3000 year old sword found - amazing bronze design

There has to be some suspicion as archaeology has become such a 'loaded' discipline- used to confirm or underline current accepted theories or indeed, prejudices. There's a lot of money involved too with regard to funding further excavations/research and the notoriously inflated yet brittle ego and 'reputation' of academics. Piltdown Man....;)

Experts on bronze, metallurgists, will know more about the properties of corrosion of this metal in the ground. It may well endure very well in certain dry soils. However, the sword and the arrow heads were allegedly buried with a corpse and the decomposition and acids of a rotting body would surely have had an impact on them? But perhaps not. It's an interesting find yet worth pondering over.
 
I would personally find this difficult to believe...but I'm not an expert by any means and will defer to the actual experts in the field.
 
Stating the obvious, IMO Archaeological fakes/hoaxes have existed since it was a thing, archaeology that is. Everything from skulls, tablets, gold cloak pins, Japanese stone tools, scythes, bronze and other metal coins, statuary… on-and-on. I was visiting at the Smithsonian and consulted with staff concerning riveted tools discovered in the USA upper Midwest, located with mounds near waterbodies, the tools made by Indian peoples. This was an incredible discovery since it was unknown outside India tools were riveted for the time period (and certainlynot in the US). I didn’t learn any details about the origin of the find; the people involved in their discovery; the qualifications and motivations of the academics and scientists involved. But the Smithsonian was REALLY excited to say the least. If amateur archaeologists are involved in something, it exposes a different level of vulnerability to scamming; amateurs are thought to be the most dangerous of those in the field. I don’t mean to be obtuse but greater interest in this find and time will probably bear out if that beautiful sword and the arrowheads are authentic (and authentic to the time attributed them) vis a vis the dig.
 
Last edited:
Archeology is an interest of mine, but I am far from an expert in the field. If it was not for the Smithsonian's opinion I would certainly believe this to be a fake.
 
Last edited:
The part that confuses me is the polished appearance. Bronze, even underwater, will take on a patina.

The photo looks like it was staged after everything was cleaned up.
The sword absolutely has a patina. That's why it's green and not polished and golden. It's damp in the original dig pictures, which gives it a sheen.

There are later pictures from researchers at The Bavarian State Office for Monument Protection that show it dry, and it is a much better representation of how it actually looks. The sword appears very much in line with existing, confirmed discoveries from the same time period around the world.


There ARE other bronze swords out there that came out of the ground VERY nice looking, including some in China and others in Greece. Do not be so quick to judge this particular book by its cover.
 
The sword appears very much in line with existing, confirmed discoveries from the same time period around the world.

rqxJz2R.jpeg





There ARE other bronze swords out there that came out of the ground VERY nice looking, including some in China and others in Greece.

My favorite is the Sword of Gou Jian, King of Yue.

jmJn9xy.jpeg



The pattern on the surface of this sword and other Chinese bronze weapons is a mystery, but 5 years ago a physicist with a special interest in bronze and I figured out how and why it was made, and how to replicate it. We were going to pitch "Secrets of the Chinese Bronze Sword" to Nova as a follow-up to "Secrets of the Viking Sword" and remake it, but he got too busy with his business. I should contact him and see if he's still super busy these days.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top