The idea that there was a Copper Age between the Neolithic and Bronze Age was inspired by the discovery of the use of native copper in prehistoric North America. Its currency in European prehistory owes much to the 1861 observations by William Wilde that copper tools preceded the use of bronze in Ireland, though Wilde did not postulate a Copper Age per se. Acceptance of the existence of a Copper Age was a long process, not least as it seemed to contradict the premises of the Three Age System and was conflated with arguments for the local development of copper metallurgy, but the 1876 and 1880 international prehistoric archaeology congresses were key moments in its recognition. By the mid 1880s its validity was widely accepted in Europe. In contemporary dating schemes, the definition of the Copper Age varies according to regional and national traditions. This paper touches on the debate concerning the use of technological stages as chronological periods and examines the history of alternative conceptualisations of the early periods of metallurgy in Europe, including those that posit socio-economic phases of development.

新石器时代和青铜时代之间存在铜器时代的想法是受到史前北美发现使用原生铜的启发而产生的。它在欧洲史前时期的流行很大程度上要归功于威廉·王尔德 1861 年的观察，即铜工具先于爱尔兰使用青铜，尽管王尔德本身并没有假设铜器时代。接受铜器时代的存在是一个漫长的过程，尤其是因为它似乎与三时代体系的前提相矛盾，并且与当地铜冶金发展的论点混为一谈，但 1876 年和 1880 年的国际史前考古学大会其认可的关键时刻。到 1880 年代中期，其有效性在欧洲被广泛接受。在当代测年方案中，铜器时代的定义根据地区和国家传统而有所不同。本文涉及有关使用技术阶段作为时间顺序的争论，并研究了欧洲早期冶金时期的替代概念化的历史，包括那些假定社会经济发展阶段的概念化的历史。