Ancient Hilted Sword Made Of Iron Lined With Steel Found In Oman

[Robert F. Smith]

...............................................................

A close reading of the text involves a private interpretation of the scriptures, which we are warned against. And why would a close reading of the text in the 1950s ignore the obvious fact that it took only 8 years for the "Clan" Lehi to cross the Arabian Peninsula, yet claim the Nephite Nation was restricted to a 500 x 200 mile area (Sorenson's words) for 1,000 years until Moroni decided to walk north? And this while Nephites are have claimed to have lived among the Maya in the same restricted area, despite Alma 48:2 mentioning no "Others?"  ................................................................

Hugh Nibley did warn us (more than once) about that back-robed false priesthood of academia, and I agree that it just doesn't seem right that the chosen people of God (Israel) had to endure being bound then and now within such closely circumscribed space.  Surely God could have provided more appropriate Lebensraum.  Such a pity that the descendants of Manasseh should have been confined in so limited a space in the New World as well.  One wonders how the Olmec felt being hemmed in like that, and the Maya as well -- over two millennia in the Yucatan and Guatemala.  Just doesn't seem right.

 

So if you believe it's ok to ignore the huge expanse of the Arabian Peninsula, compared to tiny Israel, I understand. But you are ignoring it.

I suppose that I should cry "Great Kahuna!" and meet you for drinks at the local Tiki-room, where we can continue this incoherence in properly illogical decor, but, well, you know . . .

[Robert F. Smith]

Well, being raised in the Church, I never considered criticizing the text of the scriptures to be one of my defining attributes. I consider them to be a standard - a baseline - if you will, with which we use judge theories or teachings of men that are thrown at us.

But if you consider criticism of the text of the scriptures to fall within your realm of reasoning, then the Geographical location of the Book of Mormon can be most anywhere. Just criticize and explain away any verse(s) that don't fit your paradigm, and up is down, black is white, and good is evil.

You have it backwards, Tiki.  The text should tell us what to take as the paradigm.

[Tiki]

You have it backwards, Tiki.  The text should tell us what to take as the paradigm.

I don't believe I have it backwards. You've already confirmed that the text contains hyperbole - meaning it contains half- or partial-truths. All because it doesn't fit your Mesoamerica paradigm.

We've already gone over this.

 

Hey, it was nice bantering with you. Have a good rest of the week.

Edited June 24, 2014 by Tiki

[rodheadlee]

You made the following claim.

 

The Book of Mormon does not make that claim.

"And I did teach my people to build buildings, and to work in all manner of wood, and of iron, and of copper, and of brass, and of steel, and of gold, and of silver, and of precious ores, which were in great abundance." (2 Nephi 5:15)

 

Here are the other 4 verses that mention steel.

 

"And it came to pass that as I, Nephi, went forth to slay food, behold, I did break my bow, which was made of fine steel; and after I did break my bow, behold, my brethren were angry with me because of the loss of my bow, for we did obtain no food." (1 Nephi 16:18)

 

"And I beheld his sword, and I drew it forth from the sheath thereof; and the hilt thereof was of pure gold, and the workmanship thereof was exceedingly fine, and I saw that the blade thereof was of the most precious steel." (1 Nephi 4:9)

 

"Wherefore, he came to the hill Ephraim, and he did molten out of the hill, and made swords out of steel for those whom he had drawn away with him; and after he had armed them with swords he returned to the city Nehor, and gave battle unto his brother Corihor, by which means he obtained the kingdom and restored it unto his father Kib." (Ether 7:9)

 

"And we multiplied exceedingly, and spread upon the face of the land, and became exceedingly rich in gold, and in silver, and in precious things, and in fine workmanship of wood, in buildings, and in machinery, and also in iron and copper, and brass and steel, making all manner of tools of every kind to till the ground, and weapons of war—yea, the sharp pointed arrow, and the quiver, and the dart, and the javelin, and all preparations for war." (Jarom 1:8 )

Maybe you should research Portobelo Panama. This port's sole existence was to move gold from the new world to the old world. Thousands of ships carted off precious metals from Portobelo. There is a fort on each side of the harbor dedicated to protecting the loot.

[thesometimesaint]

Maybe you should research Portobelo Panama. This port's sole existence was to move gold from the new world to the old world. Thousands of ships carted off precious metals from Portobelo. There is a fort on each side of the harbor dedicated to protecting the loot.

 

Gold, Glory, and the Gospel lead to the invasion of the New World by Europeans.

[changed]

So I stumbled across this recent article from archaeology.org about the discovery of an Iron-Age Chieftains grave in Oman that is 2300 years old.  It's a short article but gives an interesting description of a sword found in the grave.  Here's the link, but I will just copy and paste the article because its so short. 

 

MUSCAT, OMAN—Muscat Daily reports that an ancient cemetery is being excavated ahead of a road construction project in Mudhaibi. One area of the cemetery dates to the third millennium B.C., and the other dates to the first millennium B.C. Among the oldest graves is one thought to be the 2,300-year-old tomb of a chieftain who had been buried with a male and a female camel, a sword with a hilt shaped as an eagle’s head, a robe, a conical woolen hat, and leather shoes. He also wore two daggers, one on each side of his waist. The sword and the daggers had been made of iron lined with steel—a style that may connect the burial to the Indus Valley, where it is thought that iron swords were first forged. 

 

Here's the link to the Muscat Daily artilce that sheds a bit more light on that sword.  This is interesting when compared to the infamous sword of Laban. 

 

http://www.muscatdaily.com/Archive/Oman/2-300-years-old-grave-in-Sinaw-could-be-Oman-s-biggest-archaeological-find-37sy

 

Interesting!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

As a side note, now that I am living in the South, I think it would be very hard to preserve anything that is iron in this corrosive environment.  We have tools go bad in a couple of years if stored outside in the garage, and we're 2 hours away from the ocean.  Anything close to the ocean, and you can kiss any iron goodbye.  Nothing would last very long here.  That not much is found, is simply an effect of the environment.

 

Edited June 24, 2014 by changed

[bcuzbcuz]

Interesting!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

As a side note, now that I am living in the South, I think it would be very hard to preserve anything that is iron in this corrosive environment.  We have tools go bad in a couple of years if stored outside in the garage, and we're 2 hours away from the ocean.  Anything close to the ocean, and you can kiss any iron goodbye.  Nothing would last very long here.  That not much is found, is simply an effect of the environment.

Even if every single trace of any iron or steel products had rusted into oblivion (including every single evidence of any rust from such deterioration) and all such evidence vanished and unobservable, would not the SLAG from the original smelting of iron ore be observable? Slag doesn't rust or disappear. Please provide any evidence if you wish to refute this point. Or if you can name any processing or smelting iron ore that does not produce slag, please substantiate.

Has any slag from iron ore smelting or refining, from pre-Columbian period, been found anywhere in north, central or south America?

[Robert F. Smith]

Even if every single trace of any iron or steel products had rusted into oblivion (including every single evidence of any rust from such deterioration) and all such evidence vanished and unobservable, would not the SLAG from the original smelting of iron ore be observable? Slag doesn't rust or disappear. Please provide any evidence if you wish to refute this point. Or if you can name any processing or smelting iron ore that does not produce slag, please substantiate.

Has any slag from iron ore smelting or refining, from pre-Columbian period, been found anywhere in north, central or south America?

You need to put your modern Bessemer Convertor away for a moment, bcuzbcuz, and think about how ancient peoples created steel at the local level with an oven and bellows.  Iron did not need to be smelted, but rather heated to a soft, red-hot state in the oven, then that bloom removed by the smith and hammered and shaped into the desired implement -- quenching in water or oil, and reheating in a charcoal fire during the process.  This does not produce piles of slag.

 

However, as I pointed out above (perhaps you ignored all my citations, including the wonderful videos on swordmaking), tons of iron objects have been found in lowland Veracruz Olmec sites.

[bcuzbcuz]

You need to put your modern Bessemer Convertor away for a moment, bcuzbcuz, and think about how ancient peoples created steel at the local level with an oven and bellows.  Iron did not need to be smelted, but rather heated to a soft, red-hot state in the oven, then that bloom removed by the smith and hammered and shaped into the desired implement -- quenching in water or oil, and reheating in a charcoal fire during the process.  This does not produce piles of slag.

 

However, as I pointed out above (perhaps you ignored all my citations, including the wonderful videos on swordmaking), tons of iron objects have been found in lowland Veracruz Olmec sites.

Are you saying the Olmec are the Jaredites?

[thesometimesaint]

Are you saying the Olmec are the Jaredites?

 

Coulds be. But I think it is more likely that some of the descendents of the Jaredites intermingled with the Olmec. 

[Robert F. Smith]

Are you saying the Olmec are the Jaredites?

See, even you are beginning to get the big picture. "If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, . . . "

[Robert F. Smith]

Coulds be. But I think it is more likely that some of the descendents of the Jaredites intermingled with the Olmec. 

One encounters the same problem with the Essenes and the people of the Dead Sea sect.  They live in the same time and place and achieve the same objectives, yet there is doubt based on small details.  Can one prove it absolutely?  No.  Is there a preponderance of evidence?  Yes.

[bcuzbcuz]

You need to put your modern Bessemer Convertor away for a moment, bcuzbcuz, and think about how ancient peoples created steel at the local level with an oven and bellows.  Iron did not need to be smelted, but rather heated to a soft, red-hot state in the oven, then that bloom removed by the smith and hammered and shaped into the desired implement -- quenching in water or oil, and reheating in a charcoal fire during the process.  This does not produce piles of slag.

 

However, as I pointed out above (perhaps you ignored all my citations, including the wonderful videos on swordmaking), tons of iron objects have been found in lowland Veracruz Olmec sites.

I'm not sure where you get your information. I live in Sweden, a country and part of northern Europe, where there are massive amounts of evidence that show the progressive of technology from the stone age to the bronze age and to the iron age.

You can find the same information, although most of it is in Swedish, Finnish or Icelandic. Slag is called "slagg" in Swedish so it's quite easy to identify.

Most of these papers talk about finds of slag identifying where iron was used. Some of the iron came from meteors and did not produce much slag, but mire iron and surface mining gave iron ores that needed to have a separation process. This separation heating produced slag.

Here are the articles: summa sumarum- Iron processing produces SLAG

http://samla.raa.se/xmlui/bitstream/handle/raa/4329/rga2007_08.pdf?sequence=1

http://norrbottensmuseumarkeologi.wordpress.com/2011/04/05/arkeologi-i-haparandabanans-spar-del-5-jarnframstallningsplatsen-vid-jernbacksmyren/

Järnet är ett hållbarare och mångsidigare material än de tidigare råmaterialen för arbetsredskap och vapen. Avgörande för att järnet så snabbt blev allmänt var att man kunde tillverka enkla arbetsredskap ur lokal sjö- eller myrmalm. Den egentliga järnbränningen utfördes troligen på boplatsen eller i dess närhet i en s.k. blästerugn. Det smälta järnet tappades skilt. Den järnmängd som utvanns var mycket liten jämfört med den slagg som uppkom. Platser där järn tillverkats påträffas ofta just på grund av slaggen. Konsten att tillverka järn spred sig ungefär samtidigt till olika delar av landet. Kunskaperna om tillverkningsmetoden kom emellertid från olika håll – från öster, söder eller väster – beroende på var kulturgrupperna hade kontakter från förut. Vårt lands äldsta kända järntillverkningsplatser är nästan lika gamla som de första importföremålen av järn.

Förromersk järnålder 500 f.Kr. - 0

Romersk järnålder 0 - 400 e.Kr.

Folkvandringstid 400-575 e.Kr.

Merovingertid 575 - 800 e.Kr.

Vikingatid 800 - 1025 e.Kr.

Korstågstid 1025 - 1300 e.Kr.

Huvudparten av föremålsbeståndet från järnåldern utgörs av gravfynd. Det har hittats rikligt med boplatser, men de har tillsvidare undersökts endast i ringa utsträckning. Finlands järnålder indelas i perioder, som har definierats utgående från vissa ledande smycken och vapen som varit i bruk. Järnålderns perioder har anpassats till namn som använts på övriga håll i Europa.

Förromersk järnålder 500 f.Kr. - 0

Handelsförbindelser bröts, vilket kommer till synes i att fynden minskar till antalet i hela norra Europa. Ofta saknar gravarna helt föremål. En klimatförsämring har möjligen påverkat den ekonomiska situationen.

De avlidna fick sparsamt med gravgods med sig i graven. I allmänhet är gravarna helt utan föremål. Tidigare trodde man att landet hade nästan avfolkats under förromersk järnålder, vilket dock inte torde vara riktigt. Föremålsbeståndet visar att kontakter med Estland och Baltikum upprätthölls. Ett talande exempel är en handelsmans depåfynd från Bjärnå. Fyndet omfattade s.k. tappyxor, spjutspetsar samt skäror och liar. Man kan skilja mellan en kulturkrets vid kusten och en i inlandet.

I kustområdet fick man sin huvudsakliga utkomst från havet. Slagg som har påträffats på boplatserna utgör bevis på järnframställning. På en del boplatser finns spår av bostäder vars väggar har tätats med lera. Föremålsbeståndet är i allmänhet anspråkslöst. Metallföremål är sällsynta. Gravarna bestod i allmänhet av låga rösen och fyrsidiga stensättningar. I dem har man i allmänhet funnit endast keramik (lerkärl).

Bosättningen i inlandet fortsatte de östliga traditionerna från tidig metallålder. Boplatserna låg ofta på samma platser som under stenåldern. Hit spred sig konsten att tillverka järn samtidigt som till kusten. Vårt lands äldsta järnvapen, två östliga krumma dolkar har påträffats i Savukoski.

Romersk järnålder 0 – 400 e.Kr.

En del föremål som tillverkats i det romerska riket, såsom dryckeshorn av glas och vinskopor av brons samt romerska kopparmynt har funnit sin väg ända till Finland. De första århundradena från vår tideräknings början kan därför också hos oss kallas för romartid.

Järnålderskulturen stabiliserade sig vid kusten. Gravfälten är synliga vittnesbörd om att bosättning fanns. Däremot känner man till endast ett fåtal boplatser. Gravfälten ligger i allmänhet vid åmynningar. Metallföremålen var för det mesta importerat gods, smyckena kom närmast från Baltikum och vapnen från germanska områden i väster. Kustområdet torde ha fått kulturinfluenser från Östersjöområdet. Befolkningen i inlandet och i norra Finland fortsatte sitt traditionella levnadssätt.

Den gamla traditionen representeras av gravröse som i allmänhet bestod av sten och jord. I rösena har man påträffat både brand- och skelettgravar. En tidstypisk företeelse är rektangulära högar, stensättningar, i vilka de döda har begravts antingen brända eller obrända. Gravfältens stensättningar kan även vara låga, omfatta stora områden och sakna struktur, s.k. brandgravfält. I dessa har man begravt de döda brända eller obrända. I sydvästra Finland förekommer brandgropsgravar av svensk typ, i vilka resterna av en bränd individ har placerats i en grop i marken och täckts över. Ibland har resterna placerats i ett ler- eller träkärl. Gravgropen kan ibland vara täckt av en stenhäll.

Under yngre romersk järnålder dök gravfält upp också i inlandet, i Satakunda och Tavastland. Nyland hade fortsättningsvis kontakter till Baltikum. När det gäller landets sydvästra delar lägger man märke till kontakterna med Skandinavien. Tavastland och Syd-Österbotten urskiljs som särskilda grupper. Likbränningen befästs men i övrigt är gravformerna desamma som tidigare.

Största delen av föremålen var fortfarande importerade från Östersjöområdet, både från Baltikum och från germanska områden. Bland föremålen märks också lyxvaror som kommit från avlägsnare trakter. En betydande del av våra guldfynd från järnåldern dateras till denna tid. Fynden består av ringar, samt delar av hals- och armringar, vars huvudsakliga fyndområde är Egentliga Finland. Den förmögenhet som avspeglas i gravfynden antas ha grundat sig på pälshandeln. Den allmänna förekomsten av pilspetsar bör sannolikt tolkas som att jakten hade en viktig ställning. Det förekommer rikligt med pilspetsar, vilket kan ses som ett belägg för att jakten varit av betydelse. Ett bevis på att man allt mera har utnyttjat ödemarkerna är föremål och enstaka gravar som påträffats på långt avstånd från gravfältsområdena.

Folkvandringstid 400 – 575 e.Kr.

http://www.nba.fi/sv/nationalmuseum/undervisning/undervisningspaket/forhistoria/information/utskrift3

‹Förromersk järnålder (500 f.Kr. — Kr.f.)

Myrmalm användes som källa till järn till en början.

Ett rekonstruerat järnåldershus i Odense i Danmark.

Huvudartikel: Förromersk järnålder

Efter klimatförsämringen inträder den förromerska järnåldern, en period som är känd för sin relativa sparsamhet i arkeologiska fynd. Det är även under denna period som germanska stammar blev kända i medelhavsvärlden och för romarna. I det arkeologiska materialet syns från denna tid en sjunkande bronsimport, till följd av införandet av lokal järnframställning. Till en början var järnet mycket värdefullt och användes till utsmyckningar. De tidigaste källorna till järn var myrmalm där järnet är lättare att nå än i berg. De äldsta järnartefakterna är nålar, men svärd och skäror återfinns också. Brons fortsatte att användas under perioden, men mer och mer för detaljer medan det hårdare järnet infördes för bruksföremål. De kulturella traditionerna utvecklades från bronsålderstraditionerna men det förekom starka influenser från Hallstattkulturen i Centraleuropa. En bronsåldersedvänja som dessa behöll var kremering och urnsättning av döda. Under de yngsta seklerna spreds influenser från Västeuropa (La Tène-kulturen) till Norden via nordvästra Tyskland. Från denna tid finns järnefterlämningar i form av svärd, sköldar, spjuthuvuden, saxar, skäror, pincetter, knivar, nålar, spännen och grytor - liksom många andra liknande föremål. För bland annat kannor användes även brons med en stil som byggde vidare på bronsåldersstilen. Ett av de mest intressanta fynden är Dejbjerg-vagnen från Jylland: en fyrhjulig vagn av trä och brons. Under denna tid görs odlingstekniska framsteg och bysamhället grundläggs.[1]

http://sv.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fornnordisk_tid

Som en möjlighet föreslog Museiverkets forskare att smeder på 1500 - 1600-talet har använt förhistoriska föremål som råvaror (Niukkanen 2012). Det är mycket möjligt att smeden skulle ha rövat föremål från gravar på ett antaget gravfält, som befunnit sig på en sandbacke ca 300 m norrut, och använt dessa som råmaterial. Varför skulle järnföremål, såsom brottstycken av eggfragment och slagg i så fall ha spritts i olika lager på ett så stort terassområde som 300 x 350 m? Ur metallurgisk synvinkel kan man ännu misstänka att vore det så klokt eller överhuvudtaget möjligt att utnyttja t.o.m. sådana föremål till råämne som redan för hundratals år sedan förvandlats till magnetit, wüstit och järnoxid. För det tredje kan man tänka sig att det skulle finnas en mera vardaglig förklaring till varför det på området fanns kniv- och andra eldvapenfragment och att man inte använt dessa som återvinningsmaterial; smeden behärskade kanske härdning av kolstål men inte eggens anlöpning efter härdningen. Eggen kan beroende på sin kolhalt och sina blandämnen härdas t.o.m. till glashård, men om den inte anlöps kan den lätt gå av, om den träffar en sten eller då man gröper ur, vrider i eller klyver trä. (bl.a. Peets 2013; Pleiner 2005,2006; Buchwald 2005; Godfrei & Nie 2003). I stället för den i arkeologisk källlitteratur förekommande akademiska förklaringen, såsom ”begravningsritualer” och ”offergåvor”, kan man begrunda också metallurgin ur smedens och snickarens synvinkel, vilka har smitt och använt kniven.

http://rautakymi.fi/Svenskasidor/Virasforsen.html

[thesometimesaint]

Please translate for us English only speakers.

[bcuzbcuz]

Please translate for us English only speakers.

Gladly.

 

http://www.nba.fi/sv/nationalmuseum/undervisning/undervisningspaket/forhistoria/information/utskrift3

 

This study comes from Finland and is done by the Finnish National Museum. In its opening statement is states, "The amount of iron produced was very small compared to the amounts of slag created. The places where iron was manufactured is often found because of the deposits of slag."

 

It talks about slag being found from small household production in villages bordering the Baltic and that grave sites have been easier to find than living quarters.

 

http://arkeologipnorrbottensmuseum.blogspot.se/2011/03/arkeologi-i-haparandabanans-spar-del-5.html

 

This study is done in Haparanda. And done under the auspices of the Norrbotten Museum. This area is in the cold, dark north of Sweden, an area where even as I write this, on the 25th of June, the temperature there is 5 degrees Celsius and they had snow last week.

 

"The search was done over a sandy area, close to the Jernbacks mire. The metal detector beeped over an area of 30 square meters. When the peat moss was lifted relatively large chunks of characteristic slagg were identified."

 

 

 

http://samla.raa.se/xmlui/bitstream/handle/raa/4329/rga2007_08.pdf?sequence=1

 

This article is from the Swedish National Heritage Board. The article is called: "Archeo-Metalurgical Study of Slag and Iron From Grave Sites" by Daniel Andersson and Lena Grandin and is done in west Bohuslän, which is the most westerly province in Sweden, touching up to Norway and the Atlantic. The paper lists 128 slag finds from 8 different sites.

 

The combined results from the excavation, made by Bohusläns Museum, and the 

archaeometallurgic analyses show that forging took place at the site during the transition 

between the Vendel Period and Viking Age. The smithing hearth(s), was built on a plateau, 

lined with clay and run with charcoal as fuel. In one hearth, primary smithing took place. That 

is, slag was removed from either a bloom or a slag rich currency bar before the secondary 

smithing, or forging of iron items, could begin. The analysed slag samples indicate that the 

latter took place in another hearth, but we cannot exclude that both processes could be 

performed in the same hearth. Most of the iron objects were extensively corroded and only a 

few traces of the iron quality could be observed. Among these we found carbon steel of good 

quality that also revealed a high level of forging. 

 

http://sv.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fornnordisk_tid

 

This site is Swedish and talks about the earliest sources of iron ore.

 

"In the beginning, iron was very valuable and was used mostly for jewelry. The earliest source sites for iron ore came from mire iron." (It was literally raked from the bottom of small pools of water in the peat mire fields)

 

http://rautakymi.fi/Svenskasidor/Virasforsen.html

 

This site is Finnish and talks about how this site was discovered when iron objects were found as a new highway was under construction.

 

"On a few terraces, approx. 50-150 meters northwest of the first find, many iron objects were recovered, a fragment of an ax edge, retouched arrow points, fragments of knives, a fire iron, a belt buckle of bronze, some iron age ceramics. At a depth of 40-50 cms in a darker band of sand were quantities of slag and iron objects. In the area determined to be the iron smith's work area, approx. 15x20 meters were also large swaths of darkened earth.

 

In the Spring and Summer of 2012, more slag clusters were found. (These slag composites were dated)

 

In further studies from 2013 the work group found two new slag clusters on a cliff side at about 17 meters height. (slag finds are mentioned after this, a total of 25 times) along with finds of iron objects

 

 

 

It would seem slag, from 500 BCE, is quite common.

Edited June 25, 2014 by bcuzbcuz

[thesometimesaint]

Thanx.

 

I was aware that Nordic iron objects were pretty common. I didn't know about the slag.

[bcuzbcuz]

Thanx.

 

I was aware that Nordic iron objects were pretty common. I didn't know about the slag.

Basically, if you find slag, there's a good chance of finding iron objects. No slag, no iron.

[thesometimesaint]

Basically, if you find slag, there's a good chance of finding iron objects. No slag, no iron.

 

Not sure that is entirely true. Forging a preexisting iron object, say a meteorite, wouldn't necessitate producing slag. They are already pure iron,and sometimes with some nickel.

[bcuzbcuz]

Not sure that is entirely true. Forging a preexisting iron object, say a meteorite, wouldn't necessitate producing slag. They are already pure iron,and sometimes with some nickel.

Very true. The composition and amount of nickel is a good identifier....along with ceramic scratch test etc. Meteorite iron in its raw state has markedly straight parallel lines when cut in a cross section. I don't know if processed meteorites maintain that characteristic.

[thesometimesaint]

Very true. The composition and amount of nickel is a good identifier....along with ceramic scratch test etc. Meteorite iron in its raw state has markedly straight parallel lines when cut in a cross section. I don't know if processed meteorites maintain that characteristic.

 

I don't know either. If we have any blacksmiths here maybe they can answer that question.

[Robert F. Smith]

I'm not sure where you get your information. I live in Sweden, a country and part of northern Europe, where there are massive amounts of evidence that show the progressive of technology from the stone age to the bronze age and to the iron age.

........................................................................................   

One does not have to find slag in order to prove the existence of iron artifacts, and production of a bloom leaves only small quantities of slag in any case:

 

Iron works (including furnaces) were found by W. F. Petrie at Gerar in Palestine, and iron-working even spread into Meroe – both before the time of Lehi – and this may be the product of Greek mercenaries (Ionian and Carian Greeks) contemporary with Lehi using the same technology in Nubia.  Assyrian texts tell of tribute in the form of iron bars delivered to Assyrian King Sargon II (722-705 B.C.), and indeed 160 tons of such bars were found by archeologists at his palace in Khorsabad (ancient Dar Sharrukin), Iraq.

 

I have already mentioned that surface outcroppings of magnetite (lodestone) and other workable iron ores (ilmenite and hematite) which were readily available in Oaxaca, where San Jose Mogote seems to have been the primary center for the processing of such ores into elite exchange objects such as small mirrors and drilled beads.  See Kent Flannery, ed., ed., The Early Mesoamerican Village (N.Y.: Academic Press, 1976). 40,59-60,109,288,317-325,357,363; see also Flannery & Schoenwetter, "Climate and Man in Formative Oaxaca," Archaeology, 23/2 (April 1970), 148-149.

[bcuzbcuz]

One does not have to find slag in order to prove the existence of iron artifacts, and production of a bloom leaves only small quantities of slag in any case:

Iron works (including furnaces) were found by W. F. Petrie at Gerar in Palestine, and iron-working even spread into Meroe – both before the time of Lehi – and this may be the product of Greek mercenaries (Ionian and Carian Greeks) contemporary with Lehi using the same technology in Nubia. Assyrian texts tell of tribute in the form of iron bars delivered to Assyrian King Sargon II (722-705 B.C.), and indeed 160 tons of such bars were found by archeologists at his palace in Khorsabad (ancient Dar Sharrukin), Iraq.

I have already mentioned that surface outcroppings of magnetite (lodestone) and other workable iron ores (ilmenite and hematite) which were readily available in Oaxaca, where San Jose Mogote seems to have been the primary center for the processing of such ores into elite exchange objects such as small mirrors and drilled beads. See Kent Flannery, ed., ed., The Early Mesoamerican Village (N.Y.: Academic Press, 1976). 40,59-60,109,288,317-325,357,363; see also Flannery & Schoenwetter, "Climate and Man in Formative Oaxaca," Archaeology, 23/2 (April 1970), 148-149.

I'm well acquainted with Flinders Petrie's work. The Petrie Museum in London is on my to-do-list, although I will be going there for his work on Egypt.

Time will tell if finds in and around Oaxaca or anywhere else in Central America produce knives or swords, hopefully as equally well preserved as the drilled beads, for the most part, virtually free of rust.

Edited June 27, 2014 by bcuzbcuz

[omni]

Sounds like a pretty hokey scenario to me. The non-Mormon anthropologists and archeologists I have worked under are quite busy with their own large-scale projects in both field and lab, all of which must be written and published. You make them seem like a mass of bon vivants who have all the time in the world to devote to an area which they regard a priori as not likely to repay their investment of time. Serious scholarship is much more than a weekend spent with the latest best-seller on the NYT list, and requires real investment of time. Often years of time. And for what? Derision from colleagues. Loss of funding for research. Being dropped from graduate school. Being denied tenure.  Really?  More tongue-in-cheek?

 

 

 

Sorry for the delayed response, I've been away on business.  Under your hypothetical scenario we shouldn't expect any new scholarship to be accepted that challenges an existing paradigm.  After all, anthropologists and archeologists aren't a "mass of bon vivants who have all the time in the world to devote to an area which they regard a priori as not likely to repay their investment of time."

 

 

So, Omni, in light of your views (expressed here) that Mesoamerican history is increasingly out of line with what we find in the BofM, and that the evidence does not exist which can correlate the two traditions, why would you ever imagine any non-Mormon scholar giving so much as the time of day to a Mormon colleague? Seems like you want to have it both ways: You complain that at least some non-Mormon scholars ought to take a look, but simultaneously claim that there is nothing to look at. Moreover, you say that any correlations which the dreaded "apologists" come up with are created out of whole cloth and are not to be found in either the BofM text, nor in anthropological reality.  Sounds like a zero-sum game.

 

 

That is precisely my point, we aren't seeing (most) archeologists give the BoM the time of day because nothing they are seeing in their work or reading in the works of others is giving them cause to take a deeper look.  We're talking about advanced civilizations consisting of hundreds of thousands even millions of individuals over a period of a thousand years.  Shouldn't we expect some legitimate archeologists to find verifiable (sorry, Bat Creek Stone doesn't count) evidence of a link to ancient Middle Eastern cultures, the Hebrew Language, or some evidence of Christianity existing in Pre-Colombian America?  Instead of the BoM leading to the reinterpretation of Ancient American cultures, Ancient American cultures are leading to the reinterpretation of the BoM.

 

ps.  I mistakenly gave you a rep point, but I'll just count it as one I should have given you on another thread, but didn't have the chance.  

 

[bcuzbcuz]

Interesting!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

As a side note, now that I am living in the South, I think it would be very hard to preserve anything that is iron in this corrosive environment.  We have tools go bad in a couple of years if stored outside in the garage, and we're 2 hours away from the ocean.  Anything close to the ocean, and you can kiss any iron goodbye.  Nothing would last very long here.  That not much is found, is simply an effect of the environment.

 

 

Judging by the rust on most vehicles here in the cold north of Europe, it could be assumed that all rustable metals, like iron or steel, would cease to exist within a few years of them being buried in water or dirt.

 

But such isn't the case in every situation. The Wasa ship that sank 1628 in Stockholms harbor and was under water since then, when recovered and re-floated in 1961, still had many iron objects partially or completely intact. The wood of the ship was mostly intact. In fact, more damage had been done by anchors from modern boats than from water or worm damage. Most nails had rusted completely but left telltale rust markers of red or yellow. Some bolts in the rudder had, however, survived. Most of the cannons and cannonballs were in a remarkable state of preservation.

 

The difference lies in how the iron was formed. Cast iron has a relatively high percentage of carbon, about 6 to 7 times more than wrought iron. This difference in carbon plays a significant part in the preservation of the iron. Wrought iron, such as the nails in the ship, with only 1% or less, of carbon had rusted away.

 

Going back further in time, to the Roman Empire's rule of Germany, from 50 BCE to 300 CE, many iron objects have been found. From the Roman conquest in the Battle of the Teutoburg Forest, 9 CE, swords, daggers, spearheads and even hobnails from the soldiers boots and the peculiar plate-like horseshoes that the Roman's made, have been recovered. That means these objects have been lying in the ground for more than 2000 years and they're still intact and identifiable.

 

The hobnails are, for me, of particular interest. Despite the rain (and when it rains in the forests around the Rhine, it comes down in torrential buckets, with thunder storms you wouldn't believe), these hobnails have survived. The hobnails were a "throw-away" product. They loosened with wear from the Roman soldier's boots and the Roman army even sent smiths on military campaigns to re-supply and remake boots. The nails were not a quality product, but they have survived.

 

In the Scandinavian countries rusted swords and daggers have been recovered from early iron age periods, around 500 BCE. But as I have noted above, it is easier to find the iron slag from the production of these products than it is to find the actual knives.

 

Rust doesn't destroy everything.

[Robert F. Smith]

Sorry for the delayed response, I've been away on business.  Under your hypothetical scenario we shouldn't expect any new scholarship to be accepted that challenges an existing paradigm.  After all, anthropologists and archeologists aren't a "mass of bon vivants who have all the time in the world to devote to an area which they regard a priori as not likely to repay their investment of time."

If we placed all "new scholarship" on the same level as simply pointing toward a new paradigm shift, and that all paradigm shifts are equal, I suppose you'd be right -- though these are grossly naive assumptions. You seem unfamiliar with academe, where only certai types of paradigm shifts are acceptable.

 

That is precisely my point, we aren't seeing (most) archeologists give the BoM the time of day because nothing they are seeing in their work or reading in the works of others is giving them cause to take a deeper look.  We're talking about advanced civilizations consisting of hundreds of thousands even millions of individuals over a period of a thousand years.  Shouldn't we expect some legitimate archeologists to find verifiable (sorry, Bat Creek Stone doesn't count) evidence of a link to ancient Middle Eastern cultures, the Hebrew Language, or some evidence of Christianity existing in Pre-Colombian America?  Instead of the BoM leading to the reinterpretation of Ancient American cultures, Ancient American cultures are leading to the reinterpretation of the BoM.

 

ps.  I mistakenly gave you a rep point, but I'll just count it as one I should have given you on another thread, but didn't have the chance.  

Thanks for the mistaken rep point, which unfortunately I must take as another example of your getting things backwards.  In order for these imaginary "legitimate archeologists" (of the New World) to find anything verifiable as a link to the Mideast, they would have to be familiar with the Mideast, which they are not.  In order for the Book of Mormon to be in any way reinterpreted by New World cultures, they would have to know something about the Book of Mormon, which (again) they do not.

 

Brant Gardner has several times made the point on this Board (and elsewhere) that empty assumptions about what we should expect to find in order to verify the existence of "ancient Middle Eastern cultures, the Hebrew Language, or some evidence of Christianity existing in Pre-Colombian America," fails to take into account the likely permutations in such cultures and languages, even as it is usually completely ignorant of what such cultures and languages consist of.  In other words, nothing + nothing = nothing (in the mind of the naive inquirer).  Such a lack in ethnographical information leads to emphasis on things like the Bat Creek Stone, and to the misspelling of "Pre-Columbian," etc.  Serious scholarship never takes such an approach.

 

Moreover, in all three areas (Middle Eastern culture, Hebrew Language, and evidence of Christianity) you have assumed before the fact that no such evidence exists -- even though you know nothing about New World archeology, religion, and linguistics.  You might try reading Sorenson's Mormon's Codex, but that would only cause you the discomfort of cognitive dissonance, and so you are unlikely to confuse yourself with the facts.  Paradigm shifts are simply too dangerous.  Right, omni?