Sold for $482,000 inclusive of Buyer's Premium

Tim Simmons · 7th June 2009, 11:05 AM

Just to prick this topic a little- here is an extract from "Miskwabik- Metal of Ritual, Amelia M. Trevelyan, The University Press Of Kentucky" Which mentions the history of denial about Native American metalwork from the North East, all be it that the book is about copper. The general idea is that work was fashioned from "float copper" the copper was not just picked up in the top layer of soil but obtained from extensive mining. Much of the copper had to be extracted from a surounding matrix of stone and spoil by fire. Okay this is not stricktly smelting ore but shows an understanding of the concept. One has to assume that indeed a degree of smelting may have occured in this process. I see a similarity to Brass in sub-saharan Africa inspite of a great deal of evidence in both cases.

As to iron in the Pacific North West could it be a similar situation? very small scale ritual production? again as in the case for Brass in sub-saharan Africa, native production being replaced by more easy to come by trade iron. The maturity of artistic expression and forge work seen in PNW iron work makes me think of a strong tradition only to decline with contact and trade.

Just food for thought I am not a qualifide acedemic.

lemmythesmith · 7th June 2009, 12:35 PM

Hi all, there's some interesting info and pics here....

http://www.livinglandscapes.bc.ca/up...gger/app2.html

fearn · 7th June 2009, 08:05 PM

Hi All,

Couple of historical notes, somewhat off topic:

There was indigenous ironworking going on in the Arctic--the Greenland Arctic. Bits of the Cape York Meteorite (which landed on the Cape York Peninsula, NW Greenland roughly 10,000 years ago) were being cut off and cold forged into blades at least 1000 years ago (ref: McGhee, Ancient People of the Arctic, 2001). The meteorite is currently at the American Museum of Natural History (AMNH link)

I'm still looking for images of these blades, but I suspect that they would have been small tools, rather than big daggers. Cold forging means pounding a flake into shape and scraping it sharp, and that would take a lot of effort to make any sort of useful blade.

I'd also point out that the "Old Copper Complex" in the western Great Lakes area dates back to 6,000 years ago, although copper working was confined to jewelry by 3,000 years ago. Apparently, when the copper mines in Michigan were found by Europeans, they were human-worked pits with the tools still in them.

Basically, copper working isn't new to North America. The big issue to make it work is heat and technology. Copper melts at 1085 deg. C, about 200 deg C hotter than a campfire. Because of this, you need some precursor technology, such as a pottery kiln, to provide expertise and technology in getting the proper temperatures. Iron can be similarly worked in a bloomery at 950 deg C up (1070 deg. C is apparently optimal). This is lower than the temperature required to melt iron (1538 deg C), but importantly, it requires bellows and charcoal to work.

So if we're looking for a culture that has independently developed iron or copper smelting, I think it's a safe guess that they'd also have things like ceramic pots, probably bellows (or at least blow tubes), and some other technological infrastructure lying around. While I have great admiration for the skills of the tribes of the Pacific Northwest and Pacific Arctic, they weren't potters. Rather, they were carvers and weavers. Prior to Contact, I think they worked native copper lumps whenever they could find them, but they didn't start working big sheets of copper until those were available through trade with the Europeans (the copper was used to coat the hull to make it worm-proof, and ships carried extra for repairs).

So far as figuring out how old the daggers are, I think this sets an upper limit. They probably could not have been produced prior to European contact. The tribes didn't have the precursor technology necessary to get enough copper (let alone iron) to make them. However, other groups (notably the Hawaiians) learned how to work with iron quite quickly after they met their first blacksmiths, and I'd bet that's the case for the PNW as well. They weren't stupid people, after all, just limited to the technology that their local environment could sustain.

My 0.00002 cents,

F

Tim Simmons · 8th June 2009, 08:52 AM

Good points Fearn. I think the idea of oxygenating a fire is not hard to grasp even if an area is not known for ceramic production. One just has to think of the low fired ceramic wares from Africa, often fired on an open fire or smouldering dung fire. Yet we see African smelting of iron from a hole in the ground, the fire oxygenated from simple bag bellows. I would imagine simple smelting sites like these would present problems for archaeologists to differentiate from domestic hreaths? The picture is from "Kwakiul Art, Audrey Hawthorn, University of Washington Press. Perhaps inspired by European design or not? but I cannot believe that people who make such splendid articulated masks would have problems arriving at a form of bellows.

fearn · 9th June 2009, 04:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tim Simmons

Good points Fearn. I think the idea of oxygenating a fire is not hard to grasp even if an area is not known for ceramic production. One just has to think of the low fired ceramic wares from Africa, often fired on an open fire or smouldering dung fire. Yet we see African smelting of iron from a hole in the ground, the fire oxygenated from simple bag bellows. I would imagine simple smelting sites like these would present problems for archaeologists to differentiate from domestic hreaths? The picture is from "Kwakiul Art, Audrey Hawthorn, University of Washington Press. Perhaps inspired by European design or not? but I cannot believe that people who make such splendid articulated masks would have problems arriving at a form of bellows.

Hi Tim,

I agree that once you point out the problem and solution, they would be fully capable of understanding. However, there are a bunch of lessons that you have to learn to work iron, including:

1. Rocks melt/ become flexible with heat. They knew that heat-treating chert and other stones made them more workable for knapping, but the idea that things become more flexible with heat is more applicable to wood than stone.
2. That it's useful to make super-hot fires. This is the pottery lesson.
3. That charcoal is useful for making super-hot fires.
4. That copper can be melted in super-hot fires.
5. That bellows, blow-tubes, or other gizmos help make fires hotter--I'm sure they knew about blowing on flames, but that sustained air flow thing is tricky.
6. That furnaces help make really hot fires.
7. (The trickier part) that if you heat up ocher or other iron ore in a charcoal furnace with a draft, you get this stuff that, if you pound it repeatedly under heat in the proper fashion, turns out to be really useful--iron.

That's a lot to learn from scratch. I think it was easier in Eurasia and Africa because there was so much trade in ideas going around that one tribe didn't have to make all of the discoveries in order to make iron. They could borrow or steal from others.

Now, assuming you don't know about iron or even melting and molding copper. How do you know that there's something called iron that's out there and worth having, let alone discover all those steps and put them together? However, once you've seen iron and steel, it's not hard to learn how to make it.

F

VANDOO · 9th June 2009, 03:12 PM

PURE GOLD, PURE SILVER AS WELL AS PURE COPPER NUGETS CAN BE FOUND IN RIVERS AND STREAMS OR DUG FROM ROCKS IN SEVERAL AREAS OF THE AMERICAS. CONSIDERING THE METAL WORK THAT WAS DONE IN PRECOLUMBIAN AMERICA NORTH AND SOUTH WHICH IS OBVIOUS IN THE MANY ARTEFACTS FOUND IN MUSEUMS MANY OF WHICH WERE DUG BY ARCHEOLOGISTS THERE CAN BE NO DOUBT THAT METAL WORK WAS DONE OVER A LONG PERIOD AND OVER A LARGE AREA.THE LARGER CIVILIZATIONS (SUCH AS THE MOUND BUILDERS, AZTECK, INCA, MAYA) NO DOUBT SENT OUT PARTYS TO EXPLORE AND TRADE OVER LARGE AREAS IN ANCIENT TIMES SO THEIR TECKNOLOGY WOULD HAVE SPREAD.
THERE ARE ARTEFACTS IN GOLD, SILVER,COPPER AND BRONZE SO PERHAPS THERE WAS RUDIMENTRY IRON WORKING BUT IRON UNLIKE THE ABOVE METALS IS SELDOM FOUND IN NUGGET OR LARGE LUMPS EXCEPT IN METEORITES. THAT WOULD HAVE MADE IT MORE DIFFICULT TO REFINE THAN THE OTHERS PLUS THE HIGHER HEAT REQUIRED SO PERHAPS IF ANY ARTEFACTS WERE MADE OF IT THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN SMALL PERHAPS AMULETS AND NO DOUBT WOULD HAVE RUSTED AWAY. I AM SURE IF ANY OF THE METAL WORKERS OF THE DAY CAME ACROSS IRON THEY WOULD HAVE EXPERIMENTED WITH IT AS THEY DID WITH OTHER METALS.
I WONDER IF ANY ARCHEOLOGICAL DIGGS HAVE FOUND RUST IN ANY OF THE BURIALS THAT HAVE BEEN EXCAVATED?

I AGREE THE IRON OR STEEL KNIVES THAT STARTED THIS THREAD ARE MORE LIKELY AFTER CONTACT WAS MADE, WHICH CAN COVER QUITE A LONG PERIOD AND DIFFERENT POSSIBILITYS AS TO WHO VISITED THE AMERICAS BEFORE COLUMBUS. CHINESE, AFRICANS,PHONECIANS,VIKINGS, EGYPTIANS AMONG OTHER POSSIBILITYS.

JUST MY 2 CENTS WORTH

David · 9th June 2009, 06:08 PM

If we can count on oral tradition at all (and granted, it can be questionable at times) the "Killer Whale" dagger i posted in post #14 goes back 10 generations. If we count a generation as 20 yrs. that would place it's origins in the very beginning of the 1800's. If we look at the very competent crafting of this blade though, it is clear that the Tlingit did not learn to forge like this over night, so i think we need to look just a bit further back than that date for the introduction of this art form to the tribes.
I agree with Barry that we don't necessarily need to link this to the first European encounters. Chinese or other Asian explorers may well have made the voyage (or trek) across the Bering Strait years before the English or even the Russians arrived, though if the 1741 date for Russian encounters is correct blades like this may well have been made before the end of the 18th century.

ThePepperSkull · 11th March 2010, 03:49 AM

I never knew there was such magnificent ethnographic blade work done in my neck of the woods! this is fantastic!

David · 9th June 2009, 02:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fearn

So if we're looking for a culture that has independently developed iron or copper smelting, I think it's a safe guess that they'd also have things like ceramic pots, probably bellows (or at least blow tubes), and some other technological infrastructure lying around. While I have great admiration for the skills of the tribes of the Pacific Northwest and Pacific Arctic, they weren't potters. Rather, they were carvers and weavers.

I would think that this would have less to do with available technology and more that it might be a real bitch to dig clay out of the perma-frost. They were carvers and weavers based on available resources.

8th June 2009, 08:52 AM	#4
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,844	Good points Fearn. I think the idea of oxygenating a fire is not hard to grasp even if an area is not known for ceramic production. One just has to think of the low fired ceramic wares from Africa, often fired on an open fire or smouldering dung fire. Yet we see African smelting of iron from a hole in the ground, the fire oxygenated from simple bag bellows. I would imagine simple smelting sites like these would present problems for archaeologists to differentiate from domestic hreaths? The picture is from "Kwakiul Art, Audrey Hawthorn, University of Washington Press. Perhaps inspired by European design or not? but I cannot believe that people who make such splendid articulated masks would have problems arriving at a form of bellows. Attached Images

7th June 2009, 11:05 AM	#1
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,844	Ritual use. Just to prick this topic a little- here is an extract from "Miskwabik- Metal of Ritual, Amelia M. Trevelyan, The University Press Of Kentucky" Which mentions the history of denial about Native American metalwork from the North East, all be it that the book is about copper. The general idea is that work was fashioned from "float copper" the copper was not just picked up in the top layer of soil but obtained from extensive mining. Much of the copper had to be extracted from a surounding matrix of stone and spoil by fire. Okay this is not stricktly smelting ore but shows an understanding of the concept. One has to assume that indeed a degree of smelting may have occured in this process. I see a similarity to Brass in sub-saharan Africa inspite of a great deal of evidence in both cases. As to iron in the Pacific North West could it be a similar situation? very small scale ritual production? again as in the case for Brass in sub-saharan Africa, native production being replaced by more easy to come by trade iron. The maturity of artistic expression and forge work seen in PNW iron work makes me think of a strong tradition only to decline with contact and trade. Just food for thought I am not a qualifide acedemic. Attached Images

7th June 2009, 12:35 PM	#2
lemmythesmith Member Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 93	Hi all, there's some interesting info and pics here.... http://www.livinglandscapes.bc.ca/up...gger/app2.html

7th June 2009, 08:05 PM	#3
fearn Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 1,247	Hi All, Couple of historical notes, somewhat off topic: There was indigenous ironworking going on in the Arctic--the Greenland Arctic. Bits of the Cape York Meteorite (which landed on the Cape York Peninsula, NW Greenland roughly 10,000 years ago) were being cut off and cold forged into blades at least 1000 years ago (ref: McGhee, Ancient People of the Arctic, 2001). The meteorite is currently at the American Museum of Natural History (AMNH link) I'm still looking for images of these blades, but I suspect that they would have been small tools, rather than big daggers. Cold forging means pounding a flake into shape and scraping it sharp, and that would take a lot of effort to make any sort of useful blade. I'd also point out that the "Old Copper Complex" in the western Great Lakes area dates back to 6,000 years ago, although copper working was confined to jewelry by 3,000 years ago. Apparently, when the copper mines in Michigan were found by Europeans, they were human-worked pits with the tools still in them. Basically, copper working isn't new to North America. The big issue to make it work is heat and technology. Copper melts at 1085 deg. C, about 200 deg C hotter than a campfire. Because of this, you need some precursor technology, such as a pottery kiln, to provide expertise and technology in getting the proper temperatures. Iron can be similarly worked in a bloomery at 950 deg C up (1070 deg. C is apparently optimal). This is lower than the temperature required to melt iron (1538 deg C), but importantly, it requires bellows and charcoal to work. So if we're looking for a culture that has independently developed iron or copper smelting, I think it's a safe guess that they'd also have things like ceramic pots, probably bellows (or at least blow tubes), and some other technological infrastructure lying around. While I have great admiration for the skills of the tribes of the Pacific Northwest and Pacific Arctic, they weren't potters. Rather, they were carvers and weavers. Prior to Contact, I think they worked native copper lumps whenever they could find them, but they didn't start working big sheets of copper until those were available through trade with the Europeans (the copper was used to coat the hull to make it worm-proof, and ships carried extra for repairs). So far as figuring out how old the daggers are, I think this sets an upper limit. They probably could not have been produced prior to European contact. The tribes didn't have the precursor technology necessary to get enough copper (let alone iron) to make them. However, other groups (notably the Hawaiians) learned how to work with iron quite quickly after they met their first blacksmiths, and I'd bet that's the case for the PNW as well. They weren't stupid people, after all, just limited to the technology that their local environment could sustain. My 0.00002 cents, F

9th June 2009, 03:12 PM	#6
VANDOO (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: OKLAHOMA, USA Posts: 3,138	PURE GOLD, PURE SILVER AS WELL AS PURE COPPER NUGETS CAN BE FOUND IN RIVERS AND STREAMS OR DUG FROM ROCKS IN SEVERAL AREAS OF THE AMERICAS. CONSIDERING THE METAL WORK THAT WAS DONE IN PRECOLUMBIAN AMERICA NORTH AND SOUTH WHICH IS OBVIOUS IN THE MANY ARTEFACTS FOUND IN MUSEUMS MANY OF WHICH WERE DUG BY ARCHEOLOGISTS THERE CAN BE NO DOUBT THAT METAL WORK WAS DONE OVER A LONG PERIOD AND OVER A LARGE AREA.THE LARGER CIVILIZATIONS (SUCH AS THE MOUND BUILDERS, AZTECK, INCA, MAYA) NO DOUBT SENT OUT PARTYS TO EXPLORE AND TRADE OVER LARGE AREAS IN ANCIENT TIMES SO THEIR TECKNOLOGY WOULD HAVE SPREAD. THERE ARE ARTEFACTS IN GOLD, SILVER,COPPER AND BRONZE SO PERHAPS THERE WAS RUDIMENTRY IRON WORKING BUT IRON UNLIKE THE ABOVE METALS IS SELDOM FOUND IN NUGGET OR LARGE LUMPS EXCEPT IN METEORITES. THAT WOULD HAVE MADE IT MORE DIFFICULT TO REFINE THAN THE OTHERS PLUS THE HIGHER HEAT REQUIRED SO PERHAPS IF ANY ARTEFACTS WERE MADE OF IT THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN SMALL PERHAPS AMULETS AND NO DOUBT WOULD HAVE RUSTED AWAY. I AM SURE IF ANY OF THE METAL WORKERS OF THE DAY CAME ACROSS IRON THEY WOULD HAVE EXPERIMENTED WITH IT AS THEY DID WITH OTHER METALS. I WONDER IF ANY ARCHEOLOGICAL DIGGS HAVE FOUND RUST IN ANY OF THE BURIALS THAT HAVE BEEN EXCAVATED? I AGREE THE IRON OR STEEL KNIVES THAT STARTED THIS THREAD ARE MORE LIKELY AFTER CONTACT WAS MADE, WHICH CAN COVER QUITE A LONG PERIOD AND DIFFERENT POSSIBILITYS AS TO WHO VISITED THE AMERICAS BEFORE COLUMBUS. CHINESE, AFRICANS,PHONECIANS,VIKINGS, EGYPTIANS AMONG OTHER POSSIBILITYS. JUST MY 2 CENTS WORTH

9th June 2009, 06:08 PM	#7
David Keris forum moderator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Nova Scotia Posts: 7,211	If we can count on oral tradition at all (and granted, it can be questionable at times) the "Killer Whale" dagger i posted in post #14 goes back 10 generations. If we count a generation as 20 yrs. that would place it's origins in the very beginning of the 1800's. If we look at the very competent crafting of this blade though, it is clear that the Tlingit did not learn to forge like this over night, so i think we need to look just a bit further back than that date for the introduction of this art form to the tribes. I agree with Barry that we don't necessarily need to link this to the first European encounters. Chinese or other Asian explorers may well have made the voyage (or trek) across the Bering Strait years before the English or even the Russians arrived, though if the 1741 date for Russian encounters is correct blades like this may well have been made before the end of the 18th century.

11th March 2010, 03:49 AM	#8
ThePepperSkull Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 338	I never knew there was such magnificent ethnographic blade work done in my neck of the woods! this is fantastic!