No bronze?

the_lyniezian · Nov 7, 2008

Inspired by:

Dutchie? said:
Europe rejecting gunpowder is like asking what if Antiquity rejected bronze in favour of keeping the wooden spear. Or if Industrialization rejected the steam engine in favour of manual labour. The benfits provided by the new technology are just too great to be overcome by any sort of traditionalists. Anyone not choosing it would quickly be overcome by someone else that had adopted the new power.

in the "Europe rejects gunpowder" thread.

What if there was no advent of serious metalworking, at least of bronze? Whatif society was still stuck in the Stone Age? Could civilisation develop and along what lines?

King Thomas · Nov 7, 2008

Didn't the Aztecs not have bronze?

mowque · Nov 7, 2008

or the Australian Aboriginals

Admiral Brown · Nov 7, 2008

King Thomas said:
Didn't the Aztecs not have bronze?

They didn't have Bronce. I've heard the Tarascan (their northern neighbours) had Bronce knifes, but I'm not sure if it's true...

Riain · Nov 7, 2008

The Maya, Aztecs and Incas did not use metal tools or weapons in a serious way and managed to build societies on par with somewhat earlier Eurasian civilisations. Certainly I'd put these civilisations above early medieval Europe, who did have metal tools and weapons. It's not until social changes occured in the late medieval era that Europeans surpassed these stone technology civilisations. I personally think that technology, or the lack thereof, had any major effect on society until well into the 'modern' era; the British agricultural and industrial revolutions.

robertp6165 · Nov 8, 2008

the_lyniezian said:
What if there was no advent of serious metalworking, at least of bronze? Whatif society was still stuck in the Stone Age? Could civilisation develop and along what lines?

If the question is, could civilization develop to our present level without bronze, the answer is yes. Basically it would simply progress from copper, silver, and gold smelting to iron smelting without the intermediate stage of discovering the alloy which is bronze.

If the question is, could civilization develop to our present level without metallurgy, the answer is clearly no.

Analytical Engine · Nov 8, 2008

Um, do you mean making bronze artificially, or do yo mean native bronze too?

robertp6165 · Nov 8, 2008

Analytical Engine said:
Um, do you mean making bronze artificially, or do yo mean native bronze too?

Bronze is an alloy. It doesn't occur naturally.

Analytical Engine · Nov 8, 2008

robertp6165 said:
Bronze is an alloy. It doesn't occur naturally.

Um, yes it does...

http://www.mindat.org/min-785.html

robertp6165 · Nov 8, 2008

Analytical Engine said:
Um, yes it does...

http://www.mindat.org/min-785.html

Okay, I suppose technically you've got me there. It does exist. However, it seems to be a trace contaminant which occurs only in oxidized tin ores at 4 locations in the world. Nothing in the source you provided, or any other source I have been able to locate (there are very few that mention it at all, because it is so rare) indicates that there are substantial deposits of it. More importantly, while we can separate it out today with our modern techniques, there is nothing to indicate this was possible for people with ancient technology. Therefore, for all intents and purposes, it might as well not exist as far as this POD is concerned.

Tocomocho · Nov 8, 2008

robertp6165 said:
If the question is, could civilization develop to our present level without bronze, the answer is yes. Basically it would simply progress from copper, silver, and gold smelting to iron smelting without the intermediate stage of discovering the alloy which is bronze.

If the question is, could civilization develop to our present level without metallurgy, the answer is clearly no.

I'm not that sure. The Egyptians weren't able to steal the secret of iron from the Hittites for decades (smart as they were, they kept their tech secret to their enemies). There is a big difference in the temperature needed to melt copper and that to melt iron: without the middle step of bronze, it's doubtful people would learn to make ovens powerful enough.

Valdemar II · Nov 8, 2008

Tocomocho said:
I'm not that sure. The Egyptians weren't able to steal the secret of iron from the Hittites for decades (smart as they were, they kept their tech secret to their enemies). There is a big difference in the temperature needed to melt copper and that to melt iron: without the middle step of bronze, it's doubtful people would learn to make ovens powerful enough.

The Subsaharan Africans didn't use Bronze before they discovered Iron-making. You could easily see the same thing happen in other places poor in copper and tin and geographic isolated.

arctic warrior · Nov 8, 2008

Tocomocho said:
I'm not that sure. The Egyptians weren't able to steal the secret of iron from the Hittites for decades (smart as they were, they kept their tech secret to their enemies). There is a big difference in the temperature needed to melt copper and that to melt iron: without the middle step of bronze, it's doubtful people would learn to make ovens powerful enough.

Melting point:
Copper 1084 C
Gold 1064 C
Silver 960 C
Tin 232 C

Iron 1520 C

So it wasn't going through a middle stage in making bronze, but the bronce working enabled man to smelt iron, bronze age smelt ovens working in 1300-1550 C range!

Tocomocho · Nov 8, 2008

Valdemar II said:
The Subsaharan Africans didn't use Bronze before they discovered Iron-making. You could easily see the same thing happen in other places poor in copper and tin and geographic isolated.

Did they discover iron tech on their own or did they just import the iron tech (ovens and all) from North Africa and Arabia? My impression was the last one.

Valdemar II · Nov 8, 2008

Tocomocho said:
Did they discover iron tech on their own or did they just import the iron tech (ovens and all) from North Africa and Arabia? My impression was the last one.

They discovered it themself twice. Once in East Africa and once in West Africa.

tallwingedgoat · Nov 8, 2008

The Haya steel making process is one of the earliest in the world, going back 2,000 years and pre-date European steel making. While it's possible they were influenced from outsiders the process involving termite mound clay is distinctly their own.

It's also possible to develop high temperature kilns without inventing bronze. Pottery kilns run from 1000-1400C.

arctic warrior · Nov 9, 2008

tallwingedgoat said:
The Haya steel making process is one of the earliest in the world, going back 2,000 years and pre-date European steel making. While it's possible they were influenced from outsiders the process involving termite mound clay is distinctly their own.

It's also possible to develop high temperature kilns without inventing bronze. Pottery kilns run from 1000-1400C.

So bronze wouldn't be a pre-requisite for iron working but was an important step in getting to work metals!!!

abas · Nov 9, 2008

arctic warrior said:
Melting point:
Copper 1084 C
Gold 1064 C
Silver 960 C
Tin 232 C

Iron 1520 C

So it wasn't going through a middle stage in making bronze, but the bronce working enabled man to smelt iron, bronze age smelt ovens working in 1300-1550 C range!

But copper alloys have lower melting point than copper itself and initially iron was produced without melting in temperature lower than 1000 C.

Analytical Engine · Nov 10, 2008

abas said:
But copper alloys have lower melting point than copper itself and initially iron was produced without melting in temperature lower than 1000 C.

You need high temperatures to cast iron.

However, it doesn't need to be that hot to be hammered into shape.