On 03-Nov-2015 7:51 PM, John Wood wrote:
> Perhaps all cutting surfaces have been interpreted as art and hence
> why there is nothing recorded as such.
I get your point, I can well believe that something is labeled
tentatively in a record and then that identification gets carried on to
the next item. Circular reasoning
But I think you are applying circular reasoning here. Do you know of
anything that has been identified as art that could remotely be
considered a cutting board? A suitable surface with random
chop/slice/scrape marks? Evidence of food remains?
Again, a cutting board would likely be made of wood (unless otherwise
unavailable) and unlikely to survive in the archaeological record.
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.