Thread: Hone ID - Charnley or Llyn Idwal? Opinions please

doorsch, that looks like the stones which according to adrspach are more recent CFs. I got one too.

@piet:

Cf is a Novaculite type...this one looks more like a kind of Slate/Schist but iam unsure...Can you post a picture of yours ?

Sure, more pics here.

Doorch that grey hone you have looks to be very typical schist.

A good starting point to look into it is Eidsborg schist. It's a material that has been used since people started to make metals and has been found all over Europe. With grave finds ranging from Iceland, to Poland. While yours may not be from that region there is a lot of information regarding that region and how the stone was quarried and used. And since yours is definitely of the schist type most of the information will cover how that stone should behave.

Trade in the Telemark | Promare

Piet, I don't think that stone is true novaculite, I've got several similar samples from my rock hounding over in Charnwood forest. I found a series of rocks similar to that in a nearby woods, In terms of how it behaves compared to CF it's harder and slower and more dense, And sits in a much more compact and solid layer of rock under the standard CF seam. It is still a CF siltstone and it can still have the red inclusions, But it is not the material used in the vintage hones. My samples behave very similar to Arkansas finishing stones, They don't shed any grit at all and take a face polish in a very similar fashion.

The vintage material is still actually available if you go to the correct locations. I believe the reason this stone was not used it the fact it would take a lot longer to dress with ancient tools.

It even sound like there is a forest in Charnwood parish from your description. Can you describe what you understand by vintage hones. It is known that there were different quality CF hones depending on source of stone. There are different layers with different characteristics but they are still CF in similar fashion to Belgian Coticule which comes in different layers too with different sub names.

Hi guys interesting read and explanations, to add more information...

1) yes it is quite hard in this thinking to hard for a shist
2) it seems to be fine and leaves a mirror finish
3) knocking on a CF (i have 3) and on this one sounds the same
4) hardes or density is very high


@iceni:
Probably the picture does not give the colour correct it is more greenish...quite greener the most of the CFs i have seen...

I will add further more detailled pictures but i must admit that Piets Same fits quite good

More pictures:
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3811/...55dff6_c_d.jpg

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3761/...9d702c_c_d.jpg

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7027/...8f56ac_c_d.jpg

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3764/...d03558_c_d.jpg

Here at this spot it looks like a shist, but thats the only area which has this look a like
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3673/...e0b1cc_c_d.jpg

It even sound like there is a forest in Charnwood parish from your description. Can you describe what you understand by vintage hones. It is known that there were different quality CF hones depending on source of stone. There are different layers with different characteristics but they are still CF in similar fashion to Belgian Coticule which comes in different layers too with different sub names.

The whole Charnwood region has a lot of geological confusion in it.

This is a map I made for myself overlaying the Igneous from the geological surveys over a regular map.



The red area represents a diorite belt that is nothing to do with the CF hone material. It sits at or near surface level in the red areas.

The pink dot represents the real CF quarry, It's on private land, and you need permission to visit. The actual location has Vintage grade CF material at surface level.

The material that is similar to the vintage hone material that I got was take from the woods just north of the pink dot.

The whole area is an ancient fault line, and the rocks have been twisted in the ground to form the hills.



The difference in the material is found because of the tools that were used to dress the stones. The pink dot stone is softer, Therefor easier to work, It's at surface level and therefore easier to quarry, IT also pulls out of the ground in hone shaped lumps. As you move around the location the same material can be found in more and less compressed forms. The denser stone is much harder to work, comes away in blocks rather than rectangles and while it has a flat compression surface the edges and shape are less hone like to begin with. Since a pink dot hone would take a few hours to lap on wet sand, going and purposefully picking a harder stone and doubling the dress time would not be an option. This is evident in how the hones were made. The Cole-orton hone makers were traveling 15 miles to get to the pink dot, when there are 2 quarries with similar stone located within 2 miles of Cole-orton. They also worked with very basic tools that would not have dealt with the harder material, And the market for the stone was for a fast stone not a finisher. All things that go against the harder stone as a vintage hone.

I'm still grading the pink dot myself, I've got to go back and collect more rocks to grade the faces and the seams in the quarry faces. The stone from both locations at face value looks very similar, the density seems to be the biggest grading factor. The heavy stone is for the most part a slower stone, with harder inclusions that are more compressed. The softer stone seems to be the other way, Weak inclusions even porus, with flowing seams of grit that can be worked round if needed. The strata within the stone is again different, This rock is made from a seabed, and the inclusions follow a ripple rather than a line, The stone also falls into layers of compression that are linear giving 2 distinct features to work around. Again I have to investigate this fully by pulling rock in situe and marking the location and angle in the ground to see if there has also been a shift in the ripple and the compression stages meaning the 2 layers are skewed. The red inclusions in the rock seem to follow the ripple but the red dots also move through the stone. I'm not sure exactly why they do this but they can span multiple ripple layers and not be in line with the compression layer either! It is possible that the red layer is another stone that has been deposited into the silt that had enough rigidity to hold it's shape as the silt layer was formed then got compressed in the compression phase making it appear out of key. The red can also be present in the harder stones found in the other location.

My information is in no way complete, there is very little written about how it was quarried and dealt with other than a small insert and a articles here and there.

I do not agree with your information. I have managed to visit most of the locations on your map with some interesting differences in findings. I took Henk (Margeja) to few of those locations as you can see from pictures in his book. Also with flattening stones I am finding that damp sand is quite fast on hard hones especially as you can use significantly larger area and strokes for lapping. As with the speed and harness of hones it depends what you want them for. For fine edge speed is not that relevant. For honing under pressure harder hone is better and equivalent of fine arkie in UK is CF.

I do not agree with your information. I have managed to visit most of the locations on your map with some interesting differences in findings. I took Henk (Margeja) to few of those locations as you can see from pictures in his book. Also with flattening stones I am finding that damp sand is quite fast on hard hones especially as you can use significantly larger area and strokes for lapping. As with the speed and harness of hones it depends what you want them for. For fine edge speed is not that relevant. For honing under pressure harder hone is better and equivalent of fine arkie in UK is CF.

I think you misunderstood what I was posting. I wasn't trying to belittle the other locations, Just give a hypothesis as to why we don't see that harder stone in vintage hones.

I actually agree that the harder material may make a better finisher, I have a lump next to me now that has continued to self glaze just like my Trans Black Arkansas, and it's giving an equally fine edge whilst been faster.

I'm going to test one of the theory about cutting the harder stuff later in the week with a guillotine, I have a feeling it's not going to work. I'm either going to see the stone fracturing, or it simply will prove too hard to cut in this manner... It's not a problem for an angle grinder tho!

Until I have seen skilled stone mason at work I did not believe that splitting a piece of rock can be so easy. Just to be able to recognize direction of the cleavage is the good start. As with use of the guillotine i understand where you coming from. After a bit of research and talking to few experts on vintage tools I am more inclining to go in direction of the guillotine type of tool being used after basic splitting into slabs to make the characteristic CF shape which was then finished on sand table. I have seen this "roughing" done in smaller scale on hard sandstone and slate by hand as well as by machine into shape of scythe-stones.