| Chalcolithic Eneolithic, Aeneolithic, or Copper Age |
|---|
| ↑Stone Age ↑Neolithic |
By region Africa (2600 BC–1600 AD) West Asia (6000–3500 BC) Europe (5500–2200 BC)
Central Asia (3700–1700 BC) South Asia (4300–1800 BC)
China (5000–2900 BC) Mesoamerica (6500–1000 BC) |
Related topics |
| ↓Bronze Age ↓Iron Age |
TheCopper Age, also called the Eneolithic or the Chalcolithic Age, has been traditionally understood as a transitional period between theNeolithic and theBronze Age, in which a gradual introduction of the metal (native copper) took place, while stone was still the main resource utilized. Recent archaeology has found that the metal was not introduced so gradually and that this entailed significant social changes, such as developments in the type of habitation (larger villages, launching of fortifications), long-distance trade, and coppermetallurgy.
Some of the earliest Copper Age artifacts were found in the 5th and 6th millennia BCE archaeological sites of theVinča culture such asMajdanpek,Jarmovac andPločnik (including a copper axe from 5500 BCE). Somewhat later, in the 5th millennium BCE, metalwork is attested atRudna Glava mine inSerbia, and at Ai Bunar mine inBulgaria.[1]
3rd millennium BCE copper metalwork is attested in places likePalmela (Portugal),Cortes (Navarre), andStonehenge (England). However, as often happens with theprehistoric times, the limits of the age cannot be clearly defined and vary between different sources.
The theory thatmetallurgy was imported into Europe from the Near East has been practically ruled out. A second hypothesis, that there were two main points of origin of metallurgy in Europe, in southern Spain and in West Bulgaria, is also doubtful due to the existence of sites outside the centers of diffusion where metallurgy was known simultaneously with, or before, those in the 'original' nuclei, such asBrixlegg (Tyrol, Austria), while sites closer to the supposed origins of metallurgy, such as in the north of Spain, show fewer metal artifacts than sites in the south and practically no evidence of production.[2]
Currently, the general opinion is that the development of metallurgy took place independently in different places, at different times, with various techniques. One fact that supports this interpretation is that, although the final products (beads, rings, sickles, swords, axes, etc.) are quite similar throughout Europe, the method of production is not. Thus the use ofcrucibles was the technique utilized in the south of Spain, whereas central Europe employed aslagging process, but Cabrierés (France) used a primitive oxidizing non-slagging process,[3] while in the British Isles the absence of debris, slag or ceramic suggests another technique.[4]
Consequently, the way in which metallurgy was initiated differs considerably depending on the region. There are areas in which copper seems to play a crucial role (i.e., the Balkans), whereas other areas show no interest in it at all. Then there are societies that use copper artifacts, but do not practice metallurgy,[5] and there are other ones that fully adopt some of the cultural innovations but ignore the rest.[who?] One example of the latter isBasque country in northern Spain, where splendid largedolmens are present along theEbro river, but metal is rather infrequent, and when it does appear between the trapping, it is more oftenbronze orarsenical copper thancopper.[6]
Copper is the eighth most abundant metal in the Earth's crust, is available all over the world, and is one of the few that can appear in a pure state.[7] It is not complicated to work with, and a bare hammering can be enough to transform a nugget into a bead. The eye-catching look of native copper makes it easy to recognize, and even flashier if converted into jewelry, a possible motivation for humankind to start metallurgy with it. An evolutive technological process has been described,[8] although there are authors like Javinovic,[9] who think that it is not necessary to pass through the first stages to reach the last one.
To start with, the raw material must be obtained.Copper can be found in over 160 different minerals,[7] but mining activities are entailed to obtain them in large quantities if a reasonable amount of copper is wanted. Some of the most commonly exploited minerals arecuprite,malachite,azurite,chalcopyrite,chrysocolla andtennantite; e.g.malachite was extracted inRudna Glava (Serbia), Cabrierés (France) or Chinflón (Riotinto, Spain). In fact, one of the possible explanations about whatÖtzi the Iceman, the ancientmummy found in the Alps who lived around 3300 years BCE, was doing at 3,210 metres (10,530 ft) of altitude is that he could have been prospecting for new ores of minerals.[10]
Secondly, the mineral is separated from thegangue. This is only possible bysmelting orbeneficiation. To do so, it is necessary to use a furnace that is able to reach at least 1,089 °C (1,992 °F).
Lastly, a wide range of specific tools and resources have to be available, such as furnaces, moulds,crucibles, mauls, etc.
Minerals of copper were known from ancient times. In Crete, little fragments ofmalachite andazurite were powdered and used as make up or to decorate ceramic as early as 6000 BCE.[5]
Therefore, the minerals were not collected because people were looking for copper but for virtues like those mentioned or simply because of its brightness and colour, but this knowledge of the minerals is critical since they already knew how to recognize them and where to collect them when, later, they started the systematic search for ores.
Numerous examples of mines are known all over Europe,[11] from the east:Rudna Glava (Serbia), Ai Bunar (Bulgaria); to the west:Mount Gabriel (Ireland),Great Orme,Alderley Edge (United Kingdom); crossing Central Europe:Mitterberg (Salzach, Austria),Neuchâtel (Switzerland), Cabrierés (France); to the south:Riotinto,Mola Alta de Serelles (Spain); and the Mediterranean:Corsica, Cyprus, and theCyclades islands. It is remarkable that, usually, it is not a single mine but a complex, with a variable, large number of mineshafts, as inRudna Glava (30) orMount Gabriel (31).[citation needed]
The techniques observed in all of them are quite similar. Basically they used the thermic alteration or firesetting (Mohen 1992, Craddock 1995, Eiroa et al. 1996, Timberlake 2003). This consists of applying fire to the rock and then pouring water over it: the rapid changes of temperature will cause cracks within the rocks that can be totally broken with the help of mauls and picks. Then the useful masses were selected, crushed and transported to the production centre that could be in the surrounding area (Mitterberg) or far away (Rudna Glava).
The mines were exploited in extremely efficient and clever ways, according to the technology available (Jovanovic 1980, Craddock 1995, Timberlake 2003). The entire convenient mineral was collected and the abandoned shafts carefully refilled with gangue and rocks (Mohen 1992; 85). For example, atMount Gabriel, it was estimated that they extracted the astonishing number of 32,570.15 tonnes (35,902.44 tons) of rock, gangue and ore. The usable amount of copper was 162.85 tonnes and the final smelting finished metal was 146.56 tonnes (Jackson 1980; 24). The entire process was thoroughly described in 1744 by Lewis Morris, Crown Mineral Agent for Cardiganshire, and, incidentally,antiquarian.[12]
Their method seems to be this. They make a great fire of wood in the bottom of their rakes which were always open up on that account, and when the rock was sufficiently hot they cast water upon it, which shiver'd it; and then with stone wedges, which they drove in with other stones, they work'd their way through the hardest rocks, tho' but slowly.
The tools employed are mainly presented in Lewis' observations, but other ones have been recovered in archaeological context:
The information available about the people of theCopper Age has not substantially increased along with the number of archaeological sites. Several ideas have been proffered, one of the most followed is that the metal itself did not bring abrupt transformation into the people's life,[17] or even more that early copper does not produce anything useful at all,[18] meaning with this that with the copper, they produced mainlyjewellery and, overall, weapons that obviously were not within reach of the majority of the population but only to privileged individuals. In other words, the real importance of the metal is not utilitarian but social. This is a suitable explanation about the rising of Great Cultures of Metal such asVinča culture (Ex-Yugoslavia)Tiszapolgar,Remedello andRinaldone (Italy),Montagne Noire (France),El Argar andTargas (Spain), etc.
Between 4000 and 3300 BC, copper artefacts, mainly from Serbian mines, reached northern Germany and southern Scandinavia.[19] The metal was probably redistributed by groups in the eastern Alps. Societies of theFunnel Beaker Culture in the north of central and northern Europe were able to cast the copper into different types and they deposited it mainly in hoards. There is no reason to believe that copper was the exclusive preserve of privileged individuals. In contrast to the aforementioned regions, copper artefacts had a more symbolic value.[19]
As the period moved forward, especially around the 3rd millennium, new and complex realities would appear strongly linked to the metal, like the impressive fortified villages ofLos Millares (Spain),Vila Nova de Sao Pedro (Portugal) or the more modestcairn next to Copa Hill in the United Kingdom destinated to control the centres of extraction, or the equally and generalized cultural phenomenons ofMegalithism,Rock Art,Bell Beakers Vessels that are known from Scandinavia to the South of Spain and from Scotland to Turkey.