METAL, MOULDS, AND THE METHOD OF MANUFACTURE.
HAVING now passed in review the various forms of weapons, tools,
ornaments, and vessels belonging to the Bronze Period of this country,
it will be well to consider the nature of the metal of which they
are formed, and the various processes by which they were produced
and finished ready for use. Some of these processes, as for instance
the hammering out of the cutting-edges of tools and weapons, and the
production of ornamental designs by means of the hammer and punch, have
already been mentioned, and need be but cursorily noticed. The main
process, indeed, of which this chapter will treat is that of casting.
Bronze, as already stated, is an alloy of copper and tin, and
therefore distinct from brass, which is an alloy of copper and zinc.
Many varieties of bronze—or, as it is now more commonly called,
gun-metal—are in use at the present day; and one remarkable feature
in bronze is that the admixture with copper of the much softer metal
tin, in varying proportions, produces an alloy in most if not all cases
harder than the original copper; and when the tin is much in excess, as
in the metal used for the specula of telescopes, so much harder that,
_à priori_, such a result of the mixture of two soft metals would have
been thought impossible. The following table compiled from a paper in
_Design and Work_, reprinted in Martineau and Smith’s _Hardware Trade
Journal_,[1602] gives some of the alloys now in most common use and the
purposes to which they are applied:—
Per cent.
Tin. Copper. of Copper.
11 108 = 90·76 {A common metal for cannon and machine
{brasses, used also for bronze statues.
11 99 = 90· }
11 96 = 89·72 }Gun-metal proper, used for cannon.
11 84 = 88·44 {Used for bearings of machinery,
{frequently called gun-metal.
11 72 = 86·75 Rather harder.
11 60 = 84·50 Harder, not malleable.
11 44 = 80·00 Used for cymbals and Chinese gongs.
11 48 = 81·35 Very hard, used for culinary vessels.
11 36 } {76·69 }Bell-metal
12 36 } or {75·00 }
11 24 = 68·57 Yellowish, very hard, sonorous.
11 4 = 26·66 {Very white, sometimes used for specula
{with with some other slight admixture.19746
Lord Rosse, however, in casting specula, preferred using copper and tin
in their atomic proportions, or 68·21 per cent. of copper and 31·79 of
tin.
The addition of tin, while increasing the hardness of copper, also
renders it more fusible. In small proportions it but little affects
the colour of the copper,[1603] and it is difficult to recognise its
presence from the physical characters of the copper, except from that
of increased hardness. What appear, therefore, to be copper instruments
may, and indeed often do, contain an appreciable admixture of tin,
which, however, can only be recognised by analysis.
Besides the superiority of one alloy over another, it appears probable
that the method of treatment of the metal may somewhat affect its
properties. M. Tresca[1604] found that a gun-metal cast by Messieurs
Laveissière, consisting of—
Copper 89·47
Tin 9·78
Zinc 0·66
Lead 0·09
was superior in all respects to either the common gun-metal A or the
phosphor-bronze B cast at Bourges, the constituents of which were as
follows:—
A B
Copper 89·87 90·60
Tin 9·45 8.82
Zinc 0·31 0·27
Lead 0·37 0·31
—————— ——————
100·00 100·00
The results of both ancient and modern experience as to the proportions
in which copper and tin should be mixed, in order to produce a tough
and hard though not brittle metal, appear to be nearly the same;
and nine parts of copper to one part of tin may be regarded as the
constituents of the most serviceable bronze or gun-metal.
In the following table I have given the results of some of the more
recent analyses of bronze antiquities found in the United Kingdom,
and have omitted the early analyses of Dr. Pearson[1605] in 1796 as
being only approximative. I have arranged them so far as practicable
in accordance with the different forms of the objects analyzed; and
one feature which is thus brought out tends strongly to confirm the
conclusion which has been arrived at from other premises, that certain
forms of bronze weapons and other instruments and utensils are of later
date than others.
It will be seen, for instance, that in the flat and flanged celts, the
palstaves, and even spear-heads, lead, if present at all, exists in but
very minute quantity; whereas in the socketed celts and swords, which
are probably later forms, and especially in those from Ireland, this
metal occurs in several cases in considerable proportions.
This prevalence of lead is very remarkable in some of the small
socketed celts found in very large numbers in Brittany, which from
their diminutive size have been regarded as “votive” rather than as
destined for actual use. In some of these Professor Pelligot[1606]
found as much as 28·50 and even 32·50 per cent. of lead, with only 1½
per cent. or a small trace of tin. In others, with a large per-centage
of tin, there was from 8 to 16 per cent. of lead. Some of the bronze
ornaments of the Early Iron Period also contain a considerable
proportion of this metal, which, in the early Roman _as_[1607] and
its parts, is found to the extent of from 20 to 30 per cent. Although
some such proportion as 9 to 1 appears to have been aimed at, there is
great variation in the proportions of the principal ingredients even in
cutting tools of the same general character, the tin being sometimes
upwards of 18 per cent. and sometimes less than 5 per cent. of the
whole.
This variation was no doubt partly due to occasional scarcity of tin;
but, as Dr. W. K. Sullivan has pointed out,[1608] there are two other
causes for it: first, the separation of the constituent metals in the
fused mass, and the accumulation of the tin in the lower portion of
the castings; and, second, the throwing off of the tin by oxidation
when the alloys were re-melted. M. Dusaussoy[1609] found that an alloy
containing 90·4 per cent. of copper and 9·6 per cent. of tin lost so
much of the latter metal by six fusions that it ultimately consisted of
95 per cent. of copper and only 5 per cent. of tin.
With regard to the early sources of the copper and tin used in this
country, and in general through Western Europe, it will not be in my
power to add much to what has already been published on this subject.
It seems probable that gold, which commonly occurs native and
brilliant, was the first metal that attracted the attention of mankind.
The next metal to be discovered would, in all probability, be copper,
which also occurs native, and has many points of resemblance with gold.
The use of this metal, as I have observed in the Introductory Chapter,
no doubt originated in some part of the world where, as on the shore
of Lake Superior, it occurs in a pure metallic state. When once it was
discovered that copper was fusible by heat, the production of the metal
from some of the more metallic-looking ores, such as copper pyrites,
would follow; and in due time, either from association with the
metal, or from their colour and weight, some of the other ores, both
sulphuretted and non-sulphuretted, would become known.[1610]
When once the production of copper in this manner was effected, it is
probable that the ores of other metals, such as tin, would also become
known, and that tin ores would either be treated conjointly with the
ores of copper, as suggested by Dr. Wibel, so as at once to produce
bronze; or added to crude copper, as suggested by Professor Sullivan;
or again, be smelted by themselves so as to produce metallic tin. At
what date it was generally known that “brass is molten out of the
stone”[1611] is, however, a question difficult to answer.
Native copper and many of its ores occur in Hungary, Norway, Sweden,
Saxony, and Cornwall; but copper pyrites is far more generally
distributed, and is found in most countries of the world. So far,
therefore, as the existence of this metal is concerned, there was no
necessity for the Britons in Cæsar’s time to make use of imported
bronze, especially as tin was found in abundance in Cornwall, and
long before Cæsar’s time was exported in considerable quantities to
the Continent. And yet his account may to some extent be true, as a
socketed celt of what is almost undoubtedly Breton manufacture has been
found near Weymouth,[1612] and several instruments of recognised French
types have been found in our southern counties. Bronze vessels also may
have been imported.
Copper and its ores are abundant in Ireland, especially copper pyrites
and gray copper.
Although tin was formerly found in abundance in some parts of Spain,
and also in less quantity in Brittany,[1613] there can be but little
doubt that the Cassiterides, with which either directly or indirectly
the Phœnicians traded for tin,[1614] are rightly identified with
Britain. But, with due deference to Professor Nilsson and other
antiquaries, I must confess that the traces of Phœnician influence in
this country are to my mind at present imperceptible; and it may well
be that their system of commerce or barter was such as intentionally
left the barbarian tribes with whom they traded in much the same stage
of civilisation as that in which they found them, always assuming that
they dealt directly with Britain and not through the intervention of
Gaulish merchants.
The argument, however, that the Phœnician bronze would have been
lead-bronze, because the Phœnicians derived their civilisation and
arts from Egypt, and had continual intercourse with that country,
where lead-bronze was early known, appears to me wanting in cogency.
For though the Egyptians may have used lead-bronzes for statues and
ornaments, the Egyptian dagger[1615] analyzed by Vauquelin gave copper
85, tin 14, and iron 1 per cent., and showed no trace of lead. Of one
point we may be fairly certain, that the discovery of bronze did not
originate in the British Isles, but that the knowledge of that useful
metal was communicated from abroad, and probably from the neighbouring
country, France. When and in what manner that and the other countries
of Western and Central Europe derived their knowledge of bronze it is
not my intention here to discuss. I will only say that the tendency of
the evidence at present gathered is to place the original source of
bronze, like that of the Aryan family, in an Asiatic rather than an
European centre.
The presence in greater or less proportions of other metals than copper
and tin in bronze antiquities may eventually lead to the recognition of
the sources from which in each country the principal supplies of metal
were obtained. Professor Sullivan, in the book already cited, arrives
at the following among other conclusions from the chemical facts at his
command:—
1. The northern nations in ancient times used only true bronzes—those
formed of copper and tin—of greater or lesser purity according to the
kind of ores used.
2. Many of these bronzes contain small quantities of lead, zinc,
nickel, cobalt, iron, and silver, derived from the copper from which
the bronze was made.
3. Though some bronzes may have been produced directly by melting a
mixture of copper and tin ores, the usual mode of making them was by
treating fused crude copper with tin-stone.[1616] In later times bronze
was made by mixing the two metals together.
4. The copper of the ancient bronzes seems to have been smelted in many
different localities.
Some analyses of bronze antiquities found in other countries are given
in the works indicated below,[1617] in addition to those mentioned on
page 418.
Key to Line Item and Location
Line A. Flat celt, Ireland
Line B. Flanged celt
Line C. Palstave (Mean)
Line D. ” Fife
Line E. Socketed celt, Yorkshire
Line F. Socketed celt, Ireland
Line G. ” ” (Mean)
Line H. ” ” Wicklow
Line I. ” ” Cavan
Line J. ” ” Dowris
Line K. Dagger, Newton, near Cambridge
Line L. Dagger, Ireland (?)
Line M. ” “
Line N. Sword, England (Mean), Chertsey, Br.
Line O. Sword, Scotland
Line P. ” Ireland (Mean)
Line Q. ” “
Line R. ” ” (Mean)
Line S. ” “
Line T. ” “
Line U. Spear-head, Ireland
Line V. ” “
Line W. ” “
Line X. Halberd, Ireland
Line Y. Shield, Coveney Fen
Line Z. ” “
Line AA. Trumpet, Dowris
Line BB. Caldron, Scotland
Line CC. ” “
Line DD. ” Ireland
┌————┬—————┬—————┬————┬—————┬—————┬—————┬—————┬—————┬—————┬——————┬———┐
│ │ C │ T │ L │ I │ N │ C │ S │ Z │ S │ T │ A │
│ │ o │ i │ e │ r │ i │ o │ i │ i │ u │ o │ n │
│ │ p │ n │ a │ o │ c │ b │ l │ n │ l │ t │ a │
│ │ p │ . │ d │ n │ k │ a │ v │ c │ p │ a │ l │
│ │ e │ │ . │ . │ e │ l │ e │ . │ h │ l │ y │
│ │ r │ │ │ │ l │ t │ r │ │ u │ . │ s │
│ │ . │ │ │ │ . │ . │ . │ │ r │ │ t │
│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ . │ │ . │
├————┼—————┼—————┼————┼—————┼—————┼—————┼—————┼—————┼—————┼——————┼———┤
│ A. │86·98│12·57│ │ │ │ │ 0·37│ │ │ 99·92│ B │
│ B. │90·18│ 9·82│ │Trace│ │ │ │ │ │100·00│ A │
│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ C. │89·33│ 9·20│ │ 0·34│ │ │ │ │ 0·24│ 99·11│ A │
│ D. │81·19│18·31│0·75│ │ │ │ │ │ │100·25│ D │
│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ E. │81·15│12·30│2·63│ Tr. │ 0·13│ │ 0·07│ │ [*]│96·28 │ A │
│ F. │90·69│ 7·44│1·28│ Tr. │ Tr. │ Tr. │ │ │ │ 99·41│ A │
│ │ │ │ │ \——v——/ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ G. │83·65│11·02│3·20│ 0·58│ 0·34 │ │ │ │ 98·79│ A │
│ H. │88·30│10·92│0·10│ Tr. │ │ │ │ │ Tr. │ 99·32│ B │
│ I. │95·64│ 4·56│0·25│ │ │ │ 0·02│ │ │100·47│ B │
│ J. │85·23│13·11│1·14│ │ │ │ │ │ 0·15│ 99·63│ F │
│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ K. │85·33│14·20│0·29│ Tr. │ 0·27│ │ 0·04│ │ [**]│100·13│ A │
│ L. │99·72│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ 0·28│100·00│ A │
│ M. │87·97│11·35│0·28│ │ │ │ │ Tr. │ Tr. │ 99·60│ B │
│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ N. │89·69│ 9·59│ │ 0·33│ │ │ │ │ Tr. │ 99·61│ A │
│ O. │88·51│ 9·30│2·30│ │ │ │ │ │ │100·11│ D │
│ P. │91·79│ 8·17│ │ Tr. │ │ │ │ │ Tr. │ 99·96│ A │
│ Q. │87·07│ 8·52│3·37│ │ │ │ │ │ Tr. │ 99·96│ B │
│ R. │85·63│10·03│2·93│ 0·44│ │ │ │ │ │ 99·03│ A │
│ S. │88·63│ 8·54│2·83│ │ │ │ │ │ │100·00│ E │
│ T. │83·50│ 5·15│8·35│ 3·00│ │ │ │ │ │100·00│ E │
│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ U. │86·28│12·74│0·07│ 0·31│ │ 0·09│ │ │ │ 99·49│ B │
│ V. │84·64│14·01│ │ Tr. │ │ │ │ │ Tr. │ 98·65│ B │
│ W. │88·42│11·29│ │ Tr. │ 0·29│ 0·29│ │ │ │100·29│ G │
│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ X. │95·85│ 2·78│0·12│ 1·32│ │ │ │ │ │100·07│ B │
│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │
│ Y. │87·50│11·62│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ 99·12│ C │
│ Z. │87·55│11·72│ │ │ 0·40│ │ │ │ │ 99·67│ C │
│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │
│AA. │79·34│10·87│9·11│ │ │ │ │ │ │ 99·32│ F │
│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │
│BB. │92·89│ 5·15│1·78│ │ │ │ │ │ │ 99·82│ D │
│CC. │84·08│ 7·19│8·53│ 0·03│ │ │ │ │ │ 99·83│ D │
│DD. │88·71│ 9·46│1·66│ │ │ │ │ │ │ 99·83│ B │
└————┴—————┴—————┴————┴—————┴—————┴—————┴—————┴—————┴—————┴——————┴———┘
A, Mr. J. A. Phillips, see _Quart. Journ. Chem. Soc._, vol. iv.
p. 276.
B, J. W. Mallet, _Trans. R. I. Ac._, vol. xxii. p. 324.
C, T. H. Henry, F.R.S., _Pub. Camb. Ant. Soc._, No. xiv. p. 13.
D, Dr. George Wilson, Wilson’s “Preh. Ann. of Scot.,” vol. i. p. 374.
E, Prof. Davy, ” ” ” “
F, Dr. Donovan, ” ” ” “
G, De Fellenberg. ” ” ” “
* In this case oxygen to the extent of 3·83 was present. The bronze
had become so friable as to be easily pulverised in a mortar. Mr. J.
Arthur Phillips writes about it as follows:—“When a freshly-broken
fragment of it is examined under a low magnifying power, it is seen
to consist of a metallic net-work enclosing distinct and perfectly
formed crystals of cuprite, surrounded by a greyish white substance
which is chiefly bioxide of tin. In this alloy the nickel, silver, and
iron are evidently accidental impurities, but the lead is no doubt an
intentional ingredient.” The specific gravity after pulverization is
about 7·26 only.
** Specific gravity 8·59.
I have here given most of the trustworthy analyses already published,
and have only added two new analyses kindly made for me by Mr. J. A.
Phillips, F.G.S., of a socketed celt from Yorkshire and of a small
dagger from Newton, near Cambridge.
Those who wish for detailed information as to the composition of
the bronze antiquities found in other countries are referred to De
Fellenberg’s essays and to Von Bibra’s comprehensive work.[1618]
The copper which was used by the bronze-founders of old times appears
to have been smelted from the ore and run into a shallow concave mould
open at top, in which the metal assumed the form of a circular cake,
convex below and flat above; but before becoming sufficiently cold
to be quite set into tough metal, these cakes seem as a rule to have
been disturbed and broken up into numerous pieces, better adapted
for re-melting than the whole cakes would have been. This method of
breaking up the solid cakes while hot saved also an infinity of labour;
as to cut such masses into small pieces when cold would, even with
modern appliances, be a difficult task; and with only bronze and stone
tools at command would have been nearly impossible. Many of the cakes
are, however, interspersed with cavities formed in the metal, and in
some cases there seems reason to think that this may have been produced
intentionally, so as to render the breaking of the cakes even when cold
more readily practicable.
Many of the blocks of metal cast in rough moulds, and known by Italian
antiquaries as _æs signatum_, have a similar broken appearance at the
ends. Professor Chierici[1619] has suggested that the moulds in which
they were cast were of considerable length, and that from time to time
clay and sand were thrown in so as to break the continuity of the
metal, which indeed was poured in at intervals, after the insertion of
the sand or clay, to form the break in the mould.
Some pieces of metal which have been regarded as ingots, and which not
improbably are really such, have the form of a double-ended axe with a
very small shaft hole. They have been discovered with several of the
bronze-founders’ hoards in France. Dr. V. Gross, of Neuveville, has a
fine example of this kind found at Locras, in the Lac de Bienne.[1620]
It is about 16½ inches long and 4¾ inches wide at the ends, the hole
through the centre being about ¼ inch in diameter, and the weight of
the ingot, which is of pure copper, is about 6½ lbs.
Rough lumps of metal have frequently been found with deposits of
bronze implements in Britain, these latter being sometimes in a
worn-out or broken condition, and apparently brought together as old
metal for re-casting. In other deposits the instruments seem new and
ready for use, or again they are in an unfinished condition. All the
circumstances of these discoveries, however, go to prove that they are
in fact the stock-in-trade of the ancient bronze-founders. The jets
or waste pieces from the castings, of which I shall subsequently have
to speak, are often found mixed with the rude lumps. These lumps have
usually the appearance of pure copper, and in many cases have proved to
be so on analysis.
Some copper cakes appear, however, to belong to Roman times. They
differ in shape from those already described, in being of nearly even
thickness, but with the edge inclined as if they had been cast in a
small frying-pan. They are from 10 to 13 inches in diameter and about
2 inches thick; and on more than one found in Anglesea[1621] there are
inscriptions in Roman characters. They weigh from 30 to 50 lbs.
Turning now to the instances of lumps of rough metal being found with
bronze weapons and tools, the following may be cited, though other
instances are given in the tables at page 462:—
Lanant, Cornwall,[1622] heavy lumps of fine copper, found with broken
socketed celts, &c.
Kenidjack Cliff, Cornwall,[1623] with palstaves and socketed celts.
St. Hilary, Cornwall,[1624] lumps weighing 14 or 15 lbs. each, said to
have been found with spear-heads.
Near Worthing, Sussex, several lumps of metal, with palstaves and
socketed celts.
Beachey Head,[1625] three lumps of raw copper, apparently very pure,
with palstaves, socketed celts, &c.
Wick Park, Stogursey, Somerset,[1626] with palstaves, socketed celts,
broken swords, spears, &c.
Kingston Hill, Surrey,[1627] with socketed celts, fragments of swords,
and spear-head.
Beddington, Surrey,[1628] with mould, socketed celts, gouge,
spear-heads, &c.
Wickham Park, Croydon, Surrey,[1629] with palstave, gouge, hammer, &c.
Danesbury, near Welwyn, Herts,[1630] lumps of metal with damaged
socketed celts.
Cumberlow, Herts,[1631] with palstaves, socketed celts, fragments of
swords, &c.
Westwick Row, Hemel Hempsted,[1632] several lumps, with socketed celts.
Romford, Essex,[1633] lumps of metal in waste pieces and imperfect
castings, untrimmed socketed celts, &c.
Fifield, Essex,[1634] upwards of 50 lbs. of metal, with socketed celts.
High Roding, Essex,[1635] with socketed celts, &c.
Kensington,[1636] with socketed celt, gouge, &c.
Sittingbourne, Kent,[1637] with socketed celts, gouges, &c.
Meldreth, Cambs,[1638] with socketed celts, chisel, ring of caldron,
&c.
Carlton Rode, Norfolk,[1639] lumps of metal, with socketed celts,
gouges, &c.
Helsdon Hall, Norwich,[1640] pieces of copper, socketed celts, &c.
Earsley Common, York,[1641] several lumps of metal, with nearly a
hundred socketed celts.
Martlesham, Suffolk,[1642] a large quantity of metal, including some
lumps weighing 5 or 6 lbs., with socketed celts, gouge, &c.
West Halton, Lincolnshire,[1643] with socketed celts and broken sword.
Roseberry Topping, Yorkshire,[1644] with socketed celts, gouges,
hammer, &c.
In the Heathery Burn Cave, Durham, and in the Guilsfield find, there
was in each case at least one lump of metal.
Besides the cakes of copper, bars of that metal appear to have been
hammered into an oblong form, and then cut into lengths of from 4 to
5 inches, weighing each about ¼ lb., and in that state to have served
as the raw material for the bronze-founders. Thirteen of these short
bars were found at Therfield, near Royston, Herts,[1645] and Dr. Percy
found on analysis that they contained about 98½ per cent. of copper
with a small alloy of tin or antimony, probably the latter. Some
fifteen or sixteen “pieces of long triangular brass” are described
as having been found with about the same number of celts at Hinton,
near Christchurch, Hants.[1646] These bars “seemed to be pieces of the
metal out of which the celts were cast.”
In Scotland some “lumps of brass” were found with the swords, spears,
&c., in Duddingston Loch.[1647] Probably other lumps of metal have
been found in that country, but they seem to be scarcer in Scotland
and Ireland than in England.
Although, as already observed, Spain may have been the principal
Western source of tin in early times, and possibly Malacca[1648] in
the East, the trade with Britain for that metal must have commenced
at a very remote epoch. We might expect, therefore, that fragments of
tin would be frequently found in the old bronze-founders’ hoards. But
though lumps of copper have so often been discovered in them, tin is
at present conspicuous by its absence. The only instance to which I am
able to refer is the discovery at Achtertyre,[1649] Morayshire, of four
“broken bits of tin,” in company with socketed celts, spear-heads, and
bracelets. These pieces seem to be fragments of a single bar which was
about 6 inches in length, of oval section, and somewhat curved, and in
weight about 3 ounces. Though spoken of as tin, the metal is in fact a
soft solder composed, according to Dr. Stevenson Macadam, of—
Tin 78·66
Lead 21·34
——————
100·00
This, he points out, is a more fusible alloy than the ordinary
plumbers’ solder, which consists of 1 of tin to 2 of lead, and fuses
at 441 degrees Fahr., as it contains nearly 4 of tin to 1 of lead,
and would fuse at 365 degrees. Whether this bar was intended for
use as solder, or represents a base tin exported to Scotland from
the tin-producing districts, is an interesting question. Professor
Daniel Wilson[1650] has called attention to the fact that in all the
bronze instruments found in Scotland which have been submitted to
analysis lead is uniformly present, though in varying proportions.
Soldering[1651] is considered to have been entirely unknown in the
Bronze Age, and even during the earlier times of the Iron Age; but the
art of burning bronze on to bronze was certainly known, and instances
of its having been practised are given in preceding pages.
Some fragments of pure metallic tin have from time to time been found
on the Continent. A small hammered bar found at the Lake-dwelling of
Estavayer,[1652] and analyzed by M. de Fellenberg, was free from lead,
zinc, iron, and copper.
Besides being found in Cornwall, tin occurs in France,[1653] Saxony,
Silesia, Bohemia, Sweden, Spain, and Portugal. It also occurs in
Etruria,[1654] and is said to be found in Chorassan.[1655]
This metal is said by Dionysius[1656] to have been struck into coins
at Syracuse, but none such are at present known. Among the Ancient
Britons,[1657] however, tin coins cast for the most part in wooden
moulds were in circulation, not in the tin-producing districts, but
in Kent and the neighbouring parts of England. Their date is probably
within a century of our era, either before or after Christ.
[Illustration: Fig. 514.—Falmouth. 1/12]
A large ingot of tin, in shape like the letter H, was
dredged up in Falmouth harbour.[1658] It is 2 feet 11 inches long and
about 11 inches wide, and 3 inches thick, and, though a small piece has
been cut off at one end, it still weighs 158 lbs. It is shown in Fig.
514. The late Sir Henry James, F.R.S.,[1659] has pointed out that the
form in which the ingot is cast adapts it for being laid in the keel of
a boat, and for being slung on a horse’s side, two of them thus forming
a proper load for a pack-horse. He has also suggested that this was the
form of ingot in which the tin produced in Cornwall was transported to
Gaul, and thence carried overland, as described by Diodorus Siculus,
to the mouths of the Rhone. Curiously enough this author speaks of the
blocks being in the form of astragali, with which this ingot fairly
coincides. Other ingots[1660] of tin of different form have also been
found in Cornwall, but there appears to me hardly sufficient evidence
to determine their approximate date, and I therefore content myself
with mentioning them. A lump cast in a basin-shaped mould, with two
holes in the flat face converging so as to form a V-shaped receptacle
for a cord, is in the Blackmore Museum at Salisbury.
What appear to be ingots of copper rather than votive or mortuary
tablets have been found in Sardinia,[1661] and in their form present a
close analogy with this ingot of tin, though they are of much smaller
dimensions. Both the sides and ends curve inwards, the notch at the
ends of some being semicircular. They are counter-marked with a kind of
double T.
As to the method of melting the metal but little is known. It seems
probable, however, that the crucibles employed must have been vessels
of burnt clay provided with handles for moving them; while for pouring
out the metal small ladles of earthenware may have been used. At
Robenhausen,[1662] on Lake Pfäffikon, Switzerland, small crucibles of
a ladle-like form have been found, in some cases with lumps of bronze
still in them. Crucibles without handles have been discovered at
Unter-Uhldingen,[1663] in the Ueberlinger See.
The methods of casting were various. Objects were cast—
1. In a single mould formed of loam, sand, stone, or metal, the upper
surface of the casting exhibiting the flat surface of the molten
metal, which was left open to the air. In the case of loam or sand
castings a pattern or model would be used, which might be an object
already in use, or made of the desired form in wood or other soft
substance.
2. In double moulds of similar materials. The castings produced in
this manner when in unfinished condition show the joints of the
moulds. When sand was employed a frame or flask of some kind must have
been used to retain the material in place when the upper half of the
mould was lifted off the pattern. The loam moulds were probably burnt
hard before being used. In many cases cores for producing hollows in
the casting were employed in conjunction with these moulds.
3. In what may be termed solid moulds. For this process the model was
made of wax, wood, or some combustible material which was encased in
a mass of loam, possibly mixed with cow-dung or vegetable matter,
which on exposure to heat left the loam or clay in a porous condition.
This exposure to fire also burnt out the wax or wood model and left a
cavity for the reception of the metal, which was probably poured in
while the mould was still hot.
Sir John Lubbock[1664] regards this as the commonest mode of casting
during the Bronze Age, but so far as this country is concerned it
appears to me to have been very seldom, if ever, in use. Except in
highly complicated castings, such as ring within ring, no advantage
would be gained by adopting the process, as the same result could
usually be obtained by the use of a mould in two halves, while the
pattern would then be preserved. In comparing a number of objects
together, though, like the six hundred and eighty-eight specimens of
celts in the Dublin Museum, no two may appear to have been cast in
the same mould, it does not follow that this was actually the case,
for allowance must be made for hammering, polishing, and ornamenting,
which were subsequent processes, and also for wear at the edge. Even
in castings from the same metal mould there will be considerable
variations, from differences in the amount of coating used to prevent
the hot metal from adhering to mould, and the length stopped off by the
core. But of this I shall shortly speak.
The moulds formed of burnt clay have but rarely lasted to our times,
though some have been found on the continent of Europe.
One for a perforated axe found among the remains of Lake-dwellings
near Laibach, in Carniola, is in the museum of that town. Others will
subsequently be mentioned.
The single moulds found within the United Kingdom are all of stone, and
are adapted for the production of flat celts, rings, knives, and small
chisels. In some cases it is hard to say whether a mould was intended
to be used alone or in conjunction with another of the same kind, so as
in fact to be only the half of a mould.
The single mould, which I have engraved as Fig. 515, was found near
Ballymena, Co. Antrim, and, as will be seen, is for a flat celt of
the ordinary form. The material is a micaceous sandstone, which a
recent possessor of the mould has thought so well adapted for use as
a whetstone, that the mould is in places scored with the marks where
apparently a cobbler’s awl has been sharpened. A celt cast in such a
mould would be flatter on one face than the other, and be blunt at the
ends, though much thinner there than in the middle. Before being used
it would be submitted to a hammering process, which would render the
two faces nearly symmetrical, and at the same time condense the metal
and render it harder and fitter for cutting purposes, especially at the
edge which was drawn out. In an Irish specimen in my collection there
is in one face a deep conical depression, apparently caused by the
contraction of the metal in cooling. It was probably necessary to add
a little molten metal to the casting while cooling in order to avoid
such defects. The sides as well as the faces of these plain celts have
usually been wrought with the hammer, and it seems probable that some
even of the flanged celts were originally plain castings in an open
mould.
[Illustration: Fig. 515.—Ballymena. ½]
Moulds of the same kind have been found, though rarely, in England. In
a field near Cambo,[1665] near Wallington, Northumberland, was found
a block of sandstone, having on one face two moulds for flat celts of
different sizes, and on the other face another such mould, and also one
for a flat ring. It is now in the British Museum.
Stone blocks with moulds cut in them have been found in Scotland.
One with a mould for a large celt in the centre, and near it in one
corner of the slab a mould for a very small celt, was found in a cairn
near Kintore, Aberdeenshire.[1666]
Another large block, forming the end of a cist, near Kilmartin,
Argyleshire,[1667] has nine depressions in it in the form of flat
celts, which may have been used as moulds. They are barely an
eighth of an inch in depth, and on this account have been thought
to be pictorial representations rather than moulds. With a metal so
imperfectly fluid as melted bronze, castings could be made thicker
than the depth of the moulds, and it is by no means impossible that
this stone and another forming part of the same cist may have been
intended for the production of castings. The second slab of stone may
have served for casting pins.
The stone moulds from Trochrig, near Girvan, Ayrshire,[1668] and
Alford, Aberdeenshire,[1669] with depressions of various forms upon
them, not improbably belong to a later period than that of which I am
treating.
A mould for casting rings, 2½ inches in diameter, found at Kilmailie,
Invernessshire, is in the Museum at Edinburgh.
One for two flat celts on the one face, and for a larger celt and
perhaps a knife on the other, is in the Antiquarian Museum at
Edinburgh.[1670]
These moulds are more abundant in Ireland.
One in the Belfast Museum,[1671] polyhedral in shape, has moulds upon
four of its faces for flat celts of different sizes. In the Bateman
Collection is a slab of schistose stone (7 inches by 6 inches) with
three such moulds upon it. It was found near Carrickfergus, Co.
Antrim.[1672]
On a slab in the Museum of the Royal Irish Academy[1673] there are
moulds for two flat celts, and also for one with a stop-ridge and a
loop. It would appear as if the founder must have possessed a second
half of this latter mould.
Two moulds formed of stone, and apparently intended for flat or
slightly flanged celts, have been found at Bodio in the Lago di
Varese.[1674]
Moulds for palstaves and socketed celts have been found both of stone
and of bronze, but it will be well to reserve the latter until all the
forms of moulds made of stone have been considered. Such celt moulds
have always been made in halves.
In Fig. 516 is shown the half of a mould for palstaves, which is now
in the Museum of the Royal Irish Academy. The other half is with it.
They are formed of sandstone. It is uncertain in what part of Ireland
they were found.
Another mould, formed of mica schist, and now in the British Museum,
was found in the river Bann, and was intended for short palstaves
about 3½ inches long.
[Illustration: Fig. 516.—Ireland. ½]
[Illustration: Fig. 517.—Ireland. 1/1]
The half of a mould for casting palstaves of a somewhat broader form
was found near Lough Corrib, Galway,[1675] and is in the Antiquarian
Museum at Edinburgh. Another has been engraved by Dunoyer,[1676] who
has also figured a mould for a looped palstave, from the Museum of the
University of Dublin. A stone mould from Ireland, for palstaves with
double loops, is in the Antiquarian Museum at Edinburgh. As the halves
of these stone moulds are rarely made so as to be dowelled together,
they are almost always of exactly the same size externally, so as to
be readily adjustable into their proper position when tied together
for the reception of the metal.
The half of a mould for a small palstave, with transverse edge, is
shown full size in Fig. 517. The original is of green schist, and
is in the Royal Academy Museum at Dublin. It is remarkable that a
mould for so rare a form should have been found. A stone mould for
transverse palstaves of the same kind has, however, lately been
discovered in the Lac de Bienne[1677] by Dr. V. Gross.
On the Continent stone moulds for ordinary palstaves have been found
in some numbers, especially in the Lake habitations. In the museum
at Geneva are several from the Station of Eaux Vives. The wings as
originally cast were vertical to the blades, so that they might be
withdrawn from the mould, and they were subsequently hammered over to
form the side pockets, as in Fig. 85.
Moulds for looped palstaves have been found in the Lac du Bourget,
Savoy.[1678] One of them is in my own collection. A broken mould for a
palstave was found at Billy (Loir et Cher).[1679]
Others have been found in Hungary.[1680]
A few stone moulds for casting socketed celts have been found in
England. The half of one, apparently for celts without loops, was
found near Milton, Dorsetshire,[1681] and is now in the Dorchester
Museum. It has several holes on the face of the slab, as if for the
reception of dowels, on which the other half of the mould would fit.
In another instance a set of moulds has been formed of three slabs of
stone, and would produce two varieties of socketed celts, one half
of the mould of each being engraved on the two faces of the central
slab. It is only this central piece which has been preserved. It was,
I believe, found at Bulford Water, near Salisbury, and not at Chidbury
Hill, near Everley, as stated in the “Barrow Diggers.”[1682] On one
face is the mould for a single-looped socketed celt about 4½ inches
long, of oblong section, with three vertical ribs on the face; on the
other is that for a double-looped celt of the same character, but
about 5¼ inches long, also with three vertical ribs. This mould is
formed of some variety of greenstone, and is now in the collection of
the Rev. E. Duke, of Lake House, near Salisbury.
Stone moulds for socketed celts, with vertical ribs upon them, have
been found in the Lacustrine Station of Eaux Vives, near Geneva. There
are often moulds on each face of the stones.
Others in sandstone for socketed celts have been found in
Hungary.[1683]
Several moulds for such instruments have been discovered in
Sweden.[1684] One with diagonal air-passages, like those in Fig. 521,
is in the Copenhagen Museum.
Stone moulds for socketed celts have also been found in Scotland. Two
pair from the parish of Rosskeen, Ross-shire,[1685] have been figured
by Professor Daniel Wilson. They are for looped celts rather wide and
straight at the edge, about 5 inches long and of hexagonal section.
The castings from the one are plain upon the faces; in those from the
other there are three annulets connected by raised ribs, much the same
as on one face of the celt from Wigtonshire (Fig. 166). These moulds
had the two halves dowelled together when in use. On one there appears
to be a second mould for a small flat bar.
In Ireland stone moulds for socketed celts are rare, and they appear
to have been for the most part cast in sand or loam. There is,
however, in the Museum of the Royal Irish Academy,[1686] the half of
a mould of this kind made of mica slate, and much worn by age and
exposure, apparently intended for a ribbed socketed celt. It has
dowel-holes on the face of the slab.
The mould, or more properly half of a mould, for a tanged knife,
with a central rib along the blade, is shown in Fig. 518. It is of
close-grained sandstone, and was found near Ballymoney, Co. Antrim.
The surface on which the knife has been engraved is ground very
smooth, as if to fit another half mould. In this other half there was
probably little more than grooves for the central rib and tang, as the
mould at the edge of the knife would produce a casting fully 1/16 inch
thick, which would require a good deal of hammering out.
[Illustration: Fig. 518.—Ballymoney. ½]
[Illustration: Fig. 519.—Broughshane. ½]
Fig. 519 shows the half of a mould for a dagger blade of elegant form.
It is of mica slate, and was found near Broughshane, Co. Antrim. It
is about 1 inch in thickness; and on the other face are moulds for a
small flat chisel with side stops, in total length about 2⅝ inches,
for a flat triangular celt-like tool about 1½ inch long, and an
unfinished mould for a segment of a flat ring.
Stone moulds for daggers have been found in the Italian
_terramare_.[1687]
[Illustration: Fig. 520.—Knighton. ¼]
[Illustration: Fig. 521.—Knighton. ¼]
In Figs. 520 and 521 I have reproduced on the scale of one-fourth the
engravings of two stone moulds which were found near Knighton, but
in the parish of Hennock, near Chudleigh, Devon, and are published
in the _Archæological Journal_.[1688] They are of a light greenish
micaceous schist, such as occurs in Cornwall. The large one is 24½
inches in length by 3 inches in its greatest width, the smaller is
21½ inches long and also 3 inches wide. When found the two halves of
each mould were in apposition; the longer mould placed vertically, the
shorter horizontally. As will be seen, they are for the production of
rapier-shaped blades. In the smaller is a series of small channels, to
allow of the escape of air during the process of casting.
[Illustration: Fig. 522.—Maghera. ½]
On the larger, by the side of the main mould, is a second, which would
produce a slightly tapering casting, ribbed longitudinally on one
face and flat on the other. It is difficult to judge of the purpose
for which it was intended, but it may possibly have been at once an
ornament and a support for the scabbard of the blade.
Some fluted pieces of bronze, such as would be produced from a mould
of this kind, are in the museum at Tours, found in a hoard at St.
Genouph.
A mould for a short leaf-shaped sword has been found in Ireland.[1689]
A stone mould, formed of green micaceous schist, and found at Maghera,
Co. Derry, is in the collection of Canon Greenwell, F.R.S., and is
shown in Fig. 522. As will be seen, it is for a spear-head of the
ordinary Irish type, with loops on the socket. These, however, were
probably flattened down during the finishing process. The outside of
the mould has been neatly rounded, and has shallow grooves in it to
assist in keeping the string in place with which the two halves of the
mould were bound together when ready for use.
In the same collection is the half of a mould for spear-heads, from
Armoy, Co. Antrim. It is much like the figure, but 7⅞ inches long.
I have the half of a mould for a nearly similar spear-head, made of
light brown stone, with the sides left square, and not rounded. This
is also from the North of Ireland. It is difficult to understand the
manner in which the cores for forming the sockets of the spear-heads
were supported in the moulds. Possibly small pins of bronze were
attached to the clay core, which kept it in position, but which
during the casting process got burnt into the molten metal. I have,
however, found no actual traces of such a contrivance. On examining
broken spear-heads it will sometimes be found that the socket core
inside the blade, instead of being simply conical, has lateral
projections running into the thicker part of the blade.
A mould for spear-heads of the same kind as Fig. 521, found near
Claran Bridge,[1690] in the barony of Dunkellen, Co. Galway, has at
the base two pin-holes about 1 inch long and ¼ inch in diameter.
Their axes are parallel to that of the socket. These may possibly be
connected with the steadying of the core.
A stone mould found at the edge of Lough Ramer, Co. Cavan,[1691] and
now in the Museum of the Royal Irish Academy, is quadrangular in
section, with moulds for very small lance-heads on three of its faces.
On the fourth there are marks of a worn-out mould. The corresponding
halves have not been found. Such instances of several half-moulds on a
single block of stone are not unfrequent.
[Illustration: Fig. 523.—Lough Gur. ½]
[Illustration: Fig. 524.—Campbelton. ½]
A moiety of a stone mould for casting spear-heads of various sizes, and
also pointed objects, “possibly,” though not probably, “arrow-heads,”
was found at Lough Gur,[1692] Co. Limerick, and is now in the British
Museum. It is a four-sided prism, 6½ inches long and 2½ inches broad
at one end of each face, and 1¾ inch at the other. A second similar
prism would, it has been observed, give four perfect moulds for casting
spear-heads slightly varying in form, but in each case provided with
side loops. These loops are as usual semicircular in form on the mould,
and were no doubt destined to be flattened in the usual manner by a
subsequent process of hammering. There is one special feature in this
mould, viz. that at the base of the blade there is a transverse notch
in the stone, evidently destined to receive a small pin, which would
serve to keep the clay core for the socket in its proper position.
There is a similar transverse notch in one of the smaller moulds for
the pointed objects. This mould is shown in Fig. 523.
There is a similar notch in a mould for leaf-shaped spear-heads
without loops in the Preusker Collection at Dresden. It would seem
as if the pin which formed the hole for the rivet was also of use to
support the core. Another such mould is in the museum at Modena.
There are similar notches in a stone mould for spear-heads, in one
of burnt clay for socketed knives, found at Mœrigen, in the Lake of
Bienne, and in one found in the Lake of Varese.[1693]
A small Irish mould for casting broad leaf-shaped lance-heads without
loops is in the Antiquarian Museum at Edinburgh.
A mould of much the same character as the Irish examples was found
near Campbelton,[1694] in Kintyre, Argyleshire. It is formed of dark
serpentine, and one of its halves is shown in Fig. 524. On the same
spot were found two polished stone celts and another stone mould for
spear-heads, in two portions, also of serpentine, shown in Figs. 525
and 526, both sides being cut for moulds, one for a looped spear-head
and the other for one without loops.
[Illustration: Fig. 525.—Campbelton. ½]
[Illustration: Fig. 526.—Campbelton. ½]
Dr. Arthur Mitchell, who has described this find, says that in this
second mould the two halves are not alike, as in the one first
described. In this case one-half has the shape of the spear-head deeply
cut into the stone, so as to include the whole thickness of the edge of
the spear, and the other side has simply the midrib alone cut on it,
and the rest of that side of the mould is gently bevelled towards the
edges, the result of which simple plan is that when the two sides are
laid together a perfect mould is made, the two sides of the casting
being almost exactly alike, less labour being thus required than in
forming an outline exactly alike on both sides of the stone mould, and
the result being equally satisfactory.
An English, or rather Welsh, quadrangular mould, much like that from
Lough Gur, was found between Bodwrdin[1695] and Tre Ddafydd, Anglesea.
It is formed of hone-stone 9¼ inches long, with the sides tapering
from 2 inches to 1½ inch. It is adapted for casting looped spear-heads
of two sizes, and what has been regarded as a double-looped celt. The
fourth side has a conical groove, and may be the complement of another
more defined mould, as is the case with Fig. 525B. It has been thought
to have been for a spike-like javelin. What has been regarded as the
mould for double-looped celts seems also to be the shallow half of a
mould for spear-heads. In the museum at Clermont Ferrand[1696] there
is an analogous stone mould for palstaves of three types and a point
or ferrule.
Of other stone moulds, I may mention one for casting buckles of a
kind like those from Polden Hill, which was found at Camelford,
Cornwall.[1697] This is not improbably of Late Celtic date.
I have a flat oval slab of compact grit, about 2 inches thick, having
on one face a mould for a thin oval plate of metal about 5 inches by
4½ inches, and on the other a mould for a rather thicker oval plate,
about 6 inches by 4½ inches. It was found near Nantlle, Carnarvon, and
was given me by Mr. R. D. Darbishire, F.S.A. I am uncertain as to the
period to which it ought to be assigned.
Of foreign moulds of stone besides those already cited, I may mention
some for double-ended hatchets and for flat celts which have been
found in the Island of Sardinia.[1698]
A number of moulds formed of stone, principally mica-schist, were
found by Dr. Schliemann[1699] during his excavations on the presumed
site of Troy. They were for casting flat celts, tanged spear-heads or
daggers, and various other forms. Several of the blocks had moulds
on both sides and ends, and served for casting as many as a dozen
different objects.
The moulds made of bronze which have been found in this country are
for palstaves, socketed celts, and gouges only. They appear to be more
abundant in England than in any of the neighbouring parts of Europe. At
one time the whole school of English antiquaries regarded the moulds
for socketed celts as cases or sheaths specially prepared to hold such
instruments.[1700] To Vallancey, I think, belongs the credit of being
the first to recognise their true character. In writing about the half
of a bronze mould for palstaves found in Ireland, he observes,[1701]
“Dr. Borlase and Mr. Lort had seen brass cases of these instruments,
which fitted them as exactly as if they had been the molds in which the
instruments were cast. I cannot conceive why these gentlemen hesitate
to call them molds, as a certain proof that they were manufactured
in Ireland, where the Romans came not, either as friends or foes,
the molds are found in our bogs; they are of brass also, mixed with
a greater quantity of iron, or in some manner tempered much harder
than the instruments.” I am not sure that the latter remark as to the
comparative hardness of the moulds holds good in all cases, otherwise
the correctness of the opinion expressed by Vallancey, now about a
hundred years ago, is undeniable.
[Illustration: Fig. 527.—Hotham Carr. ½]
In Fig. 527 are given three views of one half of a complete mould for
palstaves, which was found with a hoard of bronze objects, including
seven palstaves without loops, at Hotham Carr, in Yorkshire, E.R. It is
in the collection of Canon Greenwell, F.R.S. Among the palstaves which
were found with it only one was in an undamaged condition.
[Illustration: Fig. 528—Wiltshire. ½]
[Illustration: Fig. 529—Wiltshire. ½]
As will be seen from the figure, there are projections or dowels on the
face of this half of the mould which fit into corresponding depressions
in the counterpart, so as to steady the two halves when brought
together and keep them in proper position. At the top is a cup-shaped
cavity for the reception of the metal. Any portion of the casting which
occupied this part of the mould was broken off from the palstave when
it was cool, and was kept for re-melting. Such waste pieces, or jets,
from the moulds are of common occurrence in the old founders’ hoards,
and some will be subsequently noticed.
Another mould for simple palstaves was found in Danesfield, near
Bangor,[1702] in 1800. It is for a blade rather wider at the edge and
narrower in the shank than that produced by the Yorkshire mould. With
it was found another mould for a looped palstave of about the same
size. One half of each pair of moulds is in the British Museum, and
the other half in Lord Braybrooke’s collection at Audley End. The half
of a bronze mould for a simple palstave, with a shield-shaped ornament
below the stop-ridge, was found in Ireland.[1703] One of the same kind
was lately in the collection of Mr. Stevenson of Lisburn.
In the British Museum is another mould for looped palstaves, which is
shown in Figs. 528 and 529, for the use of which I am indebted to the
Council of the Society of Antiquaries.[1704] The original was found
in Wiltshire. It is remarkable as bearing on each of its halves bands
evidently cast from actual twine which has been upon the model; but
the bands on the two halves do not coincide, being on the one placed
higher than on the other. The sides are also joggled together in a
singular manner. As to the bands of cording, it may be that the model
of the first half of the mould was formed of clay, which when dry,
in order to prevent its being broken, was tied on to the palstave on
which it had been shaped, and was thus moulded in clay or loam; and
that afterwards, when the second half of the mould had to be cast by
a similar process, the model for it was tied on to the half-mould
already formed, the binding being in contact with the side of the band
already in relief upon the back and sides of the half-mould.
Several palstave moulds formed of bronze have been found in different
countries in Europe.
The half of one, found in the Saône, for looped palstaves, is in the
museum at Lyons.[1705]
[Illustration: Fig. 530—Harty. ½]
General A. Pitt Rivers, F.R.S., has one from the neighbourhood of
Macon.[1706]
M. Charles Seidler, of Nantes, has another.
Another from the hoard of Notre-Dame d’Or, Vienne, is in the museum at
Poitiers.
M. Forel has another found in the Lake-dwellings at Morges.[1707]
A palstave mould of bronze, found near Medingen, is in the museum at
Hanover.[1708] The half of one found at Polsen, near Merseburg,[1709]
is in that of Berlin.
Another bronze mould from the neighbourhood of Grünberg,[1710] is in
the museum at Darmstadt.
There are several bronze moulds of this character in the Museum of
Northern Antiquities at Copenhagen.
In Figs. 530 and 531 are engraved the halves of two moulds for casting
socketed celts of different sizes and patterns, which were found with
a number of other relics in the Isle of Harty, Sheppey, and are now in
my own collection. I have already given an account of this discovery
elsewhere;[1711] but as it throws so much light upon the whole process
of casting as practised towards the close of the Bronze Period, it will
be desirable to give a somewhat detailed account of the entire find and
its teachings in this place.
The hoard, which may very fairly be described as the stock-in-trade of
an ancient bronze-founder, consisted of the following articles—
Both halves of the mould, Fig. 530.
5 celts cast in this mould and a fragment.
Both halves of the mould, Fig. 531.
1 celt cast in it.
One-half of a smaller mould with a portion of a lead lining adhering to
it, as kindly determined for me by Dr. J. Percy, F.R.S.
[Illustration: Fig. 531.—Harty. ½]
3 celts, more or less worn out, apparently cast in it.
2 large celts from different moulds.
2 small socketed celts from other and different moulds.
Both halves of a gouge mould, Fig. 532.
2 gouges, both from one mould, but it is doubtful whether they are from
this. See Fig. 205.
2 pointed tools, Fig. 220.
1 double-edged knife, Fig. 253.
1 single-edged knife, Fig. 260.
1 perforated disc, Fig. 503.
1 ferrule, Fig. 377.
1 part of a curved bracelet-like object of doubtful use, with small
hole near the end.
1 hammer or anvil, Fig. 211.
1 small hammer, Fig. 212.
2 pieces of rough copper.
1 whetstone, Fig. 540.
Of the largest mould itself, Fig. 530, not much need be said. The
dowels on the face of one of the halves have been much injured by
oxidation, so that the two parts of the mould do not now fit so well
together as they did originally. On the outside of each valve are two
projecting pins intended to hold the cord in position, by which the
two parts of the mould were held together when in use. As will be
seen, the mould itself is somewhat bell-mouthed. Of the ornamental
“flanches” on the celt, I have already given the history at page 108.
The instruments cast from this mould, and present in the hoard, are
five in number, four in fairly perfect condition, and one broken in two
in the middle. Though cast in the same mould, no two are absolutely
alike. Not only do they vary in width at their edges—the natural
result of one having been more freely hammered out than another—but
in the upper part, to which very little has been done in the way of
hammering or grinding since the celt left the mould, there are striking
differences. As will be seen, the mould is calculated to produce three
parallel mouldings round the mouth of each celt; but in one of the
castings only two of these mouldings are present; in another there are
three, and there is metal enough beyond to represent half the width
of another moulding. In two others the length is equivalent to nearly
another moulding, so that the celts appear to have four mouldings round
their mouths; and in the fifth celt there is a collar of plain metal
extending ⅜ inch beyond the three bands (see Fig. 113.) On comparing
this instrument with that first described, the difference in the
length above the loop is upwards of ½ inch. This difference can only
be accounted for by a difference in the arrangement of the mould and
core at the time of casting. On comparing the interior of one celt with
that of another, it is evident that the core was not produced in any
mould or core-box, as the small projecting ribs of metal left as usual
to help in steadying the haft vary in number and position. In the case
of the celt broken in two in the middle, the core has been placed so
much out of the centre that there is a large hole in the casting where
there was not room for the metal to run. The system adopted appears,
therefore, to have been much as follows.
First, the mould was tied together in proper position, and loam or clay
was rammed into it so as tightly to fill the upper part. The mould
was, secondly, taken apart—and the clay removed and probably left
to become nearly dry. Thirdly, the lower part of the clay was then
trimmed to form the core, a shoulder being left which would form the
mould for the top of the celt. The upper part of the clay would be left
untouched, beyond having two channels cut in it to allow of the passage
of the melted metal. Fourthly, the mould would be tied together again
with the prepared core inside, the untrimmed part of which would form
a guide for its due position in the mould. Fifthly, the mould would
then be placed vertically, probably by being stuck into sand, and the
melted metal would be poured down the channels. When cool the runners
thus formed would be broken off, and the fractured surfaces would be
hammered or ground. The knife found with the hoard was probably used
for cutting the channels and trimming the core. If such a process as
that which I have described were in use, it is evident that the chances
would be much against the shoulders of the clay core being always
cut at exactly the same place, and we have at once a reason for the
variation here observed.
There is another cause for slight variations in the sharpness of the
mouldings and the other details of the castings. In order to prevent
the molten bronze from adhering to the bronze mould, the latter must
have been smeared over with something by way of protection, so as
to form a thin film between the metal of the mould and that of the
casting. Modern founders, when casting pewter in brass, or even iron,
moulds,[1712] “anoint” the latter with red ochre and white of egg, or
smoke the inside of the mould; and our plumbers prevent solder from
amalgamating with lead by using lamp-black and size, or even by rubbing
it with a dock-leaf. No doubt the ancient founders had some equally
simple method, such as brushing the mould over with a very thin coat
of marl. Turning now to the second mould, Fig. 531, it will be seen
that just below the mouldings there is accidentally present a sharply
defined small recess; the impression, however, of this recess on the
celt cast in this mould is not nearly so sharp, probably in consequence
of the mould having been smeared as lately suggested. It will also be
noticed that though there is a double band of mouldings in the mould,
there is but one and a fraction on the celt itself, which is shown in
Fig. 114.
The outside of this mould is provided with three knobs to keep the
binding cord from slipping off. The other and smallest half-mould has
a single projection in the middle, like an imperfectly formed loop.
The three celts which were apparently cast in this mould show great
uniformity at their upper ends, and to the reason for this I think the
lead adhering to the mould furnishes a clue. It is evident that if, in
preparing the cores, instead of beginning by having the mould empty
and ramming clay into it, which was subsequently to be trimmed, the
founder placed a celt in the mould, its socket would act as a core-box
or mould for a clay core which would require no further trimming so far
as the part of forming the socket was concerned. On opening out the
mould this core could be withdrawn from the socket of the model celt,
and when dry would be ready for use. Perhaps in the celts with long and
not highly tapering sockets there would be a difficulty in getting out
the clay unbroken, and the process would not be found to answer; but in
the case of the small celts there would probably be less difficulty.
In this mould I think we have the remains of a celt formed of lead,
an instrument which would be utterly useless as a cutting tool, but
which might well have been made and kept as a core-box. The very fact
of its being made of another metal would prevent its being confounded
with the other castings and being bartered away; while in the first
instance a casting in lead might have been made on a wooden core, which
could probably be trimmed to the exact shape required more readily than
one of clay. I have elsewhere[1713] called attention to the fact that
wooden moulds were in use among the Ancient Britons for the casting of
coins formed of tin. Several socketed celts made of lead have from time
to time been found, though not in association with bronze-founders’
hoards, and have been a great puzzle to antiquaries. One found at
Alnwick,[1714] near Sleaford, Lincolnshire, was thought to have come
from a barrow. One found with bronze celts in the Morbihan, is in the
collection of the Rev. Canon Greenwell, F.R.S., but it is doubtful
whether it was used as a core-box. The use which I have suggested
for them is at all events one that is possible, but we must wait for
further discoveries before accepting it as the only cause for their
existence.
A mould for sword hilts found in Italy,[1715] and now in the museum at
Munich, is formed by three pieces of bronze, even the core by which the
cavity in them was produced being formed of that metal.
But that the cores were frequently if not always made of clay, and not,
as has been sometimes supposed, of metal, is proved by the numbers of
socketed celts which from time to time have been found with the cores
still in them, though this, it is true, has been the case in France
rather than in England. In the great hoard of socketed celts found near
Plénée Jugon, in Brittany, the majority were as they had come from the
mould, with the clay cores still in them, burnt as hard as brick by the
heat of the metal. I have already mentioned this fact in describing
the tool from the Harty hoard, which appears to have been used for
extracting the cores. I have also described the anvil, if such it be,
and the hammer, Figs. 211 and 212, by means of which, probably, the
edges of the celts were drawn out and hardened. I will now add that the
celt, Fig. 114, is too long and too broad at the edge for that part of
it to enter into the mould in which it was cast. This shows how much
its edge was drawn out by hammering. The final sharpening was no doubt
effected by the whetstone, Fig. 540.
[Illustration: Fig. 532.—Harty. ½]
The other mould from this hoard is almost unique of its kind. Two views
of each of its halves are given in Fig. 532. Originally there was a
loop on the back of each half, but from one this has in old times been
broken off. The arrangement for carrying the core is different from
what it seems to have been in the other moulds. There is in the upper
part of the mould when put together a transverse hole, which would
produce what may be termed trunnions on the clay core, and assist
materially in holding it in proper position during the process of
casting. From the upper surfaces of the gouges found with the mould,
it appears that there were two channels cut for the runners of metal,
one at the middle of each half of the mould, so as to alternate with
the joint of the mould through which the air could escape during the
casting process.
What appears to be part of a mould for gouges was found in the hoard of
Notre-Dame d’Or, and is now in the museum at Poitiers.
I must now return to the other examples of moulds for socketed celts
which have been found in this country.
One, with external loops on each half, like that on Fig. 532B, was
found with looped palstaves, socketed celts, and broken dagger or
sword blades, at Wilmington,[1716] Sussex, and is now in the museum
at Lewes. All these objects, as is the case in many other hoards, had
been deposited in a vessel of coarse pottery.
Another mould, found with eleven celts and fragments of weapons at
Eaton,[1717] near Norwich, has smaller and broader loops near the
top. On each side of the face of one half, a little distance from the
actual mould, and roughly following its contour, is a shallow groove,
into which fits a corresponding ridge on the counterpart. The outer
face of each half is ornamented with two slightly curved vertical
ribs, one on each side of the loop, and joined at the base by a
transverse rib. It is for casting celts about 4¼ inches long, and of
the ordinary form.
Another mould, for celts with an octagonal neck, was found on the
Quantock Hills,[1718] Somersetshire (and not in Yorkshire), and is
now in the British Museum. The halves are adjusted to each other by a
rib and groove, as on that last mentioned, and the back is ornamented
with a peculiar raised figure with three vertical lines and a straight
transverse line at the top, and two lines at the bottom running up
to the central vertical line so as to form on each side of it an
angle of about 120°. At the junction there is a ring ornament, and
two others near the angles formed with the side lines. This mould has
a transverse hole at the top like that in the gouge-mould already
mentioned.
Another mould, also in the British Museum,[1719] is for celts with
three vertical ribs on the face. This likewise has a transverse and
nearly square hole at the top, and also recesses in each half-mould,
so as to give four points of support to the core between which the
channels for the runners might be cut. On the outside, near the top,
is a loop, and near the bottom two projecting pins to retain the
string. This appears to be the mould from Yorkshire belonging to Mr.
Warburton, figured by Stukeley.[1720]
The half of another mould for celts, of nearly the same character, was
found in the Heathery Burn Cave,[1721] already so often mentioned,
and is shown in Fig. 533, for the use of which I am indebted to the
Council of the Society of Antiquaries.
Another mould was found in the fen at Washingborough,[1722] near
Lincoln. Another, from Cleveland,[1723] found with chisels, gouges,
&c., is in the Bateman Collection.
A part of another was found in a hoard at Beddington, Surrey,[1724]
and a fragment of another at Wickham Park, Croydon. This latter is
now in the British Museum.
A bronze mould for socketed celts, found at Eikrath, was in the
collection of the late Dr. Hugo Gärthe, of Cologne. Upon the outside
there are six ribs with ring ornaments at the ends, diverging from a
loop in the centre.
A bronze mould for socketed celts, ornamented with V-shaped lines, and
found at Gnadenfeld,[1725] in Upper Silesia, is in the Berlin Museum.
Another bronze mould with an external loop, also for socketed celts,
was found in Gotland,[1726] and is in the Stockholm Museum.
[Illustration: Fig. 533.—Heathery Burn. ½]
A magnificent mould for socketed celts was found in the Cotentin[1727]
in 1827. It has broad loops outside either half, with three processes
from it running up and down the mould.
A bronze mould for spear-heads was exhibited in Paris in 1878. A part
of another was in the Larnaud hoard, and is now in the museum at St.
Germain.
There were some fragments of bronze moulds in the great Bologna hoard.
The process of casting bronze instruments in loam, clay, or sand must
have been much the same as that in use at the present day; but it was
very rarely that the mould consisted of more or less than two pieces.
On a great many bronze instruments the joint of the mould is still
visible; and in some of the large hoards, such as those which have been
found in the North of France, we see the castings just as they came
from the moulds, except that the runners have been broken off. For
socketed celts there were usually two runners of metal; for palstaves
sometimes two, and sometimes only one nearly the full width of the
upper part. It is not uncommon to find castings which show that the two
halves of the mould or the flasks have slipped sideways, so that they
were not in proper position when the casting was made.
I have a palstave from a large hoard found near Tours, in which the
lateral displacement of the mould is as much as a quarter of an inch,
so that there is what geologists might term a “fault” in the casting.
The metal which has been in contact with what was the face of the mould
is smooth, and appears to have been cast against clay. A considerable
variety of patterns was in use by the founder to whom this hoard
belonged, and they appear to have been of metal and not of wood,
some of the palstaves having been apparently cast from tools already
shortened by wear.
That castings were occasionally made even from tools already mounted in
their handles is proved by the Swiss hatchet, Fig. 185.
Some portions of moulds formed of burnt clay were found with broken
palstaves, socketed celts, gouges, knives, spear-heads, daggers,
swords, lumps of metal, runners, &c., at Questembert, Brittany, and are
in the museum at Vannes.
Part of a mould for spear-heads formed of burnt clay was found in the
Lac du Bourget;[1728] but the most interesting discoveries are those
which have been made by Dr. V. Gross at the station of Mœrigen,[1729]
on the Lake of Bienne. He there found a considerable amount of the
plant of an ancient bronze-founder, all of whose moulds, however,
were either in stone or burnt clay, and not formed of metal. The
stone moulds appear to have been principally used for the plainer
articles, such as knives, sickles, pins, &c., while for articles with
irregular surfaces, or requiring cores, clay was preferred. Of clay
moulds Dr. Gross recognises two types: one formed in a single piece,
which could serve but once, and which was broken in extracting the
casting; and the other, which was composed of two or more pieces, and
which could be used over and over again. Of the first kind there were
two examples—one for a socketed chisel and the other for a socketed
knife. The form of the mould for a chisel is nearly cylindrical, with a
funnel-shaped opening at one end, at the bottom of which are two holes
leading into the interior of the mould. The clay between these two
holes forms part of a conical core. Such a mould would give the idea of
its having been formed on a model of wax on the system known as that of
_cire perdue_; but this appears not to have been really the case, for
on examination the mould itself appears to have been originally formed
of two halves, or valves, formed of fine clay, which had been well
burnt, and these when put together had been surrounded by an external
envelope of coarse clay, which held them and the core they enclosed in
their proper position. The core itself seems to have been T-shaped,
the ends of the transverse line being triangular and fitting into
corresponding recesses in the valves of the mould.
The best-preserved mould of the second kind was one for a socketed
hammer, which was also provided with a core of the same kind. It seems
to me, however, that the distinction drawn by Dr. Gross between the two
classes of moulds does not really exist, as by enveloping such a mould
as that for the hammer in a mass of clay it would be transferred from
the second class to the first.
Clay moulds for socketed-celts have been found in Hungary.[1730]
In some Scandinavian examples[1731] of what appear to have been
ceremonial axes there is merely a thin coating of bronze cast over a
clay core, but no such specimens have as yet been found in Britain.
That bronze so thin could have been cast shows wonderful skill in the
founder.
[Illustration: Fig. 534.—Stogursey. ½]
[Illustration: Fig. 535.—Stogursey. ½]
[Illustration: Fig. 536.—Stogursey. ½]
The heads and runners, jets or waste pieces, from the castings
were reserved for being re-melted, and are frequently found in the
bronze-founders’ hoards. They are of course of various sizes, but are
usually conical masses, showing the shape of the cup or funnel into
which the metal was poured, and having one, two, or more processes from
them showing the course of the metal into the mould.
Figs. 534, 535 and 536, all from the same hoard, found at
Stogursey,[1732] Somersetshire, will give a fair idea of the general
character of these waste pieces, or jets. They are shown with their
flat face downwards, or in the reverse position to what they occupied
when in the molten state, and exhibit one, two, and four runners from
them respectively. No less than fifteen of these objects were found
with this deposit—six with one runner, three with two, and six with
four.
Jets of metal, for the most part with two runners, were found with
the Westow hoard,[1733] Yorkshire, those of Marden,[1734] Kent; of
Kensington;[1735] and of Hounslow. Those from the two latter deposits
are in the British Museum.
Another waste piece, 1¾ inch long, with two runners, was found in the
Heathery Burn Cave,[1736] and is shown in Fig. 537.
A very symmetrical jet, circular, with four irregularly conical
runners proceeding from it, was in the hoard found at Lanant,[1737]
Cornwall, and is now in the Museum of the Society of Antiquaries.
Another oval head (2 inches long), with four runners from it, has much
the appearance of a sword pommel. It was found with socketed celts on
Kenidjack Cliff,[1738] Cornwall.
[Illustration: Fig. 537. Heathery Burn.]
A perforated disc, with a collar round the central hole (Fig. 503),
which at one time[1739] I regarded as a waste piece from a casting,
I have now reason to think was prepared for some special purpose, as
at least one object of this class has been found with the runners
removed, and in a finished condition. See page 403.
The conical lump of metal found with the hoard at Marden,[1740] Kent,
and described as “a very rare species of fibula,” may be the head of
metal from a casting.
Some conical funnels of burnt clay, found in the Lake-dwellings near
Laibach, have been regarded as having served to receive the metal in
the casting process.
Runners of the same character as those already described have been
found in different countries, including Denmark[1741] and Sweden.[1742]
We must now briefly consider the processes to which the castings were
subjected before being finally brought into use. Where the objects had
sockets cast over clay cores, those cores had to be removed, probably
by means of pointed tools, such as that already described under Fig.
220. Where they were solid they seem in most cases to have undergone a
considerable amount of hammering, which both rendered the metal more
compact, and to a certain extent removed the asperities resulting from
the joints in the mould. With edged tools and weapons, whether socketed
or not, the edges especially were drawn down by means of the hammer.
These hammers, as has already been shown, were occasionally themselves
of bronze, and so also were some of the anvils. It is, however,
probable that in most cases both hammers and anvils were stones, either
natural pebbles and flat slabs, or occasionally wrought into special
shapes. In South Africa at the present day the iron assegais are
wrought with hammers and anvils of stone. Judging from the unfinished
condition of the tools and weapons in some of the old bronze-founders’
hoards, and from large deposits of socketed celts having been found
with the clay cores still in them, it seems not improbable that the
founders often bartered away their castings nearly in the state in
which they came from the moulds, with only the runners broken off, and
that those who acquired them finished their manufacture themselves.
Possibly a hammering process upon the surface of the socketed
spear-heads and celts would so loosen the cores that they would fall
out or could be extracted with merely a pointed stick.
[Illustration: Fig. 538.—Kirby Moorside. ½]
[Illustration: Fig. 539.—Hove. ½]
After the hammering, the surface of most weapons and of some tools
was further polished, probably by friction with sand, or with a
rubbing-stone of grit. I have elsewhere described some of the stone
rubbers which appear to have been in use in conjunction with sand, for
the purpose of grinding and polishing the faces of different forms of
perforated stone axes, which in Britain at all events belonged to the
period when bronze was known. It is, therefore, probable that similar
rubbers were employed for grinding and polishing the faces of bronze
weapons; and the rubber shown in Fig. 538 appears to have been destined
for this purpose. It was found with several socketed celts at Keldholm,
near Kirby Moorside, North Riding of Yorkshire, and is now in Canon
Greenwell’s collection. The material seems to be trap.
No doubt many other such rubbing-stones must exist, and it is possible
that some of those which I have regarded as used for the grinding and
polishing of weapons of stone may have served for those of bronze.
Whetstones of various kinds have from time to time been discovered
in company with bronze instruments. Near Little Wenlock,[1743]
Shropshire, some spear-heads, a socketed celt, and part of a dagger
were found in 1835, and with them are recorded to have been three or
four small whetstones. In the Dowris hoard[1744] also some rubbers of
stone with convex, concave, and flat surfaces were present. In my
“Ancient Stone Implements”[1745] I have given an account of a number
of whetstones found at various places in company with bronze relics,
not unfrequently with interments in barrows, and I need not here repeat
the details. I reproduce, however, in Fig. 539 a whetstone found in a
barrow at Hove, near Brighton,[1746] with the remains of a skeleton, a
stone axe-head, an amber cup, and a small bronze dagger.
Another whetstone, shown in Fig. 540, was found with the hoard in the
Isle of Harty, and no doubt was employed by the ancient bronze-founder
for finishing off the edges of the socketed celts and gouges in which
he dealt. It is made from a sort of ragstone.
[Illustration: Fig. 540. Harty. ½]
The decoration of the surfaces of bronze implements by sunk, and in
some cases by raised lines appears to have been effected, not as a
rule by any method of engraving, but by means of punches, as already
described in Chapter III. I have in that chapter accidentally omitted
to mention two decorated bronze celts which have been figured and
described by Mr. Llewellynn Jewitt, F.S.A.[1747] They were both found
at a place called Highlow, in the High Peak of Derbyshire, about
two miles from Hathersage, and are in the possession of the Duke of
Devonshire. There seems some reason to believe[1748] that the celts
were found in a barrow accompanied by burnt bones and pottery. One
of them (6¾ inches) is flat and ornamented with lines of slightly
impressed chevrons running along it. The other (6¼ inches) is flanged
and ornamented with a similar herring-bone pattern, which in this
instance ends in a row of triangles near the edge of the celt. In some
few cases the patterns may have been engraved, and I find on trial
that there is no difficulty in engraving such parallel lines as are
frequently seen on dagger blades by means of a flake of flint. Such an
instrument suffers but little by wear, and by means of a ruler, either
straight or curved, there is no difficulty in engraving lines of the
required character in the bronze, though the lines are hardly so smooth
as if made with a chisel-edged punch.
Notches which would assist in the breaking off of superfluous pieces
of metal, such as the runners in the moulds, can readily be made with
flint flakes used as saws.
For smoothing the surface of bronze instruments flint scraping-tools
are not so efficient, as they are liable to “chatter” and to leave an
uneven and scratched surface, much inferior to one produced by friction
with a gritty rubber.
There remains little more to be said with regard to the manufacture
of the ancient bronze tools and weapons. It may, however, be observed
that the processes of hammering-out and sharpening the edges were
employed not only by those who first made the instruments, but also by
the subsequent possessors. Many tools, such for instance as palstaves,
like Fig. 65, were no doubt originally much longer in the blade than
they are at present, and have in the course of use either been broken
and again drawn down and sharpened, or have been actually worn away and
“stumped up” by constant repetition of these processes. The recurved
ends of the lunate cutting edges of many such instruments are also due
to repeated hammering-out. In some instances the broken part of one
instrument has been converted into another form—as, for example, a
fragment of a broken sword into a knife or dagger, or a palstave that
has lost its cutting end, into a hammer.