Metallurgy / Copper

[caiusbeerquitius]

From an internal discussion elsewhere the question arised, whether the Romans used pure copper, or only copper alloys (brass, bronze in all their forms). Apparantly the only time and place in Europe, where solid copper was ever used for production of items was (far)prehistoric Anatolia. Solid copper is extremely rare. Even "Ötzi" had an arsenic-brass hatchet. This topic seems not so extremely well investigated for the Roman period, as it is for the Bronze-age (naturally ), however the topic is touched from time to time.
Here some introducing literature (in German):

- Ottaway, Barbara S.: Prähistorische Archäometallurgie,
Leidorf, 1994.
- Pernicka, E.: Die Anfänge der Kupfermetallurgie
in Europa. Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, Jahrbuch 1997, pp. 478-
483.
- SAM - von Sangmeister et al, ab 1968.
- Brandherm, Dirk: Beiträge zur Bewaffnung der Steinkupfer-
und der älteren Bronzezeit auf der Iberischen Halbinsel, 1995.
- Vollmann, Dieter: Studien zum Ãœbergang von der Kupferzeit
zur frühen Bronzezeit im östlichen Mitteleuropa, 2005.
- Heyd, Volker: Die Spätkupferzeit in Süddeutschland. Textband
und Dokumentations-Tafelband, 2000.
- Todorova, Chenrieta: Kupferzeitliche Siedlungen in
Nordostbulgarien, 1982.

[Martin Moser]

There are data available for the medical needles from Montbellet, here are the results of analyses of the various needles:

Cu 91,6, Sn 8,4
Cu 85,58, Sn 12,03, Pb 2,39
Cu 94,62, Sn 5,38
S 12,72, Cu 81,66, Sn 5,62 (S probably due to corrosion)
Cu 88,13, Sn 10,13, Pb 1,74
Cu 95,74, Sn 4,76
Cu 90,34, Sn 9,66

(Source: Michel Feugere, Ernst Künzl, Ursula Weisser: Die Starnadeln von Montbellet (Saone-et-Loire) - published in, hm, have to look this up, I'll get back ...)

Those are from one set of needles, possibly from the same manufacturer, although that is not sure. Composition varies quite a bit ...

[caiusbeerquitius]

S 12,72, Cu 81,66, Sn 5,62 (S probably due to corrosion)

Sounds quite reasonable

[Martin Moser]

hm, have to look this up, I'll get back ...

Here's the proper reference:

Feugere, M., E. Kunzl and U. Weisser (1985) - Die Starnadeln von Montbellet (Saone-et-Loire) - Ein Beitrag zur antiken und islamischen Augenheilkunde - Les aiguilles a cataracte de Montbellet (Saone-et-Loire) - Contribution a l'etude de l'ophthalmologie antique et islamique, Jahrbuch des romisch-germanischen Zentralmuseums (Mainz) 32, 436-508.

[aitor iriarte]

Hello,
I think that the question shouldn't be posed in terms of strict analysis... :roll:
What do you think about asking if Romans used what they perceived as copper (no matter the amount of impurities contained in the ore) for rivets? 8)

Aitor

[caiusbeerquitius]

Well, the difference between solid copper and copper alloys is quite visible. Even quadrantes were made of bronze, which differs in color from solid copper by being much more yellow(gold-)ish. To the Roman craftsmen solid copper was not available. The rest is a terminology question, but the materials remain the same.

[aitor iriarte]

'To the Roman craftsmen solid copper was not available.'
Waht information do you have to state that, Christian? hock:
Did, in your opinion, Roman craftsmen ONLY use recycled copper alloys for their trade? In my opinion, up to 'mostly' would be acceptable but, didn't they obtain copper from reducing copper ore from mines? Impure as it might be, it would be perceived as copper, anyway.
Do we have analysis of rivets to show if they were made from 'copper' or from an intentionally made 'copper alloy'?

Aitor

[caiusbeerquitius]

Hi Aitor.
There seems to be a misunderstaning about the term 'solid'.
Reduced copper is not solid copper. Solid copper is naturally pure copper. And the reduced copper has, due to its impurities, the characteristica of 'brass'.
Solid copper:

Is almost only found in america, extremely rare in Europe. Solid copper is of a purity, which is only comparable to modern industrial copper.