In TFA it is stated that before bronze (i.e. copper-tin alloy) copper was used for tools.
This is not true, because pure copper has always been too soft to be used in any tool. Pure copper was used for some purposes, but never for tools that had to be strong and hard, e.g. for knives.
Before bronze, for several millennia tools were made from alloys of copper and arsenic or antimony (3 metals, lead, copper and gold have been known for many millennia before other metals became known, like tin, silver and meteoritic iron). Neither of arsenic and antimony was known in pure form, so unlike the bronze made by mixing metallic copper with metallic tin, the copper-arsenic or copper-antimony alloys were made by mixing the sulfide minerals of copper and arsenic or antimony (which are all found together where sulfide minerals are mined), before smelting the metallic copper alloy from the minerals (which for sulfide minerals is done by first roasting the sulfides into oxides, to drive the sulfur away, then reducing the oxides with charcoal).
>In TFA it is stated that before bronze (i.e. copper-tin alloy) copper was used for tools.
> Before bronze, for several millennia tools were made from alloys of copper and arsenic or antimony
So do you have an actual point, or just a pedantic nit to pick over the author using "copper tools" as short-hand for "copper alloy tools"?
The article doesn't mean copper alloy tools though, it means copper tools, including weapons. At least that's how I read this:
"Copper was accessible enough and easy enough to work that it allowed early proto-states to reliably arm their warriors with something better than stone weaponry, which often chips or breaks under impact. Copper is a soft metal, hence its use in pipes and wiring today. But it generally won’t break, and though it does bend easily it can also be bent back into shape."
why do you think the article doesn't mean copper alloy?
The only use of the word 'pure' is right before iron.
it's pretty common to refer to Otzi's axe as a 'copper axe', right in the wiki page: "Ötzi's copper axe was of particular interest.". but it's 99.7% copper. It contains other materials
I really dont understand jumping from 'copper tools' to 'pure copper tools'. Otzi's axe was maybe both an example of his mastery of the profession and a useful tool (it shows signs of use and rework).
Because it said the copper tools can bend easily and be bent back into shape. The copper alloy wouldn't be so soft. And Otzi's axe wasn't an alloy, ie an intentional mix of materials, it's just that copper naturally occurs with slight impurities.
adrian_b · · focus · HN ↗
This is not true, because pure copper has always been too soft to be used in any tool. Pure copper was used for some purposes, but never for tools that had to be strong and hard, e.g. for knives.
Before bronze, for several millennia tools were made from alloys of copper and arsenic or antimony (3 metals, lead, copper and gold have been known for many millennia before other metals became known, like tin, silver and meteoritic iron). Neither of arsenic and antimony was known in pure form, so unlike the bronze made by mixing metallic copper with metallic tin, the copper-arsenic or copper-antimony alloys were made by mixing the sulfide minerals of copper and arsenic or antimony (which are all found together where sulfide minerals are mined), before smelting the metallic copper alloy from the minerals (which for sulfide minerals is done by first roasting the sulfides into oxides, to drive the sulfur away, then reducing the oxides with charcoal).
hungryhobbit · · focus · HN ↗
> Before bronze, for several millennia tools were made from alloys of copper and arsenic or antimony
So do you have an actual point, or just a pedantic nit to pick over the author using "copper tools" as short-hand for "copper alloy tools"?
dozerly · · focus · HN ↗
mahboi · · focus · HN ↗
"Copper was accessible enough and easy enough to work that it allowed early proto-states to reliably arm their warriors with something better than stone weaponry, which often chips or breaks under impact. Copper is a soft metal, hence its use in pipes and wiring today. But it generally won’t break, and though it does bend easily it can also be bent back into shape."
But I think the article is right.
fusslo · · focus · HN ↗
The only use of the word 'pure' is right before iron.
it's pretty common to refer to Otzi's axe as a 'copper axe', right in the wiki page: "Ötzi's copper axe was of particular interest.". but it's 99.7% copper. It contains other materials
I really dont understand jumping from 'copper tools' to 'pure copper tools'. Otzi's axe was maybe both an example of his mastery of the profession and a useful tool (it shows signs of use and rework).
mahboi · · focus · HN ↗
IAmBroom · · focus · HN ↗
"Alloy" doesn't imply intent.
OTOH, alloying under 1% is irrelevant to the relevant bulk properties of copper.