|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
2nd August 2020, 08:11 AM | #1 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 18
|
This might be interesting to some as well. Early Iron weapons are showing up in megalithic sites in the South. It's currently a developing topic.
The hilt design in one of the swords has a similar shape to the daggers above, and the relief, statue already posted. “Even as the survey had begun for excavation, the Centre has decided to set up a museum at Adichanallur at least now, which would tell the world about the ancientness of Tamils and their civilisation. The carbon dating conducted on the products recovered from this site in Florida labs had proved that it was at least 2,900-year-old civilization. If the excavations are done properly, the world will be surprised to see how advanced ancient Tamils’ life was,” says Mr. Kamarasu. https://www.thehindu.com/news/nation...le30716873.ece Carbon dating of samples excavated from the Adichanallur site in Thoothukudi district has revealed that they belonged to the period between 905 BC and 696 BC. The March 18, 2019, carbon dating report of samples that were sent to Beta Analytic Testing Laboratory, USA, was submitted to the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court on Thursday. https://www.thehindu.com/news/cities...le26737779.ece Last edited by Milogow360; 2nd August 2020 at 11:43 AM. |
2nd August 2020, 12:04 PM | #2 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 421
|
Thank you again. But the question is how old are weapons made of high-carbon steel. Ultra-high-carbon steel. Forged into a long sword.
Last edited by Mercenary; 2nd August 2020 at 03:12 PM. |
2nd August 2020, 12:13 PM | #3 | |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 18
|
Quote:
The other megalithic dagger examples I gave with hilts designs that are classical as well. |
|
2nd August 2020, 03:14 PM | #4 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 421
|
Oops... I got it. The sword was found by a non-archaeologist (one of the authors - R. Ramesh) at the bottom of some "pit" without any research of this pit itself or the accompanying material (we were only told about "an urn enclosed with a capstone"). But since the megalithic burials in this area "dated to the sixth century BCE or earlier" so this pit was dated to 6th century BCE too. How graceful.
The article does not meet the standards of scientific archaeological research, although one of the authors (K. Rajan) is a respected archaeologist. Just pit, just sword, just an archaeologist-enthusiast, but as result we have the oldest sword made of wootz. Just very sad. Hope I am wrong. Last edited by Mercenary; 2nd August 2020 at 05:58 PM. |
|
|