Palaeolithic Ireland

slowburner

What is the current thinking on the Palaeolithic population of Ireland? Was there one, and what evidence has been found?

Gee Bag

We have the 'Mell Flake', a hand axe found in a quarry just outside Drogheda (Though origin is disputed). It's on display downstairs in the National Museum.

Other than that we have no Paleo stuff. Doesn't mean we didn't have a human population back then. Them pesky glaciers scraped off the top layers of the country back in the Ice Age removing all possible habitation sites.

Wibbs

IIRC the Mell flake is attributed to glacial movement from elsewhere. Looks Neandertal in form to me. Given human populations in the UK going back to nearly a million years, it's inconceivable to me that earlier hominids weren't here. Now some landmasses are remarkably recent when it comes to human habitation. New Zealand a classic one. No earlier than the 12th century. Ireland is too close to a major area of habitation and was joined to Europe more than once in human prehistory. Hominids made it to Crete, a sea journey out of sight of land 400,000 years ago. Ireland would be a doddle by comparison.

As Gee Bag said the glaciers scraped so much of our ancient landscape any evidence is gonna be thin on the ground. That said I'm personally convinced it's out there. Look to Scotland for encouragement. It was blasted by glaciers too, just as much as here, if not more so given it's more northerly location. Yet nearly a dozen Paleo bifaces have been found there. Here's one from the Orkney islands which is as far north on these islands as you're gonna get http://saintandrew.org.au/2011/06/26/rare-pre-ice-age-handaxe-discovered-on-orkney/

Where would I be looking? Extreme southwest of Ireland. These areas were least affected by glaciation so may preserve earlier layers. Cork/Kerry even over to the south east. Walk the beaches of wexford and you do find flint/chert nodules of fairly ok quality for lithic production. They seem to come from some undersea outcrop as they don't figure in the local stone AFAIK.

That's another issue/factor with this country. Sources for lithic production. We don't have many on the flint front compared to Europe/the UK. So humans would have used other sources like quartzite as they did elsewhere. These can be less obvious to the eye. Not the classic lithic production scars of flint, so may be missed on a regular basis. I've an early Erectus hand axe in quartzite from French gravels in my collection and you'd miss it sooooo easily.

So I'd be looking in these southern areas for "fossil" stream and gravel beds where these tools may have fallen. I wonder has anyone tried? I'd be very surprised if even one person had actively looked in the last 100 years.

slowburner

Wibbs wrote: »

IIRC the Mell flake is attributed to glacial movement from elsewhere. Looks Neandertal in form to me. Given human populations in the UK going back to nearly a million years, it's inconceivable to me that earlier hominids weren't here. Now some landmasses are remarkably recent when it comes to human habitation. New Zealand a classic one. No earlier than the 12th century. Ireland is too close to a major area of habitation and was joined to Europe more than once in human prehistory. Hominids made it to Crete, a sea journey out of sight of land 400,000 years ago. Ireland would be a doddle by comparison.

As Gee Bag said the glaciers scraped so much of our ancient landscape any evidence is gonna be thin on the ground. That said I'm personally convinced it's out there. Look to Scotland for encouragement. It was blasted by glaciers too, just as much as here, if not more so given it's more northerly location. Yet nearly a dozen Paleo bifaces have been found there. Here's one from the Orkney islands which is as far north on these islands as you're gonna get http://saintandrew.org.au/2011/06/26/rare-pre-ice-age-handaxe-discovered-on-orkney/

It would be strange if Ireland was not populated at this period. Could there be specific reasons such as lingering ice, depleted resources etc.?

Where would I be looking? Extreme southwest of Ireland. These areas were least affected by glaciation so may preserve earlier layers. Cork/Kerry even over to the south east. Walk the beaches of wexford and you do find flint/chert nodules of fairly ok quality for lithic production. They seem to come from some undersea outcrop as they don't figure in the local stone AFAIK.

If the general pattern of the ice sheet's movement was from west to east (maybe this was only along the east coast) then most of the ancient topsoil would have ended up in the Irish Sea?

That's another issue/factor with this country. Sources for lithic production. We don't have many on the flint front compared to Europe/the UK. So humans would have used other sources like quartzite as they did elsewhere. These can be less obvious to the eye. Not the classic lithic production scars of flint, so may be missed on a regular basis. I've an early Erectus hand axe in quartzite from French gravels in my collection and you'd miss it sooooo easily.

I see lots of flint pebbles on the beaches of Wicklow. Presumably these were washed down from the flint fields in Antrim?

So I'd be looking in these southern areas for "fossil" stream and gravel beds where these tools may have fallen. I wonder has anyone tried? I'd be very surprised if even one person had actively looked in the last 100 years.

Apart from young men on beaches in Sligo, that is
When you say 'fossil stream' and gravel beds, do you mean glacial deposits like eskers?
They'd be hard beggars to find.
http://pb-archaeology.blogspot.com/2009_02_01_archive.html

slowburner

Gee Bag wrote: »

We have the 'Mell Flake', a hand axe found in a quarry just outside Drogheda (Though origin is disputed). It's on display downstairs in the National Museum.

Other than that we have no Paleo stuff. Doesn't mean we didn't have a human population back then. Them pesky glaciers scraped off the top layers of the country back in the Ice Age removing all possible habitation sites.

I know an archaeologist who hails from a part of the world renowned for its ancient artefacts. He says that he has seen a considerable number of palaeolithics in Ireland, while on unrelated digs but the established rule seems to be that you will not find such artefacts on this island - and you can't buck the establishment.

Wibbs

slowburner wrote: »

It would be strange if Ireland was not populated at this period. Could there be specific reasons such as lingering ice, depleted resources etc.?

Can't think of any TBH, unless someone out there has better info, I can't imagine paleolithic Ireland being much different to paleolithic UK.

If the general pattern of the ice sheet's movement was from west to east (maybe this was only along the east coast) then most of the ancient topsoil would have ended up in the Irish Sea?

We need a geologist

I see lots of flint pebbles on the beaches of Wicklow. Presumably these were washed down from the flint fields in Antrim?

Maybe, though the deposits around lough Neagh seem to be a bit small for so much of the stuff.

Apart from young men on beaches in Sligo, that is

When you say 'fossil stream' and gravel beds, do you mean glacial deposits like eskers?
They'd be hard beggars to find.

No, older than that. Pre or inter glacial stuff laid down in warm periods by rivers and such. Again geologist required I wonder do any such deposits exist?

http://pb-archaeology.blogspot.com/2009_02_01_archive.html

That's the kinda stuff alright.

Wibbs

slowburner wrote: »

I know an archaeologist who hails from a part of the world renowned for its ancient artefacts. He says that he has seen a considerable number of palaeolithics in Ireland, while on unrelated digs but the established rule seems to be that you will not find such artefacts on this island - and you can't buck the establishment.

Oh really? Hmmm. Well whatever about the establishment, if people don't expect to see something, if they've been told they likely won't, they'll often simply not see it. Add in lack of training to be able to see it(especially in non flint lithics) and it's very possible things could well be missed.

slowburner

Wibbs wrote: »

Oh really? Hmmm. Well whatever about the establishment, if people don't expect to see something, if they've been told they likely won't, they'll often simply not see it. Add in lack of training to be able to see it(especially in non flint lithics) and it's very possible things could well be missed.

Isn't that the established view I mean? I'm neither an anarchist or an antidisestablishmentarian

robp

In fairness, people have looked in the past and also in more recent years exactly for this. Alot of cave sites have being excavated but nothing Paleolithic so far. The Irish Mesolithic is fascinating though, so more than adequate compensation

Wibbs

Cave sites aren't that great for Paleo finds if the UK is anything to go by. Contrary to popular "cavemen" while certainly using caves, didn't use them as living areas to the degree often thought. Ancient river, lake and seashores seem to give the best chances. When you see Scotland returning finds, albeit rare, yet nada from here it seems odd. IMHO they're either looking in the wrong places, or are missing stuff outright. Or most likely of all, people, or enough people haven't really looked.

Oh and I agree the mesolithic is fascinating, but since it's relatively recent it leaves Ireland very unusually "young" as far as humanity goes.

RDM_83 again

Wibbs wrote: »

That's another issue/factor with this country. Sources for lithic production. We don't have many on the flint front compared to Europe/the UK. So humans would have used other sources like quartzite as they did elsewhere. These can be less obvious to the eye. Not the classic lithic production scars of flint, so may be missed on a regular basis. I've an early Erectus hand axe in quartzite from French gravels in my collection and you'd miss it sooooo easily.

.

Presumably Chert which is a bit more common within southern Ireland could have been used?

For me issues of Eustatic rise in location of sites would probably be the killer, especially if you think they may have been using sites like some of the mesolithic sites, sure the Irish sea basin could have lots of sites.

Interesting topic though, anybody read Stephen Oppenheimers, The Origins of the British

Wibbs

RDM_83 again wrote: »

Presumably Chert which is a bit more common within southern Ireland could have been used?

True enough, sure flint is chert anyway, though usually finer and found in chalk/limestone. For cleavers and the like quartzite is also a good un. Nice and heavy. Even for smaller and finer pieces the production skill neandertals in particular could bring to bear on the material is impressive.

For me issues of Eustatic rise in location of sites would probably be the killer, especially if you think they may have been using sites like some of the mesolithic sites, sure the Irish sea basin could have lots of sites.

Yea that would be a worry for me too R. Sea side sites I reckon would be rare. Then again they found one in southern england going back 900,000 years so you never know. I suppose(though I'm likely well off here) in the various interglacials before the current one Ireland would have risen up just like today? So a seaside site now might have been one a couple of times before? I'd say ancient river plains the more likely options. Pre ice age gravel beds if such exist out there. They might be hard to spot, particularly with the huge amount of ice age gravels around. You'd want a keen eye, serious expertise and be looking for one. It would be like looking for slightly different hay in a big haystack.

But like I said given hominids have been rocking back and forth to the UK in between the ice for close to a million years, even in colder conditions than previously thought possible, I'd be truly shocked if they never made it to here and in numbers too. Doubly so when there were times when Ireland and the UK were part of the land mass of Europe. Last year IIRC they even found a neandertal skull piece with the definitive brow ridges, dredged up in a trawlers net in the North Sea. Talk about a lucky find The stuff that even shows up on ebay from Danish trawlers is impressive.

Interesting topic though, anybody read Stephen Oppenheimers, The Origins of the British

No, sounds like an interesting title.

Gee Bag

Wibbs wrote: »

As Gee Bag said .....

I wish I'd picked a different user name

RDM_83 again

Its an "interesting" read (didnt find it easy to follow myself) and I think some of his ideas have proven pretty controversial, it was available in Dublin city library though so worth taking a look at.

Gee Bag

slowburner wrote: »

I know an archaeologist who hails from a part of the world renowned for its ancient artefacts. He says that he has seen a considerable number of palaeolithics in Ireland, while on unrelated digs but the established rule seems to be that you will not find such artefacts on this island - and you can't buck the establishment.

Speaking on behalf of the establishment, I can safely say that finding definite evidence of an Irish paleolithic would be the most super-duper amazing thing you could ever hope to achieve!!

Thing is, beneath the topsoil layer most of the low lying part of the island is covered by deep deposits of post-glacial sand and boulder clay. Any paleolithic sites would be buried under these deposits. In higher lying areas the surface of the land was effectivley bulldozed by the glaciers which probably removed any evidence for settlement. Some one else mentioned excavation in caves. This is probably the best bet for finding anything.

Wibbs

Interesting one here? http://www.jstor.org/pss/661411 A chap in 1927 claiming to have found a possible lithic factory site paleolithic in style. I wonder did any more come of it? If he found flakes and "implements", nay cores according to him that's worth a follow up. My issue would be he described the base material as limestone, though some limestones can be very dense, but dense enough for flakes? Plus it seems too northerly and exposed to glaciation for me.

slowburner

Wibbs wrote: »

Interesting one here? http://www.jstor.org/pss/661411 A chap in 1927 claiming to have found a possible lithic factory site paleolithic in style. I wonder did any more come of it? If he found flakes and "implements", nay cores according to him that's worth a follow up. My issue would be he described the base material as limestone, though some limestones can be very dense, but dense enough for flakes? Plus it seems too northerly and exposed to glaciation for me.

Curious that it was a beach in Sligo.
Surely if Mr.Burchell found
"over one hundred unrolled limestone artefacts.....in addition to implements and flakes, there occurred some cores from which they had been struck."
there would be a collection in the NMI?
It seems that his finds sparked a controversy
http://www.jstor.org/pss/25515944

Just found this.
The finds are now in the quaternary section of the British Museum according to this link which is a lengthy discussion on the Rosses Point finds
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb3284/is_n277_v72/ai_n28711511/

Wibbs

Great read. Thanks. Yea the whole thing is well bogus. It also goes some way to showing how hard it is to be definitive about some paleo lithics, given some researchers were "yep defo human in origin" and others "yep defo wave action naturals". Like I said the early stuff can be hard to pin down the more primitive it is. Neandertal stuff I'd be failry confident I'd spot in a heartbeat(actually picked one up on a hike in France many moons ago), but I'd not be nearly so confident of my ability to pick up earlier erectus stuff.

slowburner

Wibbs wrote: »

Great read. Thanks. Yea the whole thing is well bogus. It also goes some way to showing how hard it is to be definitive about some paleo lithics, given some researchers were "yep defo human in origin" and others "yep defo wave action naturals". Like I said the early stuff can be hard to pin down the more primitive it is. Neandertal stuff I'd be failry confident I'd spot in a heartbeat(actually picked one up on a hike in France many moons ago), but I'd not be nearly so confident of my ability to pick up earlier erectus stuff.

I didn't read the whole article in the second link was it confirmed that the Rosses point finds were bogus?

Wibbs

Yep pretty much and I can see why. More holes than a sieve in the research.

slowburner

Pity

slowburner

Gee Bag wrote: »

I wish I'd picked a different user name

Nah, it's a good name - at least you won't be ignored, that's for sure.
I was driving along the other day and the folk in the car next to me must have thought I was a proper loon, the way I was laughing to myself.
I just couldn't help imagining a lecture with the introduction: "ladies & gentlemen, would you please welcome the esteemed palaeontologist........ahem.......Professor Gee Bag".

Gee Bag

slowburner wrote: »

Professor Gee Bag

I like it, I like it a lot!

cyril mc namara

Hi,
I live in Tipperary and when out walking recently I found an unusual rock, I think it is flint but am not really sure as Tipp is not known for flint as far as I know. It is about 12 x 18 cm in size and while the inside is a greyish white it has on outer skin of light brown. I would appreciate any info I can get. Thanks!https://plus.google.com/photos/110757565087073145724/albums/5858513089574361377?authkey=CMOV0arzyojNlAE

Wibbs

Yep it looks like a flint nodule alright C, or probably more accurately chert. Flint is a type of chert, though usually means a higher quality type. Chert/flint can vary a lot in quality for stone tool purposes.

Chert is found in various forms of limestone and Ireland is covered in Carboniferous limestone, so there's a fair amount of chert about, however it's generally not that great quality wise, compared to say the flint of south east England or especially southern France. The latter stuff can be like glass. The higher the quality the easier and more predictable it is to work.

That said humans, modern and archaic, have often worked with worse and come out with some useful and often beautifully made tools(EG Fontmaure jasper which while lovely to look at is horrible stuff to work with because of it's brittleness and inclusions) .

cyril mc namara

Thanks Wibbs
Who knew rocks rocked!

Mountainsandh

I believe the caves near Dungarvan I mentioned before on a thread here were contenders for paleolithic stuff, according to a report about them online. Unfortunately some have been partly or fully destroyed in the last century, and the report was I think from the 90s, and stated that they more than likely would not be explored again since none were "commercially viable" (I think that's the phrase they used ! something to that effect anyway).
Mammoth, giant Irish deer, artic fox, etc... bones were found early 20th century (or late 19th) I think.

I pass the general area of one every day to work, and it floods very badly in this weather (it's near a river actually), not sure where anything that was in the cave might end up.

slowburner

...or where anything outside the cave might get washed in.

Wibbs

Interesting SB. It's southerly enough anyway to maybe have avoided much of the ravages of the last ice age. Mammoth eh? :eek: Never heard of them being found here. That's well interesting, though if it's been "worked out" chances are the good stuff is long gone. Though just maybe there are unworked deposits however small that might yield some clues.

I reckon to narrow the focus more get a hold of some scary eyed geologists and ply them with strong drink, to see if they can pin down cave systems/areas that were around pre ice age that by benefit of their underground status they'd escape the ice scraping. Then archaeologists could have a look. They might look like collapsed sink holes now, but back then... Like Gee bag(I love that ) said "[caves are] probably the best bet for finding anything". Too often it can be a case of two disciplines not talking enough with each other. I'd be very surprised to find no Paleo deposits of some nature here. They might not be evidence bearing of course(and given how rare pre modern folks were in the landscape...), but completely missing?

I'm 99% convinced pre modern folks were here. If they got into the UK and as far north as Scotland and were doing so for nearly a million years, they had to be here at at least one point. People spread quickly. I mean look at us. One of the earliest modern humans in Europe have been found in the UK. We just need to get lucky.

Keep an eye out for non chert/flint lithics for a start. Then again really early stuff even in flint needs to get your eye in. It's very opportunistic type lithic reduction at times. Sure the "handaxes"(I prefer bifaces though even that can be a fudge) are the stars of the show, but they can vary a lot. Clactonian stuff can look very haphazard. I'd personally reckon the later Mousterian/Neandertal/Levallios stuff is about the easiest to spot. To my eye it's quite consistent and looks more "designed"*, even compared to modern human meso stuff. You'd need to give me electric shocks while flashing images of micro blade tech for a month before I'd spot one of them. So the fact that none have been found so far in Ireland, given they are so obvious isn't a good sign




*Though I'd personally contend the mousterian Levallois process isn't nearly as planned(to our minds) nor cut and dried as most experts seem to think. The usual notion that there is a plan to reduce a core to specifically get a Levallois point or blade to me is well dodgy. I say they were way more practical than that. very very few of the cores I've seen(or have) look like the wiki "perfect" examples and the various types of reduction described seem well daft to me. I'd even go so far as to say the Levallois technique might even be more efficient and less wasteful and gets more useful tools out of a lump of flint than some later techniques. Done well in the hands of a master more of the debitage is useful. These guys were very frugal and focused IMHO. The notion that some bloke or gal is gonna reduce a big lump of good flint to only produce a spearpoint or a blade seems very daft. I've a couple of examples where a "debitage" piece is then looked at and the guy or gal seemed to think "oh hang on that could be useful if I did this...". Having tried the technique(hamfistedly) way back in the day, you do notice the "waste" flakes you're striking are anything but. I say bloke or gal, because it seems the gender labour division was our innovation. Before us both genders hunted etc, so IMHO a gansy load(tm) of those tools in museums were just as likely to have been crafted by a female hand.

If I had the access to decent flint I have to say I'd like to practice the technique again. It seems very few experimental archaeologists and even ardent knappers will go near it.

slowburner

Purely by chance, I came across this lone voice in favour of a Palaeolithic presence on this island.

Survivals from the Palaeolithic Age among Irish Neolithic Implements.
Knowles, W.J., 1897, Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland. Part I, First Quarter. .
pp. 45 (original ed.) pp. 67 (online ed. here)


The paper is not an easy read, but the illustrations of his personal collection are impressive.
And where might that collection be now?

'I have for several years past observed a considerable degree of resemblance between Irish Neolithic flint implements and those of the cave dwellers in the south of France of Palaeolithic age...'

'...on examining the implements of Palaeolithic age in the Musée Wiertz in Brussels, my remarks were to the effect that I could match a great number with Irish objects found in the old prehistoric surface at Whitepark bay, county Antrim, Portstewart, county Derry, and other similar sites in the north of Ireland.'

He concludes;

'...I am convinced, from a comparison of our Irish implements with those of newer Palaeolithic age in France and elsewhere...that a good contingent of those tribes who used the Mousterien and Solutrien types of implements came to the British area, and that the best examples of their surviving art and skill are to be found among the flint implements of the North of Ireland.'





(This paper also includes a reference to the first coining of the term Mesolithic.)

Wibbs

Wow, the illustrations of his bifaces on the first plate do look very paleo to me. Put another way if I was traipsing across a field in Spain or France and saw similar I'd assume Mousterian in that context anyway. That said just because a technique is used in the past and new techniques come along, it doesn't mean the old techniques don't continue or aren't sometimes revisited. The bronze age happened and we ere still using flint tools, ditto for the iron age. Plus I know jack about meso and neo fllint techniques beyond some obvious differences. Do bifaces like that show up in mesolithic and neolithic sites? Interesting one for me was the use of basalt in some examples.

It doesn't always indicate what type of human either. Sometimes the stones don't match the bones. EG the Mousterian of North Africa and the ME was made by modern humans and with the exception of tanged spearpoints looks just like a Neandertal toolkit.

As his dissertation progresses I have more doubts. The second plate for example don't look much like mousterian to me at all. They're not Levallois thats for sure judging by the scars and overall shape and it's a technique you really can't mistake for others.

The next plate some of the scrapers/knives could be mistaken for Mousterian if found in that context alright, but again a scraper is gonna tend to look like a scraper who ever makes it.

Very interesting find though SB.

Mountainsandh

Here's one of the caves I'm talking about, one intriguing article about it but there are a good few references online, including a pdf reassessment by a lady in 2002 that I haven't managed to open yet. Just google Kilgreany cave. The skeletons were found to be neolithic etc... were ruled out as paleolithic, but there is still a bit of uncertainty surrounding that ? (prepare yourself for a wtf read but I quite like that)
http://www.authorsden.com/visit/viewArticle.asp?id=38937

There was also the Shandon cave in Dungarvan, where the Mammoth bones were found (and some destroyed before the archeologist from the big town stopped the destruction !), but the cave itself was completely pulled apart and quarried to build the marts.

There are some other caves in the area stretching West from Dungarvan.

The floods throughout the years seem to make it a challenge to explain where something may or may not be found in or outside the caves. I wonder what ended up washed up in streams around them. Most of the caves are on private farmers' lands though, and with no indication of their presence outside. Often the farmers have blocked up holes and fissures/skylights to protect cattle and humans.

slowburner

So where did the Mell flake come from?
It's widely held that the flake was transported by glacial activity, from 'elsewhere' to Ireland.
The problem I see with this view is that the ice sheets over Ulster moved south eastward.





(see here also)

Clearly then, the flake must have been carried from somewhere northwest of Mell and it can't have come from northwest of the Sperrins, or am I missing something?

Wibbs

+1 SB. I always thought that an odd one too. Then again tools of similar age(400,000 years old) have been found in Scotland. It must have been warm enough in that timeframe for early hominids to survive there. IIRC the flake is of Clactonian style so homo Erectus/heidelbergensis origin. They must have been right hardy buggers to range that far north pretty much naked.

Neutronale

slowburner wrote: »

Purely by chance, I came across this lone voice in favour of a Palaeolithic presence on this island.

Survivals from the Palaeolithic Age among Irish Neolithic Implements.
W.J.Knowles M.R.I.A.. Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland. Part I, First Quarter. 1897.
pp. 45 (original ed.) pp. 67 (online ed. here)


The paper is not an easy read, but the illustrations of his personal collection are impressive.
And where might that collection be now?

'I have for several years past observed a considerable degree of resemblance between Irish Neolithic flint implements and those of the cave dwellers in the south of France of Palaeolithic age...'

'...on examining the implements of Palaeolithic age in the Musée Wiertz in Brussels, my remarks were to the effect that I could match a great number with Irish objects found in the old prehistoric surface at Whitepark bay, county Antrim, Portstewart, county Derry, and other similar sites in the north of Ireland.'

He concludes;

'...I am convinced, from a comparison of our Irish implements with those of newer Palaeolithic age in France and elsewhere...that a good contingent of those tribes who used the Mousterien and Solutrien types of implements came to the British area, and that the best examples of their surviving art and skill are to be found among the flint implements of the North of Ireland.'

(This paper also includes a reference to the first coining of the term Mesolithic.)

Wow.

Thats amazing.

How far back does that push humans arrival in Ireland?

Wibbs

That's the problem N it doesn't. The attribution of the tools was neolithic and the author seems to think this was a continuation rather than earlier humans themselves.

I'd personally believe that earlier humans were here in the last million years, Erectus, Neandertal, but that's just applying guesswork and the fact they were in the UK many times during warm periods in that time. Sadly evidence of that if it ever existed is likely lost because of the scouring of the ice sheets Ireland suffered. Southern UK remained relatively ice free over that time, so far more of their geology(paleo and others) survived.

dr gonzo

cyril mc namara wrote: »

Hi,
I live in Tipperary and when out walking recently I found an unusual rock, I think it is flint but am not really sure as Tipp is not known for flint as far as I know. It is about 12 x 18 cm in size and while the inside is a greyish white it has on outer skin of light brown. I would appreciate any info I can get. Thanks!https://plus.google.com/photos/110757565087073145724/albums/5858513089574361377?authkey=CMOV0arzyojNlAE

Very nice nodule, Im surprised to see that in Tipp myself. In any case, just to echo Wibbs assessment, it is indeed flint, and nice flint at that. If you were interested you have good material for knapping there, you should give it a google and have a go yourself. Few little bits of advice if you do. When in doubt use smaller hammerstones; hit at oblique (45 degree) angle and always follow through, if your hammerstone is stopping dead youre doing it slightly wrong; and lastly, if you get nothing after two strikes move on. This is very basic info but a quick google will give you more information on creating platforms etc. Enjoy!

Wibbs wrote: »

Sadly evidence of that if it ever existed is likely lost because of the scouring of the ice sheets Ireland suffered. Southern UK remained relatively ice free over that time, so far more of their geology(paleo and others) survived.

I would have thought that the terminus of the ice sheet would have left waterword, wexford, and some of wicklow intact...?



Incidentally

slowburner wrote: »

I just couldn't help imagining a lecture with the introduction: "ladies & gentlemen, would you please welcome the esteemed palaeontologist........ahem.......Professor Gee Bag".

Now all I can see is "Bag, G. 2013"

Wibbs

dr gonzo wrote: »

Very nice nodule, Im surprised to see that in Tipp myself.

Funny enough Dr G, thinking back to when I was the weird kid collecting fossils I did come across some pretty OK Lower Carboniferous chert/flint nodules. Because they can often form around fossils, many was the time I took my hammer to them.

In any case, just to echo Wibbs assessment,

Never a good idea Dr G.

If you were interested you have good material for knapping there, you should give it a google and have a go yourself. Few little bits of advice if you do. When in doubt use smaller hammerstones; hit at oblique (45 degree) angle and always follow through, if your hammerstone is stopping dead youre doing it slightly wrong; and lastly, if you get nothing after two strikes move on. This is very basic info but a quick google will give you more information on creating platforms etc. Enjoy!

+1 Thinking back it takes some practice Cyril. In my case I found hammering away like a gobshíte suited me, your mileage may vary, kinda gets a feel for the material, then research. And online is bloody great for that now. God my 10 year old self misses the internet As you say DR G striking platforms ca be a black art. Grinding down the edges of virgin flint to control the material another. IMHO pure hard hammer knapping is the hardest to get good at.

This French lad's vids are well worth a watch. One of the few people I've seen who can knock out a really decent Levallois point. His Neandertal cousins would be proud.

I would have thought that the terminus of the ice sheet would have left waterword, wexford, and some of wicklow intact...?

Yea maybe G, over to the geologists I reckon.

slowburner

Some detailed research on the extent of the ice sheet here
http://www.sheffield.ac.uk/geography/staff/clark_chris/britice-chrono

(the large map is very memory hungry)

For a quicker look at Chris Clark's mapping, see here
http://donsmaps.com/icemaps.html

and this short article has a useful visualisation of the extents and retreats
http://www.wesleyjohnston.com/users/ireland/past/pre_norman_history/iceage.html

It all makes you wonder could be under the eskers and drumlins, and if significant objects have ever been dredged up by trawlers around our coasts, as they frequently are from mesolithic Doggerland.