Primitive Man Part 22

"As an additional corroboration of my ideas, I will mention a curious fact which I ascertained to exist in two sepulchres of this kind which I searched; the significance of this fact can only be explained by a hypothesis which any one may readily develop.

"Each of them contained one long polished hatchet, broken in two in the middle; the other portion of which was not found in the sepulchre.

"One is now in the Museum at Cluny, where I deposited it; the other is still in my own possession. It is beyond all dispute that they were thus broken at the time of the interment.

"Numerous hatchets broken in a similar way have been found by M. A.

Forgeais in the bed of the Seine at Paris, and also in various other spots; all of them were broken in the middle, and I have always been of opinion that they proceeded from sepulchres of a like kind, which, having been placed on the edge of the river, had been washed away by the flow of water which during long ages had eaten away the banks."

At a subsequent period, that is, during the bronze epoch, dead bodies were often, as we shall see, reduced to ashes either wholly or in part, and the ashes were enclosed in urns.

FOOTNOTES:

[26] Alexandre Bertrand's 'Les Monuments Primitifs de la Gaule.'

[27] 'Des Sepultures a l'Age de la Pierre,' pp. 15, 16. 1865.

[28] 'Le Danemark a l'Exposition Universelle de 1867.' Paris. 1868.

THE AGE OF METALS.

I.

THE BRONZE EPOCH.

CHAPTER I.

The Discovery of Metals--Various Reasons suggested for explaining the Origin of Bronze in the West--The Invention of Bronze--A Foundry during the Bronze Epoch--Permanent and Itinerant Foundries existing during the Bronze Epoch--Did the knowledge of Metals take its rise in Europe owing to the Progress of Civilisation, or was it a Foreign Importation?

The acquisition and employment of metals is one of the greatest facts in our social history. Thenard, the chemist, has a.s.serted that we may judge of the state of civilisation of any nation by the degree of perfection at which it has arrived in the workmans.h.i.+p of iron. Looking at the matter in a more general point of view, we may safely say that if man had never become acquainted with metals he would have remained for ever in his originally savage state.

There can be no doubt that the free use of, or privation from, metals is a question of life and death for any nation. When we take into account the important part that is played by metals in all modern communities, we cannot fail to be convinced that, without metals civilisation would have been impossible. That astonis.h.i.+ng scientific and industrial movement which this nineteenth century presents to us in its most remarkable form--the material comfort which existing generations are enjoying--all our mechanical appliances, manufactures of such diverse kinds, books and arts--not one of all these benefits for man, in the absence of metals, could ever have come into existence. Without the help of metal, man would have been condemned to live in great discomfort; but, aided by this irresistible lever, his powers have been increased a hundredfold, and man's empire has been gradually extended over the whole of nature.

In all probability, gold, among all the metals, is the first with which man became acquainted. Gold, in a metallic state, is drifted down by the waters of many a river, and its glittering brightness would naturally point it out to primitive peoples. Savages are like children; they love everything that s.h.i.+nes brightly. Gold, therefore, must, in very early days, have found its way into the possession of the primitive inhabitants of our globe.

Gold is still often met with in the Ural mountains; and thence, perhaps, it originally spread all over the north of Europe. The streams and the rivers of some of the central countries of Europe, such as Switzerland, France, and Germany, might also have furnished a small quant.i.ty.

After gold, copper must have been the next metal which attracted the attention of men; in the first place, because this metal is sometimes found in a native state, and also because cupriferous ores, and especially copper pyrites, are very widely distributed. Nevertheless, the extraction of copper from the ores is an operation of such a delicate character, that it must have been beyond the reach of the metallurgic appliances at the disposal of men during the early pre-historic period.

The knowledge of tin also dates back to a very high antiquity. Still, although men might become acquainted with tin ores, a long interval must have elapsed before they could have succeeded in extracting the pure metal.

Silver did not become known to men until a much later date; for this metal is very seldom met with in the _tumuli_ of the bronze epoch. The fact is, that silver is seldom found in a pure state, and scarcely ever except in combination with lead ores; lead, however, was not known until after iron.

Bronze, as every one knows, is an alloy of copper and tin (nine parts of copper and one of tin). Now it is precisely this alloy, namely bronze, which was the first metallic substance used in Europe; indeed the sole substance used, to the exclusion of copper. We have, therefore, to explain the somewhat singular circ.u.mstance that an alloy and not a pure metal was the metallic substance that was earliest used in Europe; and we must also inquire how it was that bronze could have been composed by the nations which succeeded those of the polished-stone epoch.

At first sight, it might appear strange that an alloy like bronze should have been the first metallic substance used by man, thus setting aside iron, deposits of which are very plentiful in Europe. But it is to be remarked, in the first place, that iron ores do not attract the attention so much as those of tin and copper. Added to this, the extraction of iron from its ores is one of the most difficult operations of the kind. When dealing with ferruginous ores, the first operation produces nothing more than rough cast iron--a very impure substance, which is so short and brittle that it possesses scarcely any metallic qualities, and differs but little from stone as regards any use it could be applied to. It requires re-heating and hammering to bring it into the condition of malleable iron. On the other hand, by simply smelting together copper and tin ores and adding a little charcoal, bronze might be at once produced, without any necessity for previously extracting and obtaining pure copper and tin in a separate state. This will explain how it came to pa.s.s that the earliest metal-workers produced bronze at one operation, without even being acquainted with the separate metals which enter into its composition.

We are left entirely to hypothesis in endeavouring to realise to ourselves how men were led to mix together copper and tin ores, and thus to produce bronze--a hard, durable and fusible alloy, and consequently well adapted, without much trouble, for the fabrication, by melting in moulds, of hatchets, poniards, and swords, as well as agricultural and mechanical instruments.

Bronze was endowed with all the most admirable qualities for aiding the nascent industrial skill of mankind. It is more fusible than copper and is also harder than this metal; indeed, in the latter respect, it may compete with iron. It is a curious fact that bronze has the peculiarity of hardening when cooled gradually. If it is made red-hot in the fire and is then suddenly cooled by plunging it into water, the metal becomes more ductile and may be easily hammered; but it regains its original hardness if it is again heated red-hot and then allowed to cool slowly.

This, as we see, is just the contrary to the properties of steel.

By taking advantage of this quality of bronze they were enabled to hammer it, and, after the necessary work with the hammer was finished, they could, by means of gradual cooling, restore the metal to its original hardness. At the present day, cymbals and tom-toms are made exactly in this way.

All these considerations will perhaps sufficiently explain to the reader why the use of bronze preceded that of iron among all the European and Asiatic peoples.

On this quasi-absence of manufactured copper in the pre-historic monuments of Europe, certain archaeologists have relied when propounding the opinion that bronze was brought into Europe by a people coming from the East, a more advanced and civilised people, who had already pa.s.sed through their _copper age_, that is, had known and made use of pure copper. This people, it is said, violently invaded Europe, and in almost every district took the place of the primitive population; so that, in every country, bronze suddenly succeeded stone for the manufacture of instruments, weapons and implements.

By the side of these _savants_, who represent to some extent, in ethnological questions, the partisans of the great geological cataclysms or revolutions of the globe, there are others who would refer the appearance of bronze in Europe to a great extension of commercial relations. They utterly reject the idea of any conquest, of any great invasion having brought with it a complete change in manners, customs, and processes of industrial skill. In their opinion, it was commerce which first brought bronze from the East and introduced it to the men of the West. This is the view of Sir Cornewall Lewis, the archaeologist and statesman, and also of Prof. Nilsson, who attributes to the Phoenicians the importation of bronze into Europe.

Without attaining any great result, Nilsson has taken much trouble in supporting this idea by acceptable proofs. We are called upon to agree with the Danish archaeologist in admitting that the Phoenicians, that is, the inhabitants of Tyre and Sidon went _with their s.h.i.+ps_ to procure tin from Great Britain, in order to make an alloy with it in their own country, which alloy they subsequently imported into Europe.

This is nothing but historic fancy. To this romance of archaeology we shall oppose the simple explanation which chemistry suggests to us. Our belief is that the bronze was fabricated on the spot by the very people who made use of it. All that was requisite in order to obtain bronze, was to mix and smelt together the ores of oxidised copper or copper pyrites, and tin ore, adding a small quant.i.ty of charcoal. Now, copper ore abounds in Europe; that of tin is certainly rare; and it is this rarity of tin ore which is appealed to in support of the conjecture against which we are contending. But, although tin ores are nowadays rare in Europe, except in England and Saxony, they are, nevertheless, to be met with in the centre and south of the Continent; and, doubtless, in the early ages of mankind the quant.i.ties were quite sufficient to supply the slender requirements of the dawning efforts of industrial skill. We may, perhaps, be permitted to allege that the cause of the supplies of tin ores being so poor in the centre and south of Europe, may be the fact that they were exhausted by the workings of our ancestors. Thus, at least, many of the deposits of copper, silver, and lead, have been exhausted by the Romans, and we now find nothing more than the mere remains of mines which were once very productive.

We may easily see that, in order to account for the presence of bronze in Europe during the primitive epochs of mankind, it was not necessary to build up such a framework of hypothesis as Prof. Nilsson has so elaborately raised.

To sum up the whole matter, we may say that the use of bronze preceded that of iron in the primitive industry of Europe and Asia; and that the people of our hemisphere were acquainted with bronze before they came to the knowledge of pure copper and tin; this is all that we can safely a.s.sert on the point.

It might of course have been the case that copper and tin were first used alone, and that the idea was subsequently entertained of combining the two metals so as to improve both. But the facts evidently show that, so far as regards Europe, things did not take place in this way, and that bronze was employed in the works of primitive industry before copper and tin were known as existing in a separate state.[29]

We must, however, state that in the New World the matter was different.

The Indians of North America, long before they knew anything about bronze, were in the habit of hammering the copper which was procured from the mines of Lake Superior, and of making of it weapons, ornaments and implements.

After considering these general and theoretical points, we shall now pa.s.s on to the history of the employment of bronze among men of pre-historic ages, and shall endeavour to give some description of their works for the manufacture of metals.

Facts handed down by tradition evidently show that, among the peoples both of Europe and Asia, the use of bronze preceded that of iron.

Homer tells us that the soldiers of the Greek and Trojan armies were provided with iron weapons, yet he reserves for the heroes weapons made of bronze. It seems that bronze being the most ancient, was therefore looked upon as the more n.o.ble metal; hence, its use is reserved for chiefs or great warriors. Among all nations, that which is the most ancient is ever the most honourable and the most sacred. Thus, to mention one instance only, the Jews of our own times still perform the ceremony of circ.u.mcision with a knife made of stone. In this case, the stone-knife is an object consecrated by religion, because the antiquity of this instrument is actually lost in the night of time.

Bronze (or bra.s.s) is often mentioned in the Book of Genesis. Tubal-cain, the first metal-worker of the Scriptures, who forged iron for all kinds of purposes, also wrought in bronze (or bra.s.s). This alloy was devoted to the production of objects of ornament.

We read in the First Book of Kings (vii. 13, 14), "And King Solomon sent and fetched Hiram out of Tyre. He was a widow's son of the tribe of Naphtali, and his father was a man of Tyre, a worker in bra.s.s: and he was filled with wisdom, and understanding, and cunning to work all works in _bra.s.s_."

The word _bra.s.s_ must be here understood as being synonymous with bronze, and certainly the Hebrew term had this signification.

As a specially remarkable object of bronze work, we may mention the "sea of bra.s.s" of the Hebrews, which contained 3000 measures of water.