Sword Mistaken For Replica Is Actually An Ancient 3,000-Year-Old Weapon

Science Alert ^ | 24 January 2023 | Carly Cassella

[Hiddigeigei]

"If the tiles in the background are 12 x 12 then I estimate the total length to be a little under 3 feet."
You are correct. Quote from a Yahoo article on the subject:
"The 3-foot-long (91 centimeters) bronze sword had been in storage since the museum acquired the weapon in the 1930s..."

[GingisK]

In the bronze age? Steel was not present.

[hopespringseternal]

I think it’s more the case that an iron sword is more likely to be poorly made, particularly at a time when the were both in use.

[Pontiac]

We are talking about the Medieval Period not the Bronze Age.

The museum people thought the sword was produced in the Medieval Period or later as a reproduction.

[Pontiac]

My understanding is that Steel was the primary material for edged weapons in the Medieval period and that bronze was totally supplanted by iron/steel.

[wafflehouse]

i thought this was a pretty good book

1177 B.C.: The Year Civilization Collapsed

[hopespringseternal]

Oh, absolutely by the medieval period “steel” of pretty variable quality had entirely replaced bronze. And probably most blacksmiths probably knew more or less how to do it. If you were lucky steel was what you got. But if your blacksmith wasn’t very good you might wind up with a sword that was worse than bronze.

And that was definitely the case at the transition between the bronze age and iron age.

[lepton]

Iron swords were horrible. Even with the advent of cruder steels, bronze took a long time to be replaced. It was sharper, less brittle, and could be harder than the available iron, and could be repaired much more easily.

[wafflehouse]

you might have seen this, but i just came across it:

1177 BC: The Year Civilization Collapsed (Eric Cline, PhD)