A handbook for new diggers?

[pdurdin]

I've often wondered how you might go about breaking a quern stone accidentally. They're pretty solid bits of kit. I'm not sure a "weak point" in a 2ft diameter, 5 inch thick (sorry I can't break the Imperial habits of my parents' lifetime) chunk of millstone grit would be susceptible to damage by one person winding a handle on it, even on the uneven suface provided by whatever's being ground.

The many many many (I think there were over a hundred, quern production site) that turned up at Folkestone during the Town Unearthed excavation were mostly broken during the making: lots of partial unfinished stones, most seemed to have been broken during the drilling of the socket. But the green sand was relatively fragile, a complete quern stone would likely break if dropped onto a rough surface. It might happen during moving?

[Kel]

Good points, but they don't explain why you find so many broken chunks at sites where they're not being made - effectively at the end consumption point of the production chain, rather than the start or middle. Many broken chunks turn up at sites which apparently have nothing to do with production, like enclosures.

Short of a high velocity pratfall involving the equivalent of a sledgehammer accidentally dropping onto one half of a two-stone set after it had been taken apart, I'm coming up blank. I'm not even sure how you'd go about breaking one deliberately. The greensand ones I've come across don't strike me as being particularly brittle or fragile, but then I've never dropped one! (Yet...)

[CARTOON REALITY]

Short of a high velocity pratfall involving the equivalent of a sledgehammer accidentally dropping onto one half of a two-stone set after it had been taken apart, I'm coming up blank.

Two quernstones, top and bottom, survive the initial quarrying process - each one a bag of many, tiny invisible flaws. Then they are set to work grinding against each other, hundreds of thousands of rotations, their rough surfaces bumping and pummeling each other. It makes all those tiny flaws grumpy and aggravates them (all in a very gentle slow fashion, infinitely small fractures growing and growing very slightly.) Add to this the need for the quern surfaces to be occasionally redressed/repecked in order for them to work efficiently, that doesn’t help . . . Eventually the banks of one of those flaws bursts and a good crack appears. The stone is now useless and gets thrown outside, (perhaps set to some secondary task, a weight, a surface) the rain saturates the stone then the frost sets in, expanding the liquid, making the crack (and the other little flaws) far, far worse – and by then it’s all over for our old friend the Querny McStone, he's shattered
Querns are not necessarily smashed to pieces in one sudden action, it can happen in a slow motion explosion. Due to the agressive nature of their creation it’s an inheritance every quern stone is born with. And we should remember complete examples do survive this carnage . . .

Many broken chunks turn up at sites which apparently have nothing to do with production, like enclosures.

Secondary usage is a possibility here.

[Wax]

Pure poetry Mr Reality, and a description I shall remember for future reference. Try giving up caffeine in all it's nefarious forms after six pm and ration use of electronic media after the same time. if that don't help your sleep patterns get spouse (or trusted friend) to administer sharp blow to back of head ( please note incorrect administration of said blow will result in recipient shuffling of this mortal coil) Sleep well and carry on sharing your crazy dreams

[CARTOON REALITY]

Try not to worry about me Wax. It's too late for that!

And anyway, the sun is shining.

[Kel]

Good stuff, thanks :face-approve:

[P Prentice]

Rachel Popes work on roundhouses conclusively disproved earlier 'cosmological' based theorising by presenting a huge database of evidence collected throughout northern Britain

Popes work was useful in showing the cosmological model dosent work everywhere not that the cosmological model dosent work - Oswolds conclusions always looked to written before the analysis

[P Prentice]

Two quernstones, top and bottom, survive the initial quarrying process - each one a bag of many, tiny invisible flaws. Then they are set to work grinding against each other, hundreds of thousands of rotations, their rough surfaces bumping and pummeling each other. It makes all those tiny flaws grumpy and aggravates them (all in a very gentle slow fashion, infinitely small fractures growing and growing very slightly.) Add to this the need for the quern surfaces to be occasionally redressed/repecked in order for them to work efficiently, that doesn’t help . . . Eventually the banks of one of those flaws bursts and a good crack appears. The stone is now useless and gets thrown outside, (perhaps set to some secondary task, a weight, a surface) the rain saturates the stone then the frost sets in, expanding the liquid, making the crack (and the other little flaws) far, far worse – and by then it’s all over for our old friend the Querny McStone, he's shattered
Querns are not necessarily smashed to pieces in one sudden action, it can happen in a slow motion explosion. Due to the agressive nature of their creation it’s an inheritance every quern stone is born with. And we should remember complete examples do survive this carnage . . .

Secondary usage is a possibility here.

i agree entirely - its often what is done with themm afterwards that is telling

[Jack]

Popes work was useful in showing the cosmological model dosent work everywhere not that the cosmological model dosent work - Oswolds conclusions always looked to written before the analysis

Yes I would concede that point as her study area was limited to the north.

Popes work also showed how interrogating the evidence, and looking at the results in more detail, results in much better questions to ask. For instance the apparent change in the trends in roundhouse doorway position from earlier to later roundhouses is in some ways much more interesting than the initial argument as it hints at a possible chronological change in factors that affected doorway positioning.

[P Prentice]

and nobody mentions windows!