Posted 7 December 2006 - 12:39
Good morning SC, i appreciate what you say, i myself am familar with knapping signs & workmanship alike... i say this without arrogance or pig headedness aimed directly at any1....the lithic duration, its evolvement, materials & artefacts has been my passion for the last 20 odd years. I know Slate was used for roofing material but this was only from the early 1600's & was used generally on buildings mainly of high status residence, wealthier or similar.....not common on every day housing at that time. I have liased with many different bodies within the archaeological system for the past 7 years ...showing pieces, having them examined etc & have enough knowledge behind me regarding a more than worthy percentage of lithic implements. Slate indeed was used for tool making, mainly knives & scrapers as it was too brittle to use for any other purpose, but working with the sediment layers smoother down to blade, was a very strong material for such uses. Im fully aware of Slate shard found on the landscape surace from old buildings, dumps etc which if this were the case, there would be a much bigger percentage of it laying around...this isnt the case here....all these pieces resemble common lithic tool form & structure, the majority are duplicated the same in size & shape as lithic flint pieces & the majority have very clear smoothing along 1 or 2 edges....this cannot be done through natural breakage, even more especially so when both sides of the piece are smoothed & i know that Slate edges were not smoothed down to aid any aspect of its building purposes. Again said with no hatred argumentative intent but how can you explain the typical lithic lined detail found on 1 particular piece? not only that but after thorough research there were no building structures on this piece of land apart from Mesolithic & Neolithic existance....why are they only few & only found amongst knapping circles? why no large nondiscriptive cumbersome pieces that stand out as obvious smashed rubbish?... why shaped & rounded which resemble common lithic practise as rounded evidence on alot of the pieces is far too regular and clear not to be obtained through natural occurance...why mainly all the same thickness? (majority % being 4mm)...i know also Slate is not a natural material in Northants...Tin was the major commodity during the Neolithic era which was transported internationally....with this in mind, whats stopping the transportation from only a few Hundred miles away in Wales, of Slate for purposes like these?...may be pieces were pre worked in Wales & traded as the finished product...votive, religious properties....due to their unusual nature & the lack of information of....all very plausable theorys indeed....you say you have excessive knowledge on lithic material....due to the rarity of these pieces & i say this in the kindest nature, how can you state these are not the letter when you have never seen such an example before, thats what intrigues me, why are you so quick to instantly dismiss these pieces as being such when you have no knowledge on them, haven't handled or probably correct in assuming you have never even seen a similar example before? Slate along with many other natural material was used at some stage by some One experimenting for tool purposes, if they didnt try the material for uses as such, they would have never evolved...shells, wood, flint (all types) pebbles etc etc etc were all used & tried for their strength properties...yes Slate is very brittle & due to it being sediment, splits very easily...but you try smoothing down an edge on a piece & try it out as a knife or scraper....then come back to me & say it broke instantly (as this is the only assumption regarding their disbelief in their ability as a tool) you will find its exceptionally strong when used for these 2 purposes. Speaking hypothetically, not directed at any single soul personally, some people are far too quick to state adamantly something they have absolutely no knowledge on is or isn't something...period...i havent got the title of archaeologist but with an avid interest & passion for something for over 20 years, liasing with experts & major bodies, dealers, collectors & all similars worldwide, is all thats needed for you to aquire an extensive knowledge, the title only depicts a salary, not the upper hand in facts & due to the fact (apart from the obvious) ...the vast majority of lithic material identification & purposes of use such as tools & implements etc is solely guess work....nothing else & unless you know of an extreamly old lady somewhere aged about 9000 who can actually state the facts, dont you honestly think plausable possibilities are more interesting to us all as opposed to instant negative dismisal? You hear all the time about there's so much we dont know & understand about our past, so many more artefacts yet to be discovered, so much more to be found....with responces such as yours...again said with no arrogance, anger or any aspect of hatred what so ever....its not surprising people refrain from bothering, unfortunately & its only my opinion, unless you have the archaeologist title irrespective of experience & knowledge you have under your belt, anything new discovered is frowned upon....however, if you [i]are an archaeologist & find a new discovery then its a whehey for English Heritage ... their guessed identification for what ever the piece is will be absolute,correct & final... then it will be housed in a museum for the world to see & there will be a written discription next to it with details on who found it, what an amazing new discovery etc etc etc...probably.....now, an avid, passionate & knowledgable lithic lover....with more years of experience than a few archaeologists they know personally, who digs on a daily basis on known lithic areas, who knows what to look for, who spots a 2inch scraper or burin amongst Thousands of natural, who has Thousands of clearly worked flint implements that even stump leading bodies in this field (no pun intended)......etc etc etc......this apparantly has no relevance obviously......its a great shame those who probably go on a dig may be Once...twice a year...(& this isnt directed at any single soul)... who's main knowledge has been obtained through colleagues transfering files from 1 comp to the other asking for their opinions on what it could be...being told something is the latter for fact because it was guessed to be back in the early 50's...encouraging the general public to participate in a scheme allowing them to hand in items to be recorded & ID'd?, found while fieldwalking or similar ...then scanning the pic to lord knows how many mates asking for their help...being assigned with an FLO that couldn't ID a sausage in a bucket who looked about 12 years of age wearing a multi coloured Dr Who scarf...indoors?...all this while drinking warm coffee in a comfy chair with a couple of Coconut cookies on the arm in the local heritage centre or museum....its a shame these bodies cant acknowledge new artifacts of interest found by the average Joe, understandably it would take a brave name to put theirs upon a new discovery...imagine the embarrassment if the item was guessed as being wrong...dear lord...lithic history would need a serious revamp...so whats the point of knowledge, self taught or dictated to by a lecturer, if it means nothing unless you house the title obtained through a few years spent inside a building just listening?? My reply is in a friendly context & is with intrigue & interest, with absolutely no exceptionally hard fellings toward any One or any ones comments....lets share what knowledge we know with interest & plausability...be less quick to disregard an unknown...examing thoroughly all aspects of something new as opposed to letting your fear reject instantly & finally appreciate & accept we dont know half of whats out there, hence no reason to assume or adamantly dictate.....natural assumption is the mother of all ****ups, thats a proven fact......in a dreamy state ideal community eh.
Sam
0
neolithic_engraved_pottery_fragment_1.jpg 187.79K
51 downloads
sam, on 16 December 2006, 21:34, said:
