This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Iron Age article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 365 days |
This
level-3 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The claim in the article is that Egypt is in the Ancient Near East. That is wrong, Egypt is in Africa, but often articles are written to remove any historic evidence that points to Africa. Thanks for your post also, we must continue to ensure academic integrity — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.56.13.182 ( talk) 10:47, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
The whole use of terms like "Near East" and "Far East" are hopelessly colonial and Eurocentric. We should be using Africa, Asia, Europe, etc. Billyshiverstick ( talk) 00:43, 18 September 2023 (UTC) sigh...
Given articles written about the Bronze and Stone Age refer to dates in BCE, shouldn't this article follow the same convention? Also, is there any way to easily change all the BC references to BCE? Magpieram ( talk) 10:34, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
The chronology section is badly ordered, and seems to contradict itself. It says that the earliest steel manufacture was is 1800BC, then says the earliest iron production was 1200BC. Is this supposed to mean the extensive iron production began in 1200BC, but some had been going on earlier? Or does it mean 1200BC was thought to be the earliest date, but recent discoveries push it back to 1800BC? Also, what is meant by "Modern archaeological evidence" vs. "contemporary archaeological evidence"? Finally, the section "Recent archaeological work has modified not only the above chronology..." seems to be falling into the "history as detective story" style used by too many documentary makers of presenting a load of evidence, making conclusions, then surprising the audience by revealing more data that overturns the original conclusion. Shouldn't we be giving a more straight-forward description of what archaeologists currently think to be the case? Iapetus ( talk) 13:07, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
This section mentions Iron I and Iron II without any explanation. It seems to start with an explanation of Iron I and maybe explains it. But never tries to explain Iron II. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Macktennyson ( talk • contribs) 07:53, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
The bit about Iron Age I and II was carelessly cut and pasted from an article here. https://www.bu.edu/anep/Ir.html#:~:text=Iron%20II%20(1000%2D550),from%20about%201200%20to%20900. Someone who knows about the topic may be able to use that source to rewrite it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Macktennyson ( talk • contribs) 08:01, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
I can't make sense of this sentence. The Iron Age in Europe is a part of the end of the Bronze Age elsewhere? AxelBoldt ( talk) 16:39, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
The article says that it is widely accepted that the Iron Age ended in ~500 BCE in the Middle East, because of Herodotus reports on the Achemenid Empire are considered the beginning of History. At the same time it says that the IA is supposed to end when historical records begin. Since the 19th century that date has been pushed back by one or two millennia at least, as extensive historical documents have been found in Mesopotamia, Egypt, etc.
So, which is which? Is that 500 BCE date still usedby historians?
If different authors use different criteria, that should be mentioned in the article.
--
Jorge Stolfi (
talk) 19:37, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
It is requested that a global map or maps be included in this article to improve its quality. |
World maps showing the approximate beginning and ending of the period would be very helpful. -- Beland ( talk) 04:46, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
Iron was never smelted by Native Americans, thus the New World never entered a proper ‘Iron Age’ before European discovery. On the other hand, ‘native’ (unsmelted) iron ore, magnetite, iron pyrite and ilmenite (iron-titanium) was used extensively in the Andes (Chavin and Moche cultures) and Mesoamerica after 900 BC and until c.500 AD. Various forms of iron ore were mined [1], drilled and highly polished. There is considerable evidence that this technology, its raw materials and end products were widely traded in Mesoamerica throughout the Formative era (2000-200 BC). [2]
Lumps of iron pyrite, magnetite and other materials were mostly shaped into mirrors, pendants, medallions and headdress ornaments for decorative and ceremonial effect.
[3] However, convex iron ore mirrors were apparently used for firing and optical purposes by the Olmec (1500-400 BC) and Chavin (900-300 BC) cultures,
[4]and ilmenite ‘beads’ may have served as ‘hammers’ for fine work.
[5] Cite error: A <ref>
tag is missing the closing </ref>
(see the
help page). They may have developed a zeroth-order compass using a magnetite bar.
[6]
Some Mesoamerican uses of ‘native’ iron seem to have been military. Steven Jones proposed that the Olmec sewed ilmenite ‘beads’ into protective ‘mail armour’ or helmets. [7] Iron pyrite mosaics and ‘plates’ formed protective tezcacuitlapalli (mirrored back flap shields) and breastplate ornaments in the military attire of the Teotihuacan (100 BC – 600 AD), Toltec (800-1150 AD) and Chichen Itza (800-1200 AD) cultures. [8] 101.189.133.214 ( talk) 13:43, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
References
The page gives a lot of details about the chronology of Iron age and the evidence for that. An additional section on the impact of Iron age for humanity's development, what kind of new things it enabled that weren't possible in the Bronze age, etc. would be very useful.
SundaraRaman ( talk) 19:02, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
It's not a proper noun, so it's the iron age, or, possibly, iron-age. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:5988:EC00:FD1A:CF1:BDE4:B55D ( talk) 11:36, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
Hi all, I'm finding this article to resemble a string of related statements, cut and pasted into a random sequence. Discussions of metallurgy, are repeatedly confused with timelines. I'm going to cut out and collect the two themes where appropriate.
I'm also going to try and clarify, (from the text), how the concept of "The Iron Age" evolved, and is still somewhat relevant. It is a bit weird that the Age is defined by its use of a particular metal, but the definition overlaps with the rise of written history, which is not consistent across the world.
We need to make this clearer for people. Peace and Love. Billyshiverstick ( talk) 00:31, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Iron Age article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 365 days |
This
level-3 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The claim in the article is that Egypt is in the Ancient Near East. That is wrong, Egypt is in Africa, but often articles are written to remove any historic evidence that points to Africa. Thanks for your post also, we must continue to ensure academic integrity — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.56.13.182 ( talk) 10:47, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
The whole use of terms like "Near East" and "Far East" are hopelessly colonial and Eurocentric. We should be using Africa, Asia, Europe, etc. Billyshiverstick ( talk) 00:43, 18 September 2023 (UTC) sigh...
Given articles written about the Bronze and Stone Age refer to dates in BCE, shouldn't this article follow the same convention? Also, is there any way to easily change all the BC references to BCE? Magpieram ( talk) 10:34, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
The chronology section is badly ordered, and seems to contradict itself. It says that the earliest steel manufacture was is 1800BC, then says the earliest iron production was 1200BC. Is this supposed to mean the extensive iron production began in 1200BC, but some had been going on earlier? Or does it mean 1200BC was thought to be the earliest date, but recent discoveries push it back to 1800BC? Also, what is meant by "Modern archaeological evidence" vs. "contemporary archaeological evidence"? Finally, the section "Recent archaeological work has modified not only the above chronology..." seems to be falling into the "history as detective story" style used by too many documentary makers of presenting a load of evidence, making conclusions, then surprising the audience by revealing more data that overturns the original conclusion. Shouldn't we be giving a more straight-forward description of what archaeologists currently think to be the case? Iapetus ( talk) 13:07, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
This section mentions Iron I and Iron II without any explanation. It seems to start with an explanation of Iron I and maybe explains it. But never tries to explain Iron II. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Macktennyson ( talk • contribs) 07:53, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
The bit about Iron Age I and II was carelessly cut and pasted from an article here. https://www.bu.edu/anep/Ir.html#:~:text=Iron%20II%20(1000%2D550),from%20about%201200%20to%20900. Someone who knows about the topic may be able to use that source to rewrite it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Macktennyson ( talk • contribs) 08:01, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
I can't make sense of this sentence. The Iron Age in Europe is a part of the end of the Bronze Age elsewhere? AxelBoldt ( talk) 16:39, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
The article says that it is widely accepted that the Iron Age ended in ~500 BCE in the Middle East, because of Herodotus reports on the Achemenid Empire are considered the beginning of History. At the same time it says that the IA is supposed to end when historical records begin. Since the 19th century that date has been pushed back by one or two millennia at least, as extensive historical documents have been found in Mesopotamia, Egypt, etc.
So, which is which? Is that 500 BCE date still usedby historians?
If different authors use different criteria, that should be mentioned in the article.
--
Jorge Stolfi (
talk) 19:37, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
It is requested that a global map or maps be included in this article to improve its quality. |
World maps showing the approximate beginning and ending of the period would be very helpful. -- Beland ( talk) 04:46, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
Iron was never smelted by Native Americans, thus the New World never entered a proper ‘Iron Age’ before European discovery. On the other hand, ‘native’ (unsmelted) iron ore, magnetite, iron pyrite and ilmenite (iron-titanium) was used extensively in the Andes (Chavin and Moche cultures) and Mesoamerica after 900 BC and until c.500 AD. Various forms of iron ore were mined [1], drilled and highly polished. There is considerable evidence that this technology, its raw materials and end products were widely traded in Mesoamerica throughout the Formative era (2000-200 BC). [2]
Lumps of iron pyrite, magnetite and other materials were mostly shaped into mirrors, pendants, medallions and headdress ornaments for decorative and ceremonial effect.
[3] However, convex iron ore mirrors were apparently used for firing and optical purposes by the Olmec (1500-400 BC) and Chavin (900-300 BC) cultures,
[4]and ilmenite ‘beads’ may have served as ‘hammers’ for fine work.
[5] Cite error: A <ref>
tag is missing the closing </ref>
(see the
help page). They may have developed a zeroth-order compass using a magnetite bar.
[6]
Some Mesoamerican uses of ‘native’ iron seem to have been military. Steven Jones proposed that the Olmec sewed ilmenite ‘beads’ into protective ‘mail armour’ or helmets. [7] Iron pyrite mosaics and ‘plates’ formed protective tezcacuitlapalli (mirrored back flap shields) and breastplate ornaments in the military attire of the Teotihuacan (100 BC – 600 AD), Toltec (800-1150 AD) and Chichen Itza (800-1200 AD) cultures. [8] 101.189.133.214 ( talk) 13:43, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
References
The page gives a lot of details about the chronology of Iron age and the evidence for that. An additional section on the impact of Iron age for humanity's development, what kind of new things it enabled that weren't possible in the Bronze age, etc. would be very useful.
SundaraRaman ( talk) 19:02, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
It's not a proper noun, so it's the iron age, or, possibly, iron-age. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:5988:EC00:FD1A:CF1:BDE4:B55D ( talk) 11:36, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
Hi all, I'm finding this article to resemble a string of related statements, cut and pasted into a random sequence. Discussions of metallurgy, are repeatedly confused with timelines. I'm going to cut out and collect the two themes where appropriate.
I'm also going to try and clarify, (from the text), how the concept of "The Iron Age" evolved, and is still somewhat relevant. It is a bit weird that the Age is defined by its use of a particular metal, but the definition overlaps with the rise of written history, which is not consistent across the world.
We need to make this clearer for people. Peace and Love. Billyshiverstick ( talk) 00:31, 18 September 2023 (UTC)