Talk:History of metallurgy in China

Concerning iron in China, the articles on this page would help considerably: http://donwagner.dk 80.166.166.229 (talk) 09:10, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

"swords ... coated with chromium oxide"

these swords and the "other weapons", I suppose, were made of iron resp. steel, otherwise one would not have had to protect them against rust (because bronze doen't corrode, as the article states). but this is not clear in the article (also because one knows that many bronze swords still were found in qin shihuangdi's grave...). can it be made clear? and the sentence about bronze and corrosion possibly placed at the beginning of the section, contrasted then by what's being said about these coated weapons? thanx! --HilmarHansWerner (talk) 14:57, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

"Use of chromium oxide as an anti-corrosion protective coating on the bronze jian/sword. Steel jian/sword get 1 meter or longer is continued." - it says in

http://sinosword.com/Chinese-sword-classify.html (2017-08-12); article seems quite knowledgeable. but why protect bronze which does not corrode and not steel?? --HilmarHansWerner (talk) 07:45, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

well, the article seems to be wrong stating that bronze does not corrode: "...I saw no less incredible bronze weapons that armed the officers. Their swords are still sharp and largely unaffected by the 2200 years that have passed since they were forged. Instead of the green corrosion you’d expect on bronze artefacts the blades actually appear gun metal grey. " - http://www.chemistry-blog.com/2015/09/22/the-chrome-plated-mystery-of-the-terracotta-armys-swords/ 2017-08-12. so the swords seem to be out of bronze; the corrosion can be seen on the hilt... so I take out the following sentence with its inappropriate (?!!) ref: "The alloys of tin and copper enabled weapons such as bronze knives and swords to avoid rust and remain sharp in spite of 2000 years of degrading conditions." and the word "steel" in front of "swords"... --HilmarHansWerner (talk) 08:09, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

"The use of copper ... goes back to 3,000 BC"

the cases cited (example: qijia here: 2500 - 1900, but according to Qijia culture: 2200 - 1600 ??) contradict this statement.

In Majiayao culture you find: "The oldest bronze object found in China was a knife found at a Majiayao site in Dongxiang, Gansu, and dated to 2900–2740 BC.[6] Further copper and bronze objects have been found..."

in Chalcolithic it says: "In the 5th millennium BCE copper artifacts start to appear in East Asia, such as the Jiangzhai and Hongshan cultures, but those metal artifacts were not widely used."

please clarification! this is of importance because usually in the process of civilisation there is a chalcolithic phase, after the neolithic, before bronze; in this period normally copper is used (not yet the more sophisticated alloy of copper and tin) and/or gold, mostly for prestige-objects of the ruling class (e.g. black-sea-cultures). this period seems to be almost non-existant in china; there jade seems to take the role of gold... --HilmarHansWerner (talk) 15:26, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Proposed and presumptive switch to BCE

I understand that many from the Christian tradition prefer BC, but this is China in the pre-Christian era, and it seems to me that BCE would be more appropriate here.

In fact, now that I think about it, I'm going to be bold and make this change because my guess is that few will object.

But of course, if there is any opposition at all, this change can be reverted instantly pending further discussion and final consensus. — MaxEnt 15:00, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

As my reward, I was also forced to address a range of copyedit problems as well, which lead me to add several flags, including two section flags for abuse of external quotation. — MaxEnt 15:48, 2 June 2020 (UTC)