The Nature of the Source and the Manufacture of Scottish Battle-axes and Axe-hammers.

The perforated stone battle-axes and axe-hammers of Early Bronze Age Britain have been used either to interpret the status of individuals they were buried with or have been overlooked; this is especially the case with axe-hammers. Previous understandings have assumed battle-axes were purely ceremonial, while the rougher axe-hammers were neither functional nor prestigious, being too large and too crude to be prestige items. Studies of the 20th century were focused on creating a typology and understanding the manufacture and petrological sources of the stone, concluding that haphazard exploitation of stone was used to create a variety of different shapes of both implements. This paper revisits the question of how these artefacts were used. It presents the results of the first large-scale application of use-wear analysis to British Early Bronze Age battle-axes and axe-hammers, from northern Britain and the Isle of Man. Combining the results of the wear analysis with experimental archaeology and contextual analysis, it is argued that these objects were functional tools, some of which saw prolonged use that might have spanned multiple users. The evidence shows that the few implements found in burial contexts were both functional and symbolic; their inclusion in burial contexts drawing upon relational links which developed through the itineraries of these objects. It is also apparent that use and treatment were similar across all types of battle-axe and axe-hammer, with some regional variation in the deposition of axe-hammers in south-west Scotland. It is concluded that battle-axes and axe-hammers had varied and multiple roles and significances and that it is possible to discover what each artefact was used for by deploying a use-wear analysis methodology.

Section: Contextual Archaeology and Artefact Itinerariessupporting

confidence: 82%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Use and Significance of Early Bronze Age Stone Battle-axes and Axe-hammers from Northern Britain and the Isle of Man

Roy¹

2020

“…Experiments by Fenton (1984), M'Guire (1892) and Malina (1973) have shown that anything between three and twenty-five hours is required to produce an ordinary artefact, depending on the raw material used and the finish required. This part of the manufacturing process seems to have been much the same for all types of raw material and was probably accomplished with wet quartz sand on a grinding slab.…”

Section: Methods Of Manufacturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…This part of the manufacturing process seems to have been much the same for all types of raw material and was probably accomplished with wet quartz sand on a grinding slab. Experiments by Fenton (1984), M'Guire (1892) and Malina (1973) have shown that anything between three and twenty-five hours is required to produce an ordinary artefact, depending on the raw material used and the finish required. Ultramafic and nephrite axes will have taken considerably longer.…”

Section: Methods Of Manufacturementioning

confidence: 99%

A Preliminary Study of Polished Stone Artefacts in Prehistoric Southern Italy

O'Hare

1990

This paper is based on work carried out in 1984 to 1986 for an M.Phil, degree at the University of Lancaster. Virtually no work had been done on the subject for over seventy years and, with the exception of one article (Evett 1973), nothing showing the influence of the work of the Implement Petrology Committee of the Council for British Archaeology. Consequently little information was available which could be used as a basis for further research. Three problems were immediately faced: the time available in which to study artefacts in south Italian museums was severely limited; thin-sectioning could not be used; and due to lack of earlier studies data collection would have to be made blind, without reference to any formal model designed to answer previously formulated questions. These problems were all solved, and this paper outlines the development of, and theoretical and practical justifications for, my methodology, the methodology itself, its application to a sample of polished stone artefacts, the data thus obtained and their interpretation, and wider concerns such as the application of this methodology to other areas.All dates are uncalibrated C14 years BC.

“…Rare attempts to consider the stone resources of prehistoric Britain in a similar manner have focused on a distinction between flaking and pecking rocks (Shotton 1968, 482), and in particular on the properties required for use as perforated implements (Coope 1979;Fenton 1984). Crabtree (1967) in a comparable endeavour, divided north American lithics into seven categories, reserving an eighth for experimental materials such as glass, ice, and anthracite coal.…”

Section: Rock Classesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Stone Axe in Neolithic Britain

Pitts

1996

A new framework for the consideration of Neolithic axes is proposed, consisting of six rock classes defined by rock composition and working properties. The use of rock from these classes varied systematically in Britain, and reflected local geology. Flint exploitation, whose significance in the production of axes has been grossly underestimated, is considered in especial detail (with a full survey of flint mines and quarries). A major study of axe morphology is reported on. The paper includes gazetteers of caches of stone axes (many previously unpublished) and of axes found in burials.