Identifying an Early Bronze-Age Pocket Lighter with OLM and SEM
Alfred F. Pawlik
The Early Bronze-age burial site of
Bornheim-Sechtem in the lower
Before the invention of matches, fire
was created by using a special toolkit. Such a “percussion
lighter” consisted of a piece of flint, a firesteel, tinder (dried
Fomes fomentarius, a fungus growing
on trees) and some spill as an inflammable matter, e.g. birch bark.
Prior to the use of manufactured iron
tools, respectively the invention of steel, iron-ores, especially marcasite
and pyrite served as an agent to create sparks. The presence of such nodules
in various sites suggests the use of this technique at least since the
Of special interest were the residues
detected on the flake’s battered Zone I. They could not be further analysed
with optical microscopes. Therefore, an analysis with the scanning electron
microscope Stereo Scan 250 was performed. Attached to the SEM was a micro
analyzer EDAX (energy-dispersive analysis of X-rays). Its qualitative and
quantitative elementary detection, displayed as histograms, indicates the
chemical composition of a sample.
The functional link between the flake tool and the hematite object was confirmed by the microwear analysis. Elementary traces of the flint were found on the hematite, and its iron could in return be detected in the battered area of the flint percuteur. Thus, the functional part of the flake tool came in contact with the iron ore. It is well known that iron ores, and especially pyrite are used to create sparks. The residues of the flake hammerstone and the hematite object obviously correspond to each other. Also, due to the fact that these artefacts are finds from a single, secure context, they could be identified as a fire making toolkit, a "prehistoric pocket lighter". We do know, of course, that Man has created and used fire since the Early Palaeolithic period. By using a combination of optical High and Low Power analysis, scanning electron microscopy and element-dispersive analysis of X-rays, the fire making tool itself has been identified for the first time.
The wear patterns, however, are
unequally developed. The comparison between the functional area of the flake
tool (Zone I) and the hematite revealed clearly that the wear is much more
intense on the flake tool than on the hematite. Compared with the heavily
battered striking area of the flint
percuteur, the few scratches on the hematite are minor. Also, the parallel
unilinear striations are clear indicators that the wear on the hematite is the
result of a single event, few strikes with the
percuteur in the same direction.
Therefore, it can be assumed that the
percuteur had been previously used on (an)other
piece(s) of iron ore, as it was also differently used as a chisel-like tool.
With regards to the fact that these artefacts were grave goods, the
interpretation of the hematite as a mere symbolic gift to the dead person
might be permitted. Perhaps the relatives decided to keep the original “fire
steel” in the world of the living where it would be of better service than in
the hereafter, while the worn flint tool could easily be replaced. Based on
his own experimental experience, the author’s opinion is that hematite is not
a very good supplier for sparks and definitely does not possess the same
quality as pyrite. The observation, that the few strikes with the
percuteur were intentionally aimed
at the small pyrite appendage, might refer to a preference of pyrite rather
than hematite. Could this event have been some sort of an “initiation”, a
transformation of a piece of meaningless iron-ore into an animated tool for
the bearer’s afterlife?
Back to top level
|