Hank Reinhardt's The Book of the Sword (2 page)

The copper axe was quite well made, with an edge width of about two inches. It was attached to a shaft two feet long. The length of the shaft suggests to me that the axe was primarily a weapon, as tools usually have a shorter shaft. Chemical tests on the body also indicate that Otzi himself was the likely candidate for having cast the axe, as his body contained chemicals that are produced during the casting process.

But let me digress here to tell a bit more of Otzi's story, because it's fascinating. He not only deserves a book about him, but should get a novel as well.

Otzi was between 25 and 45 years old, about 5 feet 4 inches in height, and weighed about 150 pounds. Speculation was that he had been caught in a sudden storm and had frozen to death. The body and equipment were studied a great deal, but it was close to ten years before someone thought to put the body through an imaging scanner. When they did, the scientists received quite a shock. Otzi had not died of natural causes or under accidental circumstances. Otzi had been murdered.

Under his left shoulder blade was a stone arrowhead. The arrow had passed through the left arm, cutting through the triceps, probably some nerves, and had penetrated the body, probably the lung, although I am not certain of this. Medical opinion is that he would have died from the wound in about two to four hours. Once the arrowhead was located, an even more thorough search of his body was made and turned up some more wounds. These wounds were on the hands, and are what are generally referred to as "defensive wounds." When someone is attacked with an edged weapon they will usually attempt to fend off the attack with their hands. This results in many deep gashes in the hands and rarely results in stopping the attack.

We have an individual with a valuable axe, a half-finished bow, and a quiver with twelve unfinished arrows and two broken arrows, and an unsolved murder. It's impossible for me not to speculate on the tale of Otzi.

A hostile encounter leaves Otzi with his bow broken. He would retrieve the two arrows, broken in the fight, as the heads would be useful later. He finds some wood suitable for a bow and begins to prepare it. He does make some arrows, but does not have time to finish them. He is again attacked. This time the fight is probably hand-to-hand, and Otzi again makes his escape. But as he's fleeing uphill, an arrow finds him. Although mortally wounded, he keeps on, probably losing his pursuers, maybe in the dark, or because a storm came up, or just because of the cold of the mountain. He falls, only to be found 5,300 years later.

Interesting. One of oldest mummies found in Europe, and he was murdered, or, if you like, killed in battle. For Otzi didn't die quietly without a struggle. Subsequent tests revealed blood samples from at least three individuals on Otzi, his clothes and his weapons. We don't know if he was the good guy or the bad guy, what we do know is that it is a fascinating development.

While everything about Otzi is fascinating to us for what it can tell about a time that is mostly unknown to modern civilization, from the parasites in his intestines, to his wounds, clothing and tattoos, I am most concerned with that copper axe. This indicates that copper was much more in use than had been previously known, and that the earliest use dates back much further than had been stipulated before his discovery.

To further substantiate this, there was a recent discovery in Jordan of a copper weapon and tool producing factory. The factory is about five thousand years old, and in many respects this is a more important find than Otzi, though less viscerally exciting.

At the end of the 20th century, an amazing discovery was made at an excavation in the desert of southern Jordan. Located not far from the Dead Sea, Khibat Hamri Ifdan was a massive metal working complex. Although the site was found in the 1970s it was not fully excavated until 1999. The findings have been most impressive.

Archeologists uncovered a factory that was dedicated to producing copper tools: axes, hammers, knives and other items, including copper ingots. This operation was not a small four- or five-man job shop, but was quite large, obviously a factory. The factory contained about seventy rooms and, at the last counting I have heard about, the team had uncovered hundreds of ceramic molds, broken and discarded items, and approximately 5,000 tons of slag. This much slag indicates that the plant must have produced hundreds of tons over its lifetime.

It also appears, and is reported, that although the plant produced many tools and items, the primary operation was the making of copper ingots. This indicates a rather large trading network, as locals could not use as much copper as was produced. The plant was destroyed about 2700 BC by an earthquake. This time frame is right at the beginning of the Bronze Age. Frankly, I don't think anyone expected to find such a large operation at this period in time. Prior to this, the largest operation known was in Hissarlik, Turkey (believed to be the Troy of legend), and Hissarlik produced only about 70–80 items. An operation of this size indicates that the production of copper had been known long before had previously been believed. You simply do not organize a large operation such as this unless you have the artisans, the knowledge, and the market for the items that you will produce.

It is doubtful that swords were ever produced in copper. A few may have been tried, but abandoned once they were found unserviceable. Copper is simply too soft to make a good sword. Knives and axes and hammers, yes. Still, it is easy to see the antecedents of sword-making factories here.

In order to produce so much copper, it is necessary to have several different occupations come together: mining, mold making, wooden pattern making, charcoal manufacturing, heating and smelting—not to mention the trade routes that must be established and serviced. What an exciting time that must have been for the adventurers who took up trading! The world was a huge place back then. I am sure that many traders never ventured too far afield, but I am also sure that the more enterprising and adventurous sort spent years in travel, even unto the Cold Northern Seas. Which brings us back to bronze, and the true beginning of the age of swords.

We know the process for producing an item of copper or bronze. First a master is made. This can be of wood or clay. Once this is made, a mold is made that will separate and allow the master to be removed. The mold can be of clay, stone or even ceramics. It is possible, and it was done, to make a master of wax, and then burn it out, but this was later once the casting was well established. It is doubtful that this was done for simple tools, though, as it would be too expensive. The mold is filled with molten copper or bronze, and once it has cooled, the mold is separated. Another method, almost as common, was simply to carve the mold out of stone. This was practical for flat type axes and other items that were one sided. Of course you can make a left and right side of stone, and have a more durable mold, but this would seem to be more expensive than merely using a ceramic material.

A mold for a copper spear head.

Very early copper working may have been done by just one or two people. But it quickly becomes evident that superior items can be produced at a faster rate by several people working in sequence. You need someone to dig the ore, someone to smelt it, a master maker to carve or mold the master, someone to make the molds, someone to cast and pour the metal. You will also need someone to gather the wood for the fire. The culture was much different then. You couldn't call up and order coal, or turn on the electric furnace. In short, this was a cooperative venture involving a large number of people, and remained that way even until modern times. The casual solo blacksmith who took iron ore and forged a blade, ground it to shape, filed, sharpened and polished, then made a hilt, balanced it, and also made a scabbard, is so much romantic nonsense. Oh, I wouldn't say that it never happened; it is quite possible that a few tried it that way. Certainly legends tell of this happening, and always a very special sword is produced. But there were romantics back then, too, and since the sword was venerated in most societies, special blades were even more desired and sought after. But it really didn't work. Today you have some superb sword and knife makers who do each part of the whole process, but today's swords are art items, and not utility pieces. But I digress; we are still talking about copper and bronze.

Knives, axes, spears and clubs can all be made from copper. And all can be capable weapons, just not
good
ones. But the same is not true of swords. Copper simply does not have the strength to support a long blade. However, with the addition of about ten percent tin to the mixture, it becomes a very tough material, of surprising strength and durability.

Bronze weapons soon began to dominate the battlefields of the world. The spread of bronze is the cause of much speculation, and is likely to remain more speculation than fact. Was it because of trade, war, or simply spontaneous development in many different places? We simply do not know how the knowledge of bronze working was spread. What we do know is that there was a surprising amount of trade between the Mediterranean and England and Ireland and even China at that time.

The invention of bronze was a significant event in the history of man. With bronze, man was at last able to develop a tool that was pure weapon: the sword! Compared to flint, obsidian and copper, bronze was really a magical material. Bronze is hard enough to take a sharp edge, and yet not become brittle, and it was quickly made into that familiar shape we call a sword.

Reproduction bronze dagger. HRC175.

It would be interesting to create a neat chart of the development of the sword, but while a great deal is known, not enough is known to be able to state that bronze was developed in a specific area, and spread in such a way. It appears to be an invention that occurred within a few hundred years around 2000 BC in the Middle East as well as China.

As far as I have been able to determine, there does not seem to be a "national" or "ethnic" grouping to these swords. One is as likely to show up in Turkey as in Ireland. Let me also add that I have handled many more steel weapons than bronze ones, and I am aware that my knowledge of bronze weapons is limited.

Bronze spread throughout the Middle East, and then into Europe. Mercantile trading must have been quite an adventure back then, taking bronze tools and weapons into Europe to trade for amber and raw materials. The traders who followed the rivers into Northern Europe were probably a tough, hardy lot, and well able to defend their wares. The dangers of sea and forest were not undertaken lightly four thousand years ago.

The merchants traveled the Mediterranean to Iberia, maybe into the vast Atlantic and the frozen seas to the north, England, or the Scandinavian countries. All with storm and shipwreck and pirates a constant threat, and not even knowing how they would be received when they got there. Or maybe they took the land route through what we call the Balkans into what is now Germany, trading ingots of bronze or even weapons for tin and amber and furs. They faced unknown tribes, and could never be sure if they were saying the right thing or insulting the chief beyond all recall.

Could you trade with this new tribe, or would they attack and try to take your goods? You would never know until the transaction was finished. Wild lands, wild animals, and even wilder men: facing these required toughness, cunning and determination. One thing is for certain. It could not have been a dull life.

Not only were items made of bronze spread throughout Europe, but the knowledge of how these items were made was also disseminated. Soon there were bronze manufacturing centers all through Europe. This spread of information and goods was not done overnight. Indeed, it took several hundred years at least. For many years stone and bronze existed side by side. As mentioned earlier, there are several examples of stone daggers that are copies of bronze daggers, and flint swords as well. This is both pathetic and heroic.