62 replies to this topic

[stonecarver]

Hi again Anew,

apologies if my (lengthy post) was not as polite as usually - it was penned quickly as I was going out.

You didn't answer my question - why are there no other carvings of toadstools in a prehistoric context in Britain? your thoughts would be interesting...

We may never agree on whether the carvings might look like this or that funghi... but the technologial progression in axe typolgies has been very carefully studied and is well-established. The crescentic blade was an innovation over previous types, that was subsequently superseded itself by the stop-ridge (mid-septum) and the development of flanges (which features themselves were done away with with the advent of socketed axes).

But - we Are allowed to disagree. I take on-board your suggestion that the axes look a little like a particular funghi. I choose to accept that the technological considerations of the early smiths was paramount. So - that question's sorted. We both agree to dsagree.

I think it's a bit much though to call a prehistoric population 'druggies'. That's a very modern right-wing perspective there. The occasional use of such substances does not make all prehistoric Britons druggies. If you said that kind of thing about indigenous peoples from other cultures (Native American or Maori for example) you might find yourself in court... or get a smack in the mouth (in New Zealand). I'll just say I disagree entirely with your fanciful appraisal.

In your analysis there must have been many thousands of tribes extant at any one time then... because there are so very many axes. But please, where do you get the idea that they were actually weapons from? Perhaps you are not au fait with the very wide range of wooden artfects and structures made from wood. So again - could you answer my question? -

"Carpentry in the Neolithic and Bronze Age was particularly advanced in the British Isles. One only has to look at the examples of the exceptionally well-constructed sea-faring sewn-plank boats from Britain (and other types), to realise that they were a maritime community, and were adept carpenters. If axes weren't carpentry tools - what were they using to make all their wooden palisades, huts, boats, trackways and other wooden structures with in the Bronze Age?".

I never said the bow was more lethal than the axe. I said the osteolgical evidence we currently have demonstrates that barbed-and-tanged arrowheads have been identified as a recurring feature of violent injury in the period (over any other observable injury). Axes as weapons cause trauma damage that is easily identifiable. If you can find me any evidence of an axe-related injury in British prehistory - we'd love to know about it.

You seem to use the two books - Hengeworld and the Introduction to British prehisory an awful lot. One is a study of the History of research in prehistoric Wiltshire, the second is... an Introductory text....  if you like I can suggest some excellent reading material on the metallurgy...

You referred to fly algaric elsewhere (i think, or somebody did, in the alternative section, which is where I personally think it should belong), and then introduced the use of the term toadstool - like everyone else I assumed you were referring to one and the same thing - in the 'British lexicon' a toadstool refers to types of funghi. I'm British.

[Anew]

Quote

That's a very modern right-wing perspective there.

No, please, anything but that.



What I said, in essence, is that I'd rather see them as druggies than conspicuous-consumption mercantilists .. In this I made what may be the mistake of identifying with the subject .. And if there's a punch in the mouth to be had for that, so be it ..

In fact, I do believe that they used liberty-cap mushrooms extensively, and that much of their rock art was meant to be seen under drug or trance states .. I can imagine that eating the fly-agaric toadstool, or its active compounds, was the frequent preparation of their raiders and warriors, attempting to time the use so that desired effects might peak during battle ..

As the carvings resemble, to me, both toadstool and ax -- I take them as hallmarks, insignia, of Chieftains in alliance with the henge ..



The questions I ask you are moot .. You can answer them or not as you please .. And I assume the same privilege ..

The resources I cite are the ones I have .. I cite them verbatim in many cases, or with reference to particular figures to illustrate a particular point .. If you wish to disallow them, I can not prevent this .. They are still in the record for others to view ..

[stonecarver]

Hi Anew,

... a difference of opinion about a particular point (the iconography) is merely a distraction... and you are entitled to your opinion - and your vision of the past might not be wrong in any case... (and I value it too), the only caveat I would add is that it's nice to know why somebody thinks this or that - because there are often very valid reasons.  There is so much to know that any one person (certainly me! I'm the first to admit) can know only but a tiny fraction - that's the point of these forums... we discuss what we know, and hopefully we learn.

I appreciate that any questions are merely to illustrate this or that point of the debate, but it would be good to hear your responses never-the-less. Where-ever possible I try to answer any questions another members asks... and if I haven't - ask me again because I might  easily have missed something, though in this case I'm really not certain quite what. (Is there a question I didn't answer?)

I can' think of any prehistoric rock-art in the British Isles that depicts fungi... but I can only have seen a fraction of what there is...

With regard to your citing those particular works - I Can't disallow them - and you made very valid references (and in any case they are in themselves excellent books). I was thinking more along the lines you might like me to suggest some titles on the discussion subject.

Excellent books about the prehistory of the British Isles at the time of Stonehenge (and it was a rather Long time too!)... are:-


Bronze Age Britain, M. Parker-Pearson ISBN 0-7134-6801-7

Neolithic Britain and Ireland, C. Malone ISBN 0-7524-1442-9

Neolithic and Bronze Age Scotland, P.J. Asmore ISBN 0-7134-7530-7

Understanding the Neolithic, J. Thomas ISBN 0-415-20767-3

Stonehenge Complete, C. Chippendale ISBN 0-500-28467-9


There are others of course... and it would be pointless listing every relevant text - I have merely suggested a few of the ones that I think are especially good reads (and which I have bought and I heartily recommend).

That's all a bit to take in right now so I wont start listing titles relating to the metalwork here and now.

We seem to have laboured on about the axes of the earlier period and I should change the subject a bit - because there is so much more interesting metalwork to discuss.


To sum up the debate thus far:-

In Britain there was relatively short (perhaps 250 years) Copper-Age (Chalcolithic), if at all... and bronze tools appear simultaneously (though in lesser numbers). We have discussed the fact that metal axes were used to cut wood (such as the Corlea Trackeway Ireland), and the axes were initially cast in open one-piece stone moulds. Their design changes over time (and there were regional variations). Crescentic axes were a technological innovation but morphologically some people think they look like toadstools. Axes of this type are carved on certain sarsens at Stonehenge. Axes could have been used as weapons or as tools or both. There is good evidence they were used for carpentry.

The types of axes start to change with the introduction of stop-ridges and flanges which were designed to aid in hafting, and the advent of clay and/or two-part moulds which allowed more complex designs to be cast. The bronze being used was generally a binary alloy of copper and tin though arsenical bronze (that is, copper which has been strengthened by the presence of arsenic) was also used (particularly in the earlier Bronze Age).

More another time...

regards, SC.

[Anew]

Regards, Anew

[stonecarver]

Having established very clearly that the carvings at Stonehenge represent a type of Early Bronze Age axe, let's discuss the metals they were using in the Early Broze Age, when the sarsens at Stonehenge were erected.

The copper age (such as it was) lasted for perhaps a maximum of just 100 years in the British Isles (Pearson, Bronze Age Britain pp 17)... and quickly the people who used Stonehenge adopted bronze as their primary metal.

Bronze is an alloy... it's major constituent is copper. In Britain, most of the bronze in the Early and Middle Bronze Age was comprised of copper and tin, usually about 90% copper and 10% tin.

There were small quantities of native copper available - that is, copper in its natural state. But these resources were quickly worked-out and copper had to be produced by smelting. Smelting is a process where mineral ores are heated in a furnace... and effectively the metal is removed from the rock. Copper melts at 1083 degrees centigrade... so high temperatures were required to smelt the metal... the plano-convex ingots we see from this period show that smelting was taking place...

Copper is a rare metal, but it is found in perhaps 25 locations in the British Isles in quantities. Prehistoric societies were mining copper ores.. as demonstrated by the Great Orme copper mine in Wales (the largest prehsitoric copper mine in Europe).

Tin is a much rarer metal than copper. In Britain it is only found in any quantity in Devon and Cornwall (the south-west peninsula). There is evidence that in the Early Bronze Age small quatities of tin were extracted from the Wicklow stream beds in ireland, where they were extracting gold.

Tin is easier to extract from ores than copper because of its relatively low melting point (232 degrees as opposed to 1083).

If you combine tin and copper together you get the binary alloy - Bronze. This is the metal that people were using at the time of the Sarsen monument phase at Stonehenge (and subsequently). It is much stronger than tin or copper, more flexible and can be cast into complex shapes... and was used to make everything from axes, awls, daggers, rapiers, halberds, swords, cauldrons, shields, mirrors, belt componnents, horse tackle and a host of small implements. Interestingly, there do not appear to have been any bronze arrowheads in Britain at this time (the flint barbed-and-tanged arrowhaeds appear with the use of bronze, replacing the earlier laurel-leaf-shaped type).

[Anew]

stonecarver, on 26 March 2007, 20:52, said:

We seem to have laboured on about the axes of the earlier period and I should change the subject a bit - because there is so much more interesting metalwork to discuss.

Some are already aware as they have been following this, but after post 18, I started a branch-thread The Carvings in the Stonehenge Sarsens

Debate can, of course, continue on either; but the heading "Prehistoric copper and bronze at the time of Stonehenge" can be interpreted several ways; and the subject, if one includes the active period of the temple, becomes quite broad .. Branch threads may help keep this one from becoming hostage to many arenas.

[stonecarver]

This thread is about the prehistoric metalwork of the Bronze Age in the British Isles... I am sure, Anew, the other users can read...

[stonecarver]

Just to reiterate,

Having established very clearly that the carvings at Stonehenge represent a type of Early Bronze Age axe, let's discuss the metals they were using in the Early Broze Age, when the sarsens at Stonehenge were erected.

The copper age (such as it was) lasted for perhaps a maximum of just 100 years in the British Isles (Pearson, Bronze Age Britain pp 17)... and quickly the people who used Stonehenge adopted bronze as their primary metal.

Bronze is an alloy... it's major constituent is copper. In Britain, most of the bronze in the Early and Middle Bronze Age was comprised of copper and tin, usually about 90% copper and 10% tin.

There were small quantities of native copper available - that is, copper in its natural state. But these resources were quickly worked-out and copper had to be produced by smelting. Smelting is a process where mineral ores are heated in a furnace... and effectively the metal is removed from the rock. Copper melts at 1083 degrees centigrade... so high temperatures were required to smelt the metal... the plano-convex ingots we see from this period show that smelting was taking place...

Copper is a rare metal, but it is found in perhaps 25 locations in the British Isles in quantities. Prehistoric societies were mining copper ores.. as demonstrated by the Great Orme copper mine in Wales (the largest prehsitoric copper mine in Europe).

Tin is a much rarer metal than copper. In Britain it is only found in any quantity in Devon and Cornwall (the south-west peninsula). There is evidence that in the Early Bronze Age small quatities of tin were extracted from the Wicklow stream beds in ireland, where they were extracting gold.

Tin is easier to extract from ores than copper because of its relatively low melting point (232 degrees as opposed to 1083).

If you combine tin and copper together you get the binary alloy - Bronze. This is the metal that people were using at the time of the Sarsen monument phase at Stonehenge (and subsequently). It is much stronger than tin or copper, more flexible and can be cast into complex shapes... and was used to make everything from axes, awls, daggers, rapiers, halberds, swords, cauldrons, shields, mirrors, belt componnents, horse tackle and a host of small implements. Interestingly, there do not appear to have been any bronze arrowheads in Britain at this time (the flint barbed-and-tanged arrowhaeds appear with the use of bronze, replacing the earlier laurel-leaf-shaped type).

[Eagle Stone]

stonecarver, on 30 March 2007, 5:17, said:

Just to reiterate,

Having established very clearly that the carvings at Stonehenge represent a type of Early Bronze Age axe, let's discuss the metals they were using in the Early Broze Age, when the sarsens at Stonehenge were erected.

The copper age (such as it was) lasted for perhaps a maximum of just 100 years in the British Isles (Pearson, Bronze Age Britain pp 17)... and quickly the people who used Stonehenge adopted bronze as their primary metal.

Bronze is an alloy... it's major constituent is copper. In Britain, most of the bronze in the Early and Middle Bronze Age was comprised of copper and tin, usually about 90% copper and 10% tin.

There were small quantities of native copper available - that is, copper in its natural state. But these resources were quickly worked-out and copper had to be produced by smelting. Smelting is a process where mineral ores are heated in a furnace... and effectively the metal is removed from the rock. Copper melts at 1083 degrees centigrade... so high temperatures were required to smelt the metal... the plano-convex ingots we see from this period show that smelting was taking place...

Copper is a rare metal, but it is found in perhaps 25 locations in the British Isles in quantities. Prehistoric societies were mining copper ores.. as demonstrated by the Great Orme copper mine in Wales (the largest prehsitoric copper mine in Europe).

Tin is a much rarer metal than copper. In Britain it is only found in any quantity in Devon and Cornwall (the south-west peninsula). There is evidence that in the Early Bronze Age small quatities of tin were extracted from the Wicklow stream beds in ireland, where they were extracting gold.

Tin is easier to extract from ores than copper because of its relatively low melting point (232 degrees as opposed to 1083).

If you combine tin and copper together you get the binary alloy - Bronze. This is the metal that people were using at the time of the Sarsen monument phase at Stonehenge (and subsequently). It is much stronger than tin or copper, more flexible and can be cast into complex shapes... and was used to make everything from axes, awls, daggers, rapiers, halberds, swords, cauldrons, shields, mirrors, belt componnents, horse tackle and a host of small implements. Interestingly, there do not appear to have been any bronze arrowheads in Britain at this time (the flint barbed-and-tanged arrowhaeds appear with the use of bronze, replacing the earlier laurel-leaf-shaped type).

I'm now finding time to read through your threads of discussion and find it very interesting about the prehistric metal artifacts.

My problem is finding time since I have my own business along with a full time job along with keeping my wife happy but I am finding time and look forward at spending more time reading info on your forum, this is so interesting to me.

This is a link of the extensive copper mining here in Michigan or the lake superior region.

http://copperculture.homestead.com/

[Eagle Stone]

Eagle Stone, on 1 April 2007, 5:27, said:

stonecarver, on 30 March 2007, 5:17, said:

Just to reiterate,

Having established very clearly that the carvings at Stonehenge represent a type of Early Bronze Age axe, let's discuss the metals they were using in the Early Broze Age, when the sarsens at Stonehenge were erected.

The copper age (such as it was) lasted for perhaps a maximum of just 100 years in the British Isles (Pearson, Bronze Age Britain pp 17)... and quickly the people who used Stonehenge adopted bronze as their primary metal.

Bronze is an alloy... it's major constituent is copper. In Britain, most of the bronze in the Early and Middle Bronze Age was comprised of copper and tin, usually about 90% copper and 10% tin.

There were small quantities of native copper available - that is, copper in its natural state. But these resources were quickly worked-out and copper had to be produced by smelting. Smelting is a process where mineral ores are heated in a furnace... and effectively the metal is removed from the rock. Copper melts at 1083 degrees centigrade... so high temperatures were required to smelt the metal... the plano-convex ingots we see from this period show that smelting was taking place...

Copper is a rare metal, but it is found in perhaps 25 locations in the British Isles in quantities. Prehistoric societies were mining copper ores.. as demonstrated by the Great Orme copper mine in Wales (the largest prehsitoric copper mine in Europe).

Tin is a much rarer metal than copper. In Britain it is only found in any quantity in Devon and Cornwall (the south-west peninsula). There is evidence that in the Early Bronze Age small quatities of tin were extracted from the Wicklow stream beds in ireland, where they were extracting gold.

Tin is easier to extract from ores than copper because of its relatively low melting point (232 degrees as opposed to 1083).

If you combine tin and copper together you get the binary alloy - Bronze. This is the metal that people were using at the time of the Sarsen monument phase at Stonehenge (and subsequently). It is much stronger than tin or copper, more flexible and can be cast into complex shapes... and was used to make everything from axes, awls, daggers, rapiers, halberds, swords, cauldrons, shields, mirrors, belt componnents, horse tackle and a host of small implements. Interestingly, there do not appear to have been any bronze arrowheads in Britain at this time (the flint barbed-and-tanged arrowhaeds appear with the use of bronze, replacing the earlier laurel-leaf-shaped type).

I'm now finding time to read through your threads of discussion and find it very interesting about the prehistric metal artifacts.

My problem is finding time since I have my own business along with a full time job along with keeping my wife happy but I am finding time and look forward at spending more time reading info on your forum, this is so interesting to me.

This is a link of the extensive copper mining here in Michigan or the lake superior region.

http://copperculture.homestead.com/

The problem that we have here especially in America is that when anyone pointed out evidence of pre columbian intrusions it was quickly debunked as fakes or the result of natural occurances such as the dolmens found which were said to be natural even though their was celtic inscriptions or other language inscribed on them.

The problem especially in the 70's is that the professional acedamia clung onto the notion that no body was here before columbus and now with better research with scientific testing they are now admitting that it did happen but they try there hardest to hide the fact that this all happened by down playing it because what the experts and professors taught all goes down in the toilet when they realize that they are not the experts anymore.

http://www.jewellhis...cient_mines.htm

[stonecarver]

Hi Eagle Stone,

your post is really interesting... there Definitely were people prospecting and using metals in the Americas before Christopher Colon (that was his real name) visited (he hardly discovered them eh?).

I think (though I'm not sure), that things have moved on quite a bit since the 1970's in respect of this in American academica. I have certainly read a number of very good academic papers which detail prehistoric use of metals in the area you discuss.

You might consider contacting a guy whose user-name here is Knapp-Happy. He is a Native American (Indigenous peoples) and is an expert flint-knapper (and professional archaeologist). His knowledge about the prehistoric peoples of north America is pretty wide-ranging, and when I asked him about this, he was aware of the prehistoric use of metals in the USA). You might want to send him a message... (knapp_happy is his user name).

Meanwhile, I see you have mailed me, so I'll go have a read of that and get back to you there too.

Cheers!   (great post)

Stonecarver

[stonecarver]

The first evidence for the use of metals in the British Isles was mentioned in an earlier post - the cut-marks on timbers from sites such as those as the Corlea wooden trackway in Ireland. Given the fact that metals were so highly prized when they first appeared, they are difficult to date because people were not at that time burying them with the dead.

Dating from burials is obtained using radio-carbon dating generally today, though the accompanying objects can also indicate a period (if enough are found). The problem with metal objects is that they, being so valuable, were potentially in circulation for a long time... and may have been handed down for generations before they appear in a burial context.

Some of the earliest metal objects found in Britain include items such as basket-shaped ear-rings and gold buttons, or other small decorative pieces of goldwork (Pearson 1994, pp81).

Crecentic bladed axes are known from as early as 2500 BC (Mount Pleasant henge). The development of the form continued for another 1000 years and more... developing a thinner septum (body), and evolving into the type we see carved at Stonehenge. That crescentic-bladed axes continued in use for over 1000 years was a testiment to their efficiency - it was a design which was gradually improved upon... and the design as seen at Stonehenge was in the latter part of its development - other types that were cast in clay or two-part moulds... the pasltave and flanged axe with stop ridge, were to overtake it.

But from Ireland we see in some of the multiple-matrix axe moulds (used to cast several different types os axe) that older types still continued in use with the emergence of new patterns.. one such axe mould has several axes carved into it.

Timothy Taylor, from the University of Bradford has shown that we have so far only recovered a tiny percentage (in the region of less than 2%) of the metalwork made in the British Bronze Age.

[Eagle Stone]

Something that I forgot to note or emphasize is that copper that came from the keweenaw peninsula (lake superior region) has traces of silver in the copper in its native form.

So any copper or bronze artifacts that have traces of silver came from that region and my very close friend that is a metallurgic lag engineer would be able to test the metal of the exact metal composition, he said he would post soon on this site and offer his analytical services to help find the origin of where these or any copper or bronze artifacts come from.

http://www.csasi.org...l_poundings.htm

[Arno Artifacts]

Hello to all at the forum.

This is Arno Artifacts.  I am from Michigan and have a Mining Engineering degree from Michigan Technological University.
My current work is as a Metallographer / Metallurgist with an Aluminum company.

Eagle Stone and I are good friends and do go way back.  As Eagle Stone mentioned, we have discovered what we believe
to be stones that have been worked at to produce a 'bird effigy' image.. On some of these stones, there are inscriptions
which the origin of is still a mystery..

We are trying to link the artifacts (copper, silver, inscribed rocks, etc..) from Europe to those of Michigan..

I will keep it short today, but would like to hear from any of you whom would be interested in this discovery that is
still unfolding ....

Thank you.

Arno Artifacts

[Eagle Stone]

I would like to create a new thread or categorie so this topic does not interfere with what you Stone pages members intended for it to be (unless you want it on this thread) on this category.

Sometimes I feel that I may be a nuisance and I don't want to be because I respect your site and I don't want to go against the grain of this site.

I finally got my oldest brother to agree to post some pictures (all regular photos)and no digital will post them very soon.

We had  our photos in our hard drive but lost them when  the computer crashed and we have to start all over again and now we have a back up hard drive memory.

Please correspond with me to let me know one way or the other on where we can download and post photo's or if we are on the wrong site to do such a thing because I don't like to take anything for granted.