next »

TRAILBLAZERS
for students

ArchaeoFind
Archaeology News
Articles
Browse Attachments
Calendar
Downloads
Forum
Gallery
Links
Member Map
Our News Feeds
Submit Article
Tag Cloud
Video Channel

Trailblazers
Play Phaos
Chat
Trailblazers: Virtual Tours
History's Hinge - 'Ain Jalut

[bahamawrecker]

I tend to go along with Administration with a matchbox holder, made in India. Now we must find out when matches were invented and came into use.
Bahamawrecker

[Jesus of Lubeck]

Hello Administrator, Bahama, Bart, & HH Members,

Here are the results of some of the research done on the brass bangle.  The bangle in its form and motif does not appear to have a provenance from the circum-Caribbean.  The first photo posted here is of the skeletal remains of an adult male slave who died on the island of Barbados in the late 17th century or early 18th century. The second photo is a close-up of the bangle found in the burial. The bracelets or bangles found in this slave burial and others like it in the Caribbean region, are almost entirely hand-worked, rounded, and without an applied design motif.  Bahama�s brass bangle is also very dissimilar to French and British trade bracelets found in the Atlantic trade routes.

The earliest closest physical and motif match I have so far found comes from a monograph written by of the famous English Orientalist and Arabic language scholar Edward William Lane (1801-1876) titled An Account of the Manners and Customs of the Modern Egyptians. Volume 2. Within this work there is a short chapter on female adornments from which the following quote comes. With regard to bracelets, Lane is writing about the high-end versions fashioned from gold; however, the dictates of design and material appear transferable to lower-end items made from brass:

Bracelets (asa'wir) are of diamonds or other precious
stones set in gold, or of pearls, or of gold alone. The
more common kinds are represented in an engraving
here inserted.�No. 1 is a side-view of a diamond bracelet
with a front view of a portion of the same.�No. 2
is the most fashionable kind of gold bracelet, which is
formed of a simple twist.�No. 3 is a very common, but
less fashionable kind of bracelet of twisted gold.�No. 4
is also of gold.�These bracelets of gold are pulled
open a little to be put on the wrist. They are generally
made of fine Venetian gold, which is very flexible. (pp. 362-363)

The third photo uploaded shows Lane�s schematic draft of several bracelet or open-ended bangle types.  Number 4 is the design that may be of interest to Bahama.  Lane�s bracelets were produced from gold by hand.  It is likely that a wooden or metal pattern die was used and the artisan pushed the malleable gold into the die form to produce the pattern Lane recorded in figure number 4.  Evidence of this kind of handcraft technique can be seen in Lane�s illustration because the design pattern on the bracelet is visible on both the inner and outer surface of the artifact. It is possible to work brass in this fashion, however, it requires the use of a hammer and die because the metal is correspondingly more rigid than gold.  Bahama�s bangle evidences a design pattern on only the outer surface.  The inner surface is smooth.  Some brass bracelets are formed of two pieces, the outer stamped or hand-worked piece and a smooth inner piece that is soldered onto the outer bangle�s inner surface.  If this is the case, it may be possible to see a slight solder line or bead present on the artifact. Unlike the Caribbean example from Barbados, the ends of Bahama�s bangle retain a square edge as in Lane�s example and this might suggest a middle eastern provenance that does not exclude India.  The most datable element of Bahama�s bangle would be the terminal decorations at each open end of the bangle which can not be seen in the provided photo. 

It is very hard to date this object.  Soldering techniques are almost as ancient as metallurgy itself. However the beadwork and patterns on Bahama�s bangle are very tightly grouped and precise. These linear design elements on brass pieces are not well documented and further research is needed to narrow the geographic range.  Any information on the terminal decorations, if present, would be of use.  So far gold work patterns for Alexandria, Egypt from the 19th century are the closest match, but there are still dozens of sources to consult and nothing written in this post is to be construed as an attempt to date the object or exclude a particular date.

Very interested in the match box idea.  There is a great deal of material on match boxes, the history of the match, a very serious research rabbit-hole to go down.

Best Regards to All,

Lubby

Works cited for these comments:

The Atlantic Slave Trade and Slave Life in the America�s: A Visual Record by Jerome S. Handler and Michael L. Tuite Jr.

Edward William Lane
An Account of the Manners and Customs of the Modern Egyptians. Volume 2 (1833-1835)

Herbert Maryon
85. Archaeology and Metallurgy. I. Welding and Soldering
Man, Vol. 41. (Nov. - Dec., 1941), pp. 118-124.

[Bart]

If your item is a matchbox, it will not be a 16th or 17th century artifact. Possibly mid to late 19th century, if it is of India origin, as it appears to be. How does this fit into the context of the other wreck artifacts Bahama?

Bart
************

In 1669, phosphorous was discovered - phosphorous was soon used in match heads.

In 1680, an Irish physicist named Robert Boyle (Boyle's Law) coated a small piece of paper with phosphorous and coated a small piece of wood with sulfur. He then rubbed the wood across the paper and created a fire. However, there was no useable match created by Robert Boyle.

In 1827, John Walker, English chemist and apothecary, discovered that if he coated the end of a stick with certain chemicals and let them dry, he could start a fire by striking the stick anywhere. These were the first friction matches. The chemicals he used were antimony sulfide, potassium chlorate, gum, and starch. Walker did not patent his "Congreves" as he called the matches (alluding to the Congreve's rocket invented in 1808). Walker was a former chemist at 59 High Street, in Stockton-on-Tees, England. His first sale of the matches was on April 7, 1827, to a Mr. Hixon, a solicitor in the town. Walker made little money from his invention. He died in 1859 at the age of 78 and is buried in the Norton Parish Churchyard in Stockton. (br1781- d1859)

One Samuel Jones saw Walker's "Congreves" and decided to market them, calling his matches "Lucifers". "Lucifers" became popular especially among smokers, but they had a bad burning odor.

In 1830, the French chemist, Charles Sauria, created a match made with white phosphorous. Sauria's matches had no odor, but they made people sick with a ailment dubbed "phossy jaw". White phosphorous is poisonous.

In 1855, safety matches were patented by Johan Edvard Lundstrom of Sweden. Lundstrom put red phosphorus on the sandpaper outside the box and the other ingredients on the match head, solving the problem of "phossy jaw" and creating a match that could only be safely lit off the prepared, special striking, surface.

In 1889, Joshua Pusey invented the matchbook, he called his matchbook matches "Flexibles". Pusey's patent was unsuccessfully challenged by the Diamond Match Company who had invented a similar matchbook (their striker was on the outside, Pusey's was on the inside). His patent was later purchased by the Diamond Match Company in 1896 for $4,000 and a job offer.

In 1910, the Diamond Match Company patented the first nonpoisonous match in the U.S., which used a safe chemical called sesquisulfide of phophorous.

United States President William H. Taft publicly asked Diamond Match to release their patent for the good of mankind. They did on January 28, 1911, Congress placed a high tax on matches made with white phosphorous.

http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/blmatch.htm

[Jesus of Lubeck]

Hello Bart and Bahama (as well as Administration),

Excellent summary of the history of matches Bart.  It would appear that the emergence of the modern match circa 1827 coincided with the disappearance of the personal tinder box (circa 1837).  Perhaps I may advance the idea that the brass container functioned as a tinder box - this would allow only a slight modification of Administration's observation that the container is a match box.  A tinder box would accommodate my only slight reservation about the match box identification - the brass container is neither cylindrical nor perfectly square.  Additonally, Bahama's artifact echos a leather tinder pouch in some respects.

Here is a quote from Mr. Miller Christy, an early 20th century English collector of tinder boxes:

Throughout Turkestan, northern India, Tibet, Mongolia, and central Asia generally, a special form of leather tinder-pouch, intended to be carried on the waist belt, is in general use.  Probably in the high, dry plateau of central Asia, a mere leather pouch suffices to keep the tinder dry; whereas in our moister insular climate some form of box is necessary (p. 200).

There are several possibilities for further research into the precise provenance of Bahama's tinder (match) box.  Are there any other clues that were found close to this assemblage, flints perhaps?

In any event, it may be possible to narrow down whether the object is a match or a tinder box.  If the determination is that it is a tinder box, than the artifact may predate the 19th century.

Works cited for these comments:

Miller Christy
Concerning Tinder-Boxes. Article III. - Personal Tinder-Boxes
The Burlington Magazine for Connoisseurs, Vol. 3, No. 8. (Nov., 1903),

Best Regards to All,

Lubby

P.S. I have images of 19th century leather tinder pouches and their fasteners if this is of interest.

[Bart]

Hi Lubby, tinderbox may be a possibility, but the old saw comes to the fore here, size matters. To me it seems to be quite small for the purpose. I do like the idea that it held something light though. Were the container filled with sand for example, the loops appear to be well below the midpoint of gravity, and the container appears to me that it would tip upside down easily. Perhaps the strap went down through one loop, then beneath the container and back up through the other loop, it may be much more stable. Assuming of course a leather strap was used, and it was meant to carried around the neck or hung on a belt. Assumptions can lead astray often enough.

It also seems to be gender specific, I think it is a guy thing. Imagine having to carry this thing around, what would you keep in it? Custom and culture would come into play here. For some reason, I can't picture a woman having to tote this thing everywhere.

Bart

[Jesus of Lubeck]

Hello Bart,

Very good points and comments as usual.  I agree entirely with you on the center of gravity of the object with respect to the bottom loops; however, looking at Bahama's latest set of photos, I imagined a rather elegant arrangement for the strap: the leather strap, after passing under the lower loops, then passes through the narrow brass slits on the upper sides of the artifact on each side just below the lid.  I could be interpreting the photo incorrectly though, so do not hesitate to say so.

I would be hesitant to gender-type the artifact at this point, although I have posted that the possibility should be entertained that the artifact might be associated with a female accoutrement.  Since we are moving in the match-box or tinder-box direction your point that the artifact should be associated with a male certainly pull me into your orbit.  As with the in-situ photo I posted, bracelets were also worn by males in many cultures.  Personal tinder boxes also.  In fact, Asian fashion for such objects tends to take almost purse-like forms.

I will plow through some more collections latter in the day and see what else turns up.

Best Regards,

Lubby

[Jesus of Lubeck]

Hello Bahama and Bart,

Here is another post on the on-going research into the form and style of the brass container that Bahama was gracious enough to share with HH.  We at HH are entertaining the idea that the artifact is perhaps a brass match/tinder box.  Because there is a belief that the decorative motif on the object is Asian and perhaps Indian, an effort has been made to find additional similarities in the form of the object that might give some insight into its provenance.  The research progressed along the lines that the brasswork form of the artifact echoed another material, perhaps leather.

In the last post I made, I was unable to locate any Indian or central Asian examples of leather forms close enough to suggest a strong affinity with Bahama�s find.  However, I was able to find a strong tradition of belt or strap fastened tinder and tobacco pouches.  One of the problems in linking Bahama's artifact with the central Asian leather forms, which did strongly influence metalwork as the Mongols expanded into China and the near east, is that the cover flap of the leather pouch was very often carried over into metal designs.  Additionally, I could find no example in central Asian or Indian collections of the very elegant ring and strap arrangement evident on Bahamas piece.

Then Bart posted his comments directing my attention to the center of gravity issue with the artifact.  These comments drew attention, again to the very unique upper slits through which, presumably, the straps of the brass object passed.  This design feature might serve as a basis to classify some characteristic of the object. 

A new approach: what if the brass artifact drew its inspiration from a wooden form?  Are there any stylistic affinities between Bahama�s object and Asian cultures that produced tinder-pouches or boxes from wood?

As the research unfolded, something of interest did turn up that might be of interest.  The series of photos uploaded with this post are of a tobacco box made on the island of Taiwan (historically Formosa) by one of the nine aboriginal cultures that are known to have inhabited the island, the Paiwan.  This Paiwan tobacco box is much larger than Bahama�s brass piece (w 3�, d 1.5�, h 9.75�) and is dated circa 1800 CE.  It is fashioned from an undetermined hardwood.  Of particular note, and immediately striking, is the design and form of the wooden loops through which the rope-strap fastens to the body of the box.  Moreover, the lid of this wooden form articulates along the rope in a very elegant design that echoes the presumed strap configuration of Bahama�s artifact.

I should also point out the design motif of the Paiwanese Tobacco box is very likely floriate inspired.

The Paiwan share numerous cultural and linguistic similarities with groups along the Philippine-Indonesian arc of islands (Paiwanese is a member of the Western Austronesian language family � or Malagasy-Polynesian in most sources).  This European contact with the Paiwanese, as well as with the other indigenous groups on the island of Taiwan, began with the Spanish and Portuguese but between 1624 and 1662, the Dutch established a strong presence on the island and exerted a powerful influence from forts established at Zeelandia and Proventia.  Of course Dutch Formosa during this period became a major entrepot for trade between China, Japan, the Dutch East Indies and thence to Europe. 

Now I am not suggesting that Bahama�s brass container is a direct copy of a Paiwanese form, however, there would appear to grounds to link the form of Bahama�s brass container to a wooden antecedent, perhaps a tobacco or tinder box, inspired by one of the island cultures of the Pacific-Indian Ocean archipelagos, perhaps as far west as Madagascar, for whom the crafting of utilitarian objects from hardwood was the norm.  While there may be some distant link to the form of Bahama's artifact with Malagasy forms, it is nevertheless equally clear from the brasswork and the decorative motif that Indian or Hindu aesthetics also exerted a heavy influence.

Works cited for these comments:

A Note on Japanese Research in Formosa
Herbert Passin
American Anthropologist, New Series, Vol. 49, No. 3. (Jul. - Sep., 1947), pp. 514-518

Dutch-Aboriginal Interaction in New Netherland and Formosa: An Historical Geography of Empire
Laurence M. Hauptman; Ronald G. Knapp
Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, Vol. 121, No. 2. (Apr. 29, 1977), pp. 166-182.

[bahamawrecker]

Bart and Lubby,

many thanks for your great research. I have not had time to read and reply, so I send two more pictures of another container from the same wreck site in the mean time.
It is somehow of the same family, being crudely manufactured, maybe copied from a much more elaborate original, by an artist of lesser capacity.
Bahamawrecker   

[Jesus of Lubeck]

Thank you Bahama for the latest photo of a second brass container from your shipwreck assemblage.  During the course of looking into the second artifact, I decided to take another stab at narrowing down the floral motif (motive) of your first.  In an earlier post I suggested that the design was affiliated with the five-petal lotus pattern � a pattern associated with Asian decorative arts for many centuries.

However, Administration and Bart have directed our attention to the possibility of your objects being associated with matches specifically and perhaps personal fire-starting in general.  Of course such utilitarian objects in the early modern and modern periods evolved hand in hand with the smoking of both opium and tobacco.  It is often forgotten that both opium and tobacco produce very attractive blossoms.  Is there then any possible link between the floral motif on Bamhama�s first object (B1) and these two narcotic flowering plants?  The opium poppy motif search did not result in an identifiable five-petal motif; however, the tobacco flower, to my great surprise, did.  I have uploaded a modern photograph of nicotiana tabacum along with two renditions, the first of which occurs on an Aztec statue of Xochipilli, the prince of flowers.  Note the tobacco blossom on the right thigh of the god.  The second illustrated image derives from the work of Leonhart Fuchs and is described by author Anna Pavod as representing a:

[d]etail showing the flowers of the tobacco-plant, from a manuscript compiled under the direction of Leonhart Fuchs (1501-66), professor of medicine at the university of T�bingen. Fuchs was one of the first men to study plants for their own sake, as well as for their medical applications. His De historia stirpium commentarii insignes of 1542 was the second notable printed herbal produced in Germany, supplanting Otto Brunfels� Herbarum vivae icones (1530-36), even though the illustrations in the older work were of a higher quality. Fuchs laboured for the last twenty-four years of his life in the compilation of a much larger botanical encyclop�dia, commissioning and collecting hundreds of high-quality illustrations, which included some of the earliest known depictions of such novelties as the tomato and tobacco plants: but this opus never made it to the press. (Pavod, The Naming of Names, figure 4)

The discussion of B1 and B2 becomes more intriguing should the floral representation on B1 prove to be that of a tobacco flower.  In the first instance, the craftsmanship and technique of the artifacts yet appear Indian or south Asian.  The tobacco motif appearing on an artifact where the botanical plant itself was not native and introduced by Europeans will offer a better chance of narrowing down areas in Asia where such a tobacco motif could have developed on a native art-form.  I believe tobacco cultivation was introduced into Asia by the Portuguese and Spanish at the end of the 16th century.  It might be fruitful to review the history of the spread of tobacco cultivation in Asia to see if any regions emerge that produced objects associated with the tobacco habit and tobacco trade using local lost-wax casting methods and materials.   

Works consulted for these comments:

Anna Pavod
The Naming of Names. Bloomsbury USA, 2005

Here is the link to the University of Edinburgh Special Collections Division where Fuchs� De historia stirpium commentarii insignes  resides in fond:

http://www.lib.ed.ac.uk/resources/collections/specdivision/botmaug06.shtml

Best Regards,

Lubby

[bahamawrecker]

Hi everybody and thanks for the feedback.
I am underway and have just a minute, so here is the last picture of the series.
More do come soon. (after I have time to read all your interesting posts)
Bahamawrecker

[Jesus of Lubeck]

I would like to make a few comments in general about the B1 and B2 artifacts.  When studying the early-modern world, I am often startled at how interconnected it actually was. To state it simply � it was an age, like our own, characterized by a dramatic exchange across vast spans of geography of both trade objects and people.  With respect to B1 and B2, the possibility should be investigated whether an Indian or south Asian community was transferred to the Caribbean and perhaps used their native knowledge and technique to craft these objects.  Whoever made B1 was familiar enough with nicotiana tabacum to render a very fluid and naturalistic design incorporating the flower into a motif.  Are there any areas of tobacco cultivation in the circum-Caribbean area where south Asian communities or groups also were present?  Such a possibility should be investigated along with other major theories on the provenance of the artifacts, along with running down other leads.

The second comment I would like to politely make regards the five-petal lotus blossom motif often described by historians of Asian art.  If an Asian object was known to have been produced after the late 16th century in Asia, particularly an area where tobacco cultivation was introduced, the five-petal motif may not represent the ubiquitous lotus.

With respect to the latest artifacts - again, well done Bahama, and thank you for sharing these remarkable finds with HH.

Best Regards,

Lubby

[Jesus of Lubeck]

The Bahama spur artifact is fortunately endowed with an avian decoration in an awkwardly prominent position.  This bird looks suspiciously like a waterfowl and could be a Burmese hintha.  The hintha (in Pali: Hamsa, or in English: goose) is noteworthy in so far as it was the royal symbol of the lower Myanmar Kingdom of Hanthawaddy (commonly referred to in English historical writings as the Kingdom of Pegu), which reached the zenith of its power between 1364 and 1555.  After this period, the history of the Mon in Myanmar becomes less clear.  A Burman dynasty, the Toungoo, destroyed the political unity of the independent Mon kingdom.  It appears that several Mon city-states retained their independence into the 17th century.  At the beginning of the 17th century, the Portuguese made a serious attempt to conquer Myanmar but were repulsed in 1613 CE.  In any event, the hintha, besides being a royal symbol during the period of the Mon Kingdom, continued to be associated as a Mon symbol.

I came across the hintha during the quest for utilitarian brass objects cast using the lost-wax method in Austronesian culture areas.  Bahama�s spur (B4 � should we start numbering them?) artifact possesses what could be a hintha decoration and indicate a Mon or southern Myanmar provenance (not ruling out the Nicobar Islands which are also ethnically and linguistically Mon).  I have uploaded two images of opium weights containing Mon hintha forms from brass lost-wax cast techniques. The first is a wide-ranging group of undetermined date.  The Second is a weight dated to the 17th century.  Should Bahama�s latest posted find prove to be a Mon artifact in a 17th century shipwreck in the Caribbean, it can only belong to a very small and very interesting number of possible vessels.  Very exciting stuff.  Let us see how the dating of the assemblage holds up.

As it stands, perhaps we can focus some research into the Mon techniques of lost-wax casting, which incidentally was very highly developed.  Moreover, did the Europeans introduce tobacco to any of the Mon areas?  If so, when?  I think I hear the sound of one of Tom Zart�s hinges moving a little.

This is all very tentative so please feel free offer comments an criticism.  There is a great deal I have to learn about this subject.

Best Regards,

Lubby

[bahamawrecker]

A time capsule? or an archaeologist's nightmare?

The place where our mystery shipwreck lies.

Could the location of the shipwreck shed some light on the origin of the artifacts?
 
This shipwreck has yet to be excavated. For this reason I will hold back on the name and  some details of the location.
However, to further the research and to make it possible to give this research some direction, I will disclose as much as possible information.
Please feel free to ask for more details.

The location is in the Caribbean.
It is a harbor.
As such it has been hit by dozens of  Hurricanes over the centuries. Every Hurricane claimed some of the ships that were in the harbor at that time.
Then there were the battles, fires, earthquakes and tidal waves. Historic records tell us of some of these events and of the ensuing shipwrecks.
How many shipwrecks?
Off course we know not, about every ship that sank, but we do know that there are several hundred shipwrecks within 10 square miles.
This means that the probabilities are high that the scatter trail of one shipwreck can cross over and be intermingled with the wreckage originating from several other shipwrecks. 
From the point of view of an archaeologist this might be a nightmare.
Why?
With artifacts of many different origins and time frame it becomes very difficult to tell to which shipwreck a specific artifact belongs.

The artifacts shown here come from a very small area. They were buried in deep mud. This could indicate that the artifacts are resting on the bottom of the sea since considerable time.
Other artifacts found close by give a fairly good time frame of the year 1700, give or take 25 years.
This is consistent with the time of the sinking of the two shipwrecks that we were trying to find. 
Bahamawrecker

[bahamawrecker]

Fantastic detective work, Lubby.
You seem to close in to the origin of the artifacts in a uncanny way.
This leaves me with a dilemma about which artifact I should post next.
The reference to wax casting above, might have a connection to the next artifact.

Crude copies?
The artifacts depicted above have a certain artistic charm, in spite of being fashioned in a way that suggests a craftsman using unsophisticated tools and average skill, rather than a highly skilled artist.
Could it be that the artifacts are crude copies of more artful originals?
Or should I reason the opposite way.
Were the containers meant to be simple, low cost implements for every day use, crafted by a craftsman with an inkling of artistry?

Maybe the next piece will give insights. Or... will it raise more questions? 

An artists workshop?

This piece is rough cast.
No further work has been added after it was removed from the casting mold. The casting mold appears to have been made of sand. Possibly the artwork was first formed out of wax, then the wax sculpture was embedded in some kind of cohesive sand. The liquid metal was then poured into the mold.
The wax melted and evaporated from the heat. The metal (copper?, brass?, bronze?) filled the voids.

This method is called the lost wax casting. It has been used since thousands of years. It allows for very detailed work.
When we look at the details of the figures, we notice immediately the coarseness and lack of fine detail.
Was it that the artist wanted to finish the details by carving and filing later?
Was this a casting experiment?
There seems to be a strange mixture of coarseness and detail. Even though the figures are rough and crude,  we can recognize many details in the shapes.
Some of these details are quite baffling. For example, the �breasts� on the figure on the right.
Is this supposed to represent a warrior women?
Is this the reason why this figure's hips are wide, while the hips of the figure on the left are narrow?

Well, I have to admit defeat. These crude little figures have me perplexed.

Could somebody be so kind and solve this enigma?
Bahamawrecker
     

[Administration]

The figures remind of those in coastal West Africa, such as Benin.

1700s Africa-US African slaves initially used to work in tobacco fields, not on cotton plantations

1650s South Africa European settlers grow tobacco and use it as a form of currency

1560 Africa Portuguese and Spaniards ship tobacco to East Africa, where it spread to Central and
West Africa

History of Tobacco