I’m wondering if you ever get the time to drop in to the James Cook University..?

There is a thesis there by Dr Richard Cosgrove on a rare stone tool known as the ooyurka.

I’ve been in contact with them but they won’t lend even a fascimile of it. They are quite happy to allow me to view it at the Uni and even were willing to ship it to Cairns if I happened to be wanting to see it there.
There have been three threads on it so far but it seems nobody else knows much about the ooyurka at all.
http://www2b.abc.net.au/science/k2/stn/newposts/5201/topic5201411.shtm

I do know where JCU is, and I have been known to ride my pushbike through their gardens… apart from a student or two, I don’t really have any contacts there. But I am happy to investigate.

pain master said:

I do know where JCU is, and I have been known to ride my pushbike through their gardens… apart from a student or two, I don’t really have any contacts there. But I am happy to investigate.

:) big :)

ta..

roughbarked said:

pain master said:

I do know where JCU is, and I have been known to ride my pushbike through their gardens… apart from a student or two, I don’t really have any contacts there. But I am happy to investigate.

:) big :)

ta..

Students are the clue.. If I was a student.. there would be no worries.. I could download whatever I needed. on a borrow credit basis.. or whatever it is they do.

I’ll answer here as well… I’m happy to go look at the document. I’ll even ask for Janine at the desk. However, I would not know where to start when reading the thesis. I know you’re keen on learning more about the Ooyurka, and that you have found one that got lost or traded a long way away and at a long time ago.

What should I be looking for?

pain master said:

I’ll answer here as well… I’m happy to go look at the document. I’ll even ask for Janine at the desk. However, I would not know where to start when reading the thesis. I know you’re keen on learning more about the Ooyurka, and that you have found one that got lost or traded a long way away and at a long time ago.

What should I be looking for?

Well, to my knowledge the thesis was based upon early agricultural use of rainforests for food etc..
Yes, the ooyurka I have could well have been traded and have possibly only been used for ceremonial issues this far south if that was the case. However, learning jus what they surmised was the usage could lead to suggestions for what it was used for here.. and lead any researchers who do study this ooyurka under microscopes as to what to look for. It is quite possible that this ooyurka is proof of rainforests further south and this could have ramifications for historical recording of events.

roughbarked said:

pain master said:

I’ll answer here as well… I’m happy to go look at the document. I’ll even ask for Janine at the desk. However, I would not know where to start when reading the thesis. I know you’re keen on learning more about the Ooyurka, and that you have found one that got lost or traded a long way away and at a long time ago.

What should I be looking for?

Well, to my knowledge the thesis was based upon early agricultural use of rainforests for food etc..
Yes, the ooyurka I have could well have been traded and have possibly only been used for ceremonial issues this far south if that was the case. However, learning jus what they surmised was the usage could lead to suggestions for what it was used for here.. and lead any researchers who do study this ooyurka under microscopes as to what to look for. It is quite possible that this ooyurka is proof of rainforests further south and this could have ramifications for historical recording of events.

well I did think that perhaps the Ooyurka was found down there because once there was rainforest.

But seeing how expensive decorative items like shells and betelnut were up in the Highlands of PNG all because of trade makes me think that this may have been a unique part of bride-price or just simply traded from hand to hand…. maybe even people buying it thinking they were getting a great score only to discover it was rubbish where they lived and passed it on!?!?

pain master said:

roughbarked said:

pain master said:

I’ll answer here as well… I’m happy to go look at the document. I’ll even ask for Janine at the desk. However, I would not know where to start when reading the thesis. I know you’re keen on learning more about the Ooyurka, and that you have found one that got lost or traded a long way away and at a long time ago.

What should I be looking for?

Well, to my knowledge the thesis was based upon early agricultural use of rainforests for food etc..
Yes, the ooyurka I have could well have been traded and have possibly only been used for ceremonial issues this far south if that was the case. However, learning jus what they surmised was the usage could lead to suggestions for what it was used for here.. and lead any researchers who do study this ooyurka under microscopes as to what to look for. It is quite possible that this ooyurka is proof of rainforests further south and this could have ramifications for historical recording of events.

well I did think that perhaps the Ooyurka was found down there because once there was rainforest.

But seeing how expensive decorative items like shells and betelnut were up in the Highlands of PNG all because of trade makes me think that this may have been a unique part of bride-price or just simply traded from hand to hand…. maybe even people buying it thinking they were getting a great score only to discover it was rubbish where they lived and passed it on!?!?

You are talking about a people who left stone tools in camp if they didnt fit into a dilly bag without burden.

roughbarked said:

pain master said:

roughbarked said:

Well, to my knowledge the thesis was based upon early agricultural use of rainforests for food etc..
Yes, the ooyurka I have could well have been traded and have possibly only been used for ceremonial issues this far south if that was the case. However, learning jus what they surmised was the usage could lead to suggestions for what it was used for here.. and lead any researchers who do study this ooyurka under microscopes as to what to look for. It is quite possible that this ooyurka is proof of rainforests further south and this could have ramifications for historical recording of events.

well I did think that perhaps the Ooyurka was found down there because once there was rainforest.

But seeing how expensive decorative items like shells and betelnut were up in the Highlands of PNG all because of trade makes me think that this may have been a unique part of bride-price or just simply traded from hand to hand…. maybe even people buying it thinking they were getting a great score only to discover it was rubbish where they lived and passed it on!?!?

You are talking about a people who left stone tools in camp if they didnt fit into a dilly bag without burden.

Bride price is a reason.. as I pointed out, a good wife was worth two good axes.

but.. we are still looking at dating of stone cutting techniques, dating of the stone itself and of particulates found upon it.

roughbarked said:

pain master said:

roughbarked said:

Well, to my knowledge the thesis was based upon early agricultural use of rainforests for food etc..
Yes, the ooyurka I have could well have been traded and have possibly only been used for ceremonial issues this far south if that was the case. However, learning jus what they surmised was the usage could lead to suggestions for what it was used for here.. and lead any researchers who do study this ooyurka under microscopes as to what to look for. It is quite possible that this ooyurka is proof of rainforests further south and this could have ramifications for historical recording of events.

well I did think that perhaps the Ooyurka was found down there because once there was rainforest.

But seeing how expensive decorative items like shells and betelnut were up in the Highlands of PNG all because of trade makes me think that this may have been a unique part of bride-price or just simply traded from hand to hand…. maybe even people buying it thinking they were getting a great score only to discover it was rubbish where they lived and passed it on!?!?

You are talking about a people who left stone tools in camp if they didnt fit into a dilly bag without burden.

good point… I sometimes feel embarrassed that I know more about PNG indigenous culture then I do about my own back yard…. But I’m getting there.

roughbarked said:

roughbarked said:

pain master said:

well I did think that perhaps the Ooyurka was found down there because once there was rainforest.

But seeing how expensive decorative items like shells and betelnut were up in the Highlands of PNG all because of trade makes me think that this may have been a unique part of bride-price or just simply traded from hand to hand…. maybe even people buying it thinking they were getting a great score only to discover it was rubbish where they lived and passed it on!?!?

You are talking about a people who left stone tools in camp if they didnt fit into a dilly bag without burden.

Bride price is a reason.. as I pointed out, a good wife was worth two good axes.

a wife has never been cheap.

pain master said:

roughbarked said:

roughbarked said:

You are talking about a people who left stone tools in camp if they didnt fit into a dilly bag without burden.

Bride price is a reason.. as I pointed out, a good wife was worth two good axes.

a wife has never been cheap.

you’d be buggered if one of the axes was an ooyurka and you dind’t know how ou yurked her

roughbarked said:

pain master said:

roughbarked said:

Bride price is a reason.. as I pointed out, a good wife was worth two good axes.

a wife has never been cheap.

you’d be buggered if one of the axes was an ooyurka and you dind’t know how ou yurked her

I can see that “i buggered it up’‘
>>
you didn’t know how you urked her

I look forward to checking out the JCU library. Let you know eh?

pain master said:

I look forward to checking out the JCU library. Let you know eh?

Thanks mate..

it is for the good of us all to work this stuff out.

any update on this Roughy? I am planning on visiting the library tomorrow and joining up.

pain master said:

any update on this Roughy? I am planning on visiting the library tomorrow and joining up.

Yes, unfortunately They don’t lend anything to non-members. So even the downloadable stuff requires the borrower to be staff or student.

Did you read the links I posted in relation to ooyurka @ JCU library in the SSSF thread? They are at the end of the thread I linked. Basically, I’d love to have the whole thesis to peruse but that looks difficult to procure. I’d love photos and measuremens or any data you are able gather. I suppose that we may never know whether it was simpy a tool traded for a wife as we countenanced or whether it has deeper significance to Aboriginal and climate history but it is worth at least making attempts to learn.

roughbarked said:

pain master said:

any update on this Roughy? I am planning on visiting the library tomorrow and joining up.

Yes, unfortunately They don’t lend anything to non-members. So even the downloadable stuff requires the borrower to be staff or student.

but I can be a community member?

roughbarked said:

Did you read the links I posted in relation to ooyurka @ JCU library in the SSSF thread?

you do this a bit Roughy, but here goes sighs “Yes I did read the links”

Why I asked is, this is a 167 page document about 20 Ooyurkas that the good doctor had researched. I doubt that his thesis would explain how yours ended up so far away from the Tropics or why it is made from Basalt. But I daresay there maybe an interesting chapter or two that may help as to why they are made. I don’t really want to read all 167 pages and then regurgitate it to you. I will ask if “as a community member” whether I can get a photocopy and then post that down to you.

roughbarked said:

Did you read the links I posted in relation to ooyurka @ JCU library in the SSSF thread? They are at the end of the thread I linked. Basically, I’d love to have the whole thesis to peruse but that looks difficult to procure. I’d love photos and measuremens or any data you are able gather. I suppose that we may never know whether it was simpy a tool traded for a wife as we countenanced or whether it has deeper significance to Aboriginal and climate history but it is worth at least making attempts to learn.

Well I, for one, am hugely interested in this…

pain master said:

roughbarked said:

Did you read the links I posted in relation to ooyurka @ JCU library in the SSSF thread?

you do this a bit Roughy, but here goes sighs “Yes I did read the links”

Why I asked is, this is a 167 page document about 20 Ooyurkas that the good doctor had researched. I doubt that his thesis would explain how yours ended up so far away from the Tropics or why it is made from Basalt. But I daresay there maybe an interesting chapter or two that may help as to why they are made. I don’t really want to read all 167 pages and then regurgitate it to you. I will ask if “as a community member” whether I can get a photocopy and then post that down to you.

Well, can the thesis be purchased? Is it published somewhere other than the copy in the JCU Library?

pain master said:

roughbarked said:

Did you read the links I posted in relation to ooyurka @ JCU library in the SSSF thread?

you do this a bit Roughy, but here goes sighs “Yes I did read the links”

Why I asked is, this is a 167 page document about 20 Ooyurkas that the good doctor had researched. I doubt that his thesis would explain how yours ended up so far away from the Tropics or why it is made from Basalt. But I daresay there maybe an interesting chapter or two that may help as to why they are made. I don’t really want to read all 167 pages and then regurgitate it to you. I will ask if “as a community member” whether I can get a photocopy and then post that down to you.

I’ll be frever grateful to you if you do manage to find that chapter.

Dinetta said:

pain master said:

roughbarked said:

Did you read the links I posted in relation to ooyurka @ JCU library in the SSSF thread?

you do this a bit Roughy, but here goes sighs “Yes I did read the links”

Why I asked is, this is a 167 page document about 20 Ooyurkas that the good doctor had researched. I doubt that his thesis would explain how yours ended up so far away from the Tropics or why it is made from Basalt. But I daresay there maybe an interesting chapter or two that may help as to why they are made. I don’t really want to read all 167 pages and then regurgitate it to you. I will ask if “as a community member” whether I can get a photocopy and then post that down to you.

Well, can the thesis be purchased? Is it published somewhere other than the copy in the JCU Library?

Not sure about copies being able to be purchased but it is definitely published nowhere else.
I’d be happy to purchase a copy but the offer wasn’t made. Perhaps it isn’t a function of the library.

roughbarked said:

Dinetta said:

pain master said:

you do this a bit Roughy, but here goes sighs “Yes I did read the links”

Why I asked is, this is a 167 page document about 20 Ooyurkas that the good doctor had researched. I doubt that his thesis would explain how yours ended up so far away from the Tropics or why it is made from Basalt. But I daresay there maybe an interesting chapter or two that may help as to why they are made. I don’t really want to read all 167 pages and then regurgitate it to you. I will ask if “as a community member” whether I can get a photocopy and then post that down to you.

Well, can the thesis be purchased? Is it published somewhere other than the copy in the JCU Library?

Not sure about copies being able to be purchased but it is definitely published nowhere else.
I’d be happy to purchase a copy but the offer wasn’t made. Perhaps it isn’t a function of the library.

Thesis is read.

pain master said:

roughbarked said:

Dinetta said:

Well, can the thesis be purchased? Is it published somewhere other than the copy in the JCU Library?

Not sure about copies being able to be purchased but it is definitely published nowhere else.
I’d be happy to purchase a copy but the offer wasn’t made. Perhaps it isn’t a function of the library.

Thesis is read.

Much to be learned?

roughbarked said:

pain master said:

roughbarked said:

Not sure about copies being able to be purchased but it is definitely published nowhere else.
I’d be happy to purchase a copy but the offer wasn’t made. Perhaps it isn’t a function of the library.

Thesis is read.

Much to be learned?

not really. Hope he didn’t offer this thesis as part of his PhD? While some effort has gone into setting up a few experiments, he leaves the reader with more questions then answers. In fact, the SSSF team had it pretty well nailed.

But, I took some notes… and i will post them over the next few posts.

his definition of an Ooyurka is limited…

It is an ooyurka if it is found in the Innisfail region (only two found outside of this area, one in Cairns and one in Lucinda, and the Lucinda one was found at a beach midden (perhaps the midden one was traded and ended up being used for something it wasn’t originally designed for? – PM’s note)). An Ooyurka needs to have some kind of shoulder waisting, the orientation of the face has to be perpendicular, and there needs to be some residue of polish, or organic material in the working face. There is a narrowness of the working face and it should be a slate (there are some schists, and 2 basalt ones found but the rest are argillaceous or spotted hornsfel slate). And finally (this is weird – PM note) the working face should be convex, concave or flat. (What the? What else is there? – PM note).

Casey in 1936 said that the Ooyurka is similar to “whetstone. Native name Ooyurka used by Settlement Creek blacks to sharpen tomahawks, etc and to strip retted fibre of verain”

There are only two Settlement Creeks in Qld, one just south of Townsville and the other is out in the Gulf country. Neither are in the Innisfail region where all the Ooyurkas have been discovered. 80-90% of them have been dug up by ploughs while planting Sugar Cane.

None have been carbon dated.

It is suggested that they are no older then 5,000 year old, yet no one from the Dyirbal or Yidin clans know how to use the Ooyurka nor know what they are for. Also, Ooyurka is not a word from the language of these two Rainforest clans.

Kennedy in 1949 suggested the stones were used to smooth the modern Aboriginal tools. It appears the Rainforest Aboriginal made wooden swords. The stones may have even been heated up and used to apply Xanthorrhea resin to axe heads and spear heads.

This was tested by Cosgrove, but he said the stones got too hot after two applications and the resulting residue did not match the original artifacts.

It was suggested that the Rainforest Aboriginals were quite sedantry and would spend the wet season in the one location and then get into the hunting once the drier season started. It is said that the ooyurka was left behind in their shelters and used by others or used by themselves when they returned back to the area at commencement of the next wet.

The food of these people during the wet, consisted of some pretty starchy nuts like:

Elaeocarpus bancroftii
Castanospermum australe
Beilschmiedia bancroftii
Endiandra palmerstonii

Cosgrove tried using the ooyurka to firstly crack these kind of nuts and then to try and crush these.

Big fail.

The working edge of the ooyurka was often less than 15mm wide and this is less then these nuts, so often the working edge would bounce/slide off the nut and hit the anvil surface, often causing damage to the (pretty soft) edge of the Ooyurka. These kind of slates have a Mohs scale rating of 3 at the hardest! None of the original ooyurkas showed this kind of damage.

pain master said:

roughbarked said:

pain master said:

Thesis is read.

Much to be learned?

not really. Hope he didn’t offer this thesis as part of his PhD? While some effort has gone into setting up a few experiments, he leaves the reader with more questions then answers. In fact, the SSSF team had it pretty well nailed.

But, I took some notes… and i will post them over the next few posts.

Yes, thanks very much PM. In my communications with Dr Cosgrove I got very little out of him other than what he concluded in brief. Apparently that episode is longe over for him. Interesting that there were a couple also made from basalt. Also interesting that the local tribes knew nothing about it even in the early days. Strange that there is not dreamtime type lore but then I’d say that word of mouth isn’t necessarily the best way to store accurate historical data. As if the one who knew that story died without passing it on then the story was lost.

Is it OK to put your findings in the SSSF thread? I’ll let you do it if you wish.

A few huge gaps in his research.. carbon dating is one. Also he does not seem to be specific about the residues other than telling us what they are not.

I’ll continue, and yeah, I’m happy for you to put these notes on the SSSF, or even point them all over to this thread. Either way is no drama. You could (if you wanted) cut n paste them so they are longer posts for the science crew?

Anyway, I will not look at the North or South Johnstone rivers in the same way again.

In the thesis, there are black and white photographs of (I think) around 80 of the Ooyurkas that Cosgrove was lucky enough to check out, and it appears that the shouldering/necking condition is the minority. I mean shoulder/waisting was point 2 in the definition and all Ooyurkas must have this, but yeah, the majority of them look just like convenient rocks. All triangular in shape, with a touch of waisting that perhaps would fit the hand. The main effort in construction is the working face.

Oh yeah, 2 of the Ooyurkas were decorated with striation coming over the shoulders and into a V pattern at the base. Kinda like a Tie around the neck. I looked at the two photos of these two, and buggered if I could make it out… Looked like it might have been scratched around in the ground by the plough.

But Cosgroves comments seem pretty accurate about this scratches as being deliberate as opposed to plough damage, so I take his word for it. My uneducated eye just wasn’t convinced.

You ask about the organic material?

Cosgrove thought that monocots like Palms, Cane and Bamboo (prevalent in the area) with their high silica content may have been the reason for some of the polish or residue left within the stone tools surface. He tried many experiments with ooyurkas that he made from hornfels slate (both argillaceous and spotted) and could not replicate the same residue or particles.

He said in one particular example the residue was small black globules < 1.5mm. He did say that it was amazing considering the high rainfall and humidity of the region that any organic material left on these tools. He did experiment with heating up an Ooyurka, pressing this onto Xanthorrhea resin and then trying to apply this molten resin onto a spear head. He said the first heating was okay, the second (was getting hotter) but after the third, the stone just had to much convective heat within to handle, even with bark insulated handle (wrapped around the shoulders). And it took some time to cool down.

And even then, it was a fairly messy process, and the Rainforest Aboriginals already had a pretty reliable standard way of applying Xanthorrhea gum.

He talks about this residue is not just on the working face, but up around the shoulders as well. (PM-note coming up) In my experience with tools and stones and axes in PNG and campfire and hot sweaty weather is that these tools would have been reasonably dirty at times, and quite possibly, these resins could be a blend of food/sweat/skin/fat/ash/plant material.

I guess I need to check out the thesis again to re-read sections to see if there are additional answers that perhaps I had overlooked. It was a big read.

Construction… yeah.

Using hornfels slate and its Moh scale rating of 3, means that there are some tougher rocks out there. What is Quartz? Is it 6? Year 12 Geology coming out here???

But it appears that the rock was selected primarily for its shape. Always triangular first up and then shaped if required. If you look at all the photos, the majority are relatively un-shaped, with the minority looking like yours Roughy. There is evidence of hammer dressing and surface grinding (using a sand medium as an abrasive) particularly around the shoulders. Only 42% show signs of hammer dressing and only 25% show signs of surface grinding.

The hammer dressing is evident in small chipping/dents which are 3-4mm in diameter and up to 2mm in depth.

Oh yeah, not only the hornfels slate or the 2 basalt ones were there. There were 3 or 4 made from Greywacke and a couple which were a Phyllite Schist.

Cosgrove gets technical when he starts to talk about the working face, and its construction. He kinda lost me a little, but he talks about furrows that are evident on the working face and he says that a grinding process was used to excavate the face. He talks of this separately to the sand polishing and he mentions using a fixed file in his creation.

I can’t recall the Aboriginal people having the odd half-bastard-round files, but I digress.

I’m guessing that by using a Quartz like stone (a large one) as your base file then by grinding the working face of your favourite hornfels slate back and forth, one can recreate the furrows that he has identified.

All of Cosgroves experiments and construction attempts were made around the Johnstone Rivers and outdoors.

He used his tools to try and grind bark, nuts, rainforest timber, and monocots, all in an attempt to recreate the resins/polish.

my gut feeling?

Used for burnishing timber tools, spears and swords.

Great reading in that report, thanks PM…

Dinetta said:

Great reading in that report, thanks PM…

Yes! Piqued my interest too. So it was a sanding smoothing tool, basically.

Happy Potter said:

Dinetta said:

Great reading in that report, thanks PM…

Yes! Piqued my interest too. So it was a sanding smoothing tool, basically.

Could also ask Clarence Slockee, Aboriginal GA presenter and with his wonderful wealth of knowledge about Aboriginal Culture, might know. Well you never know..

Happy Potter said:

Happy Potter said:

Dinetta said:

Great reading in that report, thanks PM…

Yes! Piqued my interest too. So it was a sanding smoothing tool, basically.

Could also ask Clarence Slockee, Aboriginal GA presenter and with his wonderful wealth of knowledge about Aboriginal Culture, might know. Well you never know..

thanks Dinetta and Potter. It is considered that because of the almost sedentary lifestyle of the Rainforest Aboriginal clans, material possessions were considered, and yes because the Ooyurka was weighty, it was often a material good that was left behind, to be used later. They weighed between 50g and 1060g with the mean weight being 302.5g. The majority were between 100-300gms.

65% had a flat working surface, 23% concave and 12% convex. Cosgrove was pretty thorough in his discussions with elders from Innisfail up to Kuranda, and south through the Palm Island group and to Townsville. They did not know what the Ooyurka was. Perhaps Clarence may know? Depends on where his clan originates?

I guess the interesting part is, how did it get to where Roughy picked up his?

Me thinks a white man transported it. Roughy, is this possible?

pain master said:

Happy Potter said:

Happy Potter said:

Yes! Piqued my interest too. So it was a sanding smoothing tool, basically.

Could also ask Clarence Slockee, Aboriginal GA presenter and with his wonderful wealth of knowledge about Aboriginal Culture, might know. Well you never know..

thanks Dinetta and Potter. It is considered that because of the almost sedentary lifestyle of the Rainforest Aboriginal clans, material possessions were considered, and yes because the Ooyurka was weighty, it was often a material good that was left behind, to be used later. They weighed between 50g and 1060g with the mean weight being 302.5g. The majority were between 100-300gms.

65% had a flat working surface, 23% concave and 12% convex. Cosgrove was pretty thorough in his discussions with elders from Innisfail up to Kuranda, and south through the Palm Island group and to Townsville. They did not know what the Ooyurka was. Perhaps Clarence may know? Depends on where his clan originates?

I guess the interesting part is, how did it get to where Roughy picked up his?

Me thinks a white man transported it. Roughy, is this possible?

I know more about Aboriginal stuff than Clarence, so it would not be much use assking him.
As PM and I pointed out as well as Dr Cosgrove. This tool is completely unknown to any Aboriginal people that were alive when we arrived in Australia.
Knowledge of its use and history of use had vanished well before we arrived.

The unknown material discovered could relate to the fact that whatever it was used for, happens to be now extinct. However even extinct things have living relatives.

No white man placed this tool where it was found. It was found by the first white man to use that land and was found well buried in a sand dune.. Possibly covered by one or many of our historically huge dust storms.

Yes all heaveier stone tools were left in camps. Each camp had its own tool box and cutelry set.

roughbarked said:

pain master said:

Happy Potter said:

Could also ask Clarence Slockee, Aboriginal GA presenter and with his wonderful wealth of knowledge about Aboriginal Culture, might know. Well you never know..

thanks Dinetta and Potter. It is considered that because of the almost sedentary lifestyle of the Rainforest Aboriginal clans, material possessions were considered, and yes because the Ooyurka was weighty, it was often a material good that was left behind, to be used later. They weighed between 50g and 1060g with the mean weight being 302.5g. The majority were between 100-300gms.

65% had a flat working surface, 23% concave and 12% convex. Cosgrove was pretty thorough in his discussions with elders from Innisfail up to Kuranda, and south through the Palm Island group and to Townsville. They did not know what the Ooyurka was. Perhaps Clarence may know? Depends on where his clan originates?

I guess the interesting part is, how did it get to where Roughy picked up his?

Me thinks a white man transported it. Roughy, is this possible?

I know more about Aboriginal stuff than Clarence, so it would not be much use assking him.
As PM and I pointed out as well as Dr Cosgrove. This tool is completely unknown to any Aboriginal people that were alive when we arrived in Australia.
Knowledge of its use and history of use had vanished well before we arrived.

The unknown material discovered could relate to the fact that whatever it was used for, happens to be now extinct. However even extinct things have living relatives.

No white man placed this tool where it was found. It was found by the first white man to use that land and was found well buried in a sand dune.. Possibly covered by one or many of our historically huge dust storms.

Yes all heaveier stone tools were left in camps. Each camp had its own tool box and cutelry set.

Cosgrove suggests that the Ooyurka is not older than 5,000 years bp. Yet the majority of them were found whilst ploughing cane fields or in a sand dune. This to me says that they are older then 5,000 years of age. Although, through forest clearing and ploughing, we do not necessarily know as to what depth below ground these items were. There’s a lot of soil/rock movement in clearing a rainforest and turning it into a cane field???

roughbarked said:

This tool is completely unknown to any Aboriginal people that were alive when we arrived in Australia.
Knowledge of its use and history of use had vanished well before we arrived.

I wonder if it was a tool to the predecessors of the Tasmanian aborigines before they were pushed south. It may be something that got left behind due to weight, and not needed in the different climatic conditions where the indigenous foods were different. Could explain why one was found in your area too RB. Someone carried it for a while but discarded it as too heavy or unnecessary in transit.

Yes it is a long way from rainforest to a deserted sand dune. Why would a white man carry one that far? Haven’t mapped it but it would easily be in excess of 3,000 km even in a crow flight. If he wanted to trade it he could have done it way further upriver.

I am still of the opinion that the tools should have been dated rather than just take a stab at their age due to them being found in rainforest which is a relatively young part of Australia’s history.

The only correlation to rainforest would be that the area it was found is a place that would have been totally inundated for very long periods followed by dustbowl type drying out. It would have been an island in a vast marsh. One of many such large sand dunes on the Murrumbidgee flood plain. If for example another one was to be found somewhere like Kow swamp or Lake Mungo, this would perhaps prove that they came this way with an earlier migration or was traded on one of the known and mapped trading routes used by aboriginal people.

To my mind, the only useful dating data avaiable to the casual observer would be the incidence of grinding tools rather than chipping flaking or pecking. What do we know of when the grinding of tools began in Australia? Well, we have flimsy evidence to suggest that it shouldn’t be much longer than 20, 000 years ago. However, I doubt we really know that for sure.
By waisted, I presume Dr Cosgrove meant that each ooyurka showed some evidence of an attempt to shape the handle. However the art of making them either appears to have been the domain of very few members of the many nations that once spanned Australia or that the fixed grinding tools that were used to make them were not common. It could be argued from the above descriptions(if proper excavations were done at the site of each tool find when they were found), that the art of making them had slowly faded, the knowledge and the skill were passing and the later ones were more rudimentally crafted. This could have been from many causes but it is most likely that the original use had declined for reasons only to be guessed at say such as climate change or extinction.. for example

Dr Cosgrove was doing work on rainforest foods and cultures. Therefore he assumed that the tool was principally associated with rainforest. This does not have to be a hard fact.. He didn’t actually find evidence to suffest that. Thes tools could still well have been form before the last ice age.

pain master said:

Cosgrove suggests that the Ooyurka is not older than 5,000 years bp. Yet the majority of them were found whilst ploughing cane fields or in a sand dune. This to me says that they are older then 5,000 years of age. Although, through forest clearing and ploughing, we do not necessarily know as to what depth below ground these items were. There’s a lot of soil/rock movement in clearing a rainforest and turning it into a cane field???

Yes. I would suggest that farming caused much disturbance. Just ask Time Team about that.

bluegreen said:

roughbarked said:

This tool is completely unknown to any Aboriginal people that were alive when we arrived in Australia.
Knowledge of its use and history of use had vanished well before we arrived.

I wonder if it was a tool to the predecessors of the Tasmanian aborigines before they were pushed south. It may be something that got left behind due to weight, and not needed in the different climatic conditions where the indigenous foods were different. Could explain why one was found in your area too RB. Someone carried it for a while but discarded it as too heavy or unnecessary in transit.

This is a possibility. Given that even the site that it was found on was unknown to local aboriginal people.

roughbarked said:

bluegreen said:

roughbarked said:

This tool is completely unknown to any Aboriginal people that were alive when we arrived in Australia.
Knowledge of its use and history of use had vanished well before we arrived.

I wonder if it was a tool to the predecessors of the Tasmanian aborigines before they were pushed south. It may be something that got left behind due to weight, and not needed in the different climatic conditions where the indigenous foods were different. Could explain why one was found in your area too RB. Someone carried it for a while but discarded it as too heavy or unnecessary in transit.

This is a possibility. Given that even the site that it was found on was unknown to local aboriginal people.

there have been just over 100 Ooyurkas found. Almost a third of them found in the one locality, all but the other two thirds would have been only a day or maybe two days walk from the main centre. The two that have been found outside this range were at Cairns to the north and Lucinda to the south (at a midden). If these were truly from a time of Aboriginal migration, then they would be further afield, surely?

Cosgrove did try his hornsfel slate at cutting down a tree and there was predictable damage to the end of the blade.

It was suggested by someone that the ooyurka was a hinged tool and that one end of it was placed in a socket. No scarring on the tool suggests that this was the case.

Casey in 1936 studied the four that were in Australian museums, including 2 in the Museum of Victoria, 1 in the Australian Museum and the 4th in the Queensland Museum.

pain master said:

roughbarked said:

bluegreen said:

I wonder if it was a tool to the predecessors of the Tasmanian aborigines before they were pushed south. It may be something that got left behind due to weight, and not needed in the different climatic conditions where the indigenous foods were different. Could explain why one was found in your area too RB. Someone carried it for a while but discarded it as too heavy or unnecessary in transit.

This is a possibility. Given that even the site that it was found on was unknown to local aboriginal people.

there have been just over 100 Ooyurkas found. Almost a third of them found in the one locality, all but the other two thirds would have been only a day or maybe two days walk from the main centre. The two that have been found outside this range were at Cairns to the north and Lucinda to the south (at a midden). If these were truly from a time of Aboriginal migration, then they would be further afield, surely?

Cosgrove did try his hornsfel slate at cutting down a tree and there was predictable damage to the end of the blade.

It was suggested by someone that the ooyurka was a hinged tool and that one end of it was placed in a socket. No scarring on the tool suggests that this was the case.

Casey in 1936 studied the four that were in Australian museums, including 2 in the Museum of Victoria, 1 in the Australian Museum and the 4th in the Queensland Museum.

The finding of tools in Australia has largely been accidental. No real archaeological surveys were actually carried out on any of the early finds and much area has simply been vastly altered with little or no regard for what may have been covered up or pushed out of the way.

Hinged: how was this described? which part of the tool was the hinge point what was it hinged to and is there wear on the hinge points to suggest this?

What we do know is that animal residues were not mentioned. I am aware that animal fats can be detected on ald tools. In some cases it can be observed with the naked eye.

roughbarked said:

pain master said:

roughbarked said:

This is a possibility. Given that even the site that it was found on was unknown to local aboriginal people.

there have been just over 100 Ooyurkas found. Almost a third of them found in the one locality, all but the other two thirds would have been only a day or maybe two days walk from the main centre. The two that have been found outside this range were at Cairns to the north and Lucinda to the south (at a midden). If these were truly from a time of Aboriginal migration, then they would be further afield, surely?

Cosgrove did try his hornsfel slate at cutting down a tree and there was predictable damage to the end of the blade.

It was suggested by someone that the ooyurka was a hinged tool and that one end of it was placed in a socket. No scarring on the tool suggests that this was the case.

Casey in 1936 studied the four that were in Australian museums, including 2 in the Museum of Victoria, 1 in the Australian Museum and the 4th in the Queensland Museum.

The finding of tools in Australia has largely been accidental. No real archaeological surveys were actually carried out on any of the early finds and much area has simply been vastly altered with little or no regard for what may have been covered up or pushed out of the way.

Hinged: how was this described? which part of the tool was the hinge point what was it hinged to and is there wear on the hinge points to suggest this?

What we do know is that animal residues were not mentioned. I am aware that animal fats can be detected on ald tools. In some cases it can be observed with the naked eye.

The Hinged suggestion came up in Cosgrove’s Introduction and was dismissed that quickly, that I did not write notes as to whom made the original claim. Cosgrove kinda said that a previous investigator had suggested that the ooyurka was hinged into a socket but none of the stones that Cosgrove studied showed any signs of wear or damage from such a suggestion.

Like I say, his thesis leaves me with more questions then answers.

It does not mention animal residue and quite possibly the tool is not sharp enough in the preparation of hides or deboning and the stone type is not hard enough to break or crush animal bone. Maybe to tenderised a Kangaroo Steak?

Just as we do in this day and age, it was not unknown to aboriginal people that sands or ground and powdered minerals are great abrasives.
There are evidences of specific tool grinding stones where grooves show that grinding was practised for a very long time on each site.
I have also photographed a tool which could only be described as a stone age broad axe. if you think the ooyurka was too heavy to carry, the broadaxe(as I call it) would have been impossible to swing even if tied to a stick. Presumably they did use fixed tools to work on other tools materials. See the broadaxe here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/99559986@N00/sets/72157627399092524/

The ooyurka could have been a tool for lifting bark. The plant residues may be from a tree which was widespread but is not any longer. I would have liked to have seen the tool tested for relationship to the Antarctic Beech, for example.

Yes, his theory and the tool itself leave more questions than answers but perhaps that’s why his thesis should have gone much further into studying this elusive tool.

Meat tenderiser sounds applicable but again one would espect aniimal residues to have been found.

roughbarked said:

Meat tenderiser sounds applicable but again one would espect aniimal residues to have been found.

pounding clay to paste re ochre colours.. scraping out hollowed tree trunk canoes.. could be anything.

roughbarked said:

Meat tenderiser sounds applicable but again one would espect aniimal residues to have been found.

if they were looked for? I think the one that was found at the midden is a clue. A long way from home, on the coast and amongst busted sea shells. Like I say, I reckon this one was traded and no proper methodology was discussed. So the new owner tried busting a few mussels, didn’t work so he ditched it into his midden.

Happy Potter said:

roughbarked said:

Meat tenderiser sounds applicable but again one would espect aniimal residues to have been found.

pounding clay to paste re ochre colours.. scraping out hollowed tree trunk canoes.. could be anything.

I think the thing here is Cosgrove questioned many of the local Aboriginal people about possible uses and they all turned around and said “we got tools and techniques for that”. Why reinvent the wheel so to speak?

pain master said:

roughbarked said:

Meat tenderiser sounds applicable but again one would espect aniimal residues to have been found.

if they were looked for? I think the one that was found at the midden is a clue. A long way from home, on the coast and amongst busted sea shells. Like I say, I reckon this one was traded and no proper methodology was discussed. So the new owner tried busting a few mussels, didn’t work so he ditched it into his midden.

The basalt one could easily bust mussells but it would bcome worn and mussells are easier to chuck in the fire.. they open naturally and this also tests their quality and proves them edible. Otherwise your theory sounds a plausible one.

pain master said:

Happy Potter said:

roughbarked said:

Meat tenderiser sounds applicable but again one would espect aniimal residues to have been found.

pounding clay to paste re ochre colours.. scraping out hollowed tree trunk canoes.. could be anything.

I think the thing here is Cosgrove questioned many of the local Aboriginal people about possible uses and they all turned around and said “we got tools and techniques for that”. Why reinvent the wheel so to speak?

Yes it clearly appears to be a tool that was superseded for some reason. As yet unfathomed.

roughbarked said:

pain master said:

roughbarked said:

Meat tenderiser sounds applicable but again one would espect aniimal residues to have been found.

if they were looked for? I think the one that was found at the midden is a clue. A long way from home, on the coast and amongst busted sea shells. Like I say, I reckon this one was traded and no proper methodology was discussed. So the new owner tried busting a few mussels, didn’t work so he ditched it into his midden.

The basalt one could easily bust mussells but it would bcome worn and mussells are easier to chuck in the fire.. they open naturally and this also tests their quality and proves them edible. Otherwise your theory sounds a plausible one.

I used Mussels as a generic seafood, perhaps it were fresh oysters he was trying to shuck?

pain master said:

roughbarked said:

pain master said:

if they were looked for? I think the one that was found at the midden is a clue. A long way from home, on the coast and amongst busted sea shells. Like I say, I reckon this one was traded and no proper methodology was discussed. So the new owner tried busting a few mussels, didn’t work so he ditched it into his midden.

The basalt one could easily bust mussells but it would bcome worn and mussells are easier to chuck in the fire.. they open naturally and this also tests their quality and proves them edible. Otherwise your theory sounds a plausible one.

I used Mussels as a generic seafood, perhaps it were fresh oysters he was trying to shuck?

Again, I’ve seen stone flakes that are long and knife blade shaped. You’d think they’d have used those.

roughbarked said:

pain master said:

roughbarked said:

The basalt one could easily bust mussells but it would bcome worn and mussells are easier to chuck in the fire.. they open naturally and this also tests their quality and proves them edible. Otherwise your theory sounds a plausible one.

I used Mussels as a generic seafood, perhaps it were fresh oysters he was trying to shuck?

Again, I’ve seen stone flakes that are long and knife blade shaped. You’d think they’d have used those.

but I did say “I reckon this one was traded and no proper methodology was discussed. So the new owner tried busting a few mussels, didn’t work so he ditched it into his midden.”

he may have wrongfully traded for the item thinking he was getting “new and improved” yet in reality, he scored “old and inferior”… I think the fact it was discarded amongst a midden could mean it was considered not suitable for the task at hand???

roughbarked said:

pain master said:

roughbarked said:

The basalt one could easily bust mussells but it would bcome worn and mussells are easier to chuck in the fire.. they open naturally and this also tests their quality and proves them edible. Otherwise your theory sounds a plausible one.

I used Mussels as a generic seafood, perhaps it were fresh oysters he was trying to shuck?

Again, I’ve seen stone flakes that are long and knife blade shaped. You’d think they’d have used those.

It can be seen here (apart from a few more modern scratches), that it was used longitudinally

that the points were hardly sharp.

pain master said:

roughbarked said:

pain master said:

I used Mussels as a generic seafood, perhaps it were fresh oysters he was trying to shuck?

Again, I’ve seen stone flakes that are long and knife blade shaped. You’d think they’d have used those.

but I did say “I reckon this one was traded and no proper methodology was discussed. So the new owner tried busting a few mussels, didn’t work so he ditched it into his midden.”

he may have wrongfully traded for the item thinking he was getting “new and improved” yet in reality, he scored “old and inferior”… I think the fact it was discarded amongst a midden could mean it was considered not suitable for the task at hand???

Yes you did but this would simply point to what I’ve been thinking and suggesting. That the tool was so old that nobody knew what it was for.

Definitely a damaged stone axe.

damaged by ploughing.

I’m a tool maker too. I made this one more than forty years ago. By sitting on the back porch and using only my hands and some hand tools; a coarse and fine file, both for the finishing. A jewellers fret saw to cut excess metal away to make the filing easier. all done by using my knee as a workbench.
Like any toolmaker, particularly one starved of high tech machinery, one would choose target material that most closely resembles the finished product.. saves work ergs.
This is a brass tap handle converted to watchmakers brass hammer by a first year apprentice, me. Just a tap handle, a stick, a couple of files and the creative use of a jewellers saw. Yep I’ve abused it lots of times since but as an example of both tool material selection, craftmanship and wear usage.. it fits.

roughbarked said:

I’m a tool maker too. I made this one more than forty years ago. By sitting on the back porch and using only my hands and some hand tools; a coarse and fine file, both for the finishing. A jewellers fret saw to cut excess metal away to make the filing easier. all done by using my knee as a workbench.
Like any toolmaker, particularly one starved of high tech machinery, one would choose target material that most closely resembles the finished product.. saves work ergs.
This is a brass tap handle converted to watchmakers brass hammer by a first year apprentice, me. Just a tap handle, a stick, a couple of files and the creative use of a jewellers saw. Yep I’ve abused it lots of times since but as an example of both tool material selection, craftmanship and wear usage.. it fits.

careful, you catch the eye of the “tap abuse police”… Nice hammer by the way.

pain master said:

roughbarked said:

I’m a tool maker too. I made this one more than forty years ago. By sitting on the back porch and using only my hands and some hand tools; a coarse and fine file, both for the finishing. A jewellers fret saw to cut excess metal away to make the filing easier. all done by using my knee as a workbench.
Like any toolmaker, particularly one starved of high tech machinery, one would choose target material that most closely resembles the finished product.. saves work ergs.
This is a brass tap handle converted to watchmakers brass hammer by a first year apprentice, me. Just a tap handle, a stick, a couple of files and the creative use of a jewellers saw. Yep I’ve abused it lots of times since but as an example of both tool material selection, craftmanship and wear usage.. it fits.

careful, you catch the eye of the “tap abuse police”… Nice hammer by the way.

I’ve been hammered by the blunt intsrument use abuse cops.

^ not very scientific looking photo but well this tool has been to Denmark for more than 50 years.. Some idiot tried to engrave something illegible on the face of the tool .. Hope it wasn’t the wife’s grandfather’s name .. or I’ll get shot.

The face of the tool is so flat that as you can see.. cannot get a cigarette paper in all the way along apart from right at the ends where it curves about a mm or so away.

The pecking hasn’t been completely polished off the face so, I may assume that this tool is more of a rasp or file than say a food processor or a hide softener. I may continue to assume that the polished part of the face deliberate, leaving the pecked pocks as abrasive roughage on the tool, for working other, softer tools such as spear shafts. Also I conclude that it can also be used to pare bark away from stems or tree trunks and could have been used in wooden tool making from spear shafts all the way to bark canoe construction. Most likely nothing to do with food at all.

The fact that it was superceded is possibly due to changing environment and as has already been put “Why reinvent the wheel?”

Why haven’t we found more of them? Well long may we ponder but it is likley that they are from a time when many were simply washed away or buried more deeply. The region where most have been found is after all, subject to monsoons cyclones and tsunami…

I also conclude that it was made to be suited for both left and right handed people to use in the single direction .. pushing along and forward.. which is what leads me to call it the bark parer.. for canoe construction or anything lesser along that scale. the tool, whichever hand I hold it.. has the flat edge angled awy so that it can slide around a tree trunk under bark.

Now I did read the comments about similar suggestions but I have onnly ever seen the one tool edge.. I haven’t seen accessible photos of any others. I may imagine that any edge could be fashioned on this, the woodworkers plane of the stone age.

Note; the plaster model depicted in the stone tools set on flickr is not a cast moulding gone wrong..

it is just as pointed out above.. a selection of a stray lump of plaster dried up in a bucket that the plasterer tossed away and I .. looked at curiously..

roughbarked said:

I also conclude that it was made to be suited for both left and right handed people to use in the single direction .. pushing along and forward.. which is what leads me to call it the bark parer.. for canoe construction or anything lesser along that scale. the tool, whichever hand I hold it.. has the flat edge angled awy so that it can slide around a tree trunk under bark.

Now I did read the comments about similar suggestions but I have onnly ever seen the one tool edge.. I haven’t seen accessible photos of any others. I may imagine that any edge could be fashioned on this, the woodworkers plane of the stone age.

all fair comments. Like I said earlier, and my notes are not with me now, but there were definite concave and convex versions of the Ooyurka. Not saying anything, just saying.

pain master said:

roughbarked said:

I also conclude that it was made to be suited for both left and right handed people to use in the single direction .. pushing along and forward.. which is what leads me to call it the bark parer.. for canoe construction or anything lesser along that scale. the tool, whichever hand I hold it.. has the flat edge angled awy so that it can slide around a tree trunk under bark.

Now I did read the comments about similar suggestions but I have onnly ever seen the one tool edge.. I haven’t seen accessible photos of any others. I may imagine that any edge could be fashioned on this, the woodworkers plane of the stone age.

all fair comments. Like I said earlier, and my notes are not with me now, but there were definite concave and convex versions of the Ooyurka. Not saying anything, just saying.

Well I had a chat with my aboriginal historina friend and he agreed that it could have been used for finishing spears and paring bark. The additional tool face/edges noted may well have made this the quintessential stone age tool kit.

roughbarked said:

pain master said:

roughbarked said:

I also conclude that it was made to be suited for both left and right handed people to use in the single direction .. pushing along and forward.. which is what leads me to call it the bark parer.. for canoe construction or anything lesser along that scale. the tool, whichever hand I hold it.. has the flat edge angled awy so that it can slide around a tree trunk under bark.

Now I did read the comments about similar suggestions but I have onnly ever seen the one tool edge.. I haven’t seen accessible photos of any others. I may imagine that any edge could be fashioned on this, the woodworkers plane of the stone age.

all fair comments. Like I said earlier, and my notes are not with me now, but there were definite concave and convex versions of the Ooyurka. Not saying anything, just saying.

Well I had a chat with my aboriginal historina friend and he agreed that it could have been used for finishing spears and paring bark. The additional tool face/edges noted may well have made this the quintessential stone age tool kit.

we just need to find more of them.

pain master said:

roughbarked said:

pain master said:

all fair comments. Like I said earlier, and my notes are not with me now, but there were definite concave and convex versions of the Ooyurka. Not saying anything, just saying.

Well I had a chat with my aboriginal historina friend and he agreed that it could have been used for finishing spears and paring bark. The additional tool face/edges noted may well have made this the quintessential stone age tool kit.

we just need to find more of them.

The whole tool bag would be easier to decipher and putting them together the way we have done here may help comprehend the mystery.