They pulled a shitload of solid gold and plated items from Tut’s tomb. Gold is practically unique in that it doesn’t corrode easily, so we have all these examples of exquisite goldsmith art, the stuff that didn’t get looted and melted down anyhow.
Is gold plating a conspiracy theory now too? Who knew!
Objects can be coated with gold without electroplating. The Egyptian artifacts were gilded using gold leaf. I don’t think there is any credible evidence of ancient electroplating.
I’m trying to remember, it was on a tour of some rich person’s middling castle. I think it most likely to be one of those “they say that about all the medieval castles” kind of story.
Possibly heard a tour of Rothenburg, in Bavaria? I think there are actually more castles in France. They have an interesting Kriminal museum in Rothenburg, a medieval walled city, where various medieval torture devices are on display - a baker that was caught selling underweight or adulterated bread might expect to be sentenced to a ride on the “dunker”, sort of cast iron cage where the offender was held and publicly dipped into the moat a few times, till they presumably saw the error of their ways. Also on display is one of the few known existing examples of an Iron Maiden.
Castle defense and similar was obviated after the invention or widespread adoption of gunpowder and cannon, or something like that. But banding together for mutual protection within the walls of a castle or city had advantages. Just don’t try to short anybody on their crescent rolls, or something.
Hey, I have a Gremlin as well.
Oh, I know what that is.
I remember these mysterious objects caused quite a stir - still not quite clear what they are for…
No, it is just Bad Archaeology. There are innumerable examples of bad archaeology around, and entire websites dedicated to debunking it.
Here’s one
another
https://www.hallofmaat.com/
The densest element is not gold but osmium. Therefore there must be an alloy osmium-whatever (many, actually, with the other metal in the right proportion) that has exactly the same density as gold. If you plated that with gold I doubt Ol’ Archie could tell.
Of course osmium is not cheap or easy to handle, but that is another matter. We are not here for the easy stuff, are we? With enough care you could achieve any density you wanted between osmium and alluminum to any degree of precision needed. It may be more expensive than gold or palladium, but it could be done. The math is easy, the metallurgy not so much.
Platinum’s high melting point (higher than iron!) meant that at first it wasn’t very valuable because there was little that could be done with it. But pounded into dust it could be used as a filler and it’s one of the few metals denser than gold. So at one point it was used for counterfeiting. Ironically such counterfeits later became more valuable than the gold they were imitating.
Aha! Toxylon is a toxophilite in addition to knowing a bit about toxicology!
Not if you are trying to counterfeit. The idea is to substitute a less expensive metal as a substitute or cheat. Genuine coins of the realm have a lovely ring as well. Some sort of amalgam or slug inside, it would likely “clunk” instead of ringing.
I just re-read the Bulletin of Primitive Technology article where Comstock demonstrated the baton thrower hypothesis. I don’t know what are these knobs you talk about. As Comstock notes, baton artefacts cover a range of shapes and sizes, but they all work as spear throwers. Curvature is a non-issue, as is lack of knobbage.
Accounts of indigenous arrow straightening do include specific tools for the task. What makes sense to us was many times not how things were done in the past.
As far as “any rock lying nearby”, not really.
First of all, the arrow straightening stroker (I just made that up) has to be absolutely smooth, or it will gouge / scratch the arrow shaft badly. Second, it needs to have a symmetrical cylindrical shape to put the right amount of pressure, no more, no less, to the arrow shaft surface. Having to adjust your technique on every occasion due to a different shape of stroker would be nasty, as it is quite possible to create a bend in the shaft with this method, as well.
There are many environs where there are no smooth stones of proper size anywhere to be had: The Arctic in the winter, for one, or much of the Subarctic. This is where dedicated, perforated claimed arrow straightening tools were collected, which were used as the basis for the shaft straightener hypotethis for the prehistoric artefacts.
The four-inch pieces of finger-thick polished bone I use for arrow straightening weigh maybe an ounce apiece, and can be carried inside a quiver without any cost. Having done many Stone Age excursions into the northern woods, I have always carried one with me.
Sir Fred Hoyle had a theory about Stonehenge that cannot be proved but also cannot be refuted. He conjectured that it was an eclipse computer. No one can prove this, but Hoyle pointed out that he could have used it 5000 years ago to predict eclipses. Not today–alignments have changed. Not the major stones, but the stones in a circle around the circumference. His main point was that the sight lines for things like the solstices and the moon on the ecliptic were all slightly off, but always in the correct direction. For example, it is easier, say, to build a site line for five days before (and therefore 5 days) the solstice and then split the difference than it is to actually tell when the solstice is. Functions reach their max when the derivative vanishes. He said there were a few “errors” of this sort always in the right direction.
He further conjectured that after 1000 years, the alignments would be changed enough for the predictions to have failed and that, the theory behind it having been lost in the meantime, they erected the massive stones to try to propitiate the gods. He mentioned in passing that it had been demonstrated that it was possible to move those massive stones using log rafts. He said it was demonstrated by using graduate students. Which caused someone in the audience to shout out “as logs”.
It is known, incidentally, that the massive stones were 1000 years newer.
Of course, you will say that the ancients could not have understood astronomy well enough to do this. This argument would be more compelling if we hadn’t found, and deciphered, the antikythera instrument.
The Antikythera mechanism isn’t all that ancient, and post dates Stonehenge by thousands of years and was probably from the time of Archimedes, when there was great technological progress.
At least, according to the historical documents.
I don’t have a strong opinion on Hoyle’s Stonehenge hypothesis, although it seems somewhat plausible. But it should be noted that Hoyle held a variety of, at least controversial, some would say loony, opinions about science, including that the Big Bang theory is wrong, that influenza outbreaks are caused by viruses arriving from outer space, that petroleum has an inorganic source, and that the origin of life on Earth is best explained by intelligent design rather than evolution.
I’ll bite. What is it?
When in doubt, assume it’s a sex toy.
Oh, you guys. I’m angelic 
It measures how much noodles for 4 people at a spaghetti dinner. 
Gobekli Tepe contains megalithic structures much older and more mysterious than Stonehenge. They are dated to at least 11,000 years ago when humans were supposedly just a bunch of hunter-gatherer tribes.
As yet, only 5% of the site has been excavated so who knows what else is buried in the area. The monumental stones are even more impressive than the ones at Stonehenge as they are decorated with abstract, enigmatic pictograms and carved animal reliefs.
