> who else would it be who led the transition from copper to iron, if not the people working with copper?
Karl Benz wasn’t a teamster.
Hematite colours ochre clay red. I could see just as plausible a route of origin coming through pottery, where someone stuck a lump of hematite into a kiln or whatnot.
Well, no, but he was a locomotive engineer before going into automobiles.
> I could see just as plausible a route of origin coming through pottery,
Oh, that makes sense.
It looks like kilns for pottery can be hotter than for copper, hot enough for iron (although I don't know if that's modern kilns or ancient ones), so it does seem possible you'd first notice the new metal around pottery kilns instead.
Recent discusion from another url https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45406090 123 points | 1 day ago | 79 comments
So the actual archaeological discovery notwithstanding, does anyone know why the headline would be surprising?
Like, who else would it be who led the transition from copper to iron, if not the people working with copper?
> who else would it be who led the transition from copper to iron, if not the people working with copper?
Karl Benz wasn’t a teamster.
Hematite colours ochre clay red. I could see just as plausible a route of origin coming through pottery, where someone stuck a lump of hematite into a kiln or whatnot.
> Karl Benz wasn’t a teamster.
Well, no, but he was a locomotive engineer before going into automobiles.
> I could see just as plausible a route of origin coming through pottery,
Oh, that makes sense.
It looks like kilns for pottery can be hotter than for copper, hot enough for iron (although I don't know if that's modern kilns or ancient ones), so it does seem possible you'd first notice the new metal around pottery kilns instead.
Discussed yesterday (same story, different source): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45406090