Difference between Bronze and Iron.?
If bronze was so superior to iron, then it would not have been replaced by it. The wealthy preferred iron over bronze which should be enough to realise that it was a better material. Iron was a sign of wealth when it first appeared. Most of the iron tools and weapons of the time would have been harder than pure iron because of the way they made things. Iron is soft in its pure form so pure iron was not used. As for the name Iron Age, it might be because the secret of steel was not yet known in europe when the name was chosen.
Tools are not made of the pure element iron, because it is simply too soft to be useful. As I understand it the Hittites developed a techniques for working iron that incorporated carbon and over came these difficulties, and so introduced the iron age. We think of carbon +iron as steel, in fact cast iron is an alloy of silicon and carbon with iron. Both remarks are imprecise, which is not surprising since metallurgy is complicated and for most of history was an art not a science. Certainly there are many uses for which bronze are more suitable than iron. or even steel including many household objects.
Nlo there was no steel in the iron age, just iron. I find the first statement quite strange. I am not a specialist but I think iron is harder especially in weapons. In the bronze article it says something about iron being preffered just because it was more available. Its the first time I hear this. Maybe the bronze article is a case of pedia not being reliable?
