Metalworking (rec.crafts.metalworking) Discuss various aspects of working with metal, such as machining, welding, metal joining, screwing, casting, hardening/tempering, blacksmithing/forging, spinning and hammer work, sheet metal work.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old June 10th 04, 08:36 PM
Yuri Kuchinsky
 
Posts: n/a
Default Copper Casting In America (Trevelyan)

Copper Casting In America (Trevelyan)

Greetings, all,

Here's a brief review of a new volume about Native American
copper.

_________________

_Miskwabik, metal of ritual: metallurgy in precontact
Eastern North America_, Amelia M. Trevelyan.
Lexington : University Press of Kentucky, c2004.

("Miskwabik" is an Ojibwa word for "copper".)

Description:
Miskwabik, Metal of Ritual examines the thousands
of beautiful and intricate ritual works of art—from
ceremonial weaponry to delicate copper pendants
and ear ornaments—created in eastern North
America before the arrival of Europeans. The first
comprehensive examination of this 3,000-year-old
metallurgical tradition, the book provides unique
insight into the motivation of the artisans and the
significance of these objects, and highlights the
brilliance and sophistication of the early
civilizations of the Americas. Comparing the ritual
architecture and metallurgy of the original
Americans with the ethnological record, Amelia M.
Trevelyan begins to unravel the mystery of the
significance of the objects as well as their special
functions within the societies that created them. The
book includes dozens of striking color and black
and white photographs.

Amelia M. Trevelyan is Professor and Chair of Art
History at Principia College in Elsah, Illinois.

_________________

And here's a revealing quote from the above volume, p. 15.

"Metallurgical testing and observation indicate that native
copper was primarily cold-worked in precontact times and
forged rather than cast. However, because the temperatures
necessary for melting as well as smelting copper are
comparatively low, the latter was probably a technical
possibility."

So here we see the political bias in American archaeology
laid out for all the world to see.

1. She doesn't even mention any of the available scientific
evidence indicating that, in precontact times, much copper
was cast rather than cold-worked and forged.

It may simply be plain ignorance on her part, but we
shouldn't also discount a possibility that she's
deliberately excluding any evidence that is not in accord
with her anti-Native political bias.

In any case, the name Mallory (a qualified engineer, and the
leading researcher in this area) is not mentioned in her
bibliography at all.

2. Yet she admits these things "were probably a technical
possibility". How generous of her!

So here we see the sort of an anti-Native bigotry that is
still all too common within our professional archaeological
establishment. These folks really still live in the middle
ages!

What a dark snake-pit of racism and bigotry our academic
establishment is... This never ceases to amaze me, I must
say.

This is the Dumbing-Down Crew that is hard at work to deny
the cultural achievements of Native Americans.

Regards,

Yuri.

Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.trends.ca/~yuku

A great many people think they are thinking when they are
merely rearranging their prejudices -=O=- William James

  #2   Report Post  
Old June 10th 04, 09:00 PM
Yuri Kuchinsky
 
Posts: n/a
Default Copper Casting In America (Trevelyan)


Here's something else that I've just noted about this
subject. When I said "the Dumbing-Down Crew ... hard at
work", I was actually even more correct than I thought!

Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:

Copper Casting In America (Trevelyan)

Greetings, all,

Here's a brief review of a new volume about Native American
copper.

_________________

_Miskwabik, metal of ritual: metallurgy in precontact
Eastern North America_, Amelia M. Trevelyan.
Lexington : University Press of Kentucky, c2004.

("Miskwabik" is an Ojibwa word for "copper".)

Description:
Miskwabik, Metal of Ritual examines the thousands
of beautiful and intricate ritual works of art -- from
ceremonial weaponry to delicate copper pendants
and ear ornaments -- created in eastern North
America before the arrival of Europeans. The first
comprehensive examination of this 3,000-year-old
metallurgical tradition,


What's that???

"3,000-year-old metallurgical tradition,"?

Golly gee, whoever had written this blurb doesn't even know
that this metallurgical tradition is actually 5000-year-old!

What a blooper!

Page 9 of Trevelyan's own book states,

"The Old Copper Culture was a Middle to Late Archaic
development that lasted from about 3000-1000 BC, and was
focused primarily in upper Great Lakes region."

This blurb is found in a few places on the Net, for example
at,

University Press of Kentucky
http://www.kentuckypress.com/viewboo...up=116&ID=1038

So this seems like a standard blurb.

What a bunch of turkeys... Their ignorance seems infinite.

Yuri.

the book provides unique
insight into the motivation of the artisans and the
significance of these objects, and highlights the
brilliance and sophistication of the early
civilizations of the Americas. Comparing the ritual
architecture and metallurgy of the original
Americans with the ethnological record, Amelia M.
Trevelyan begins to unravel the mystery of the
significance of the objects as well as their special
functions within the societies that created them. The
book includes dozens of striking color and black
and white photographs.

Amelia M. Trevelyan is Professor and Chair of Art
History at Principia College in Elsah, Illinois.

_________________

And here's a revealing quote from the above volume, p. 15.

"Metallurgical testing and observation indicate that native
copper was primarily cold-worked in precontact times and
forged rather than cast. However, because the temperatures
necessary for melting as well as smelting copper are
comparatively low, the latter was probably a technical
possibility."

So here we see the political bias in American archaeology
laid out for all the world to see.

1. She doesn't even mention any of the available scientific
evidence indicating that, in precontact times, much copper
was cast rather than cold-worked and forged.

It may simply be plain ignorance on her part, but we
shouldn't also discount a possibility that she's
deliberately excluding any evidence that is not in accord
with her anti-Native political bias.

In any case, the name Mallory (a qualified engineer, and the
leading researcher in this area) is not mentioned in her
bibliography at all.

2. Yet she admits these things "were probably a technical
possibility". How generous of her!

So here we see the sort of an anti-Native bigotry that is
still all too common within our professional archaeological
establishment. These folks really still live in the middle
ages!

What a dark snake-pit of racism and bigotry our academic
establishment is... This never ceases to amaze me, I must
say.

This is the Dumbing-Down Crew that is hard at work to deny
the cultural achievements of Native Americans.

Regards,

Yuri.

Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.trends.ca/~yuku

A great many people think they are thinking when they are
merely rearranging their prejudices -=O=- William James

  #3   Report Post  
Old June 10th 04, 10:49 PM
Tom McDonald
 
Posts: n/a
Default Copper Casting In America (Trevelyan)

Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:

Here's something else that I've just noted about this
subject. When I said "the Dumbing-Down Crew ... hard at
work", I was actually even more correct than I thought!

Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:

Copper Casting In America (Trevelyan)

Greetings, all,

Here's a brief review of a new volume about Native American
copper.

_________________

_Miskwabik, metal of ritual: metallurgy in precontact
Eastern North America_, Amelia M. Trevelyan.
Lexington : University Press of Kentucky, c2004.

("Miskwabik" is an Ojibwa word for "copper".)

Description:
Miskwabik, Metal of Ritual examines the thousands
of beautiful and intricate ritual works of art -- from
ceremonial weaponry to delicate copper pendants
and ear ornaments -- created in eastern North
America before the arrival of Europeans. The first
comprehensive examination of this 3,000-year-old
metallurgical tradition,



What's that???

"3,000-year-old metallurgical tradition,"?

Golly gee, whoever had written this blurb doesn't even know
that this metallurgical tradition is actually 5000-year-old!


Yuri,

I noticed that, too. However, the blurb isn't the book. From
the looks of things, the blooper was made by the person who
wrote the blurb, not Ms. Trevelyan.

What a blooper!

Page 9 of Trevelyan's own book states,

"The Old Copper Culture was a Middle to Late Archaic
development that lasted from about 3000-1000 BC, and was
focused primarily in upper Great Lakes region."


This seems to be correct, although I would have chosen to call
it the 'Old Copper Complex'.


This blurb is found in a few places on the Net, for example
at,

University Press of Kentucky
http://www.kentuckypress.com/viewboo...up=116&ID=1038

So this seems like a standard blurb.


Might could be. The blurb is wrong; Trevelyan's text is correct.


What a bunch of turkeys... Their ignorance seems infinite.


Maybe. But you haven't demonstrated either.

But I do thank you for pointing this book out to me.

Yuri.


the book provides unique
insight into the motivation of the artisans and the
significance of these objects, and highlights the
brilliance and sophistication of the early
civilizations of the Americas. Comparing the ritual
architecture and metallurgy of the original
Americans with the ethnological record, Amelia M.
Trevelyan begins to unravel the mystery of the
significance of the objects as well as their special
functions within the societies that created them. The
book includes dozens of striking color and black
and white photographs.

Amelia M. Trevelyan is Professor and Chair of Art
History at Principia College in Elsah, Illinois.

_________________

And here's a revealing quote from the above volume, p. 15.

"Metallurgical testing and observation indicate that native
copper was primarily cold-worked in precontact times and
forged rather than cast. However, because the temperatures
necessary for melting as well as smelting copper are
comparatively low, the latter was probably a technical
possibility."

So here we see the political bias in American archaeology
laid out for all the world to see.

1. She doesn't even mention any of the available scientific
evidence indicating that, in precontact times, much copper
was cast rather than cold-worked and forged.


Perhaps you could show me some of this evidence (other than the
Connor web site or the Mallery book; I can always read the
former, and have requested the latter by ILL).


It may simply be plain ignorance on her part, but we
shouldn't also discount a possibility that she's
deliberately excluding any evidence that is not in accord
with her anti-Native political bias.

In any case, the name Mallory (a qualified engineer, and the
leading researcher in this area) is not mentioned in her
bibliography at all.


Why would it be mentioned? Her book is on copper usage,
(apparently more wrt its usage as art and ceremonial usage), and
most of Mallery's book is about iron. In any case, Trevelyan
would most likely have wanted primary sources on the metallurgy,
not a book like Mallery's which quotes them.


2. Yet she admits these things "were probably a technical
possibility". How generous of her!

So here we see the sort of an anti-Native bigotry that is
still all too common within our professional archaeological
establishment. These folks really still live in the middle
ages!

What a dark snake-pit of racism and bigotry our academic
establishment is... This never ceases to amaze me, I must
say.

This is the Dumbing-Down Crew that is hard at work to deny
the cultural achievements of Native Americans.


Have you read the book? Or are you judging it by a
non-technical blurb and a few selected quotations? If the
former, good on ya; if the latter, then quityerbitchin until you
have.

Tom McDonald
  #4   Report Post  
Old June 10th 04, 10:59 PM
Martyn Harrison
 
Posts: n/a
Default Copper Casting In America (Trevelyan)

Apparently on date Thu, 10 Jun 2004 16:00:11 -0400, Yuri Kuchinsky
said:


Here's something else that I've just noted about this
subject. When I said "the Dumbing-Down Crew ... hard at
work", I was actually even more correct than I thought!


Bizarre for you to be correct, but yeah, you certainly are dumbing down the
subject quite considerably.


  #5   Report Post  
Old June 11th 04, 11:57 PM
Gary Coffman
 
Posts: n/a
Default Copper Casting In America (Trevelyan)

On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 15:36:41 -0400, Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:
Copper Casting In America (Trevelyan)

Greetings, all,

Here's a brief review of a new volume about Native American
copper.

_________________

_Miskwabik, metal of ritual: metallurgy in precontact
Eastern North America_, Amelia M. Trevelyan.
Lexington : University Press of Kentucky, c2004.

("Miskwabik" is an Ojibwa word for "copper".)

Description:
Miskwabik, Metal of Ritual examines the thousands
of beautiful and intricate ritual works of art—from
ceremonial weaponry to delicate copper pendants
and ear ornaments—created in eastern North
America before the arrival of Europeans. The first
comprehensive examination of this 3,000-year-old
metallurgical tradition, the book provides unique
insight into the motivation of the artisans and the
significance of these objects, and highlights the
brilliance and sophistication of the early
civilizations of the Americas. Comparing the ritual
architecture and metallurgy of the original
Americans with the ethnological record, Amelia M.
Trevelyan begins to unravel the mystery of the
significance of the objects as well as their special
functions within the societies that created them. The
book includes dozens of striking color and black
and white photographs.

Amelia M. Trevelyan is Professor and Chair of Art
History at Principia College in Elsah, Illinois.

_________________

And here's a revealing quote from the above volume, p. 15.

"Metallurgical testing and observation indicate that native
copper was primarily cold-worked in precontact times and
forged rather than cast. However, because the temperatures
necessary for melting as well as smelting copper are
comparatively low, the latter was probably a technical
possibility."

So here we see the political bias in American archaeology
laid out for all the world to see.

1. She doesn't even mention any of the available scientific
evidence indicating that, in precontact times, much copper
was cast rather than cold-worked and forged.

It may simply be plain ignorance on her part, but we
shouldn't also discount a possibility that she's
deliberately excluding any evidence that is not in accord
with her anti-Native political bias.

In any case, the name Mallory (a qualified engineer, and the
leading researcher in this area) is not mentioned in her
bibliography at all.

2. Yet she admits these things "were probably a technical
possibility". How generous of her!

So here we see the sort of an anti-Native bigotry that is
still all too common within our professional archaeological
establishment. These folks really still live in the middle
ages!

What a dark snake-pit of racism and bigotry our academic
establishment is... This never ceases to amaze me, I must
say.

This is the Dumbing-Down Crew that is hard at work to deny
the cultural achievements of Native Americans.


Realize that casting is primarily a technique used for cheap mass
produced items. It allows relatively low skilled workers to produce
large numbers of relatively complex identical items. Cold working is
a much more challenging, and artistically unique, way to produce
intricate copper ceremonial items. The smith has to have a higher
level of skill than the foundryman to produce equally complex work.

Given that, it seems to me that your claims of bigotry by a art
historian are unfounded. If anything, the idea that the art objects
were produced by cold work makes them even more impressive
examples of the skill of the worker than if they were mere castings.

But that said, casting pure copper is a bitch. Porosity is the enemy,
even for modern copper founders. They charge a hefty premium for
low porosity castings. Alloying the copper to make bronze improves
matters *enormously*, and production of such alloys was a huge
technological leap forward for the casting industry.

*If* the Native Americans of millenia past made the technological
leap of producing bronze alloy, it would be a significant achievement
(as it was when Old World artisans did it). But I've seen no evidence
produced in this thread that the ancient Native Americans made
such a technological leap forward.

The artifacts described appear to all be relatively pure native copper.
As such, the *intelligent* way of working the material would have
been smithing rather than casting. So if the motive were to make
ancient Native Americans appear stupid, then claiming that they
used open casting techniques would be the method of choice to do
so. Now ask yourself which side of the argument is making that
claim.

Gary


  #6   Report Post  
Old June 14th 04, 05:20 PM
Yuri Kuchinsky
 
Posts: n/a
Default Copper Casting In America (Trevelyan)

Tom McDonald wrote:
Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:


...

1. She doesn't even mention any of the available scientific
evidence indicating that, in precontact times, much copper
was cast rather than cold-worked and forged.


Perhaps you could show me some of this evidence (other than the
Connor web site or the Mallery book; I can always read the
former, and have requested the latter by ILL).


The evidence is in the Mallery book, and I've already quoted
it here.

It may simply be plain ignorance on her part, but we
shouldn't also discount a possibility that she's
deliberately excluding any evidence that is not in accord
with her anti-Native political bias.

In any case, the name Mallory (a qualified engineer, and the
leading researcher in this area) is not mentioned in her
bibliography at all.


Why would it be mentioned?


Because it's relevant.

Her book is on copper usage,
(apparently more wrt its usage as art and ceremonial usage), and
most of Mallery's book is about iron.


Non sequitur.

Yuri.

Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.trends.ca/~yuku

A great many people think they are thinking when they are
merely rearranging their prejudices -=O=- William James
  #7   Report Post  
Old June 14th 04, 05:37 PM
Yuri Kuchinsky
 
Posts: n/a
Default Copper Casting In America (Trevelyan)

Gary Coffman wrote:

On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 15:36:41 -0400, Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:
Copper Casting In America (Trevelyan)

Greetings, all,

Here's a brief review of a new volume about Native American
copper.

_________________

_Miskwabik, metal of ritual: metallurgy in precontact
Eastern North America_, Amelia M. Trevelyan.
Lexington : University Press of Kentucky, c2004.

("Miskwabik" is an Ojibwa word for "copper".)

Description:
Miskwabik, Metal of Ritual examines the thousands
of beautiful and intricate ritual works of art—from
ceremonial weaponry to delicate copper pendants
and ear ornaments—created in eastern North
America before the arrival of Europeans. The first
comprehensive examination of this 3,000-year-old
metallurgical tradition, the book provides unique
insight into the motivation of the artisans and the
significance of these objects, and highlights the
brilliance and sophistication of the early
civilizations of the Americas. Comparing the ritual
architecture and metallurgy of the original
Americans with the ethnological record, Amelia M.
Trevelyan begins to unravel the mystery of the
significance of the objects as well as their special
functions within the societies that created them. The
book includes dozens of striking color and black
and white photographs.

Amelia M. Trevelyan is Professor and Chair of Art
History at Principia College in Elsah, Illinois.

_________________

And here's a revealing quote from the above volume, p. 15.

"Metallurgical testing and observation indicate that native
copper was primarily cold-worked in precontact times and
forged rather than cast. However, because the temperatures
necessary for melting as well as smelting copper are
comparatively low, the latter was probably a technical
possibility."

So here we see the political bias in American archaeology
laid out for all the world to see.

1. She doesn't even mention any of the available scientific
evidence indicating that, in precontact times, much copper
was cast rather than cold-worked and forged.

It may simply be plain ignorance on her part, but we
shouldn't also discount a possibility that she's
deliberately excluding any evidence that is not in accord
with her anti-Native political bias.

In any case, the name Mallory (a qualified engineer, and the
leading researcher in this area) is not mentioned in her
bibliography at all.

2. Yet she admits these things "were probably a technical
possibility". How generous of her!

So here we see the sort of an anti-Native bigotry that is
still all too common within our professional archaeological
establishment. These folks really still live in the middle
ages!

What a dark snake-pit of racism and bigotry our academic
establishment is... This never ceases to amaze me, I must
say.

This is the Dumbing-Down Crew that is hard at work to deny
the cultural achievements of Native Americans.


Realize that casting is primarily a technique used for cheap mass
produced items. It allows relatively low skilled workers to produce
large numbers of relatively complex identical items. Cold working is
a much more challenging, and artistically unique, way to produce
intricate copper ceremonial items. The smith has to have a higher
level of skill than the foundryman to produce equally complex work.


Yes, Gary, but an intelligent metalworker will use the
technique that is most appropriate for the situation.

Given that, it seems to me that your claims of bigotry by a art
historian are unfounded. If anything, the idea that the art objects
were produced by cold work makes them even more impressive
examples of the skill of the worker than if they were mere castings.


It would be rather impressive if the worker knew how to use
a variety of techniques.

But that said, casting pure copper is a bitch. Porosity is the enemy,
even for modern copper founders. They charge a hefty premium for
low porosity castings. Alloying the copper to make bronze improves
matters *enormously*, and production of such alloys was a huge
technological leap forward for the casting industry.

*If* the Native Americans of millenia past made the technological
leap of producing bronze alloy, it would be a significant achievement
(as it was when Old World artisans did it). But I've seen no evidence
produced in this thread that the ancient Native Americans made
such a technological leap forward.


The Native Americans of millennia past certainly knew how to
produce bronze alloys. There's plenty of evidence of this in
S America, for example, and in Mexico.

It's also an interesting subject if the ancient Native
Americans of the Great Lakes area knew how to produce bronze
alloys. I don't exclude this possibility but, at this time,
the evidence seems to be lacking. Nobody has investigated
this possibility before, no doubt because of a racist bias
in N American archaeology.

The artifacts described appear to all be relatively pure native copper.
As such, the *intelligent* way of working the material would have
been smithing rather than casting.


Not always. See above.

So if the motive were to make
ancient Native Americans appear stupid, then claiming that they
used open casting techniques would be the method of choice to do
so. Now ask yourself which side of the argument is making that
claim.

Gary


Best regards,

Yuri.

Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.trends.ca/~yuku -=O=-
Toronto

But scientists, who ought to know
Assure us that it must be so.
Oh, let us never, never doubt
What nobody is sure about.
-- Hilaire Belloc
  #8   Report Post  
Old June 14th 04, 10:51 PM
MIB529
 
Posts: n/a
Default Copper Casting In America (Trevelyan)

Yeah, she's definitely more racist than the white-god junkies.

Yuri Kuchinsky wrote in message ...
Copper Casting In America (Trevelyan)

Greetings, all,

Here's a brief review of a new volume about Native American
copper.

_________________

_Miskwabik, metal of ritual: metallurgy in precontact
Eastern North America_, Amelia M. Trevelyan.
Lexington : University Press of Kentucky, c2004.

("Miskwabik" is an Ojibwa word for "copper".)

Description:
Miskwabik, Metal of Ritual examines the thousands
of beautiful and intricate ritual works of art?from
ceremonial weaponry to delicate copper pendants
and ear ornaments?created in eastern North
America before the arrival of Europeans. The first
comprehensive examination of this 3,000-year-old
metallurgical tradition, the book provides unique
insight into the motivation of the artisans and the
significance of these objects, and highlights the
brilliance and sophistication of the early
civilizations of the Americas. Comparing the ritual
architecture and metallurgy of the original
Americans with the ethnological record, Amelia M.
Trevelyan begins to unravel the mystery of the
significance of the objects as well as their special
functions within the societies that created them. The
book includes dozens of striking color and black
and white photographs.

Amelia M. Trevelyan is Professor and Chair of Art
History at Principia College in Elsah, Illinois.

_________________

And here's a revealing quote from the above volume, p. 15.

"Metallurgical testing and observation indicate that native
copper was primarily cold-worked in precontact times and
forged rather than cast. However, because the temperatures
necessary for melting as well as smelting copper are
comparatively low, the latter was probably a technical
possibility."

So here we see the political bias in American archaeology
laid out for all the world to see.

1. She doesn't even mention any of the available scientific
evidence indicating that, in precontact times, much copper
was cast rather than cold-worked and forged.

It may simply be plain ignorance on her part, but we
shouldn't also discount a possibility that she's
deliberately excluding any evidence that is not in accord
with her anti-Native political bias.

In any case, the name Mallory (a qualified engineer, and the
leading researcher in this area) is not mentioned in her
bibliography at all.

2. Yet she admits these things "were probably a technical
possibility". How generous of her!

So here we see the sort of an anti-Native bigotry that is
still all too common within our professional archaeological
establishment. These folks really still live in the middle
ages!

What a dark snake-pit of racism and bigotry our academic
establishment is... This never ceases to amaze me, I must
say.

This is the Dumbing-Down Crew that is hard at work to deny
the cultural achievements of Native Americans.

Regards,

Yuri.

Yuri Kuchinsky -=O=- http://www.trends.ca/~yuku

A great many people think they are thinking when they are
merely rearranging their prejudices -=O=- William James

  #9   Report Post  
Old June 15th 04, 05:42 AM
Seppo Renfors
 
Posts: n/a
Default Copper Casting In America (Trevelyan)



Tom McDonald wrote:

Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:

[..]

1. She doesn't even mention any of the available scientific
evidence indicating that, in precontact times, much copper
was cast rather than cold-worked and forged.


Perhaps you could show me some of this evidence (other than the
Connor web site or the Mallery book; I can always read the
former, and have requested the latter by ILL).


"Show me where, except the evidence of it" statement by Tom. So, if
one was to show another source than those he has excluded (which I
have done a while ago already), then he could add that to the list of
"except...", I presume!


[..]
--
SIR - Philosopher unauthorised
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The one who is educated from the wrong books is not educated, he is
misled.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
  #10   Report Post  
Old June 15th 04, 06:29 AM
Seppo Renfors
 
Posts: n/a
Default Copper Casting In America (Trevelyan)



Gary Coffman wrote:

On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 15:36:41 -0400, Yuri Kuchinsky wrote:
Copper Casting In America (Trevelyan)


[..]

So here we see the sort of an anti-Native bigotry that is
still all too common within our professional archaeological
establishment. These folks really still live in the middle
ages!

What a dark snake-pit of racism and bigotry our academic
establishment is... This never ceases to amaze me, I must
say.

This is the Dumbing-Down Crew that is hard at work to deny
the cultural achievements of Native Americans.


Realize that casting is primarily a technique used for cheap mass
produced items. It allows relatively low skilled workers to produce
large numbers of relatively complex identical items. Cold working is
a much more challenging, and artistically unique, way to produce
intricate copper ceremonial items. The smith has to have a higher
level of skill than the foundryman to produce equally complex work.

Given that, it seems to me that your claims of bigotry by a art
historian are unfounded. If anything, the idea that the art objects
were produced by cold work makes them even more impressive
examples of the skill of the worker than if they were mere castings.


Whilst there is little argument with that, it is still illogical to
believe that casting wasn't done. Each maker of jewellery, ceremonial
items would have ended up with "scraps" of copper. It is unlikely they
would have simply been thrown away. The annealing of copper would
bring it to melting temperature often enough for smaller thinner bits.
It suggests a very likely occurrence that they did melt copper, if for
no other reason than to make bigger pieces out of the small scraps and
off-cuts. This they would again cold work another time.

But that said, casting pure copper is a bitch. Porosity is the enemy,
even for modern copper founders. They charge a hefty premium for
low porosity castings. Alloying the copper to make bronze improves
matters *enormously*, and production of such alloys was a huge
technological leap forward for the casting industry.

*If* the Native Americans of millenia past made the technological
leap of producing bronze alloy, it would be a significant achievement
(as it was when Old World artisans did it). But I've seen no evidence
produced in this thread that the ancient Native Americans made
such a technological leap forward.


IIRC silver is found in with copper deposits in the Great Lakes area
and it has a melting point a bit lower lower than copper. It is likely
they could have used a silver/copper alloy or "bronze". If the
minerals co-exist then there is no need for "mixing", it is automatic
as with arsenic/copper deposits.

The artifacts described appear to all be relatively pure native copper.
As such, the *intelligent* way of working the material would have
been smithing rather than casting. So if the motive were to make
ancient Native Americans appear stupid, then claiming that they
used open casting techniques would be the method of choice to do
so. Now ask yourself which side of the argument is making that
claim.


You see, the thing is that cold working something doesn't require
"technology", where melting/smelting does. It is the implied lack of
technology where the suggested prejudices arise from.

--
SIR - Philosopher unauthorised
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The one who is educated from the wrong books is not educated, he is
misled.
-----------------------------------------------------------------


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Determining Geologic Sources of Native American Copper Yuri Kuchinsky Metalworking 92 June 23rd 04 05:21 PM
Copper plating Dan Caster Metalworking 5 July 24th 03 01:04 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:09 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2017 DIYbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about DIY & home improvement"

 

Copyright © 2017