Paleolithic Tool? (or just a rock :/)

witty

Hey

Firstly, I'm no archaeologist . I was walking around the poulaphouca reservoir (Blessington Lakes) last weekend and came across this oddly shape stone. The lake is in quite far at the moment and this was just lying among some rocks which would normally be covered with water. Just to satisfy my curiosity I thought I'd post some pics (below) to get some informed views as to whether this is something interesting ... or just a rock.

Thanks!
D

img_col.jpg

HellFireClub

I'm no specialist or achaeologist but my first reaction after seeing the pics is that it is a stone age tool of some kind, but that's just a gut feeling!

sensibleken

hard to say. but where did you find it, that might give you some clues. was it coastal or inland. any significant sites nearby?

boneless

It doesn't conform to any Meso or Neolithic tool that I have ever come across. Mind you, I am not a lithics person... it appears to me to be schist type stone. This occurs in parts of Wicklow I think, so gut reaction is that it is natural.

Irishlad11

Are the edges sharp, as if they have been worked????.......hard to say if it is a tool as it doesn't look like any Mesolithic/Neolithic tool I've ever seen. Think most tools back then were either made of flint, chert, procellenite etc - not normal rock

witty

Thanks for all the replies. So to answer a few questions ... There are sharp edges. The wider end appears to taper to an edge similar to a chisel. The other end to a point. It's hard for me to say whether these have been worked. There is obvious chipping at the chiseled end. Whether this is a result of manual working or the result of weathering is hard to say. I came across it on the shore of the lake which would've been the shore of the river Liffey before the reservoir was built. Where it was found is usually under-water. The lake is really low at the moment. Lowest I've seen it anyway. So where I found it was inaccessible to me before. The only significant sites that I know of close-by are three long cists (Britonstown) which date to the iron age (I think). To me it appears tool like. However, all my limited knowledge of what conforms to a stone age tool such as typical materials etc. conflicts with this and makes me think that it's natural. There are definite edges and points, as well as a perfectly flat region at the bottom as if it has been ground down. Also, ergonomically it fits to hand perfectly.

Irishlad11

witty wrote: »

Thanks for all the replies. So to answer a few questions ... There are sharp edges. The wider end appears to taper to an edge similar to a chisel. The other end to a point. It's hard for me to say whether these have been worked. There is obvious chipping at the chiseled end. Whether this is a result of manual working or the result of weathering is hard to say. I came across it on the shore of the lake which would've been the shore of the river Liffey before the reservoir was built. Where it was found is usually under-water. The lake is really low at the moment. Lowest I've seen it anyway. So where I found it was inaccessible to me before. The only significant sites that I know of close-by are three long cists (Britonstown) which date to the iron age (I think). To me it appears tool like. However, all my limited knowledge of what conforms to a stone age tool such as typical materials etc. conflicts with this and makes me think that it's natural. There are definite edges and points, as well as a perfectly flat region at the bottom as if it has been ground down. Also, ergonomically it fits to hand perfectly.

It certainly sounds promising. I'm only an archaeology student myself so I'm limited to what I know. You should take it to the National Museum or one of the university archaeology departments, they should be able to tell you if its the real deal or not

Aelfric

I can't see the photo for some reason (probably security settings on the compute I'm borrowing), but I can say that Chris Corlett of the DoEHGA has found numerous artefacts along that shore, so you should definitely report it to the NMI. Failure to report a find within 96hrs is an offence under the National Monuments Acts.

witty

Thanks Aelfric, I am aware of that. I already have contacted NMI's Duty Officer but have not received a response yet (which should also be an offense under some other act ).

I didn't know about Chris Corlett. Thanks for that information.

Wibbs

I've been interested and have collected lithics since I was a kid* and to me it doesn't look like one. It looks like a natural rock that looks useful, but that doesn't mean it is kinda thing. I'd agree with Irishlad11 and boneless in that it doesn't look like the usual mesolithic or neolithic or indeed paleolithic tool. What would be it's purpose? That would be my first question. What is the character of the source material? Would be my second. Is it easily explained by natural forces? Would be my third.

I would say however that IMHO too much focus has been aimed at flint and similar source materials. Flint in Ireland is rare as a natural outcrop and resource. Restricted to around Lough Neagh in the north(though there may be an underwater Irish sea source as you can find low quality flint nodules on the south east coast). So more inventive utilisation of local non flint materials was probably likely. Easily missed by those schooled to look for percussion bulbs and fractures and the like in flint as evidence of human industry, the way it would be in the rest of Europe where most of the literature comes from.

Quartz and quartzite was oft used as an alternative in non flint areas. As was basalt(going much further back), but they're not as easy to spot as flint/chert type tools. those materials hide their working well. Evidence of working on both sides would tend to give the game away. Obvious attempts at symmetry another tell. I'd take it along to the people recommended above and see if they can enlighten.







*Lest anyone gets concerned, any of the Irish lithics I found were before the current act and I did bring them to the attention of museums at the time(to little effect). The rest I've gathered in auctions and sold off collections overseas.

slowburner

I showed your picture to a senior archaeologist last night. Her immediate impression was that it could have been part of a shears. Although it would be hard to see how this blade could have been attached to the other.
She thought it was quite possible that the stone had been worked. The picture below is of an iron shears.
[Embedded Image Removed]

Wibbs

Shears in bronze, iron or steel, OK, in stone pretty much no way. No pretty much about it actually. Shears work by drawing one sharp thin blade against the other. This requires a straight edge on both*. While an expert knapper can create a straight edge, it's by nibbling at the existing edge to level it. It doesn't leave a thin straight profile behind the cutting surface. Plus the big diff between the materials is this; metal against metal blades will sharpen each other, stone and against stone will dull each other.



Shears/scissors came later anyway. Well after the bronze age kicked off. And as you point out SB how would one blade pivot with the other? Actually on that point the pivoting scissors we are familiar with today is a Roman invention IIRC. Previously they were spring scissors with the pivot at the base like they use in sheep shearing by hand.




*the evolution of that has a slightly curved edge on both which boosts efficiency, but requires the bendiness of metal to achieve that.

slowburner

Pretty much what I was thinking, but more informed - I just felt I had to report the archaeologist's initial impression.

witty

As I said before, I've little knowledge on this subject so I can't really add much to the discussion. However, I've enjoyed reading everyones thoughts. Thanks.

Also just to add, I still have not heard anything back from the Duty Officer at the NMI since I contacted them on June 26.

Wibbs

witty wrote: »

Also just to add, I still have not heard anything back from the Duty Officer at the NMI since I contacted them on June 26.

Sadly W in my experience not that big a shock. TBH if I or someone I knew happened upon something really important I'd approach mates of mates in the trade or go straight to someone in the media. The official route again in my experience is often a dead end and often dismissive to the point where one does wonder where they got their qualifications. Which is a real PITA as so much of our heritage has been missed, lost in someones drawer, or worst of all sold overseas. Mostly missed or mishandled.