Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T19:22:11.304Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Scriber, Graver, Scorper, Tracer: notes on Experiments in Bronzeworking Technique

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 September 2014

P. R. Lowery
Affiliation:
Taena Workshop, Whitley Court, Upton St Leonards, Gloucester
R. D. A. Savage
Affiliation:
Gloucestershire College of Art and Design, Pittville, Cheltenham
R. L. Wilkins
Affiliation:
Institute of Archaeology, 35 Beaumont Street, Oxford

Extract

In descriptions in the archaeological literature of the marks of workmanship characteristic of certain bronze objects of the insular Iron Age, confusion exists concerning terminology and possibly (though the imprecision of wording makes it difficult to be sure without re-examination of individual pieces) concerning technology also. Macrophotographs are seldom provided to illustrate discussion of Iron Age bronzework, even when marks of workmanship or supposed techniques of manufacture are cited as chronological or cultural symptoms, so that the confusion has been able to multiply and is now endemic in work in English in the field; individual publications need not be listed in this connection. In the present paper we illustrate, describe and as far as possible distinguish one series of tool marks experimentally produced, with notes on the methods used to produce it, in the hope of making clear the need for further experimental studies and an agreed descriptive terminology. We have chosen as the subject of the study a set of marks which illustrate some ideas associated with the so-called ‘rocked graver’ technique which have been specially liable to confusion. Since our intention is not to offer any new analysis of Iron Age bronzework, but to point out in a few details criteria which may be found useful and to offer a terminology of them, the notes are mostly concerned with the experimentally produced type series; few ancient objects are cited (as examples only, not necessarily insular, and with no implication that other ancient examples of the use of the same technique do not exist) and only two are illustrated, though references to accessible illustrations of others are given.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Prehistoric Society 1971

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Alcock, L., 1963. ‘Celtic Archaeology and Art’, in Davies, E. (ed.), Celtic Studies in Wales, 346. Cardiff.Google Scholar
Atkinson, R. J. C. and Piggott, S., 1955. ‘The Torrs Chamfrein’, Arch. XCVI, 197235.Google Scholar
‘G.A.B.’, (n.d.). Practical Engraving on Metal. 3rd ed., London.Google Scholar
SirFox, Cyril, 1958. Pattern and Purpose, Cardiff.Google Scholar
Hasluck, P. N., 1903. Engraving Metals, London.Google Scholar
Hodges, H., 1964. Artifacts, London.Google Scholar
Jacobsthal, P., 1944. Early Celtic Art, Oxford.Google Scholar
Jope, E. M., 1954. ‘An Iron Age Decorated Sword-Scabbard from the River Bann at Toome’, UJA, Ser. 3, 18, 8191.Google Scholar
Jope, E. M., 1961. ‘Daggers of the Early Iron Age in Britain’, PPS, XXVII, 307–43.Google Scholar
Maryon, H., 1938a. ‘Some Prehistoric Metalworkers' Tools’, Ant. J., XVIII, 243–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maryon, H., 1938b. ‘The Technical Methods of the Irish Smiths in the Bronze and Early Iron Ages’, PRIA, 44.C.7, Dublin.Google Scholar
Maryon, H., 1949. ‘Metalworking in the Ancient World’, American Journal of Archaeology, 53, 93125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maryon, H., 1954. Metalwork and Enamelling. 3rd ed., London.Google Scholar
Oldeberg, A., 1943. Metallteknik under Förhistorisk Tid, II, Lund.Google Scholar