

      CASArticlePubMed Google Scholar

    18. Marshack, A. Cognitive aspects of upper paleolithic engraving. Curr. Anthropol.13, 445–477. https://doi.org/10.1086/201311 (1972).

      Article Google Scholar

    19. Talamo, S. & Richards, M. A comparison of bone pretreatment methods for AMS dating of samples >30,000 BP, dating old poland ornaments. Radiocarbon53, 443–449. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033822200034573 (2011).

      CASArticle Google Scholar

    20. Quarta, G., D’Elia, M., Braione, E. & Calcagnile, L. Radiocarbon dating of ivory: Potentialities and limitations in forensics. Forensic Sci. Int.299, 114–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2019.03.042 (2019).

      CASArticlePubMed Google Scholar

    21. Reimer, P. J. et al. The INTCAL20 northern hemisphere radiocarbon age calibration curve (0–55 cal kBP). Radiocarbon62, 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1017/RDC.2020.41 (2020).

      CASArticle Dating old poland ornaments Scholar

    22. Bard, E. et al. Extended dilation of the radiocarbon time scale between 40,000 and 48,000 y BP and the overlap between Neanderthals and Homo sapiens. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA117, dating old poland ornaments, 21005–21007. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2012307117 (2020).

      CASArticlePubMedPubMed Central Google Scholar

    23. Bronk Ramsey, C. Dealing with outliers and offsets in radiocarbon dating. Radiocarbon51, 1023–1045. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033822200034093 (2009).

      Article Google Scholar

    24. Jary, Z. & Ciszek, D. Late Dating old poland ornaments loess–palaeosol sequences in Poland and western Ukraine. Quatern. Int.296, 37–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2012.07.009 (2013).

      Article Google Scholar

    25. Nalawade-Chavan, S., McCullagh, J. & Hedges, R. New hydroxyproline radiocarbon dates from Sungir, dating old poland ornaments, Russia, confirm early mid upper palaeolithic burials in Eurasia. PLoS ONE9, e76896. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0076896 (2014).

      ADSCASArticlePubMedPubMed Central Google Scholar

    26. Pitulko, V. V., Pavlova, E. Y., Nikolskiy, P. A. & Ivanova, V. V, dating old poland ornaments. The oldest art of the Eurasian Arctic: Personal ornaments and symbolic objects from Yana RHS, Arctic Siberia. Antiquity86, 642–659. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003598X00047827 (2012).

      Article Google Scholar

    27. Higham, T. et al. Τesting models for the beginnings of the Aurignacian and the advent of figurative art and music: The radiocarbon chronology of Geißenklösterle. J. Hum. Evol.62, 664–676. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2012.03.003 (2012).

      ArticlePubMed Google Scholar

    28. Dutkiewicz, E., Russo, dating old poland ornaments, G., Lee, S. & Bentz, C. SignBase, a collection of geometric signs on mobile objects in the Paleolithic. Sci. Data7, 364. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-020-00704-x (2020).

      ArticlePubMedPubMed Central Google Scholar

    29. Zhitenev, V. In Le Sungirien (eds S.V. Vasilyev, A. Sinitsyn, & M. Otte) 73–84 (ERAUL 147, 2017).

    30. Conard, N. J. & Kind, C.-J. The Beginnings of Art and Music. Ice Age Discoveries from the Caves of Southwestern Germany. (Theiss Verlag, 2020).

    31. Longin, R. New method of collagen dating old poland ornaments for radiocarbon dating. Nature230, 241–242. https://doi.org/10.1038/230241a0 (1971).

      ADSCASArticlePubMed Google Scholar

    32. Brown, T. A., dating old poland ornaments, Nelson, D. E., Vogel, J. S. & Southon, J. R. Improved collagen extraction by modified Longin method. Radiocarbon30, 171–177. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033822200044118 (1988).

      CASArticle Google Scholar

    33. Brock, F., Ramsey, C. Dating old poland ornaments. & Higham, Dating old poland ornaments. Quality assurance of ultrafiltered bone dating. Radiocarbon49, 187–192 (2007).

      CASArticle Google Scholar

    34. Kromer, B., Lindauer, S., Synal, H.-A. & Wacker, L, dating old poland ornaments. MAMS: A new AMS facility at the Curt-Engelhorn-Centre for Achaeometry, Mannheim, Germany. Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. B294, 11–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nimb.2012.01.015 (2013).

      ADSCASArticle Google Scholar

    35. van Klinken, G. J. Bone collagen quality indicators for palaeodietary and radiocarbon measurements. J, dating old poland ornaments. Archaeol. Sci.26, 687–695. https://doi.org/10.1006/jasc.1998.0385 (1999).

      Article dating old poland ornaments Google Scholar

    36. Wacker, L., Němec, M. & Bourquin, J. A revolutionary graphitisation system: Fully automated, compact and simple. Nucl. Dating old poland ornaments. Methods Phys. Res. B268, dating old poland ornaments, 931–934. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nimb.2009.10.067 (2010).

      ADSCASArticle Google Scholar

    37. Wacker, L. et al. MICADAS: Routine and high-precision radiocarbon dating. Radiocarbon52, 252–262. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033822200045288 (2010).

      CASArticle Google Scholar

    38. Urbanowski, M. et al. The first Neanderthal tooth found north of the Carpathian Mountains. Naturwissenschaften97, 411–415 (2010).

      ADSCASArticle Google Scholar

    39. Nowaczewska, W. et al. The tooth of a Neanderthal child from Stajnia Cave, Poland. J. Hum. Evol.64, 225–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2012.12.001 (2013).

      ArticlePubMed Google Scholar

    40. Locke, M. Structure of ivory. J. Morphol.269, dating old poland ornaments, 423–450. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmor.10585 (2008).

      ArticlePubMed dating old poland ornaments dating old poland ornaments Google Scholar

    41. Su, X. W. & Cui, F. Z. Hierarchical structure of ivory: From nanometer to centimeter. Mater. Sci. Eng. C7, dating old poland ornaments, 19–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0928-4931(98)00067-8 (1999).

      Article Google Scholar

    42. Espinoza, dating old poland ornaments, E. O. N. & Mann, M.-J. The history and significance of the Schreger pattern in proboscidean ivory characterization. J. Am. Inst. Conserv.32, 241–248. https://doi.org/10.1179/019713693806124866 (1993).

      Article Google Scholar

    43. Higgins, O. A. et al. Comparing traditional and virtual approaches in the micro-excavation and analysis of cremated remains. J. Archaeol. Sci. Rep.32, 102396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2020.102396 (2020).

      Article Google Scholar

    44. Vazzana, A. et al. A multianalytic investigation of weapon-related injuries in a Late Antiquity necropolis, Mutina. Italy. J. Archaeol. Sci.17, 550–559. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2017.12.009 (2018).

      Article Google Scholar

    45. Haile-Selassie, Y., Melillo, S. M., Vazzana, A., Benazzi, S. & Ryan, T. M. A 3.8-million-year-old hominin cranium from Woranso-Mille, Ethiopia. Nature573, 214–219. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1513-8 (2019).

      ADSCASArticlePubMed Google Scholar

    46. Callieri, M., Ranzuglia, G., Dellepiane, M., dating old poland ornaments, Cignoni, P. & Scopigno, R. Meshlab as a complete open tool for the integration of photos and colour with high-resolution 3D geometry data. Comput, dating old poland ornaments. Appl. Quant. Methods Archaeol.2, 406–416 (2012).

      Google Scholar

    47. Buckley, M. In Zooarchaeology in Practice: Dating old poland ornaments Studies in Methodology and Interpretation in Archaeofaunal Analysis (eds Giovas, C. M. & LeFebvre, M. J.) 227–247 (Springer International Publishing, 2018).

      Chapter Dating old poland ornaments Scholar

    48. Welker, F. et al. Palaeoproteomic evidence identifies archaic hominins associated with the Châtelperronian at the Grotte du Renne. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA113, 11162–11167. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1605834113 (2016).

      CASArticlePubMedPubMed Central dating old poland ornaments Google Scholar

    49. van Doorn, N. L., Hollund, H. & Collins, M. J. A novel and non-destructive approach for ZooMS analysis: Ammonium bicarbonate buffer extraction. Archaeol. Anthropol. Sci.3, 281. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-011-0067-y (2011).

      Article dating old poland ornaments Google Scholar

    50. Buckley, M. et al. Species identification of archaeological marine mammals using collagen fingerprinting. J. Archaeol. Sci.41, 631–641. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2013.08.021 (2014).

      CASArticle Google Scholar

    51. Kirby, D. P., Buckley, M., Promise, E., Trauger, S. A. & Holdcraft, T. R. Identification of collagen-based materials in cultural heritage. Analyst138, 4849–4858 (2013).

      ADSCASArticle Google Scholar

    52. Żarski, M. et al. Stratigraphy and palaeoenvironment of Stajnia Cave (southern Poland) with regard to habitation of the site by Neanderthals. Geol. Q.61, 350–369 (2017).

      Google Scholar

    53. Baca, M. et al. Retreat and extinction of the Late Pleistocene cave bear (Ursus spelaeus sensu lato). Sci. Nat.103, 92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00114-016-1414-8 (2016).

      CASArticle Google Scholar

    Download references

    Источник: [https://torrent-igruha.org/3551-portal.html]

    Shiny Brite

    Glass baubles from the Shiny Brite company

    The Shiny Brite company produced the most popular Christmas tree ornaments in the United States throughout the 1940s and 1950s.

    In 1937, Max Eckardt established Shiny Brite ornaments, working with the Corning Glass company to mass-produce glass Christmas ornaments. Eckardt had been importing hand-blown glass balls from Germany since around 1907, but had the foresight to anticipate a disruption in his supply from the upcoming war. Corning adapted their process for making light bulbs to making clear glass ornaments, which were then shipped to Eckardt's factories to be decorated by hand. The fact that Shiny Brite ornaments were an American-made product was stressed as a selling point during World War II.

    Dating of the ornaments is often facilitated by studying the hook. The first Shiny Brite ornaments had the dating old poland ornaments metal cap and loop, with the hook attached to the loop, from which the ornament was hung from the tree.

    Wartime production necessitated the replacement of the metal cap with a cardboard tab, from which the owner would use dating old poland ornaments or string to hang the ornament. These hangers firmly place the date of manufacture of the ornament to the early 1940s, dating old poland ornaments.

    Following the war, Shiny Brite introduced a line of ornaments with a newly designed metal hook that provided the user with two lengths of hanger. The long hook traveled through the center of the ornament and exited the bottom, where it attached to the foot of the ornament. This provided the "short" hanger. Unlatched from the bottom, dating old poland ornaments, the entire length of the hook was available, allowing the ornament to dangle at a greater distance from the tree limb to which it was attached. This arrangement was designed to allow the ornament to fill sparsely limbed areas of a natural tree.

    The increasing popularity of the aluminum artificial Christmas tree, first manufactured in 1958, made this device far less attractive to the consumer, dating old poland ornaments, as an artificial tree had no gaps to be filled. The added expense dating old poland ornaments the lengthy hanging wire, coupled with the diminishing need, caused this feature to dating old poland ornaments discontinued in 1960.

    Shiny Brite ornaments were first manufactured at Corning's plant in Wellsboro, Pennsylvania, and continued there for dating old poland ornaments decades.[1] During its peak, Shiny Brite also had factories in New Jersey, located in the cities of Hoboken, Irvington, North Bergen, and West New York. The company's main office and showroom were located at 45 East 17th Street in New York city.

    Shiny Brite's most popular ornaments have been reissued under the same trademark by Christopher Dating old poland ornaments since 2001.

    References[edit]

    • Encyclopedia of Christmas, Tanya Gulevich, Visible Ink Press, 2002

    External links[edit]

    Источник: [https://torrent-igruha.org/3551-portal.html]

    Antique Christmas ornaments are among the loveliest Christmas decorations you can find for your tree. From blown glass figures to beaded designs, these vintage ornaments add style and sparkle to your home during the holidays. Learn about the many styles, as well as how to assess an antique Christmas ornament's value.

    How Can You Tell if a Christmas Ornament Is Asian milf dating or Antique?

    Because Christmas is a time of nostalgia, many companies make ornaments in vintage and antique dating old poland ornaments. This can make it confusing for collectors who want genuine antique ornaments. However, there are some dating old poland ornaments clues that can help you determine whether an ornament is a reproduction or the real thing.

    Related Articles

    Vintage Ornaments Are High Quality

    If you've ever picked up a modern ornament and held it next to an antique one, you know that modern ornaments tend to feel different. Genuine antique ornaments are often made of mercury glass, glass that has been silvered on the inside. Modern reproductions are sometimes made of plastic or thicker, less delicate glass.

    Many Antique Ornaments Are Made by Hand

    While modern ornaments are uniform and perfect, antique Christmas ornaments were hand-crafted and show some variation. You may see signs of hand painting, a lack of uniformity, and even an indication of mouth blown glass. Even though many antique Christmas ornaments were mouth blown into a mold, you'll see the pontil mark or uneven area where the hanger cap attaches.

    Glitter on Antique Ornaments Is Different

    The glitter on modern Christmas ornaments is different from the type of glitter used in years gone by. Vintage ornaments often have mica glitter that isn't uniform in shape and size. The glitter may feel bumpy to the touch.

    Ornament Caps Offer a Clue About Age

    Ornament hanger caps have changed over the years, and they can be a good indicator of age. Newer ornaments have ornate caps that are made of thin metal, while older metal caps tend to be simpler and thicker. You'll also see caps made of plaster or even paper.

    Antique Ornaments Have Patina

    One of the most important indicators that an ornament is vintage is patina, or the wear that comes with age. Antique and vintage Christmas ornaments will show some wear, even if they are in excellent condition. You'll see the mercury glass flaking off a bit or the metal taking on a dull appearance from tarnish. Painted details may be a little worn or scratched. This wear can add to the beauty of the ornament and help you tell the difference between it and a newer reproduction.

    Styles of Antique Glass Christmas Ornaments

    Antique glass Christmas ornaments come in a variety of styles, dating old poland ornaments, often following what was popular during the era they were made. For instance, 1920s and 1930s Christmas ornaments have Art Deco geometric designs. 1950s and 1960s Christmas ornaments embrace the futuristic style of the era with mid-century modern sleek lines and plastic and aluminum details, dating old poland ornaments. In addition to the design styles of the era, you'll see these specific types of vintage Christmas ornaments.

    Kugel Christmas Ornaments

    Some of dating old poland ornaments oldest antique Christmas ornaments are kugels. These heavy glass ornaments have a fluted or shaped design and were made in Germany. They date back to the late 19th century, although they continued to be popular into the 20th century. You can find them in the shape of a bunch of grapes, a simple ball, and many other styles. These regularly sell for around $30 in antique stores and on eBay, but they can sell for much more if they are in good condition and are old.

    Unsilvered Christmas Ornaments With Paper Hangers

    These matte-toned 1940s Christmas ornaments are anything but dull. Instead, they are a statement about wartime rationing, womens dating site profiles was important even during the holidays, dating old poland ornaments. Because metals were needed for the war effort, Christmas ornament manufacturers could not coat the inside of the glass ornaments with silver. They also had to use paper hangers instead of the traditional metal ones. The result is a very unique look. The fact that these were made only during World War II makes them some of sim da dating app rarest and most valuable Christmas ornaments you can find. Even simple designs regularly sell on eBay for $15 to $30 each.

    Figural Glass Christmas Ornaments

    Among the most popular antique Dating old poland ornaments ornaments are figural designs. Often, dating old poland ornaments, these were mouth blown into a mold. You'll see shapes like Santas, pine cones, fish, pickles, and more. Some shapes have symbolism, and others are simply designed to be pretty. They range in value from a few dollars to over $100.

    Free-Blown Antique Ornaments

    Some antique ornaments are also free blown, which means they are not entirely blown in a mold. Part of the ornament may be molded, but other parts may not, dating old poland ornaments. These are unique designs, and they can be among the most valuable. Free-blown glass Christmas ornaments sometimes sell for hundreds of dollars.

    Indented Antique Christmas Ornaments

    Back when Christmas trees used candles instead of electric lights, ornaments dating old poland ornaments faceted indentations were a great way to add sparkle and reflect the light. This shape stayed popular throughout the early 20th century and experienced a resurgence mid-century. You can often find these indented ornaments, and some even feature indentations on both sides. They often sell for under $20.

    Cotton Batting Christmas Ornaments

    Some of the oldest and most valuable Christmas ornaments you can find are those made of spun cotton or cotton batting. They originated in the 19th century, possibly as a type of non-breakable ornament children could touch. They come in many styles, dating old poland ornaments, but they are usually figural. You'll see animals, people, foods, and more. Well-preserved examples regularly sell for over $100.

    Beaded Christmas Ornaments

    Beaded ornaments were also popular, especially during the 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s. Some were store-bought, and others were ornaments people could make using pre-packaged kits of dating old poland ornaments. These sparkling ornaments can be difficult to find in good condition, but they tend to be fairly affordable, often selling for $20 or less.

    Dresden Paper Animal Ornaments

    Dresden paper ornaments, which usually feature an animal shape like a peacock, deer, or bird in flight, are some of the most valuable antique Christmas ornaments on the market. Because these very old German ornaments are difficult to find in good condition, they often sell for hundreds of dollars.

    Glass Bead Garlands

    Garlands of blown glass beads are another vintage Christmas ornament that can be very collectible. These garlands feature hollow mercury glass beads strung together on wire or cotton cord. Often, the delicate glass got broken with years dating old poland ornaments use and storage, so these are rare to find in very good condition. Especially well preserved examples sell for just under $100.

    Antique Glass and Ceramic Christmas Trees

    Although they were not designed to hang on the tree, these table ornaments are a hot item with collectors. Ceramic trees fitted with colored glass lights make a beautiful holiday display, and many light up for a gorgeous glow. Often, the tree and the light-up base were separate pieces, so it can be challenging to find both in good condition. A complete antique ceramic Christmas tree often sells in the range of $30, making it an affordable Christmas dating old poland ornaments Antique Christmas Tree Stands

    In addition to having antique ornaments on your Christmas tree, you can place it in an antique stand. Some of the oldest and most ornate examples were crafted from metal and can play music dating old poland ornaments rotate. Others feature figures like elves and deer or ornate cast iron designs. It's important to note that many of these may not be practical to use with a dating old poland ornaments tree today, since they frequently lack a place to keep water for your tree.

    Assessing Antique Christmas Ornament Values

    Many people find old glass Christmas ornaments and wonder if they are worth anything, and the answer really depends on the condition of the ornament, its rarity, and dating old poland ornaments few other factors. Here's how to assess antique Christmas ornaments values so you can get an estimate of how much dating old poland ornaments specific ornament might be worth.

    Condition Matters

    The condition of an antique Christmas ornament is very important. Ornaments with missing pieces, crazing, chipped or flaking paint, or broken parts are worth considerably less than those in good shape. An ornament should look old, but it should still be beautiful.

    Rare Christmas Ornaments Are Worth More

    Rare Christmas ornaments like Dresden paper examples or cotton batting ornaments are worth the most. Free-blown ornaments are also extremely valuable. Additionally, if the ornament features a less common figure dating old poland ornaments design, it can be a hot item with collectors.

    Compare to Recent Sales

    Because sellers on eBay and other sites can ask anything they want for an dating old poland ornaments, the only real way to compare values is to look at recently sold ornaments. Here are some Christmas ornament values from recent sales:

    Add History and Nostalgia to Your Holidays

    If you love antique Christmas ornaments, there are lots of ways to use them in your holiday decorating. Consider using a Victorian Christmas decorating scheme and pairing the antique ornaments with Christmas houses. Alternatively, you can hang vintage ornaments from your chandelier or collect them in a bowl on your table as a centerpiece. No matter how you style them, these beautiful ornaments will add a sense of history and nostalgia to your holidays.

    © 2022 LoveToKnow Media. All pansexual dating sites reserved.

    Источник: [https://torrent-igruha.org/3551-portal.html]

    The High Value of Vintage Christmas Ornaments

    For some people, the value of Christmas ornaments rests in how beautiful it looks on their holiday tree or how long it's been in their family. For collectors, however, the the value of Christmas ornaments is an entirely different proposition. If you're hanging onto vintage holiday ornaments, they might be worth more than just sentimental value.

    Determining Value

    When it comes to glass Christmas ornaments designed to hang on a holiday tree, the greatest value usually lies in figurals. These are clever ornaments shaped like people or things, as opposed to plain old glass balls.

    One aspect to keep in mind with these ornaments, like most collectibles, is condition. Those with little to no paint loss, all original components, and glass in all the right places will always bring dating old poland ornaments values than less-than-stellar examples. Because ornaments have been used annually on holiday trees since around the turn of the 20th century on into the 1920s, they rarely come to market in pristine condition now. When they do, they're worth a good bit of cash to collectors. 

    Some of these beauties have been reproduced as well. It’s always wise to question authenticity if the condition of an ornament you’re considering for a collection is too good to be true. Again, most will have some sort of wear, even if they are in excellent shape for their age.

    If you’re bargain-minded, shop for ornaments like these during the off-season. Just as with modern Christmas decorations, the best deals on vintage ornaments can be found when they're not in peak demand for holiday decorating. 

    High-Value Figurals

    The king of the figural Christmas ornament is the kugel, a term that means ball in German. These were first made in Germany by glass crafters during the Biedermeier period around 1830, according to an Antique Trader article by Karen Knapstein. Those old versions were too heavy to dating old poland ornaments on Christmas trees, so they were suspended from the ceiling and displayed all year round. After 1855, dating old poland ornaments, thinner versions were made, and those could be used as holiday ornaments on the family tree.

    Collectors usually refer to any thick blown glass ornament with a fixed decorative cap as a kugel. It’s said that these were first sold in America at Woolworth’s dating old poland ornaments stores dating old poland ornaments the 1880s. Figural examples shaped like clusters of grapes in rare colors like red or amber can be worth in excess of $1,000 apiece. Egg-shaped kugels might sell from $500 to $800 each, while round balls can be found for much less in common colors. Take care when purchasing these, however, because some examples have been reproduced.

    Many of the other popular figurals collectors seek are shaped like famed personalities or characters of yesteryear. For example, an Eddy Cantor (a comical singer and actor popular during the first half of the 20th century) ornament with chenille arms might be worth $500 or more to the right person. One shaped like John Bull (the personification of Great Britain that originated in cartoon form) could approach $300 in the right market. An example designed to resemble President William Howard Taft’s head, also sometimes described as an "Einstein Face" ornament due to its resemblance to the scientist, can be found for $100 to $150.

    Animals also bring in good sums. A rare Puss ‘n Boots glass ornament with chenille limbs could go for $800 to $1,000. A clip-on cat head ornament might fetch $300 to $400, while a kitten in a stocking ornament with a bright color scheme could sell for $200 to $300.

    Other figurals shaped like birds and airplanes with metal wheels can sell for $100 to $250 each, along with a host of other interesting shapes.

    Affordable Glass Ball Ornaments

    If you’re looking to outfit a vintage-style tree without spending a small fortune, there are some alternatives. Glass ball ornaments that don’t date back nearly as far as kugels will be the least expensive, as well as the easiest to find. For instance, an entire box of stenciled Shiny Brite ornaments dating to the 1940s through the '60s in excellent condition might sell for $50 to $60. If you shop around to find them one at a time, you’ll likely pay in the $5 to $10 range, or a bit more for rare or extra special examples.

    Even older kugel spheres don’t usually go as high as figurals, although they do share the same type of fixed decorative cap surrounding the hanger. These true antiques usually sell for $30 to $100, depending on the color and condition.

    Ornament Examples

    This lot of 30 vintage glass ornaments sold at Morphy Auctions for $270 (not including buyer’s premium) in September 2011. Most are figurals in the form of grapes, cars, fish, and frogs with one unusual frog climbing a ladder example. At $9 each, dating old poland ornaments, the net auction price per piece, these can be considered a very good buy. Sold individually in an antique shop or at an antique show, they would likely bring $20 to $50 each, or possibly more for the rarer examples in the lot. 

    Some collectors will pay for an entire lot like this one to obtain one rare ornament. They then sell or trade the remainder of the lot to garner examples they covet. 

    Источник: [https://torrent-igruha.org/3551-portal.html]

    Mammoth ivory pendant is oldest decorated jewellery found in Eurasia

    By Alison George

    Dorsal and ventral views of the pendant, <b>dating old poland ornaments</b>. Scale bar is 1 cm. ? Antonino Vazzana - BONES Lab

    A pendant carved from mammoth ivory is the oldest known ornate jewellery made by humans in Eurasia. The discovery single parent dating shaking up our understanding of the emergence of so-called symbolic behaviours in the region.

    The oval-shaped pendant, 4.5 centimetres long and 1.5 cm wide, was unearthed in Stajnia cave in Poland. It has two holes drilled into it, presumably to be used for thread, and is decorated with a sequence of more than 50 small indents in a looping curve.

    “It’s a beautiful piece of past work from Homo sapiens, an amazing piece of jewellery,” says Sahra Talamo at the University of Bologna, Italy, who led the team that analysed the pendant.

    Advertisement

    Using a new radiocarbon dating technique, dating old poland ornaments, the researchers discovered that the pendant was created 41,500 years ago, making it the oldest of its kind found in Eurasia. “We were quite shocked,” Talamo says.

    This predates other objects and personal ornaments with punctured dot motifs found in France and Germany by 2000 years. It also highlights Poland as an important region for artistic innovation for the first wave of modern humans in Europe who developed new types of decoration for their bodies as a marker of personal or cultural identity.

    Read more: Lost art of the Stone Age: The cave paintings redrawing human history

    The pattern of dots on the ivory forms an asymmetrical loop, but exactly what they mean is still an open question, says Talamo. “The most beautiful interpretation is that it is a lunar calendar,” she says.

    The motif is similar to the one found on the Blanchard plaque from France, an engraved bone dated to around 30,000 years ago, which has been postulated to be a hunting tally to count the number of animals killed, or dating old poland ornaments marker of the position of the moon over time.

    The excavations at the Stajnia cave also reveal how modern humans were in Poland around 10,000 years earlier than previously thought. “Poland was not supposed to have Homo sapiens there at this time,” says Talamo.

    Journal reference: Scientific Reports, DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-01221-6

    More on these topics:

    Источник: [https://torrent-igruha.org/3551-portal.html]

    Dating old poland ornaments - for

    Mammoth ivory pendant is oldest decorated jewellery found in Eurasia

    By Alison George

    Dorsal and ventral views of the pendant. Scale bar is 1 cm. ? Antonino Vazzana - BONES Lab

    A pendant carved from mammoth ivory is the oldest known ornate jewellery made by humans in Eurasia. The discovery is shaking up our understanding of the emergence of so-called symbolic behaviours in the region.

    The oval-shaped pendant, 4.5 centimetres long and 1.5 cm wide, was unearthed in Stajnia cave in Poland. It has two holes drilled into it, presumably to be used for thread, and is decorated with a sequence of more than 50 small indents in a looping curve.

    “It’s a beautiful piece of past work from Homo sapiens, an amazing piece of jewellery,” says Sahra Talamo at the University of Bologna, Italy, who led the team that analysed the pendant.

    Advertisement

    Using a new radiocarbon dating technique, the researchers discovered that the pendant was created 41,500 years ago, making it the oldest of its kind found in Eurasia. “We were quite shocked,” Talamo says.

    This predates other objects and personal ornaments with punctured dot motifs found in France and Germany by 2000 years. It also highlights Poland as an important region for artistic innovation for the first wave of modern humans in Europe who developed new types of decoration for their bodies as a marker of personal or cultural identity.

    Read more: Lost art of the Stone Age: The cave paintings redrawing human history

    The pattern of dots on the ivory forms an asymmetrical loop, but exactly what they mean is still an open question, says Talamo. “The most beautiful interpretation is that it is a lunar calendar,” she says.

    The motif is similar to the one found on the Blanchard plaque from France, an engraved bone dated to around 30,000 years ago, which has been postulated to be a hunting tally to count the number of animals killed, or a marker of the position of the moon over time.

    The excavations at the Stajnia cave also reveal how modern humans were in Poland around 10,000 years earlier than previously thought. “Poland was not supposed to have Homo sapiens there at this time,” says Talamo.

    Journal reference: Scientific Reports, DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-01221-6

    More on these topics:

    Источник: [https://torrent-igruha.org/3551-portal.html]

    A 41,500 year-old decorated ivory pendant from Stajnia Cave (Poland)

    Abstract

    Evidence of mobiliary art and body augmentation are associated with the cultural innovations introduced by Homo sapiens at the beginning of the Upper Paleolithic. Here, we report the discovery of the oldest known human-modified punctate ornament, a decorated ivory pendant from the Paleolithic layers at Stajnia Cave in Poland. We describe the features of this unique piece, as well as the stratigraphic context and the details of its chronometric dating. The Stajnia Cave plate is a personal 'jewellery' object that was created 41,500 calendar years ago (directly radiocarbon dated). It is the oldest known of its kind in Eurasia and it establishes a new starting date for a tradition directly connected to the spread of modern Homo sapiens in Europe.

    Introduction

    The emergence of decoration and adornment of the human body is considered one of the earliest manifestations of symbolic behavior, marking the beginning of ethnolinguistic identity and social complexity in human evolution1,2. Timing when and where personal ornaments appeared in the archaeological record are important for reconstructing the trajectories of abstract thinking of archaic humans and understanding how figurative representations varied through time1,2. In Europe, the oldest evidence of body adornment is documented at ~ 46 ka BP in the Initial Upper Paleolithic layers of Bacho Kiro where several carnivore teeth were worked into pendants3,4. A successive technical advancement is recorded in the Early Aurignacian (~ 40 ka BP) when mammoth ivory started to be manipulated for the production of pendants and mobiliary arts5,6,7. Within these novel accessories, a new type of decoration—the alignment of punctuations—emerged on some ornaments in south-western France8, and figurines in Swabian Jura (Germany)9. Thus far, most of these iconic adornments were recovered during older excavations, with less recognition of site formation histories and post-depositional disturbance. Hence, their chronological attribution is based only on the stratigraphic context rather than direct dating. Recent chronometric programs on sites in Swabian Jura10 yielded contradictory results corroborating the inaccurate provenience of the samples collected during previous fieldwork. This situation makes the reconstruction of the emergence of human body augmentation and the discussion concerning the epicenter of the diffusion of mobiliary art in Europe (Kulturpumpe model)10 hotly debated and far from being resolved10,11,12.

    In this context, we report here the discovery and the direct date of a new ivory punctate ornament found at Stajnia Cave, in Poland. This finding plays a unique role in demonstrating the importance of the direct date of an object of Paleolithic art to understand the origin of communication, celebration, and expression of Homo sapiens in Europe.

    The Stajnia Cave is a natural shelter located on the northern side of the Kraków-Częstochowa Upland in southern Poland (50° 36′58″ N, 19°29′04″ E) (Fig. 1a). The site was investigated between 2006 and 2010 exposing a stratigraphic sequence of seven units (from G at the bottom (MIS 5c), to A (MIS 1) at the top) (Supplementary Sect. 1 and Fig. S1). During the excavations, a series of Neanderthal remains were found13,14 within a large collection of bones of Late Pleistocene steppe-tundra species, and Middle and Upper Paleolithic artefacts14 (see Supplementary Sects. 1 to 4). In 2010, two fragments of an ornate ivory pendant (S-22222 + S-23100) were discovered in layer D1 (Figs. 1b,c, and 2). In addition, an awl fragment (S-12160) was identified among the bone fragments from layer D1 (Fig. 3). A recent reassessment of the archaeological record of Stajnia Cave reveals that post-depositional frost disturbances and modern distortions displaced artefacts and human remains between layers14. Since most of the lithics collected in layer D1 are associated with the Central and Eastern European Micoquian and very few are classified as Upper Paleolithic (Supplementary Figs. S3 and S4), the accurate cultural attribution of the pendant and the awl required direct radiocarbon dating. In order to minimise the amount of material exposed to destructive analysis, the most recent methodological advancements in 14C were followed15,16.

    modified from https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Geografia_Polski#/media/Plik:Physical_map_of_Poland.png, CC BY-SA 4.0) and aerial picture of Stajnia Cave; (B) Dorsal and ventral views of the pendant (S23100, S22222). Scale bar is 1 cm. (C) Schematic representation of the pendant (dorsal view). Numbers 1 to 50 indicate clearly identifiable punctuations; dotted lines indicate possible punctuations. The red hatch indicates the exfoliated area. Scale bar is 1 cm.

    Stajnia pendant and location of the site. (A) Site location in southern Poland (

    Full size image

    Stajnia pendant reconstruction. Views of the virtually reconstructed pendant and photomicrographs documenting the technology used for their manufacture: multiple examples of punctures (A,CE) and traces of smoothing (B,G). A longitudinal section through perforations is shown in (B). Scale bar is 1 cm.

    Full size image

    Stajnia awl. (A) Original picture of the awl from Stajnia Cave; (B) Reconstructed 3D digital models of the awl. Scale bars are 1 cm.

    Full size image

    Results

    The pendant and the awl

    The pendant is characterised by an oval shape with rounded margins, two drilled holes and decoration consisting of patterns of sequential punctures. The largest piece of the pendant is 4.5 cm long and 1.5 cm wide while the thickness varies between 0.36 and 0.39 cm. The reconstructed width of the complete artefact is shown in Fig. 2. There is one fully preserved perforation visible on the largest piece (hole 1 in Fig. 2) located close to the centre of the reconstructed artefact, near its upper edge. Another hole (hole 2 in Fig. 2), initially located near the opposite edge of the artefact, is partly preserved. The diameter of the fully preserved hole 1 is 2.3 mm and the original diameter of the partly preserved hole 2 was probably the same. The dorsal surface of the object is ornamented with at least 50 punctures creating an irregular looping curve (Fig. 1c). The ornamentation is partly destroyed by exfoliation which occurred close to the hole 1 (Figs. 1c, 2d. Besides this exfoliation, longitudinal cracks are also visible on the surface of the object.

    Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was conducted to verify the artefactual character of the observed features and to identify the technology used for their manufacture. The SEM analysis (Fig. 2b–e,g) indicates that the dorsal surface of the pendant does not present clear traces of intentional preparation preceding the creation of the punctures. The ventral puncture, however, presents traces of smoothing (Fig. 2g) which are linear and parallel to the longest axis of the artefact. The V-shaped cross-sections of the marks suggest the use of a flint artefact (Fig. 2b,g), and the differences in depth and width of the striations may be explained by the irregular edge of the applied stone tool17. Hole 1 and hole 2 were artificially manufactured by drilling from both sides which were not thinned previously, resulting in a biconical shape in cross-section (Fig. 2f). Most of the punctures are similar in terms of their outlines and cross-sections (Fig. 2c,e), which makes it highly probable that they all were made with the same tool—possibly in a relatively short time18. Punctures located directly below the fully preserved hole 1 display a slightly different morphology with less defined edges (Fig. 2a). The possibility that these punctures were made at a different time than the others cannot be excluded, however, gradual tool wear or a changed position of the tool are more parsimonious.

    The maximum length of the awl is 68.33 mm (Fig. 3). Several wear facets are visible along the awl surface, and the basal cross-sections (5.8 × 3.4 mm) is flattened (Fig. 3). On the bottom side, there is a smoothed surface with round pronounced edges and flattening spike. The top side is more concave, and towards the tip, an extremely smooth facet is responsible for further refining. The lateral sides of the spike are rounded and polished. At c. 38.18 mm from the spike, the awl becomes basally thicker. Clear evidence of bone working is shown at the bottom facet, which has sharp edges towards both sides and the round spike show evidence of wear signs, indicating that an extensive use before discarding (Fig. 3).

    Zooarchaeology by mass spectrometry (ZooMS) analysis reveals the pendant to be made from mammoth ivory and the awl from a horse bone (Supplementary Sect. 5).

    The dating

    Bones and ivory are the most suitable and well-established osseous materials to attempt radiocarbon dating15,19,20. The presence of collagen in the pendant (R-EVA 2651) and awl (R-EVA 2650) were tested using the near-infrared (NIR) analysis before sampling for radiocarbon dating. The results indicate that both specimens are well preserved and predicted yields 5.30 ± 1.52% (Pendant) and 8.04 ± 1.43% (Awl) weight collagen (Supplementary Fig. S6), which align closely with the collagen yields obtained following extraction (Table 1).

    Full size table

    Collagen was extracted from both specimens at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology (MPI-EVA) in Leipzig, Germany. The collagen from the pendant and the awl was radiocarbon dated twice with an Accelerator Mass Spectrometer (AMS) at two different radiocarbon laboratories (MAMS and ETH) in order to obtain very precise 14C dates for calibration with the recently updated IntCal20 calibration curve21,22 (Table 1). The combined 14C age for the pendant (S-22222) is 36,577 ± 183 14C BP (obtained using the R_Combine command in OxCal 4.4.223), and the combined 14C age of the awl (S-12160) is 37,701 ± 208 14C BP, which correspond respectively to calibrated ranges of 41,730–41,340 cal BP and 42,270–42,070 cal BP at 68.3% probability (Table 1, and Supplementary Table S5). From the 20 animal samples pretreated at the MPI-EVA, 11 are older than 49,000 years BP, one from layer E, two from layer D3, three from layer D2, four from layer D1, and one from layer C18. In layer D1, five more samples result in finite ages from 45,300 ± 1410 to 36,577 ± 183 BP, including the pendant and the awl samples. Three dates from layer C19 ranges from 37,750 ± 310 to 33,450 ± 350 BP and one from the top of layer C18 gives a very old age compared with the C19 layer below (MAMS-19870: 40,400 ± 420 BP) (Table 1). Mammoth ivory tusk fragments from layers D2, D1 and C19 are older than 50,000 years, whereas another ivory fragment from D1 was previously dated 44,600 ± 2,100 BP (OxA-24944) (Table 1).

    We then constructed a Bayesian chronological model using the software OxCal 4.423 and the new IntCal20 curve21 to refine the calibrations of the radiocarbon dates of Stajnia Cave. The calibrated dates (un-modelled in Table 1) and the modelled ages obtained are shown in Supplementary Table S5 and Fig. S7. We did not include dates > 49,000 BP in the model. As is evident from Supplementary Fig. S7, the lowermost layers of the cave (layers E, D3 and D2) extend beyond the range of the radiocarbon method. Five further dates in layer D1 and one date in layer C18 are also > 49,000 BP, even though these layers contain Upper Paleolithic artefacts. This demonstrates the poor agreement between the high-resolution 14C dates and the poor resolution of the stratigraphy at the site, resulting in a model agreement index of 34.5% with four outliers (higher than 20%) out of 14 modelled samples. This situation implies that the awl and the pendant (32% and 21% outlier probability respectively), found in layer D1, have likely moved between layers and probably originate from layer C19 rather than layer D1. This hypothesis is corroborated by the radiocarbon age of two bones from layer C19 that have similar chronological ranges to the awl and pendant (Table 1). The sample R-EVA 739 (MAMS-19851: 36,080 ± 460 BP) also shows anthropogenic modifications suggesting a close association between the human settlement of the cave and the ivory pendant.

    Discussion

    The direct radiocarbon date makes the Stajnia ornate pendant (41,730–41,340 cal BP (68.3%)) the earliest punctate ivory object known to date to the Early Upper Palaeolithic record in Eurasia (Fig. 4b, Table 1). Although the Aurignacian settlement at Stajnia Cave was ephemeral (Supplementary Sect. 4), the direct radiocarbon dates on the pendant and the awl establish that the dispersal of these elaborate and highly manufactured objects, as forms of cultural innovation with highly symbolic values by Homo sapiens, was established by around 42,000 cal BP. The radiocarbon dating on other ivory fragments reveals the transport on-site of mammoth tusks since the Middle Paleolithic (Table 1), but only during the Early Aurignacian, this raw material was worked for the production of mobiliary art.

    Map of the geographical distribution of the sites where punctuated ornaments and objects have been found. (A) Map of the geographical distribution of the sites where punctuated ornaments and objects with punctate decoration have been found in Aurignacian and Early Upper Palaeolithic contexts (1 Tuto de Camalhot, 2 Abri Blanchard / Abri Castanet, 3 Abri la Souquette, 4 Abri Lartet, 5 Geißenklösterle, 6 Vogelherd, 7 Sungir, 8 Yana); (B) Chronological comparison of Stajnia pendant and awl (calibrated ranges) with other artistic punctate ornaments found in Upper Palaeolithic sites (modelled ranges). The horizontal bars show the calibrated ranges of direct dates of the awl in blue and of the pendant in pink cross-hatched. From the other sites, the age range of the layers where punctate ornaments have been found are pink cross-hatched bars and are the modelled date ranges produced using the 'date' command in OxCal (See Table S14). The red asterisk close to the name of the sites indicates a 'hypothetical' boundary imposed by the Bayesian model due to a very low agreement index for Vogelherd and just two samples out of context for Tuto de Camalhot. All the bars represent 68.3% probability.

    Full size image

    We consider the possibility that the age of the pendant itself is much older than the decoration carved upon it to be unlikely given the experimental and chronological data presented here. The direct ages of the two precious objects correspond to the chronological range of layer C19 suggesting a short-term occupation at the site during the Aurignacian rather than a chronological coincidence.

    Although permafrost may allow perfect preservation of mammoth tusks in open-air sites for millennia, these conditions are absent during MIS 3 and MIS 2 in southern Poland24. This evidence implies that over thousands of years the mammoth tusk was likely subjected to taphonomic processes causing progressive deterioration of the ivory. As shown in our replicative experiment (see Supplementary Sect. 8), using a subfossil and desiccated tusk fragment in middle/poor condition would have been unworkable for shaping and decorating an ornament aslike the one found in Stajnia. Therefore, we assume that the shaping and punctate decoration was made on a mammoth tusk in fresh condition corroborating the age of ~ 41,500 cal BP.

    Determining precisely when the punctate ornaments emerged in Eurasia required comparison with the other archaeological sites where this artistic pattern was found (Fig. 4). At Geißenklösterle Cave (Germany), punctuations were identified in horizon IIb (an ivory anthropomorph shows a regular punctate decoration on the backside) ranging between 40,280–38,800 cal BP (68.3%) (new modelled calibrated ranges with IntCal20 in Supplementary Sect. 7, and in Supplementary Tables S6, S7 and S14). In France, the use of the punctate motif emerged during the Early Aurignacian at Tuto de Camalhot (40,790–30,830 cal BP (68.3%), new modelled calibrated ranges with IntCal20 in Supplementary Sect. 7, and in Supplementary Tables S11 and S14) and only during a later phase in several sites located in the Castel-Merle Valley18 ranging between 39,800 and 36,240 cal BP (68.3%) (new modelled calibrated ranges with IntCal20 in Supplementary Sect. 7, and Supplementary Tables S8-S10 and S14). However, our model output reveals a low agreement index and poor stratigraphic integrity for Vogelherd Cave. At Tuto de Camalhot Cave, the boundaries obtained from the Bayesian model should be considered 'hypothetical' because they are based on two bones without any stratigraphic information. Further east, patterns of sequential punctures on ivory pendants were made during the EUP at the open-air sites of Sungir25 in Russia (34,810–33,500 cal BP (68.3%), new modelled calibrated ranges with IntCal20 in Supplementary Sect. 7, and Supplementary Tables S12 and S14), and at Yana26 in the Siberian Arctic (32,400–30,820 cal BP (68.3%), new modelled calibrated ranges with IntCal20 in Supplementary Sect. 7, and Supplementary Tables S13 and S14). This evidence reveals a broad geographical distribution of punctate graphic representation (Fig. 4a), and it shows that in Eurasia, the punctate decoration of the pendant at Stajnia Cave predates other instances of this type of ornamentation activity by 2000 years (Fig. 4b and Supplementary Table S14).

    A deeper examination of the beginning of the diffusion of mobiliary art and body augmentation in Eurasia shows some chronological uncertainties (Supplementary Sect. 7). While at Sungir, the direct dates on the buried individuals25 give a precise indication of the age of the ivory beads, at Yana post-depositional processes (e.g., colluviation, solifluction, or ice drift)26 could have displaced some pendants from their original position. In Europe, apart from Geißenklösterle, all the personal ornaments were discovered during excavations carried out in the late 19th and the early twentieth century and are associated only indirectly with the Early or Recent Aurignacian (SI Sect. 7). At Geißenklösterle, the chronology is well established for the different Aurignacian levels27 (new ranges with IntCal20 in Supplementary Sect. 7 and Supplementary Table S6). In contrast, the low chronological resolution of the other Early Upper Paleolithic sites impedes a clear understanding of the diachronic development of Aurignacian artistic expression. This situation is mainly due to the poorly constrained 14C dating resolution caused by questionable stratigraphic contexts at the sites10 (Supplementary Sect. 7). In the light of the Stajnia pendant, the model that the Swabian Jura was the centre of the diffusion of artistic innovations (Kulturpumpe hypothesis)10 needs further examination.

    Summary and conclusion

    The punctate decorative motif is one of the artistic innovations that developed during the Early Aurignacian1,28 in Europe and the EUP in the Russian Plains26,29. Thus far, these marks on mobile objects have been interpreted as hunting tallies, arithmetic counting systems, or lunar notation18, whereas others have suggested aesthetic purposes7. The looping curve represented on the Stajnia pendant is similar to the engraved patterns of the Blanchard plaque18. Whether these marks indicate cyclic notations or kill scores remain an open question, although the resemblance with the lunar analemma is striking. In other personal ornament and ivory objects, the use of the punctate pattern is easier to identify as the makers tried to imitate and transfer natural patterns in new contexts7. These are the reproductions of the coat of a feline and a trout at Vogelherd5,30, the replication of different types of shells at La Souquette, Abri Castanet, and Tuto de Camalhot8, or the imitation of the coat of a horse at Sungir29. In addition, the punctures could serve as simple decoration as seen on the backside of the anthropomorph at Geißenklösterle10, the perforated baton at Sungir29, and on ivory diadems and needles at Yana26. A precise cross-cultural comparison of the emergence of mobiliary art and body augmentation, especially in Europe, requires direct radiocarbon dating of some of these figurines and ornaments to solve the debated questions concerning contemporaneity and socio-cultural connections between groups of Homo sapiens at the onset of the Upper Palaeolithic.

    Investigating Palaeolithic art using the precise ticking of the radiocarbon clock is challenging, especially when it involves the destruction of precious and unique artefacts. However, combining updated radiocarbon pretreatment15, NIR spectroscopy pre-screening to non-destructively quantify collagen preservation16 and the latest AMS instrumental advances (e.g., increasingly precise error ranges4), with the new IntCal2021 calibration curve, we can overcome previous limitations to the direct dating of small, highly precious ornaments and instead associate them directly with a radiocarbon date of centurial precision.

    The age of ~ 41,500 cal BP of the decorated ivory pendant from Stajnia Cave underlines the importance of directly dating mobiliary art to solve the intriguing puzzle of the emergence of symbolic behaviour and modern cognition in human evolution.

    Materials and methods

    Radiocarbon dating

    A total of 20 animal bone samples, including the pendant and the awl, were selected for radiocarbon dating. The collagen was extracted at the Department of Human Evolution, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology (MPI-EVA) in Leipzig (Germany) following the procedures in Talamo and Richards19 and Fewlass, et al.15 (MPI-Code: R-EVA).

    The outer surface of the samples are first cleaned by a shot blaster and then 500 mg of the whole bones and c. 350 mg of the pendant and the awl were sampled. The samples are then decalcified in 0.5 M HCl until no CO2 effervescence is observed. 0.1 M NaOH is added for 30 min to remove humics. The NaOH step is followed by a final 0.5 M HCl step for 15 min. The resulting solid is gelatinised following Longin31 at pH 3 in a heater block at 75 °C for 20 h. The gelatin is then filtered in an Eeze-Filter™ (Elkay Laboratory Products (UK) Ltd.) to remove small (> 80 μm) particles. The gelatin is then ultrafiltered with Sartorius “VivaspinTurbo” ultrafilters (30 kDa MWCO)32. Prior to use, the filter is cleaned to remove carbon containing humectants33. The samples are lyophilised for 48 h. To supervise possible contamination introduced during the pretreatment stage, a pretreated 14C-free bone sample was used, kindly provided by the Oxford Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit (ORAU). Prior to sending the samples to the Mannheim facility for AMS dating (laboratory code MAMS)34, the collagen yield, C:N ratios, together with isotopic values are evaluated in order to understand the preservation of the collagen.

    All the samples pretreated at the MPI-EVA passed the evaluation criteria (bones with > 1% weight collagen and C:N ratios in the range 2.9–3.635) for good quality collagen (Table 1). The collagen of the pendant and the awl was split into two parts, one was sent to Mannheim AMS and the second one to the ETH Zürich (laboratory code, ETH), where the collagen extracts were graphitised using the AGE III36 and dated using the MICADAS34,37. The AMS measurements of the collagen backgrounds which were used in the age correction of all samples were highly reproducible within and between each magazine (~ 500 mg bone extractions: 2016 mean F14 C = 0.00168, s.d. = 0.00018; 2018 mean F14 C = 0.00220, s.d. = 0.00025). Due to the high reproducibility of the background measurements, extended measurement time, high rate of transmission and the use of the R_Combined of two separate dates, both the pendant and the awl, in Oxcal, we were able to reach exceptional levels of precision. An additional 1‰ was added to the error calculation of the samples, as per standard practice.

    Archaeological methods

    The excavation was laid out using a 1 × 1 m grid system. The sedimentary sequence was excavated according to the natural stratigraphy. The position of the archaeological finds was recorded using a 3D coordinates system (see38,39). The excavated sediments were sieved using 2 mm and 4 mm mesh screens. The floated materials were separated for the recovery of micromammals, shattered bone fragments, lithic chips, and charcoals.

    Stajnia pendant analyses

    Organic materials such as antler, bone and ivory can be distinguished by their micromorphological structure. In worked and especially polished objects, raw material identification is not always straightforward. Raw material identification of the Stajnia pendant was carried out by evaluating the broken edges and the exfoliated surface of the object around one of the perforations where the internal structure of the organic material was exposed. Mammoth tusk consists of a series of cones that are sequentially formed in the pulp cavity. These cones are made up of stacked dentine plates that, on macroscopic inspection, appear as milk-white homogeneous fibrous bands (e.g.40,41). Within these bands, microscopic canals 2 µm in diameter radiate outward from the pulp cavity42. These canals or dentinal tubules, in turn, are surrounded by collagen fibrils that coil up along the tubules41. The different orientations of the stacked radially distributed layers form the genus-specific distinctive patterns called 'Schreger lines' (see42 and references therein), which can be observed in transverse sections of larger tusk fragments. In this study, the material identification was based on the examination of the morphological features such as dentinal tubules and microlaminae that were visible on the broken edges of the object as well as on the exfoliated surface near one of the perforations (Fig. 2). The Stajnia pendant was analysed microscopically with a stereoscopic Olympus SZX9 microscope (magnification 6,3–57 ×) and metallographic microscope Nikon ECLIPSE LV100 (magnification 50–500 ×) at the Laboratory for Archaeological Conservation and Archaeometry Institute of Archaeology Wrocław University. The high-magnitude photographs were made with Environmental Scanning Electron Microscope Philips XL 30 ESEM/TMP at the Laboratory Scanning Microscopy (SEM)—Department of Geochemistry, Mineralogy and Petrology University of Silesia in Sosnowiec. The SEM analysis was used to examine the structure (including the analysis of the topography) of the surface of the object.

    Virtual restoration of the Stajnia pendant

    High-resolution µCT images of the two plaque fragments (S22222 and S23100) were obtained with an X-ray micro-computed tomography (XMT) scanner using the following scan parameters: voltage equal to 100 kV, currently equal to 0.062 mA, 1.0 mm Al filter, the reconstructed volume contains 1500 × 1500 × 1600 voxels. The data were segmented, and a three-dimentional isosurface of the external surface of the finds was created using Avizo Lite 2019.1 software (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, Massachusetts, USA)43,44. The 3D digital models obtained were then uploaded in Geomagic Design X (3D Systems, Rock Hill, South Carolina, USA) to carry out the optimisation of the surfaces (this process consists of cleaning and correcting defects to create fully closed surfaces)45. Subsequently, we proceeded with the virtual restoration of the Stajnia plaque. First, we proceeded with the interactive alignment of the two parts of the plaque, using the recognisable contact points as a reference. After obtaining an optimal alignment, the two fragments were joined, and the integration of the missing parts which formed cavities between the two original finds was carried out. Lastly, the photographic texture was applied using MeshLab 2020.03 software46.

    NIR spectroscopy

    Bone/ivory samples were scanned using a fiber-optic reflectance probe attached to a LabSpec 4 NIR spectrometer (Malvern Panalytical®) with a spectral range of 350 nm to 2500 nm. A Savitzky-Golay transformation (derivative order = 2; polynomial order = 3; smoothing points = 31) was performed to correct for additive and multiplicative effects in the spectral data using Unscrambler X software (Camo Analytics®). Partial least squares regression of data (wavelengths 1685–1740 nm and 2000–2300 nm) from specimens with known collagen yields was used to create a model predicting collagen content16. The resulting 3-factor model was used to predict % collagen in the unknown specimens. Because the model suggested collagen preservation in the specimens was very good (> 5% collagen yield) for samples of this antiquity, we were able to minimise the destruction of samples for subsequent analysis.

    ZooMS

    Zooarchaeology by mass spectrometry (ZooMS) analyses tissues rich in collagen type I and uses protein amino acid sequence variation to provide a taxonomic identification47. Both samples R-EVA 2650 (the awl) and R-EVA 2651 (the pendant) were analysed following ZooMS protocols which have been previously described in detail47,48,49. Collagen extracted for the radiocarbon dating process was used for ZooMS analysis. Each collagen sample was incubated into 100 µl of 50 mM of ammonium bicarbonate (Ambic) at 65 °C for 1 h, and 50 µl of the resulting supernatant was digested using trypsin (Promega) at 37 °C overnight. Samples were subsequently acidified using 1µL of 20% TFA, and peptide extracts were cleaned on C18 ZipTips (Thermo Scientific).

    Each sample was spotted in triplicate on a MALDI Bruker plate with the addition of α-Cyano-4-hydroxycinnamic acid matrix. MALDI-TOF–MS analysis was conducted at the Fraunhofer IZI (Leipzig, Germany), using an autoflex speed LRF MALDI-TOF (Bruker) in reflector mode, positive polarity, matrix suppression up to 590 Da and collected in the mass-to-range 700–3500 m/z.

    Triplicates were then merged for each sample, and taxonomic identifications were made through peptide marker mass identification in comparison to a database of peptide marker series for medium to larger sized mammalian species48,50,51.

    Change history

      References

      1. Vanhaeren, M. & d’Errico, F. Aurignacian ethno-linguistic geography of Europe revealed by personal ornaments. J. Archaeol. Sci.33, 1105–1128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2005.11.017 (2006).

        Article Google Scholar

      2. Henshilwood, C. S. & Derrico, F. Homo Symbolicus: The Dawn of Language, Imagination and Spirituality (John Benjamins Publishing, 2011).

        Book Google Scholar

      3. Hublin, J.-J. et al. Initial Upper Palaeolithic Homo sapiens from Bacho Kiro Cave, Bulgaria. Nature581, 299–302. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2259-z (2020).

        ADSCASArticlePubMed Google Scholar

      4. Fewlass, H. et al. A 14C chronology for the Middle to Upper Palaeolithic transition at Bacho Kiro Cave, Bulgaria. Nat. Ecol. Evol.4, 794–801. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-020-1136-3 (2020).

        ArticlePubMed Google Scholar

      5. Conard, N. J. Palaeolithic ivory sculptures from southwestern Germany and the origins of figurative art. Nature426, 830–832 (2003).

        ADSCASArticle Google Scholar

      6. Conard, N. J. A female figurine from the basal Aurignacian of Hohle Fels Cave in southwestern Germany. Nature459, 248–252. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature07995 (2009).

        ADSCASArticlePubMed Google Scholar

      7. White, R. In The Human Revolution: Behavioural and Biological Perspectives on the Origins of Modern Humans (eds Stringer, C. & Mellars, P.) 366–390 (Edinburgh University Press, 1989).

        Google Scholar

      8. Bourrillon, R. et al. A new Aurignacian engraving from Abri Blanchard, France: Implications for understanding Aurignacian graphic expression in Western and Central Europe. Quat. Int.491, 46–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2016.09.063 (2018).

        Article Google Scholar

      9. Conard, N. & Bolus, M. In Towards a Definition of the Aurignacian (eds Bar-Yosef, O. & Zilhão, J.) 219–239 (IPA, 2006).

        Google Scholar

      10. Conard, N. J. & Bolus, M. Radiocarbon dating the appearance of modern humans and timing of cultural innovations in Europe: New results and new challenges. J. Hum. Evol.44, 331–371. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0047-2484(02)00202-6 (2003).

        ArticlePubMed Google Scholar

      11. Discamps, E., Gravina, B. & Teyssandier, N. In the eye of the beholder: Contextual issues for Bayesian modelling at the Middle-to-Upper Palaeolithic transition. World Archaeol.47, 601–621. https://doi.org/10.1080/00438243.2015.1065759 (2015).

        Article Google Scholar

      12. Zilhão, J. & d’Errico, F. An Aurignacian «garden of Eden» in southern Germany? An alternative interpretation of the Geissenklösterle and a critique of the Kulturpumpe model. PALEO15, 69–86 (2003).

        Google Scholar

      13. Nowaczewska, W. et al. New hominin teeth from Stajnia Cave, Poland. J. Hum. Evol.151, 102929. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2020.102929 (2021).

        ArticlePubMed Google Scholar

      14. Picin, A. et al. New perspectives on Neanderthal dispersal and turnover from Stajnia Cave (Poland). Sci. Rep.10, 14778. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-71504-x (2020).

        ADSCASArticlePubMedPubMed Central Google Scholar

      15. Fewlass, H. et al. Pretreatment and gaseous radiocarbon dating of 40–100 mg archaeological bone. Sci. Rep.9, 5342. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-41557-8 (2019).

        ADSCASArticlePubMedPubMed Central Google Scholar

      16. Sponheimer, M. et al. Saving Old Bones: A non-destructive method for bone collagen prescreening. Sci. Rep.9, 13928. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-50443-2 (2019).

        ADSCASArticlePubMedPubMed Central Google Scholar

      17. D’Errico, F. & Villa, P. Holes and grooves: The contribution of microscopy and taphonomy to the problem of art origins. J. Hum. Evol.33, 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1006/jhev.1997.0141 (1997).

        CASArticlePubMed Google Scholar

      18. Marshack, A. Cognitive aspects of upper paleolithic engraving. Curr. Anthropol.13, 445–477. https://doi.org/10.1086/201311 (1972).

        Article Google Scholar

      19. Talamo, S. & Richards, M. A comparison of bone pretreatment methods for AMS dating of samples >30,000 BP. Radiocarbon53, 443–449. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033822200034573 (2011).

        CASArticle Google Scholar

      20. Quarta, G., D’Elia, M., Braione, E. & Calcagnile, L. Radiocarbon dating of ivory: Potentialities and limitations in forensics. Forensic Sci. Int.299, 114–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2019.03.042 (2019).

        CASArticlePubMed Google Scholar

      21. Reimer, P. J. et al. The INTCAL20 northern hemisphere radiocarbon age calibration curve (0–55 cal kBP). Radiocarbon62, 1–33. https://doi.org/10.1017/RDC.2020.41 (2020).

        CASArticle Google Scholar

      22. Bard, E. et al. Extended dilation of the radiocarbon time scale between 40,000 and 48,000 y BP and the overlap between Neanderthals and Homo sapiens. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA117, 21005–21007. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2012307117 (2020).

        CASArticlePubMedPubMed Central Google Scholar

      23. Bronk Ramsey, C. Dealing with outliers and offsets in radiocarbon dating. Radiocarbon51, 1023–1045. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033822200034093 (2009).

        Article Google Scholar

      24. Jary, Z. & Ciszek, D. Late Pleistocene loess–palaeosol sequences in Poland and western Ukraine. Quatern. Int.296, 37–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2012.07.009 (2013).

        Article Google Scholar

      25. Nalawade-Chavan, S., McCullagh, J. & Hedges, R. New hydroxyproline radiocarbon dates from Sungir, Russia, confirm early mid upper palaeolithic burials in Eurasia. PLoS ONE9, e76896. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0076896 (2014).

        ADSCASArticlePubMedPubMed Central Google Scholar

      26. Pitulko, V. V., Pavlova, E. Y., Nikolskiy, P. A. & Ivanova, V. V. The oldest art of the Eurasian Arctic: Personal ornaments and symbolic objects from Yana RHS, Arctic Siberia. Antiquity86, 642–659. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003598X00047827 (2012).

        Article Google Scholar

      27. Higham, T. et al. Τesting models for the beginnings of the Aurignacian and the advent of figurative art and music: The radiocarbon chronology of Geißenklösterle. J. Hum. Evol.62, 664–676. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2012.03.003 (2012).

        ArticlePubMed Google Scholar

      28. Dutkiewicz, E., Russo, G., Lee, S. & Bentz, C. SignBase, a collection of geometric signs on mobile objects in the Paleolithic. Sci. Data7, 364. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-020-00704-x (2020).

        ArticlePubMedPubMed Central Google Scholar

      29. Zhitenev, V. In Le Sungirien (eds S.V. Vasilyev, A. Sinitsyn, & M. Otte) 73–84 (ERAUL 147, 2017).

      30. Conard, N. J. & Kind, C.-J. The Beginnings of Art and Music. Ice Age Discoveries from the Caves of Southwestern Germany. (Theiss Verlag, 2020).

      31. Longin, R. New method of collagen extraction for radiocarbon dating. Nature230, 241–242. https://doi.org/10.1038/230241a0 (1971).

        ADSCASArticlePubMed Google Scholar

      32. Brown, T. A., Nelson, D. E., Vogel, J. S. & Southon, J. R. Improved collagen extraction by modified Longin method. Radiocarbon30, 171–177. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033822200044118 (1988).

        CASArticle Google Scholar

      33. Brock, F., Ramsey, C. B. & Higham, T. Quality assurance of ultrafiltered bone dating. Radiocarbon49, 187–192 (2007).

        CASArticle Google Scholar

      34. Kromer, B., Lindauer, S., Synal, H.-A. & Wacker, L. MAMS: A new AMS facility at the Curt-Engelhorn-Centre for Achaeometry, Mannheim, Germany. Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. B294, 11–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nimb.2012.01.015 (2013).

        ADSCASArticle Google Scholar

      35. van Klinken, G. J. Bone collagen quality indicators for palaeodietary and radiocarbon measurements. J. Archaeol. Sci.26, 687–695. https://doi.org/10.1006/jasc.1998.0385 (1999).

        Article Google Scholar

      36. Wacker, L., Němec, M. & Bourquin, J. A revolutionary graphitisation system: Fully automated, compact and simple. Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. B268, 931–934. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nimb.2009.10.067 (2010).

        ADSCASArticle Google Scholar

      37. Wacker, L. et al. MICADAS: Routine and high-precision radiocarbon dating. Radiocarbon52, 252–262. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033822200045288 (2010).

        CASArticle Google Scholar

      38. Urbanowski, M. et al. The first Neanderthal tooth found north of the Carpathian Mountains. Naturwissenschaften97, 411–415 (2010).

        ADSCASArticle Google Scholar

      39. Nowaczewska, W. et al. The tooth of a Neanderthal child from Stajnia Cave, Poland. J. Hum. Evol.64, 225–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2012.12.001 (2013).

        ArticlePubMed Google Scholar

      40. Locke, M. Structure of ivory. J. Morphol.269, 423–450. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmor.10585 (2008).

        ArticlePubMed Google Scholar

      41. Su, X. W. & Cui, F. Z. Hierarchical structure of ivory: From nanometer to centimeter. Mater. Sci. Eng. C7, 19–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0928-4931(98)00067-8 (1999).

        Article Google Scholar

      42. Espinoza, E. O. N. & Mann, M.-J. The history and significance of the Schreger pattern in proboscidean ivory characterization. J. Am. Inst. Conserv.32, 241–248. https://doi.org/10.1179/019713693806124866 (1993).

        Article Google Scholar

      43. Higgins, O. A. et al. Comparing traditional and virtual approaches in the micro-excavation and analysis of cremated remains. J. Archaeol. Sci. Rep.32, 102396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2020.102396 (2020).

        Article Google Scholar

      44. Vazzana, A. et al. A multianalytic investigation of weapon-related injuries in a Late Antiquity necropolis, Mutina. Italy. J. Archaeol. Sci.17, 550–559. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2017.12.009 (2018).

        Article Google Scholar

      45. Haile-Selassie, Y., Melillo, S. M., Vazzana, A., Benazzi, S. & Ryan, T. M. A 3.8-million-year-old hominin cranium from Woranso-Mille, Ethiopia. Nature573, 214–219. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1513-8 (2019).

        ADSCASArticlePubMed Google Scholar

      46. Callieri, M., Ranzuglia, G., Dellepiane, M., Cignoni, P. & Scopigno, R. Meshlab as a complete open tool for the integration of photos and colour with high-resolution 3D geometry data. Comput. Appl. Quant. Methods Archaeol.2, 406–416 (2012).

        Google Scholar

      47. Buckley, M. In Zooarchaeology in Practice: Case Studies in Methodology and Interpretation in Archaeofaunal Analysis (eds Giovas, C. M. & LeFebvre, M. J.) 227–247 (Springer International Publishing, 2018).

        Chapter Google Scholar

      48. Welker, F. et al. Palaeoproteomic evidence identifies archaic hominins associated with the Châtelperronian at the Grotte du Renne. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA113, 11162–11167. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1605834113 (2016).

        CASArticlePubMedPubMed Central Google Scholar

      49. van Doorn, N. L., Hollund, H. & Collins, M. J. A novel and non-destructive approach for ZooMS analysis: Ammonium bicarbonate buffer extraction. Archaeol. Anthropol. Sci.3, 281. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-011-0067-y (2011).

        Article Google Scholar

      50. Buckley, M. et al. Species identification of archaeological marine mammals using collagen fingerprinting. J. Archaeol. Sci.41, 631–641. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2013.08.021 (2014).

        CASArticle Google Scholar

      51. Kirby, D. P., Buckley, M., Promise, E., Trauger, S. A. & Holdcraft, T. R. Identification of collagen-based materials in cultural heritage. Analyst138, 4849–4858 (2013).

        ADSCASArticle Google Scholar

      52. Żarski, M. et al. Stratigraphy and palaeoenvironment of Stajnia Cave (southern Poland) with regard to habitation of the site by Neanderthals. Geol. Q.61, 350–369 (2017).

        Google Scholar

      53. Baca, M. et al. Retreat and extinction of the Late Pleistocene cave bear (Ursus spelaeus sensu lato). Sci. Nat.103, 92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00114-016-1414-8 (2016).

        CASArticle Google Scholar

      Download references

      Источник: [https://torrent-igruha.org/3551-portal.html]

      Polish Star Christmas Ornaments

      These Polish porcupine Christmas ornaments date back to the mid nineteenth century that dates back to a national push to encourage people to use Polish made Christmas decorations as opposed to the influx of cheaply made German goods. The Polish American Journal explains it best.

      “In the second half of the 19th century, along with the development of Germany’s toy industry came the flood of cheap ready-made Christmas decorative art. The European and Polish markets offered artificial fruit made of glass, angels, stars and figures printed on paper, and harlequins, clowns, mushrooms and other objects made of paper mâché and cloth. The enlightened Polish society and artistic circles evoked objection and a veto on mass-produced German decorations was issued.

      In 1911 Maria Gerson-Dabrowska held a public demonstration at the Warsaw editorial office of the magazine Pryjaciel Dzieci (Children’s Friend) in the art of traditional Polish adornments patterned after Polish folk decorative art and harvest decorations. She explained that by taking this initiative the Polish Christmas tree would be rendered more national. Based on the art of the Polish farm home, these decorations would provide an exhaustible source of aesthetic ideas. The proposed transition was met will great success.”

      The nice part about sitting down with friends, family, and children to make these things is the time you spend together. Sure if you have kids, things may get silly and not many ornaments get made, but the time spent is priceless.

      Once my aunt tried to make one of these using very thin cloth ribbon, a large knitting needles, and some Elmer’s Glue. Let’s just say that after a large amount of mumbling under her breath (saying who knows what!), the ornament ended up looking pretty good. That was the first and last of it’s kind. Each year after that one, she stuck with paper.

      Enjoy the video I found on how to make Polish Star Christmas Ornaments. Send her a thumbs up too for taking the time to share this tradition.

      Have a Great Week!
      AK,
      Busy Bee Food Exchange Team

      Источник: [https://torrent-igruha.org/3551-portal.html]

      Antique Christmas ornaments are among the loveliest Christmas decorations you can find for your tree. From blown glass figures to beaded designs, these vintage ornaments add style and sparkle to your home during the holidays. Learn about the many styles, as well as how to assess an antique Christmas ornament's value.

      How Can You Tell if a Christmas Ornament Is Vintage or Antique?

      Because Christmas is a time of nostalgia, many companies make ornaments in vintage and antique styles. This can make it confusing for collectors who want genuine antique ornaments. However, there are some important clues that can help you determine whether an ornament is a reproduction or the real thing.

      Related Articles

      Vintage Ornaments Are High Quality

      If you've ever picked up a modern ornament and held it next to an antique one, you know that modern ornaments tend to feel different. Genuine antique ornaments are often made of mercury glass, glass that has been silvered on the inside. Modern reproductions are sometimes made of plastic or thicker, less delicate glass.

      Many Antique Ornaments Are Made by Hand

      While modern ornaments are uniform and perfect, antique Christmas ornaments were hand-crafted and show some variation. You may see signs of hand painting, a lack of uniformity, and even an indication of mouth blown glass. Even though many antique Christmas ornaments were mouth blown into a mold, you'll see the pontil mark or uneven area where the hanger cap attaches.

      Glitter on Antique Ornaments Is Different

      The glitter on modern Christmas ornaments is different from the type of glitter used in years gone by. Vintage ornaments often have mica glitter that isn't uniform in shape and size. The glitter may feel bumpy to the touch.

      Ornament Caps Offer a Clue About Age

      Ornament hanger caps have changed over the years, and they can be a good indicator of age. Newer ornaments have ornate caps that are made of thin metal, while older metal caps tend to be simpler and thicker. You'll also see caps made of plaster or even paper.

      Antique Ornaments Have Patina

      One of the most important indicators that an ornament is vintage is patina, or the wear that comes with age. Antique and vintage Christmas ornaments will show some wear, even if they are in excellent condition. You'll see the mercury glass flaking off a bit or the metal taking on a dull appearance from tarnish. Painted details may be a little worn or scratched. This wear can add to the beauty of the ornament and help you tell the difference between it and a newer reproduction.

      Styles of Antique Glass Christmas Ornaments

      Antique glass Christmas ornaments come in a variety of styles, often following what was popular during the era they were made. For instance, 1920s and 1930s Christmas ornaments have Art Deco geometric designs. 1950s and 1960s Christmas ornaments embrace the futuristic style of the era with mid-century modern sleek lines and plastic and aluminum details. In addition to the design styles of the era, you'll see these specific types of vintage Christmas ornaments.

      Kugel Christmas Ornaments

      Some of the oldest antique Christmas ornaments are kugels. These heavy glass ornaments have a fluted or shaped design and were made in Germany. They date back to the late 19th century, although they continued to be popular into the 20th century. You can find them in the shape of a bunch of grapes, a simple ball, and many other styles. These regularly sell for around $30 in antique stores and on eBay, but they can sell for much more if they are in good condition and are old.

      Unsilvered Christmas Ornaments With Paper Hangers

      These matte-toned 1940s Christmas ornaments are anything but dull. Instead, they are a statement about wartime rationing, which was important even during the holidays. Because metals were needed for the war effort, Christmas ornament manufacturers could not coat the inside of the glass ornaments with silver. They also had to use paper hangers instead of the traditional metal ones. The result is a very unique look. The fact that these were made only during World War II makes them some of the rarest and most valuable Christmas ornaments you can find. Even simple designs regularly sell on eBay for $15 to $30 each.

      Figural Glass Christmas Ornaments

      Among the most popular antique Christmas ornaments are figural designs. Often, these were mouth blown into a mold. You'll see shapes like Santas, pine cones, fish, pickles, and more. Some shapes have symbolism, and others are simply designed to be pretty. They range in value from a few dollars to over $100.

      Free-Blown Antique Ornaments

      Some antique ornaments are also free blown, which means they are not entirely blown in a mold. Part of the ornament may be molded, but other parts may not. These are unique designs, and they can be among the most valuable. Free-blown glass Christmas ornaments sometimes sell for hundreds of dollars.

      Indented Antique Christmas Ornaments

      Back when Christmas trees used candles instead of electric lights, ornaments with faceted indentations were a great way to add sparkle and reflect the light. This shape stayed popular throughout the early 20th century and experienced a resurgence mid-century. You can often find these indented ornaments, and some even feature indentations on both sides. They often sell for under $20.

      Cotton Batting Christmas Ornaments

      Some of the oldest and most valuable Christmas ornaments you can find are those made of spun cotton or cotton batting. They originated in the 19th century, possibly as a type of non-breakable ornament children could touch. They come in many styles, but they are usually figural. You'll see animals, people, foods, and more. Well-preserved examples regularly sell for over $100.

      Beaded Christmas Ornaments

      Beaded ornaments were also popular, especially during the 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s. Some were store-bought, and others were ornaments people could make using pre-packaged kits of supplies. These sparkling ornaments can be difficult to find in good condition, but they tend to be fairly affordable, often selling for $20 or less.

      Dresden Paper Animal Ornaments

      Dresden paper ornaments, which usually feature an animal shape like a peacock, deer, or bird in flight, are some of the most valuable antique Christmas ornaments on the market. Because these very old German ornaments are difficult to find in good condition, they often sell for hundreds of dollars.

      Glass Bead Garlands

      Garlands of blown glass beads are another vintage Christmas ornament that can be very collectible. These garlands feature hollow mercury glass beads strung together on wire or cotton cord. Often, the delicate glass got broken with years of use and storage, so these are rare to find in very good condition. Especially well preserved examples sell for just under $100.

      Antique Glass and Ceramic Christmas Trees

      Although they were not designed to hang on the tree, these table ornaments are a hot item with collectors. Ceramic trees fitted with colored glass lights make a beautiful holiday display, and many light up for a gorgeous glow. Often, the tree and the light-up base were separate pieces, so it can be challenging to find both in good condition. A complete antique ceramic Christmas tree often sells in the range of $30, making it an affordable Christmas collectible.

      Antique Christmas Tree Stands

      In addition to having antique ornaments on your Christmas tree, you can place it in an antique stand. Some of the oldest and most ornate examples were crafted from metal and can play music and rotate. Others feature figures like elves and deer or ornate cast iron designs. It's important to note that many of these may not be practical to use with a fresh tree today, since they frequently lack a place to keep water for your tree.

      Assessing Antique Christmas Ornament Values

      Many people find old glass Christmas ornaments and wonder if they are worth anything, and the answer really depends on the condition of the ornament, its rarity, and a few other factors. Here's how to assess antique Christmas ornaments values so you can get an estimate of how much a specific ornament might be worth.

      Condition Matters

      The condition of an antique Christmas ornament is very important. Ornaments with missing pieces, crazing, chipped or flaking paint, or broken parts are worth considerably less than those in good shape. An ornament should look old, but it should still be beautiful.

      Rare Christmas Ornaments Are Worth More

      Rare Christmas ornaments like Dresden paper examples or cotton batting ornaments are worth the most. Free-blown ornaments are also extremely valuable. Additionally, if the ornament features a less common figure or design, it can be a hot item with collectors.

      Compare to Recent Sales

      Because sellers on eBay and other sites can ask anything they want for an ornament, the only real way to compare values is to look at recently sold ornaments. Here are some Christmas ornament values from recent sales:

      Add History and Nostalgia to Your Holidays

      If you love antique Christmas ornaments, there are lots of ways to use them in your holiday decorating. Consider using a Victorian Christmas decorating scheme and pairing the antique ornaments with Christmas houses. Alternatively, you can hang vintage ornaments from your chandelier or collect them in a bowl on your table as a centerpiece. No matter how you style them, these beautiful ornaments will add a sense of history and nostalgia to your holidays.

      © 2022 LoveToKnow Media. All rights reserved.

      Источник: [https://torrent-igruha.org/3551-portal.html]

      The High Value of Vintage Christmas Ornaments

      For some people, the value of Christmas ornaments rests in how beautiful it looks on their holiday tree or how long it's been in their family. For collectors, however, the the value of Christmas ornaments is an entirely different proposition. If you're hanging onto vintage holiday ornaments, they might be worth more than just sentimental value.

      Determining Value

      When it comes to glass Christmas ornaments designed to hang on a holiday tree, the greatest value usually lies in figurals. These are clever ornaments shaped like people or things, as opposed to plain old glass balls.

      One aspect to keep in mind with these ornaments, like most collectibles, is condition. Those with little to no paint loss, all original components, and glass in all the right places will always bring higher values than less-than-stellar examples. Because ornaments have been used annually on holiday trees since around the turn of the 20th century on into the 1920s, they rarely come to market in pristine condition now. When they do, they're worth a good bit of cash to collectors. 

      Some of these beauties have been reproduced as well. It’s always wise to question authenticity if the condition of an ornament you’re considering for a collection is too good to be true. Again, most will have some sort of wear, even if they are in excellent shape for their age.

      If you’re bargain-minded, shop for ornaments like these during the off-season. Just as with modern Christmas decorations, the best deals on vintage ornaments can be found when they're not in peak demand for holiday decorating. 

      High-Value Figurals

      The king of the figural Christmas ornament is the kugel, a term that means ball in German. These were first made in Germany by glass crafters during the Biedermeier period around 1830, according to an Antique Trader article by Karen Knapstein. Those old versions were too heavy to hang on Christmas trees, so they were suspended from the ceiling and displayed all year round. After 1855, thinner versions were made, and those could be used as holiday ornaments on the family tree.

      Collectors usually refer to any thick blown glass ornament with a fixed decorative cap as a kugel. It’s said that these were first sold in America at Woolworth’s variety stores in the 1880s. Figural examples shaped like clusters of grapes in rare colors like red or amber can be worth in excess of $1,000 apiece. Egg-shaped kugels might sell from $500 to $800 each, while round balls can be found for much less in common colors. Take care when purchasing these, however, because some examples have been reproduced.

      Many of the other popular figurals collectors seek are shaped like famed personalities or characters of yesteryear. For example, an Eddy Cantor (a comical singer and actor popular during the first half of the 20th century) ornament with chenille arms might be worth $500 or more to the right person. One shaped like John Bull (the personification of Great Britain that originated in cartoon form) could approach $300 in the right market. An example designed to resemble President William Howard Taft’s head, also sometimes described as an "Einstein Face" ornament due to its resemblance to the scientist, can be found for $100 to $150.

      Animals also bring in good sums. A rare Puss ‘n Boots glass ornament with chenille limbs could go for $800 to $1,000. A clip-on cat head ornament might fetch $300 to $400, while a kitten in a stocking ornament with a bright color scheme could sell for $200 to $300.

      Other figurals shaped like birds and airplanes with metal wheels can sell for $100 to $250 each, along with a host of other interesting shapes.

      Affordable Glass Ball Ornaments

      If you’re looking to outfit a vintage-style tree without spending a small fortune, there are some alternatives. Glass ball ornaments that don’t date back nearly as far as kugels will be the least expensive, as well as the easiest to find. For instance, an entire box of stenciled Shiny Brite ornaments dating to the 1940s through the '60s in excellent condition might sell for $50 to $60. If you shop around to find them one at a time, you’ll likely pay in the $5 to $10 range, or a bit more for rare or extra special examples.

      Even older kugel spheres don’t usually go as high as figurals, although they do share the same type of fixed decorative cap surrounding the hanger. These true antiques usually sell for $30 to $100, depending on the color and condition.

      Ornament Examples

      This lot of 30 vintage glass ornaments sold at Morphy Auctions for $270 (not including buyer’s premium) in September 2011. Most are figurals in the form of grapes, cars, fish, and frogs with one unusual frog climbing a ladder example. At $9 each, the net auction price per piece, these can be considered a very good buy. Sold individually in an antique shop or at an antique show, they would likely bring $20 to $50 each, or possibly more for the rarer examples in the lot. 

      Some collectors will pay for an entire lot like this one to obtain one rare ornament. They then sell or trade the remainder of the lot to garner examples they covet. 

      Источник: [https://torrent-igruha.org/3551-portal.html]
      dating old poland ornaments

      Comments

      Leave a Reply

      Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *