March 2, 2005
DOES ANYONE BELIEVE IN PROGRESS ANY MORE?:
The high tech of prehistory (Robert C. Cowen, 3/03/05, CS Monitor)
Archaeologists are finding that our love of sophisticated technology has ancient roots. The latest example is the exquisite sheen Chinese craftsmen gave to ceremonial sapphire axes about 5,000 years ago.Posted by Orrin Judd at March 2, 2005 6:25 PMPeter Lu suspected there was more to that beauty than met the eye. Using modern analytical technology, he appears to have found the oldest use of industrial diamonds yet. What's more, the ancient craftsmen wielded them with skill that challenges modern technology. "It's absolutely remarkable that with the best polishing technologies available today, we couldn't achieve a surface as flat and smooth as was produced 5,000 years ago," says Mr. Lu, a graduate student at Harvard.
Whether they are taking a second look at familiar artifacts or studying a new find, archaeologists now can see deeply enough into the nature of these materials to gain insight into the technological sophistication of their makers. Chemical analyses have become so sensitive they detect the faintest presence of telltale molecules. Devices for microscopic imaging can even map out the distribution of atoms on a surface if need be.
It was assumed that the Chinese axes were polished with quartz sand, a widely used ancient abrasive. However, X-ray analysis and microscopic inspection showed the axes are 40 percent corundum. We call that mineral ruby or sapphire, depending on its color. It's the second-hardest mineral, after diamond. That's tough stuff for quartz to abrade. Microscopic comparison of the old polished surface with an area freshly polished in the lab confirmed that diamond would have been the craftsmen's best friend. Moreover, there were diamond deposits within 150 miles.
If subsequent research confirms this conclusion, Lu and the international team studying the axes will have identified the first known prehistoric use of industrial diamonds.
When we find prehistoric bases on the moon, I'll stop believing in progress.
Posted by: Brandon at March 2, 2005 10:57 PM"It's absolutely remarkable that with the best polishing technologies available today, we couldn't achieve a surface as flat and smooth as was produced 5,000 years ago."
I doubt that! The most precise modern surfaces are those in optics, which can be accurate to within a few nanometers (finished and polished by hand, BTW). I don't think the Chinese were quite this proficient; it requires measurement techniques which there is no evidence they knew.
Posted by: jd watson at March 3, 2005 12:18 AMI had an anthro Prof who was big on ancient technology. One of his points was that you can get very accurate results without direct measurement. So, just because they couldn't do the measuring, doesn't mean they couldn't get very smooth. Nevertheless, I concur that modern optics are undoubtedly smoother. But note that even we use indirect measurements.
Posted by: Annoying Old Guy at March 3, 2005 12:30 AMThere is probably some confusion here between smoothness and flatness.
We moderns can get things both smooth and very flat. I doubt the Chinese were very good at flatness.
Posted by: Harry Eagar at March 3, 2005 1:37 AMLeftists no longer believe in progress. Why should the rest of us care what they think?
Posted by: Joseph Hertzlinger at March 4, 2005 12:51 PM