Saren
You are readng too much into what I wrote. I was just astonished that it was
thought to be newsworthy. Metallurgical students doing this kind of thing
(though not archaeometallurgy which was unknown) was common
practice when I was one. You went home looking like a chimney sweep too.
There were no showers. (or much safety equipment - shared gloves were about
the limit)
I did not say that smelting was easy. It clearly is not easy to control.
However from observations of later experiments in which I took no part I
would suggest that once you have found out how to do it you can smelt
reliably almost every time. This is borne out by the "tourist smelters". We
were, unlike the reported students, out in the open with a furnace built as
nearly as possible to the design of the furnace we were simulating, not with
bricks. This will change the working conditions because the lining is dried,
not fired, clay. The bellows were manpowered (includes by inference
womanpowered), though not made from goatskin.
Clearly the youngest children would not be in charge, though I would guess
that "adulthood" was much earlier that now. I would guess that the smelter
may well have been younger than the students in the article. Surely the
enterprise would have been a family affair and provide work for all who
could help. There were no schools or creches (as far as we know) and baby
would be there too.
After years of helping Dad I have no doubt that quite young boys would know
how to look after the furnace, and probably do so for part of the time.
Similarly the young girls could probably sort ore as well as Mum if this
was how the work was divided. We do not know - Mum may well have been the
smelter while Dad was the smith or just kept the wolves away.
Peter
Peter Hutchison
Honorary General Secretary
The Historical Metallurgy Society Ltd
Tel +44 (0) 1792 233 223
[log in to unmask]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|