Michal Milewski" Wrote
>
> > This may be a trivial question but I have really tried to
> > find an answer - with no success.
> >
> > I've always thought about Hittites as propagators of
> > metallurgy and first users of iron swords. However, this
> > turns out to be incorrect, as I've learned about the Sea
> > Peoples (Phrygians, Philistines?) who invaded the Hittite
> > Empire in the 13th century BC. Their iron swords gave them
> > an advantage over Hittite soldiers. And this exact period is
> > marked as the beginning of the Iron Age. At about the same
> > time, iron swords were used by Doric tribes invading Achaean
> > Greece from northwest. How did they get the iron swords if
> > they had no earlier contacts with Hittites (in contrast to
> > Achaeans, but they still used weapons made of bronze)?
> >
> > So, my question is: When, where and by whom were the iron
> > swords used first time on a mass scale?
Mark Odegard replied concerning the Hittites and Iron:
> This seems to have been the older view, one that is still being
spread by things dependant on older sources. Bronze is satisfactory,
and in fact, in some ways better, for just about any application iron
is used for, including much weaponry (steel is another matter).
>
> The real story seems to be that the smiths ran out of tin, or the
usual exchange routes had been disrupted. Tin and copper occur in
different kinds of rocks, and only very rarely do these kinds of
rocks occur near to each other.
>
> Iron is harder to work, but they seem to have known all about iron
before the iron age is said to have begun.
From what I know, iron was discovered by nameless Anatolians and kept
a closely guarded secret by the Hittites. One of the Egyptian
Pharaohs (either Akhenaton or Amenophis III) requested iron weapons
from the "Man of Khatti", and was rewarded with one iron dagger,
found in Tutankhamon's tomb.
As a weapon, until the discovery of forging iron into steel or an
equivalent, an iron sword was far inferior to a bronze weapon - which
not only kept a better edge, but also was less inclined to snap
(bronze being less brittle).
The chief difference between the two metals, as Leslie Palmer wrote
in "Mycenaeans and Minoans", was that iron deposits are common.
Copper is rare and tin even more so. The chief copper deposits of
the ancient world were Oman (which has a high level of zinc, leaving
a clearly defined signature) - carried by middlemen from Dilmun,
Alashya (Cyprus, whose name means copper) and Tinma in the Sinai (The
Egyptian Source). Tin deposits were even further afield - Cornwall
being just one locaion.
Arming soldiers with bronze, therefore was a costly business. Arming
them with iron resulted in bigger infantry armies, which could easily
outnumber the aristocratic Bronze-Age Maryanu, in his horse drawn
chariot. It was one of the reasons why the Hittites were so
formidable in the 15-13th centuries BCE.
However, when other Anatolians came by the technique, the balance of
power inside Anatolia was really upset. The first evidence of this
was the period after Muwattalis, the Hittite Labarnas (Emperor) who
fought against Rameses II. His son Urhi Teshub abandoned Hattusas to
the Kaska Hill Tribes, no doubt armed with iron weapons. It was only
with a stint of hard fighting that the capital was recovered by
Hattusilis III, his brother, who ousted his nephew to establish
himself as monarch. This, however, was the calm before the storm.
Routes to Cyprus were cut by pirates from Western Anatolia.
Hattusilis's Queen, Padukhepa, organised an attack on Cyprus, to
recover its rich copper deposits (thereby giving rise to the story of
the maritime Queen of the Amazons Joao). His son Tudhalias was the
last of the great Hittite Monarchs. I have spoken of the troubles
he, like his father before him, had with the Western Anatolians and
Greeks. The Trojan War seems to have occurred about this time.
This event released a flood of "Sea Peoples" upon the Eastern
Mediterranean, who not only retook Cyprus, but disrupted all
transport in the Eastern Mediterranean, cutting trade routes to
supplies of tin and copper. This event seems to have been also
linked to a major climatic catastrophe. The evidence for this is
growing fast. Have a look at the site
http://www.knowledge.co.uk/sis/abstract/masse.htm
Earth, Air, Fire, And Water:
The Archaeology Of Bronze Age Cosmic Catastrophes
W. Bruce Masse
U. S. Department of the Air Force, Environmental Programs Flight,
56th CES/CEV Bldg. 302, 14002 W Marauder St, Luke AFB, AZ 85309-1125,
and Affiliate Graduate Faculty, University of Hawaii, USA
e-mail:
wbmasse@...
I quote the abstract
Planetary scientists and astrophysicists recently have begun to model
the potential hazards on Earth from impact by asteroids and comets.
These models suggest that 20-30 at least locally catastrophic impacts
likely occurred in various portions of the world during the past
6,000 years, during which time occurred the major developments of
modern human civilization. This paper uses these cosmic impact
models, coupled with data from archaeology, paleoenvironmental
studies, and the systematic analysis of cosmogonic mythology and
other literary traditions, in order to identify previously unknown
catastrophic Bronze Age cosmic catastrophes, the most significant
being a globally catastrophic oceanic comet impact estimated at
between 105 and 106 megatons that occurred in 2807 BCE. These data
suggest that the threat of cosmic impact is very real, and that such
impacts have played a critical role in the development of human
civilization.
There is some really interesting evidence at this site, Mark, which
should whet your apetite.
Regards
John