CC BY. Except where otherwise noted, image copyright resides with the PostGlacial project.
Figure 1: Photograph of the pendant showing the faint engravings.
Figure 2: Location of the find. The detail of Clark's excavations is taken from the plan as published in the 1954 monograph with details of the birch tree and 'birch brushwood platform' associated with a large quantity of bone, antler and flint. The gap in Clark's plan of the brushwood is an area that was not planned but which also contained these finds and, similarly, much of the rest of Clark's excavation produced large quantities of material but plans for this area do not exist.
Figure 3: Location map of Star Carr: Star Carr was found on what would have been the edge of a lake, now known as palaeo-Lake Flixton.
Figure 4: Illustration of the pendant (by Chloe Watson).
Figure 5: 3D scan of the pendant that clearly shows the missing flake on the unengraved side of the pendant. View (3D viewer. Opens new window) | Download (.PLY) | 3D Print (.STL). (CC BY licence still applies)
Figure 6: The shale beads from Star Carr and the 'celtiform bead' at the top (Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, Cambridge, accession number: 1953.72. Used with permission).
Figure 7: The perforated amber pendant (Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, Cambridge, accession number: 1953.70. Used with permission).
Figure 8: Location of the find in relation to Clark's artefacts. The two shale beads, marked in red on the plan, were also found in 2015 within a later context than the majority of Clark's other finds and the engraved shale pendant.
Figure 9: An example of an image taken with SEM demonstrating that two lines do not meet. It is also possible to assess the direction that the incision was made, with working from left to right in this instance. Image captured at 50x magnification using secondary electron mode.
Figure 10: SEM image showing the precision of the short lines that have been incised at right angles from a longer line. Image captured at 50x magnification using secondary electron mode.
Figure 11: SEM image showing the order of engraving. The central groove is earlier, with the diagonal grooves engraved later. Each groove was drawn from the central groove, running away from it. Image captured at 40x magnification using secondary electron mode.
Figure 12: RTI viewer. Examine the pendant using WebRTIViewer.
Figure 13: An image of the pendant using specular enhancement.
Figure 14: A composite image of phasing, as set out in the slideshow. For ease of orientation in the following discussion, the pendant has been divided into coordinates: 'north' being the top.
Figure 15: Phases of working (slideshow).
Figure 16: The two main types of lines.
Figure 17: SEM showing areas of engraving that have been obliterated, probably from natural processes. Captured at 25x magnification using secondary electron mode.
Figure 18: The engraved lines on the pendant can be seen microscopically as depressed grooves with brown infilling. (Light Microscopy).
Figure 19: Micro-Raman spectra taken of brown deposit from within engraved line 11. Clear presence of organic material is indicated, likely peat.
Figure 20: Gold structures with triangular faces. (Light Microscopy).
Figure 21: High density of granular spherical crystals located within the nick mark on the non-engraved side of the pendant. (Light Microscopy).
Figure 22: Gold angular pyrite from the reference collection. (Light Microscopy).
Figure 23: Close up of a pyrite framboid with cubo-octahedral microcrystals. SEM, backscattered electron mode.
Figure 24: Micro-Raman spectrum collected from the red spot on the framboidal structure.
Figure 25: Fragmentary microfaunal remains, likely part of a copepod. Location 1, line 1. (Light Microscopy).
Figure 26: Fragmentary microfaunal remains, likely part of a copepod. Location 1, line 1. SEM, secondary electron mode.
Figure 27: Location 9. Biological structure, possibly a diatom. Micro-Raman analysis has showed the structure is carbon-rich, and thus likely organic. Location 9, line 11. (Light Microscopy).
Figure 28: Raman spectrum collected on suspected microfaunal remains in one of three locations demonstrating that this is organic.
Figure 29: Rounded quartz crystals within the perforation of the pendant. (Light Microscopy).
Figure 30: SEM image of the perforation and crystals within it. Image captured at 200x magnification.
Figure 31: Micro-Raman spectrum collected from a crystal grain located within the perforation of the pendant.
Figure 32: The antler piece from Bodal Mose, Åmose (Photograph by Arnold Mikkelsen, Nationalmuseet, CC BY-SA http://samlinger.natmus.dk/DO/9617).
Figure 33: A selection of amber pendants from Denmark. Some objects exhibit engraved lines similar to the pendant found at Star Carr. Others demonstrate the drilling technique to produce lines of dots (Photograph by Arnold Mikkelsen, Nationalmuseet, CC BY-SA http://samlinger.natmus.dk/DO/9628).
Figure 34: A close-up of some of the amber pendants from Denmark that exhibit the engraving method and the barbed line technique. Perforations at the top, presumably made in order to hang the pendants, have broken. Note also that the pendant on the left has two perforations, which is similar to the amber pendant found at Star Carr (Photograph by Arnold Mikkelsen, Nationalmuseet, CC BY_SA http://samlinger.natmus.dk/DO/9661).
Figure 35: (1) Decorated bone adze, Hammersmith; (2) Decorated antler tine, Romsey; (3) Stone phallus, Nab Head; (4) Stylised Venus, Nab Head; (5) Incised motif on cave wall, Aveline's Hole; (6) Incised motif on cave wall, Long Hole; (7) Incised pebble, Trevose Head; (8) Incised pebble, Camas Daraich; (9) Incised pebble SF1, Rhuddlan; (10) Incised pebble SF2, Rhuddlan; (11) Incised pebble SF5, Rhuddlan; (12) Incised pebble SF4, Rhuddlan; (13) Incised pebble SF6, Rhuddlan; (14) Incised pebble SF3, Rhuddlan; (15) Incised pebble B127, Llandegai.
Figure 36: The Rhuddlan incised pebbles. (A) SF1; (B) SF2; (C) SF3; (D) SF4; (E) SF5; (F) SF6.
Table 1: Dates of Mesolithic art found in the British Isles. Raw dates from original publications calibrated using Oxcal 4.2 and r% IntCal 13.