Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

flint blade?

  • 10-09-2012 8:30am
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 728 ✭✭✭pueblo


    I found this in a river yesterday, so no context.

    I am fairly sure it's flint, it looks to me like a butt trimmed flake.

    Anyone able to identify it as worked or not?


«1

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,676 ✭✭✭dr gonzo


    Wow fantastic find. Definitely flint. definitely worked.

    You can tell straight away that its worked due its dorsal surface. The dorsal is shown in the first two pictures and represents the outer surface of the core at the time of working. The criss-cross pattern is the remnants of previous removals. In addition, its not clear, but there might retouch present also (can be seen in the third pic). On top of all that I would say that this piece was very likely burned too, but its always very hard to tell when it comes to flint discolouration.

    Not only do you have a worked piece here but if there is indeed retouch here it is more then mere debitage, its a tool. I have no idea if the museum will definitely want this but I think its significant enough that you should bring it in to them for a look.

    What river, and where, did you find it may I ask?


  • Registered Users Posts: 728 ✭✭✭pueblo


    dr gonzo wrote: »
    Wow fantastic find. Definitely flint. definitely worked.

    You can tell straight away that its worked due its dorsal surface. The dorsal is shown in the first two pictures and represents the outer surface of the core at the time of working. The criss-cross pattern is the remnants of previous removals. In addition, its not clear, but there might retouch present also (can be seen in the third pic). On top of all that this piece must have been burned too.

    Not only do you have a worked piece here but if there is indeed retouch here it is more then mere debitage, its a tool. I have no idea if the museum will definitely want this but I think its significant enough that you should bring it in to them for a look.

    What river, and where, did you find it may I ask?


    Many thanks for your reply.

    I found this in the River Nore a couple of miles outside Kilkenny.

    I have a spot where I often find bits of pottery (see my previous post in the Seen & Found thread) Some of the pottery has been dated to the late 13th century, but I digress!

    I was out there again yesterday picking up bits of pottery and saw this in the river and thought it looked worked..

    I will certainly contact the museum to see if they have any interest. I have been to them before with some stones I found which turned out to be natural!

    Do you think this is likely neolithic? Is it technically a blade? a flake? a scraper?


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,676 ✭✭✭dr gonzo


    Well its status as a scraper would depend entirely on the levels of retouch involved, which I cant see clearly but I would say relatively confidently that it isnt. As for blade or flake, this piece could be described as either by different people but I think your original title is perfectly correct, it is a blade.

    The dating however is another matter. Out of context, knapped stone implements can only be said to come from the ridiculously broad time span of Meso-BA. However, by the Bronze age stone working (ironically enough) is often more amateurish, perhaps due to a more urgent, less careful production as much as a general drop in skill due to the advent of metal. For your piece however I doubt its post Neo so to answer your question, it is quite likely Neo, but possible even Meso in date.

    It goes without saying that all of this is moot of course, and I only mention this to discuss the piece with you. At this stage it is impossible to know but I dont think Im way off in any of my assessments :D

    Again, an excellent find. If you want to know anything more feel free to ask!


  • Registered Users Posts: 23 jimmyarch


    That's a great little find! It's certainly flint and very heavily patinated.

    As Dr.Gonzo says some would describe this as a flake and some as a blade. Blades are usually differentiated from flakes by being at least twice as long as they are wide but some folks also want them to have parallel sides. Therefore, really you can describe this as either, personally I would plump for describing it as a blade. I don't think its burnt, burnt flint actually lightens and the surface becomes cracked, like porcelain. The dark patination may relate to the depositional context.

    Dating is certainly a problem. In plan the morphology suggests that this would not look out of place in a Late Mesolithic assemblage and the location of retouch near the proximal (or butt) end would further support this. However, when you look at this in profile you can see that the distal is not tapered and the dorsal surface retains flake initiation scars that run opposed to the long axis of the artefact. In other words, this is from an opposed platform core, not something that screams Late Mesolithic and more likely Neolithic.

    It''s a bit of a conundrum but out of context and unassociated with an assemblage it is difficult to be sure. I agree that it is unlikely to be Bronze Age and my gut feeling would be that you are looking at a retouched blade possibly of Late Mesolithic/Early Neolithic date.

    Go back and look for more! I suggest reporting it to the NMI.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,676 ✭✭✭dr gonzo


    Ha, I just saw who replied to this thread and dreaded what I was about to be corrected on!

    OP I was actually going to say that If jimmyarch weighed in you would have your answer for definite but I wasnt expecting it so I didnt mention it, but now you have your definitive answer!


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 728 ✭✭✭pueblo


    jimmyarch wrote: »
    That's a great little find! It's certainly flint and very heavily patinated.

    As Dr.Gonzo says some would describe this as a flake and some as a blade. Blades are usually differentiated from flakes by being at least twice as long as they are wide but some folks also want them to have parallel sides. Therefore, really you can describe this as either, personally I would plump for describing it as a blade. I don't think its burnt, burnt flint actually lightens and the surface becomes cracked, like porcelain. The dark patination may relate to the depositional context.

    Dating is certainly a problem. In plan the morphology suggests that this would not look out of place in a Late Mesolithic assemblage and the location of retouch near the proximal (or butt) end would further support this. However, when you look at this in profile you can see that the distal is not tapered and the dorsal surface retains flake initiation scars that run opposed to the long axis of the artefact. In other words, this is from an opposed platform core, not something that screams Late Mesolithic and more likely Neolithic.

    It''s a bit of a conundrum but out of context and unassociated with an assemblage it is difficult to be sure. I agree that it is unlikely to be Bronze Age and my gut feeling would be that you are looking at a retouched blade possibly of Late Mesolithic/Early Neolithic date.

    Go back and look for more! I suggest reporting it to the NMI.

    Most informative, thank you.

    I will contact the National Museum, and will certainly get back to that spot to see if I missed anything!


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,218 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    jimmyarch wrote: »
    I don't think its burnt, burnt flint actually lightens and the surface becomes cracked, like porcelain. The dark patination may relate to the depositional context.
    ...the depositional context being the river bed, and hence the patination?


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,027 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Wow great find P :) Even better that you report it and other finds you make. Sadly so many don't. God knows what's kicking around in the bottom of drawers out there. :( Especially lithics. "Ah sure it's only a funny looking stone" type thing. I'm patiently awaiting the day when someone posts a picture something clearly paleolithic in an Irish context. I live in hope. My bets on a Munster find and though earlier stuff would be beyond cool, I'm crossing fingers for Mousterian*.:)




    *way back in the day when I was a mad keen fossil collecting kid, I found a couple of lithics, mostly in context too. Brought them and my scribbled location notes to the National Museum. They let me keep what I thought was the coolest one(little flint blade). Even thought I had found a mousterian example once. Ahh the innocence of a 70's ten year old:) Turned out I was vaguely on the right track as the chap described it as (IIRC) false levallois? but defo modern human. Later when I built up a small collection of the real deal from Europe, you could see the difference alright.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,218 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    I wonder how many quartz lithics escape notice.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,218 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner




  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,027 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Very much so and other raw materials too. Especially in Ireland with it's scarcity of flint. I've a quartzite Acheulean "chopper" from France, found in a riverbank context and you'd easily kick it up the road not spotting what it was. Even knowing what it is you've to look closely to see evidence of human modeling of the material. About a year ago I read of one group of researchers who've found quartz based handaxe type lithics in Crete(IIRC). Bit controversial as it would show that a couple of hundred thousand years ago, pre modern humans were seafaring out of sight of land, so still up in the air.

    It's understandable that flint has the wealth of scholarship behind it. It's a great material for working and it shows the evidence of it's working so well. Holding a stone tool in your hand you can damn near hear the noises of the various strikes the knapper made. It's why I love looking at them. Plus since from the earliest days of antiquarians looking at this stuff, the vast majority were in European contexts that had a ready local supply of the material.

    Maybe a left field approach to this? Get Australian researchers involved as the Aboriginal folks used quartzite and other fine grained rocks more than people in Europe, so researchers would be used to seeing more non classical flint lithics, so might have "better eyes" for it? Aboriginal experimental researchers who are also knappers of such materials might really enlighten. The range of tools their ancestors made from different materials is impressive.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,027 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    slowburner wrote: »
    Wiki commons animation of the Levallois technique.
    I've tried to do that. It's sooooo not easy compared to pressure flaking. Needs real understanding and control of the material. I noticed of all the knapping hobbyists and researchers online very few have even attempted the technique, even fewer have mastered it. Those that do seem to "just" aim for rounded scraper type tools. I've yet to see a pointed tool. I've a couple of Mousterian levallois cores left over from manufacture. They're just as fascinating as the tools themselves. In one the final tool struck was hit so precisely that he avoided an inclusion in the rock by a couple of mm. Real master of his(or her) craft.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Registered Users Posts: 728 ✭✭✭pueblo


    Just an update from a local archaeologist on the flint blade.

    He thinks it's late mesolithic. Interestingly, there have only been 9 previous finds from this period in the whole of County Kilkenny.

    I have contacted the National Museum and am awaiting their response.

    Thanks again for the replies.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,218 Mod ✭✭✭✭slowburner


    Wibbs wrote: »
    Very much so and other raw materials too. Especially in Ireland with it's scarcity of flint. I've a quartzite Acheulean "chopper" from France, found in a riverbank context and you'd easily kick it up the road not spotting what it was. Even knowing what it is you've to look closely to see evidence of human modeling of the material. About a year ago I read of one group of researchers who've found quartz based handaxe type lithics in Crete(IIRC). Bit controversial as it would show that a couple of hundred thousand years ago, pre modern humans were seafaring out of sight of land, so still up in the air.

    It's understandable that flint has the wealth of scholarship behind it. It's a great material for working and it shows the evidence of it's working so well. Holding a stone tool in your hand you can damn near hear the noises of the various strikes the knapper made. It's why I love looking at them. Plus since from the earliest days of antiquarians looking at this stuff, the vast majority were in European contexts that had a ready local supply of the material.

    Maybe a left field approach to this? Get Australian researchers involved as the Aboriginal folks used quartzite and other fine grained rocks more than people in Europe, so researchers would be used to seeing more non classical flint lithics, so might have "better eyes" for it? Aboriginal experimental researchers who are also knappers of such materials might really enlighten. The range of tools their ancestors made from different materials is impressive.
    There's a link to a PhD on quartz lithics in Ireland in this (quiet)thread.


    I emailed the author and he's more than happy to see it discussed.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,027 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Yea I had a read of that. Great work and great read, even for amateur eejits. Usually a good sign. :)

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Registered Users Posts: 141 ✭✭Reader1937


    Wibbs wrote: »
    Very much so and other raw materials too. Especially in Ireland with it's scarcity of flint. I've a quartzite Acheulean "chopper" from France, found in a riverbank context and you'd easily kick it up the road not spotting what it was. Even knowing what it is you've to look closely to see evidence of human modeling of the material. About a year ago I read of one group of researchers who've found quartz based handaxe type lithics in Crete(IIRC). Bit controversial as it would show that a couple of hundred thousand years ago, pre modern humans were seafaring out of sight of land, so still up in the air.

    It's understandable that flint has the wealth of scholarship behind it. It's a great material for working and it shows the evidence of it's working so well. Holding a stone tool in your hand you can damn near hear the noises of the various strikes the knapper made. It's why I love looking at them. Plus since from the earliest days of antiquarians looking at this stuff, the vast majority were in European contexts that had a ready local supply of the material.

    Maybe a left field approach to this? Get Australian researchers involved as the Aboriginal folks used quartzite and other fine grained rocks more than people in Europe, so researchers would be used to seeing more non classical flint lithics, so might have "better eyes" for it? Aboriginal experimental researchers who are also knappers of such materials might really enlighten. The range of tools their ancestors made from different materials is impressive.
    Just started on this subject, but re Crete - at what point did the Med become a sea?


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,027 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    About 5 million years ago, give or take a millennium or three.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Registered Users Posts: 23 jimmyarch


    Hi,

    I had meant to reply in terms of the patination.

    Any lithic will usually patinate, no-one really understands why. We don't know if patination is related to changes within the lithic or changes due to the relationship between the lithic and its context (i.e. exposure to soil conditions or to the air). In terms of this lithic I'm not sure that the river as the depositional context has had a great influence on it patinating (it would have patinated over time no matter where it was) but the river context certainly has had an affect in terms of weathering its surfaces and I think creating the exterior colour we see now.

    Hope this helps, great to see so much discussion of lithics on the forum, we need more!!


  • Registered Users Posts: 728 ✭✭✭pueblo


    jimmyarch wrote: »
    Hi,

    I had meant to reply in terms of the patination.

    Any lithic will usually patinate, no-one really understands why. We don't know if patination is related to changes within the lithic or changes due to the relationship between the lithic and its context (i.e. exposure to soil conditions or to the air). In terms of this lithic I'm not sure that the river as the depositional context has had a great influence on it patinating (it would have patinated over time no matter where it was) but the river context certainly has had an affect in terms of weathering its surfaces and I think creating the exterior colour we see now.

    Hope this helps, great to see so much discussion of lithics on the forum, we need more!!

    Thanks for that. I find lithics fascinating, I am interested in river archaeology and have spent a good few years combing rivers regularly, generally bringing home a load of ......well, old stones :rolleyes: ..but to date nothing older than a few pieces of early fourteenth century pottery sherds!

    I have linked to some better pics showing patination.

    I have an appointment next week with the nat. museum to show them the flint blade.... hopefully they won't want it..

    http://flic.kr/s/aHsjChaSpN




  • Hello,
    Seeing as the discussion is active, I attach a pic of another flint and would appreciate any comments. Found in Greenore near the beach.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,516 ✭✭✭Maudi


    Hello,
    Seeing as the discussion is active, I attach a pic of another flint and would appreciate any comments. Found in Greenore near the beach.
    ohh thats beautiful..very like my one ..i have found a few in fields close to the sea..theres a guy on here who gives a detailed description...


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,676 ✭✭✭dr gonzo


    Hello,
    Seeing as the discussion is active, I attach a pic of another flint and would appreciate any comments. Found in Greenore near the beach.

    Gorgeous find Kinley Itchy Loner. Just like Pueblo, yours is definitely worked and flint again. Love the ripples on it. Also quite interesting is the level of damage on the proximal edge. Could be simple damage post-deposition but it certainly looks like the took a few whacks too many! Would it be possible to see a few more pics of it?

    JimmyArch willl give you a better rundown of it if he pops on but I wouldnt bank on it as hes a busy busy man at the moment!


  • Registered Users Posts: 728 ✭✭✭pueblo


    Nice find Dr. Donkey... love the colour.

    Slightly off topic but ..interesting article on alluvial archaeology of the barrow river valley for anyone interested,

    Alluvial Archaeology in the Barrow Valley, Southeast Ireland: The "Riverford Culture" Re-visitedAuthor(s): M. Zvelebil, M. G. Macklin, D. G. Passmore, P. RamsdenSource: The Journal of Irish Archaeology, Vol. 7 (1996), pp. 13-40


  • Registered Users Posts: 23 jimmyarch


    Lovely find Dr Donkey.

    From the overall shape possibly late meso as well, the retouch near the butt end (bottom of image) looks original and there is evidence of core preparation here also. The retouch near the distal end on the right lateral margin (Gonzo, this is what you pointed to I think) may indeed be post-depositional rather than formal retouch, especially if it interrupts the patination.

    Pueblo, your latest photos are fantastic!! That lithic has been in the water a very, very long tie. The dorsal ridges are very water-rounded and I'm convinced the colouring is related to this also.

    For anyone who is interested in lithics go to facebook and search for the:
    "UCD experimental prehistoric stoneworking group" and you can see some of the work we have been doing!


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,027 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    jimmyarch wrote: »
    Hope this helps, great to see so much discussion of lithics on the forum, we need more!!
    +1 :)

    Here's my only Irish found one I still have;
    222516.jpg
    Found when I was a kid circa 1980 hunting for fossils in Easkey, Co Sligo, where the river of the same name enters the sea(western bank). It was barely visible side on in situ in soil 15 inches below ground level, laying on top of carboniferous limestone which was my main focus for the oul fossils:) so more luck than judgement that I found it. All the books I'd read at the time drummed into fossil collectors location location location so I noted each find if in situ. I started to look more in the topsoil, but only found the one. Showed to the national museum in Dublin, but they weren't interested so let me keep it. Still sharp, with little weathering.

    PS sorry no scale in pic, but it's around 60 mm in length.

    PPS cool work ye're doing in that facebook page and blog. Some nice quality results too. :)

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Registered Users Posts: 728 ✭✭✭pueblo


    ^^^^^ Nice....Did the NMI give you a period for the piece?

    It amazes me how durable these flints are.

    Also any suggested reading/links on lithics in general and/or riverine archaeology would be greatly appreciated.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,027 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    IIRC they said neolithic. They weren't that interested.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.





  • dr gonzo wrote: »
    Would it be possible to see a few more pics of it?

    Happy to oblige and apologies for the delay. This side is quite smooth with a 'mound' at the base. The two 'nibbles' on the left side in the other pic (right in this one but less obvious) look out of sync to the rest of the piece.

    Interesting to learn what its function might have been.

    By the way, Its 6cm in length.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,027 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Nice pic DD. The mound bit is the bulb of percussion and yours is a lovely example. Here's a graphic naming the various marks;
    AanatomyofKnapping.jpg
    (Upside down compared to your pic).

    You can see the features in this example I have of a Levallois point made by Neandertals(French. Old museum collection. Around 60 mm)
    223292.jpg

    Ditto with this "blade" from the same technique/time(Again French. Around 70 mm).
    223294.jpg
    That one is near textbook. Incredibly well preserved and very sharp, well capable of cutting. Mustn't have gotten much use at the time.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,516 ✭✭✭Maudi


    Wibbs wrote: »
    Nice pic DD. The mound bit is the bulb of percussion and yours is a lovely example. Here's a graphic naming the various marks;
    AanatomyofKnapping.jpg
    (Upside down compared to your pic).

    You can see the features in this example I have of a Levallois point made by Neandertals(French. Old museum collection. Around 60 mm)
    223292.jpg

    Ditto with this "blade" from the same technique/time(Again French. Around 70 mm).
    223294.jpg
    That one is near textbook. Incredibly well preserved and very sharp, well capable of cutting. Mustn't have gotten much use at the time.
    great diagram....concerning the 'nibbleing at edges' feature are they natural/wear or chipped in by the napper?


Advertisement