DOI: 10.33547/va.brz17.peb.8.2
Makroskopowa identyfikacja surowców skalnych z obiektów kultury łużyckiej. Analiza geoarcheologiczna i interpretacja funkcjonalna (zabytki wydzielone) / Macroscopic identification of lithic raw materials from Lusatian culture features. Geoarchaeological analysis and functional interpretation (selected artefacts)
by Michał Wasilewski 
in: K. Dzięgielewski, Brzezie 17. Osada solowarska z późnej epoki brązu (Via Archaeologica. Źródła z badań wykopaliskowych na trasie autostrady A4 w Małopolsce), Kraków: Wydawnictwo Profil-Archeo, Krakowski Zespół do Badań Autostrad, 2025, pp. 327-341.
The paper presents the results of a macroscopic analysis of stone artefacts from a Lusatian culture
settlement at the Brzezie 17 site, located on the northeastern margin of the Cracow Submontane Region.
The main aim of the study is to assess the role of stone within the economic system of communities
and to examine the relationships between artefacts, manuports and ecofacts from a functional and spatial
perspective.
The analysed assemblage comprises 58 stone objects, macroscopically identified as made from locally available raw materials of Carpathian and glacial origin, including sandstones, quartzitic sandstones, quartzites, conglomerates and metamorphic rocks. The methodological framework is based on the assumption that macroscopic identification is sufficient for addressing the research questions posed, while explicitly acknowledging its interpretative limitations.
A key component of the study is the correlation of stone artefacts with the functional and chronological
characteristics of the archaeological features in which they were found. The analysis demonstrates a clear
predominance of economic and production-related contexts, primarily storage pits, with residential features being only marginally represented. No significant differences were observed between the Hallstatt A–B1 and Hallstatt B phases, indicating a high degree of continuity in stone-working practices.
Particular attention is paid to the problem of distinguishing artefacts from ecofacts. The results suggest
that this boundary is fluid and context-dependent rather than strictly morphological. Many stone objects
were used with minimal or no formal modification, reflecting a pragmatic approach to raw material use.
Stone tools should therefore be understood not as residual elements of earlier technological traditions, but as an integral component of the everyday economic practices of Late Bronze Age communities.