6 ALLUSIONS TO BRONZE BY ANCIENT WRITERS. Hesiod, who is supposed to have lived about 900 B.C., and who is the earliest European author whose works have come down to us, distinctly states that iron was discovered after copper and tin. Speaking of those who were ancient, even in his day, he says that they used bronze, and not iron. τοῖς δ ̓ ἦν χάλκεα μὲν τέυχεα. χάλκεοι δέ τε οἶκοι χαλκῷ δ' εἰργάζοντο ; μέλας δ ̓ οὐχ ἔσκε σίδηρος. His poems, as well as those of Homer, show that nearly three thousand years ago, the value of iron was known and appreciated. It is true that, as we read in Dr. Smith's Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities, bronze "is represented in the Iliad and Odyssey as the common material of arms, instruments, and vessels of various sorts; the latter (iron) is mentioned much more rarely." While, however, the above statement is strictly correct, we must remember that among the Greeks the word iron (oidnpos) was used, even in the time of Homer, as synonymous with a sword, and that steel also appears to have been known to them under the name of ἀδάμας, and perhaps also of κύανος, as early as the time of Hesiod. We may, therefore, consider that the Trojan war took place during the period of transition from the Bronze to the Iron age. Lucretius distinctly mentions the three ages. He says Arma antiqua, manus, ungues, dentesque fuerunt Sed prior æris erat, quam ferri cognitus usus.* Coming down to more modern times, Eccard† in 1750, and Goguet in 1758, mention the three later ages in plain terms,§ and the same idea runs through Borlase's History of * V. 1282. + Eccard. Germanorum. De origine et moribus Goguet. De l'origine des Lois, de Arts et des Sciences. See Ch. iv. and the preface. § See Rhind in Arch. Ins. Jour. V. xiii. FINDS OF THE IRON AGE. Cornwall. Sir Richard Colt Hoare also expresses the opinion that instruments of iron "denote a much later period" than those of bronze; but M. Thomsen, the founder of the great museum at Copenhagen, was the first to apply these observations as the basis of a scientific chronology. The date of the introduction of iron into the North of Europe cannot at present be satisfactorily ascertained; nevertheless it is most likely that the use of this metal spread rapidly through Europe. Not only does it seem à priori probable that such an important discovery would do so, but it is evident that the same commercial organisation which had already carried the tin of Cornwall all over our continent, would equally facilitate the transmission of iron, as soon as that even more useful metal was discovered and rendered available. However this may be, when the armies of Rome brought the civilisation of the South into contact with that of the North, they found the value of iron already well known to their new enemies; the excellence of whose weapons indicated very considerable progress in the art of metallurgy. Nor is there any reason to suppose that arms of bronze were at that time still in use in the North, for, had this been so, it would certainly have been mentioned by the Roman writers; while the description given by Tacitus of the Caledonian weapons shows that bronze swords were no longer used in Scotland, at the time he wrote. Moreover, there are several cases in which large quantities of arms belonging to the Roman period have been found together, and in which the arms and implements are all of iron. This argument is in its very nature cumulative, and cannot therefore be fully developed here, but, out of many, I will mention a few cases in illustration. Some years ago, an old battle-field was discovered at Tiefenau, near Berne, and described by M. Jahn. On it were found a great number of objects made of iron; such as fragments of chariots, bits for horses, wheels, pieces of coats of mail, and arms of various sorts, including no less than a hundred two-handed swords. All of these were made of iron, but with them were several fibulæ of bronze, and some coins, of which about thirty were of bronze, struck at Marseilles, and presenting a head of Apollo on one side and a bull on the other, both good specimens of Greek art. The rest were silver pieces, also struck at Marseilles. These coins, and the absence of any trace of Roman influence, sufficiently indicate the antiquity of these interesting remains. Some very interesting "finds" of articles belonging to the Iron age have been made in the peat bogs of Slesvick, and described by M. Engelhardt, Curator of the Museum at Flensborg. One of these, in the Moss of Nydam, comprises clothes, sandals, brooches, tweezers, beads, helmets, shields, shield bosses, breastplates, coats of mail, buckles, swordbelts, sword sheaths, 80 swords, 500 spears, 30 axes, 40 awls, 160 arrows, 80 knives, various articles of horse gear, wooden rakes, mallets, vessels, wheels, pottery, coins, etc. Without a single exception, all the weapons and cutting implements are made of iron, though bronze was freely used for brooches and other similar articles.* In the summer of 1862, M. Engelhardt found in the same field a ship, or rather a large flat-bottomed boat, seventy feet in length, three feet deep in the middle, and eight or nine feet wide. The sides are of oak boards, overlapping one another, and fastened together by iron bolts. On the inner side of each board are several projections, which are not made from separate pieces, but were left when the boards were cut out of the solid timber. Each of these projections has two small holes, through which ropes, made of the inner bark of trees, See Lubbock in Nat. His. Rev. Oct. 1863, and Stephens in Gent. Mag. Dec. 1863. On one of the arrows were some Runic characters. I had the pleasure of visiting this interesting spot with M. Engelhardt in 1862. were passed, in order to fasten the sides of the boat to the ribs. The rowlocks are formed by a projecting horn of wood, under which is an orifice, so that a rope, fastened to the horn and passing through the orifice, leaves a space through which the oar played. There appear to have been about fifty pairs of oars, of which sixteen have already been discovered. The bottom of the boat was covered by matting. I visited the spot about a week after the boat had been discovered, but was unable to see much of it, as it had been taken to pieces, and the boards, etc., were covered over with straw and peat, that they might dry slowly. In this manner, M. Engelhardt hopes that they will perhaps, at least in part, retain their original shape. The freight of the boat consisted of iron axes, including a socketed celt with its handle, swords, lances, knives, brooches, whetstones, wooden vessels, and, oddly enough, two birch brooms, with many smaller articles. Only those, however, have yet been found which remained actually in the boat; and, as in sinking it turned partly over on its side, no doubt many more articles will reward the further explorations which M. Engelhardt proposes to make. It is evident, that this ancient boat was sunk on purpose, because there is a square hole about six inches. in diameter hewn out of the bottom; and it is probable, that in some time of panic or danger the objects contained in it were thus hidden by their owner, who was never able to recover them. Even in recent times of disturbance, as, for instance, in the beginning of this century, and in 1848, many arms, ornaments, household utensils, etc., were so effectually hidden in the lakes and peat mosses, that they could never be found again. Much interest is added to this vessel and its contents, by the fact, that we can fix almost their exact date. The boat lies, as I have already mentioned, within a few yards of the spot where the previous discoveries at Nydam were made, and as all the arms and ornaments exactly correspond, there can be little doubt that they belong to the same period. Now the previous collection included nearly fifty Roman coins, ranging in date from A.D. 67 to 217, and we cannot therefore be far wrong in referring these remains to the third century. A very similar discovery has been made at Thorsbjerg in the same neighbourhood, but in this case, owing to some chemical difference in the peat, the iron has been almost entirely removed. It may naturally be asked why then this should be quoted as an instance of the Iron age? And the answer seems quite satisfactory. All the swords, lanceheads and axe-blades have disappeared, while the handles of bronze or wood are perfectly preserved, and as the ornaments and other objects of bronze are well preserved, it is evident that the swords, etc., were not of that metal; and it is therefore reasonable to conclude that they were of iron, more especially as the whole character of the objects resembles that of those found at Nydam, and the coins, which are about as numerous as those from the latter place, range from 60 A.D. to 197; so that these two great "finds" may be regarded as almost contemporaneous. Not only are bronze weapons altogether absent from these deposits, but their forms and the character of the ornamentation are very different from those of the Bronze age; resembling in some respects Roman arms, in others they are quite peculiar, and evidently representative of northern art. From these and similar discoveries, it appears evident that the use of bronze weapons had been discontinued in the North before, probably long before, the commencement of our era. From the ease with which it could be worked, this metal was still used for brooches and ornaments; but in the manufacture of swords, lances, axes and similar implements, it had been entirely superseded by iron. |