Did Africa Have The First Iron Age?

Summary

In this engaging episode, Stefan Milo delves into the historical debate surrounding the origins of ironworking in Sub-Saharan Africa. While traditional narratives often attribute such technological advancements to diffusion from the north, Milo explores the possibility of an independent invention within the continent itself. The discussion highlights significant archaeological sites, examines the challenges of radiocarbon dating, and weighs the evidence for both diffusion and independent invention. Despite the lack of conclusive evidence, the episode leaves viewers with a sense of wonder and the understanding that Africa's metallurgical history is as complex and rich as the continent itself.

Highlights

• Stefan gets up early for a sunrise metaphor but ends up exploring Africa's ancient ironworking. 🌄
• The debate over whether ironworking in Africa was independently developed or spread from the north is sizzling hot! 🔍
• Ancient blacksmiths were amazing, relying on skill and instinct without modern thermometers or blast furnaces. 🔨
• Radiocarbon dating issues muddy the waters, especially with the old wood problem in these archaeological sites. 🌲
• No concrete evidence yet of Sahara-Saharan trade, so the diffusion of ironworking remains speculative. 🤔
• The Nok culture in Nigeria had significant ironworking activity, possibly bypassing the copper stage entirely. 🛠️
• Some archaeological sites in Africa might be the world's oldest for ironworking, dating back to 2340 BCE. 🗿
• The mysteries of early African metallurgy are a thrilling puzzle for both historians and archaeologists. 🧩

Key Takeaways

• Ironworking in Sub-Saharan Africa sparks a hot debate between diffusion from the north and local invention. 🔥
• Radiocarbon dating poses challenges in accurately dating ancient ironworking sites, leading to ongoing debates. ⌛
• Africa's metallurgical history might rewrite the book on ancient technologies, bursting with untold stories. 📚
• Diffusion theories lack hard evidence of ancient trade or contact with communities below the Sahara. 🛤️
• Despite uncertainties, the allure of ancient Africa’s technological narrative keeps the excitement alive! 🗝️

Overview

Stefan Milo takes viewers on a compelling journey to explore the origins of ironworking in Africa. His mission is to dissect whether this incredible technological advancement was a product of external influence from North Africa or a homegrown revolution within Sub-Saharan regions. Through examining key sites like Carthage, Meroe, and the Nok culture, Stefan invites us to ponder the possibilities and challenges of ancient Africa’s metal mustering mastery.

Throughout the episode, we groove along the complexities of radiocarbon dating and the 'old wood problem,' which adds a layer of intrigue to the historical puzzle. The narrative vividly paints a picture of ancient craftsmanship, where skills were passed down across generations without the aid of modern technologies like thermometers and blast furnaces. As Stefan humorously struggles with conclusions, the passion for unraveling Africa's past is infectious.

In the end, the story is one of endless curiosity and open-ended exploration. The possibility of independent invention meets the allure of potential trade connections. While definitive answers are elusive, Stefan leaves us with the excitement of missing links yet to be discovered. It's as if Africa's rich past whispers tales of technological prowess, waiting for the world to listen more closely and dig a little deeper!

Chapters

• 00:00 - 01:00: Introduction and Early Debates The chapter begins with a personal anecdote about an early morning attempt to capture a sunrise, which sets the stage for a discussion on the use of the sun rising as a metaphor in archaeology. This metaphor was prevalent in the 20th century and underscored the belief that significant advances in civilization were rooted in eastern cultures such as those in Mesopotamia, Anatolia, and Egypt. This idea was often encapsulated with the Latin phrase 'Ex Oriente Lux,' meaning 'light from the east.' The chapter seems to lay the groundwork for examining how these early debates influenced perceptions of civilization's origins.
• 05:00 - 07:00: Radiocarbon Dating Challenges The chapter discusses the challenges and debates surrounding the use of radiocarbon dating in determining the history and origin of ancient artifacts and civilizations, particularly focusing on the Near East. It questions the widely held belief that the entire world owes its cultural and technological advancements to this region, suggesting a more complex web of historical developments across different regions, including sub-Saharan Africa, especially in relation to the origins of metalworking.
• 10:00 - 12:00: Diffusion vs Invention Arguments The chapter examines the ongoing debate about whether a certain technology, possibly the production of iron, diffused from North Africa through the Mediterranean or was invented independently in the region. The author aims to explore evidence supporting both arguments and seeks to provide an introductory overview of this debate.
• 13:00 - 15:00: Evidence from North Africa This chapter references several resources for further exploration on the spread of iron technology. It points to two YouTube creators, From Nothing and Ollie Bye, who have created videos on the topic. The chapter concludes by gearing up for a discussion or debate, suggesting that more in-depth analysis or argumentation will follow.
• 16:00 - 18:00: The Role of Meroe in Iron Production The chapter explores the historical role of Meroe in the production of iron. It starts with a brief disclaimer that humans have long created iron objects from meteorites, and mentions ancient Egyptian artifacts, including iron beads and Tutankhamun's iron dagger.
• 20:00 - 22:00: Trans-Saharan Trade Networks This chapter focuses on the history and complexity of trans-Saharan trade networks, particularly emphasizing the technological and metallurgical challenges and advancements of transforming iron ore into usable items for trade. Although no detailed blacksmithing techniques are discussed, the content highlights the difficulty ironworkers experience, such as maintaining appropriate temperatures well below 1540 degrees Celsius to avoid melting iron. The narrative also touches briefly on the economic impact of iron commodities within these trade systems, symbolized by manufactured goods ranging from bridges to soft drinks, illustrating the broad scope of applications for processed iron resources. Overall, the chapter portrays the intricate balance required in ironworking and its critical role within the broader context of trans-Saharan exchange.
• 23:00 - 25:00: West African Ironworking Evidence The chapter explains the traditional West African ironworking technique, focusing on producing iron blooms. Achieving the right temperature, between 1100 and 1400 degrees Celsius, is crucial to avoid creating brittle cast iron. The desired bloom forms a spongy texture, which is repeatedly heated and hammered to transform into usable tools or weapons like spears. The narrative contrasts these historical techniques with modern advancements in iron production.
• 29:00 - 31:00: Central African Early Ironworking Sites The chapter 'Central African Early Ironworking Sites' explores the traditional ironworking techniques in Central Africa during pre-industrial times. It highlights the absence of modern technologies such as blast furnaces and thermometers, emphasizing the reliance on the skill and experience of the ironworker. These craftsmen intuitively understood the precise conditions needed, like the right furnace temperature and the correct iron consistency, for successful iron production. The chapter underscores the complexity and expertise required in this ancient craft.
• 44:00 - 47:00: Conclusion and Future Research The chapter discusses the evolution of iron working, tracing its origins back to bronze age Anatolia. It highlights the theory that in the Mediterranean, iron working emerged from copper production, noting that copper ores often contain iron. Despite this connection, the chapter emphasizes the uniqueness and complexity of the technological advancements required, which were primarily mastered by experienced copper workers.

Did Africa Have The First Iron Age? Transcription

• 00:00 - 00:30 [tired sigh] I got up a little bit earlier today  to uh try and get a sweet visual metaphor of the   sun rising but nature had other ideas. The  image of the sun rising in the east though   had been used by archaeologists a lot in the  20th century to describe this notion that   the major advances in civilization came from  mesopotamia, anatolia, egypt, from the east   from their perspective. "Ex Oriente Lux" they  would write. And you know, the civilizations of
• 00:30 - 01:00 of the ancient near east, their place in history  is guaranteed they are of course spectacular. No   one can take that away from them. Uh, but does  the entire world owe them absolutely everything?   Almost certainly not. The more we learn about  ancient history, pre-history the more complicated   it becomes. Naturally, that's as it should be.  One area where there has been huge debate, for   well over 100 years actually, is on the  origins of metal working in sub-saharan Africa.
• 01:00 - 01:30 Some say that it sort of diffused, this technology  diffused from north Africa through contact with   the mediterranean world. Others that it was  invented independently. It may even have been   the earliest region in the world to start  producing iron. So today i want to take a   look at those two arguments and see the evidence  that they put forward, see if we can come to   any satisfying conclusion. Don't consider this  anything other than an introduction to the debate,
• 01:30 - 02:00 there's always more that could be said. As always  all the sources are in the description if you want   to look into anything further. If you don't  want to wade through all the sources though,   From Nothing the best African history youtuber and  Ollie bye, the king of maps, have put together two   videos illustrating the spread of iron technology  around the world. Both those videos will be in the   pinned comment, in the description. All right  enough shenanigans let's get to the debate!
• 02:00 - 02:30 First a quick caveat, humans have been able to  create iron objects from fallen meteorites for   a long time. The oldest iron objects found so  far are these lovely 5,000 year old beads from   Egypt. Perfect for any occasion. Tutankhamun also  had a pretty posh iron dagger. We can often tell
• 02:30 - 03:00 when an iron object is made from a meteorite  because of how high the nickel content is.   What we're talking about today though is the  production of iron. Turning iron ore into bridges,   ovens, Scottish soft drinks, etc etc so on and  so on. There's so much debate around this issue   because turning iron into something usable is  pretty tough. I'm no blacksmith so this is a very   basic explanation. The iron cannot get so hot that  it will melt, it can't get above 1540 degrees c.
• 03:00 - 03:30 If the iron becomes liquid, it's going to pick up  too much carbon, become cast iron and be brittle   and rubbish. It needs to become just the right  amount of hot, between 1100 and 1400 degrees,   so that it picks up the correct amount of carbon  and forms this spongy blob called a bloom.   This bloom can then be hit with a hammer and  reheated and hit with a hammer and reheated,   hit with a hammer, again and again so on and  so on until it's something usable like a spear.   Obviously now we have better techniques  of producing iron, we can make things like
• 03:30 - 04:00 cast iron pans and stuff like that but uh back  in pre-industrial times there was none of this   technology. No blast furnaces, no thermometers.  The ability to create good iron rested solely on   the skill of the person creating it who through  a lifetime of experience just knew instinctively   when the furnace was the correct temperature,  uh when the iron was the right consistency,   when the bloom was ready for a hammering.  It's so difficult that a lot of people
• 04:00 - 04:30 believe or would argue that it's only happened  once in human history back in bronze age Anatolia.   In the mediterranean world it's believed that iron  working evolved out of copper production. Copper   ores do often feature large amounts of iron and  experienced copper workers were probably the only   trades people in the ancient world with the skill  required to control such sophisticated furnaces.   However, even there even with those conditions,  despite the presence of iron in copper ore, it
• 04:30 - 05:00 still took a long time to master. There are still  technological leaps to be made. To put it simply,   copper melts at 1083 degrees c and can be directly  cast or poured into a mould. So comparing iron   production to copper production, the temperatures  needed are lower and the finished product looks   totally different. You could imagine a scenario  though where copper smiths accidentally let   their furnace get too hot, ended up with an iron  bloom and tried to work it for whatever reason.
• 05:00 - 05:30 There are also some fundamental problems with  radiocarbon dating that are especially relevant to   this topic. As many of you know radiocarbon dating  can't provide an exact date but provides two dates   and whatever you're measuring could have been  produced, or made, or or existed, whatever, at   any point between those two dates. The problem is  due to varying levels of atmospheric carbon there   are certain periods of time where the distance  between those two dates is quite big. One period
• 05:30 - 06:00 where it is particularly inaccurate is between 800  and 400 bce. 400 years is obviously a very large   window of time and it creates a lot of doubt about  controversial sites from this period. This can be   mitigated when we have multiple ways of dating  a site, multiple points of reference, but when   we only have a radio carbon date it's a legit  problem, no two ways around it. Another issue   with radiocarbon dating is they can only measure  organic matter, like bacon sandwiches perfect   archaeology video prop, when you're looking for  the origins of metal working that's a problem,
• 06:00 - 06:30 metal was never alive. So what archaeologists  do is take samples from the charcoal inside   the furnaces. That would be great, that would  be fine if it wasn't for the old wood problem.   Which is not why your dad takes those little blue  pills but rather what if the wood is significantly   older than the furnace what if they're not the  same age? For a start some tree species are very   long lived, so if you are measuring charcoal  that was made from the heart of the tree it
• 06:30 - 07:00 could give a signal that is literally centuries  older than if you measured another part. Also   in certain conditions, particularly arid  conditions, dead trees can persist for centuries.   If someone used this wood to fuel their furnace  and we later measured the resulting charcoal,   the radiocarbon date would be centuries older  than the furnace. Again as with the problem of   the broad date range, the solution is not to rely  on one single method of dating, or trying to find
• 07:00 - 07:30 other items within the archaeological  layer, such as bone, that could be dated.   Those three issues are basically central  to this whole bloody debate. So let's take   a look at the two arguments which for the sake  of these i'll call diffusion versus invention. The earliest ironworking site so far discovered  in north Africa comes from Carthage. Just   outside the city walls was an industrial  area of the city now called Bir Massouda.
• 07:30 - 08:00 Iron production here dates to around the middle  of the 8th century bce, around the year 750. So   did Carthage's neighbours, the ancient Libyans,  Numidians, Amazigh, learn some iron working from   Carthage? Well yeah, probably they did it seems,  excavations at El Kef in western Tunisia, about   180 kilometers west of Carthage, revealed iron  slag dating again to around the 8th century bce.   There are other signs of Phoenician contact at the  town as well. So it seems knowledge of ironworking
• 08:00 - 08:30 did travel with the Carthaginian traders and  started the iron age in the region adjacent   to Carthage. How far this knowledge went  into Africa is the million-dollar question.   Over in east Africa, the most likely conduit of  iron technology is the city of Meroe, the ancient   capital of the kingdom of Kush. Similarly to  Carthage the earliest evidence of iron production   dates to between 765 bce at the earliest and 411  bce at the latest. Meroe was the hub of an ancient
• 08:30 - 09:00 trade network. Raw materials such as ivory, and  ostrich feathers, were brought in by traders and   exchanged for luxury goods produced along the nile  and the mediterranean. Excavations from the Gash   delta in eastern Sudan show that contact with  Meroe extended at least that far and who knows   probably much further into Africa. Were iron goods  and knowledge of iron production exchanged for raw
• 09:00 - 09:30 materials at Meroe? Considering the the scale of  the production it would be hard to think that it   wasn't, yet i personally in my research, i tried  very hard, i could not find any evidence of it.   Um that could be my fault entirely of course,  i'm not perfect nor am i the world's number   one expert on Meroe, or on anything, um but it  could also reflect the fact that there is just   less archaeological research being done in Africa.  We're talking about regions that just haven't been
• 09:30 - 10:00 excavated that much. That's, that's just the way  it is. Hopefully that will change in the future,   no doubt it will change in the future, but as it  stands right now we just don't have evidence of   Meroe inspiring a technological revolution in  in the neighbouring regions. Just isn't there.
• 10:00 - 10:30 Obviously a key aspect of the diffusion argument  is evidence of trade and connections between north   Africa and below the Sahara. In terms of hard  evidence there is basically none in the time   periods we're talking about. No Carthaginian  artifacts are found in sub-saharan towns and   villages. If you're picturing caravans of  camels slowly plodding along the desert,   then you need to scrub that image from your  grey cells. Camels are native to Asia and,   although still debated, it seems large herds of  camels were not present in the Sahara until the
• 10:30 - 11:00 first few centuries ce, until the roman period.  People still lived in the Sahara of course   but horse and chariot were the preferred, or maybe  only method of transport and there is a ton of   rock art throughout much of the Sahara depicting  this. Presumably these ancient saharans had metal   to produce chariots and in one excavation, copper  artifacts were recovered. Excavations at the site   of Iwelen, in Niger's air mountains, revealed  two villages dated to this chariot period and
• 11:00 - 11:30 crucially in amongst the houses, three copper  spearheads, awls, axes, clamps, various copper   doodads and ding dongs. Did this copper producing,  chariot riding, culture extend out of the Sahara?   Well, the furthest south these images have been  discovered was at Essouk in Mali, 170 miles north   of the Niger river, which would be an excellent  gateway to the land south of the Sahara. Again
• 11:30 - 12:00 we have no hard evidence of this culture extending  to the river though so whether they did or not is   just down to your own ideas, your own speculation.  Such proximity to the Niger river is interesting   because this was a major region in the development  of urbanism and large formal states in west   Africa. At the time of Carthage's founding  this region was occupied by millet farming,   cattle herding communities. By the 3rd century bce  though, about 500 years later, large cities such
• 12:00 - 12:30 as Djenne Djenno had been founded. Archaeological  evidence suggests that from the very earliest   layers at Djenne they were using iron. All right  let's summarise this diffusion debate. Pros.   Iron working by around 750 bce at multiple  locations. These cultures all had a long tradition   of metal working, they each went through copper  ages, bronze ages, the history of their metallurgy   is very well understood. Trans saharan network  of chariot riding chaps and chapettes did exist.
• 12:30 - 13:00 Cons. Despite the evidence of  this trans-Saharan network,   what's the evidence of trade and connection?  Basically none, nothing. These ancient Saharans   could work copper but not iron. If iron is as hard  to work as people say, then how could it diffuse   through the Sahara into west Africa but the people  in the Sahara aren't producing it or using it,   at least not that we can see in the archaeological  record. This brings us to the invention side of
• 13:00 - 13:30 the debate. It's possible that these copper  working saharans introduced the idea of   metallurgy into west Africa but due to a lack  of copper ore, which is genuinely very rare,   people started experimenting with iron.  Anyway let's see that side of the argument. The best evidence for this idea is in the  west where Mauritania meets Senegal. In the   first millennium bc around the town of Akjoujt,  lived some chariot riding, pastoral communities,
• 13:30 - 14:00 who included copper production in their seasonal  movements. So far, so similar to what i discussed   earlier. What is interesting about Akjoujt though,  is that it's only 250 miles from Walalde in   Senegal, one of Africa's earliest iron producing  sites. At Walalde, excavators uncovered a village   of millet farming, cow herding, agro-pastoralists,  a similar economy to those that lived along the   Niger river at the same time. There were two  archaeological layers identified, the earliest
• 14:00 - 14:30 level dated to between 800 and 550 bce and the  second 550 to 360 bce, roughly, it is in that   bloody black hole. Iron objects were recovered  from the earliest layers and 19 kilograms of slag   were found in the second layer. Crucially for this  debate, various copper artifacts were also found,   including these lovely earrings. The copper  used to make these bears the same chemical   signature as copper from Akjoujt. There's no  evidence for copper production at Walalde, so
• 14:30 - 15:00 presumably these two groups were in contact.  Copper ore from Akjoujt is also high in iron,   the copper objects that were produced there  were also hammered. These are basically   the same preconditions that are believed to have  started iron production back in western Asia.   The only issue that we have at the moment is  that we have no evidence of anyone from Akjoujt   producing iron but who knows what the future  will reveal. Also, as i said the dates from
• 15:00 - 15:30 Walalde annoyingly fall into that 400-year weak  spot of radiocarbon dating. Without another point   of reference for dating we can't narrow it down  any further. This idea that copper producing   cultures in the Sahara inspired ironworking in  regions where they didn't have access to copper   might have a lot of merit to it. Especially if you  think that ironworking can't exist without copper   production. If we have a spectrum of the ideas,  on one hand total indigenous invention, and on the
• 15:30 - 16:00 other hand purely an outside influence giving this  technology, then this idea sort of sits between   the two and it has a lot of merit. Who knows what  future excavations in that region will uncover? Another idea is that pyrotechnologies like  pottery could have led to iron working   south of the desert. Perhaps the Nok culture  of Nigeria holds the key to this proposal? The   people of the Nok culture lived in what is now  central and northern Nigeria between 1500 bce
• 16:00 - 16:30 and the first century ce. At their earliest  levels they're stone age farmers, you know,   an equivalent technological level to Europe's  neolithic. From between 900 and 400 bc though,   iron working starts to make an appearance at Nok  sites with no intermediate copper working stage.   Quite a lot of iron too. In 2016 excavations  revealed 26 furnaces split across nine sites.
• 16:30 - 17:00 So there is absolutely no doubt that the Nok  were producing iron in quite a large scale. At   the same time that this iron is being produced,  incredible terracotta figurines start to make   an appearance in the archaeological record. Some  of the requirements for producing terracotta are   similar to producing iron, such as the  construction of clay structures, and the   burning of fuel at high temperatures. However, as  i said at the start, iron workers would also need   to control the amount of carbon in the furnace,  process the ore, hammer the bloom. For some
• 17:00 - 17:30 this is too much of a technological leap. In the  opinion of Paul Craddock from the British museum.   "To postulate the invention of iron smelting  without the knowledge of copper smelting is   akin to claiming the invention of the movie  camera but with no knowledge of photography". Once again, the site just falls  into that stupid radio carbon   black hole. If the Nok culture were making iron  in around the year 900 then of course influence
• 17:30 - 18:00 from Carthage or Meroe can't be responsible. If  it started around the year 400, then it's it's   much more reasonable, there's still a long way for  it to uh travel but uh it's much more reasonable. This brings us to our final  site. Ba ba ba baaaahhhh! The site which may be the oldest  ironworking site in the entire world.   At Oboui in the Central African Republic, a  furnace, a couple of storage pits, refuse pits,
• 18:00 - 18:30 and other features like a hammer stone, and a  pot presumably used for quenching iron, were   excavated. Six charcoal samples taken from across  the site were radiocarbon dated and they all   came back within the range of 2340 and 1900 bce.  Making it potentially the oldest ironworking site   in the entire world. Not surprisingly this  has caused a lot of debate back and forth.
• 18:30 - 19:00 However, the radiocarbon dates shouldn't  be dismissed just because they're old.   They are all within the same 400 year period. If  the site was disturbed, you might expect a much   wider date range. Plus the layers above the forge  were younger than the layer containing the forge   which is as it should be of course and maybe not  how it would be if the site had been disturbed.   It's hard to imagine a scenario where  a furnace and all the surrounding pits   are left intact yet their charcoal is entirely  replaced. Perhaps this is a problem of old wood?
• 19:00 - 19:30 It's possible, however the region is believed  to have been adequately wooded at the time,   so that is unlikely. The final criticism levelled  against the site is that the iron artifacts   recovered are too well preserved for such an age.  This is for sure a legitimate criticism. Holl, the   archaeologist behind the excavation, has stated  that the iron artifacts pictured for the paper   were simply the best preserved out of 174 iron  pieces recovered. You know i can't come to any
• 19:30 - 20:00 conclusion about the site in this video. I can't  say either way. People far more knowledgeable than   me argue about it to this day. It just depends on  how much of a problem, or how likely it is that   you think they were using old wood. There's no way  around that problem at the moment. Still, Oboui is   not unique for this region. There's another site  Gbatoro which allegedly dates to the same period   and another site, Gbabiri, which dates to between  sort of 900 and 750. I mean, that's outside of
• 20:00 - 20:30 the range of that radiocarbon black hole so  should we not presume the dates are accurate?   It really just depends on how pervasive  you think the problem of old wood is. Got to interrupt that absolute scruffpot,  who should take a mirror everywhere he goes,   uh because i messed up the conclusion have to  redo it. And i also prepared possibly the stalest,   oldest meme joke ever. I mean, I know this is  an archaeology channel but the memes should be
• 20:30 - 21:00 fresh. Would have been a nice idea three years ago  though. Clearly both diffusion and invention are   lacking crucial evidence that would make a cast  iron case. Diffusion, honestly just has no hard   evidence of contact between these civilizations  and invention is overly reliant on radiocarbon   dating charcoal and all the flaws that come with  that. More excavations could prove either one   correct but i think [loud motorbike in background  ] f-in harley riders. More excavations could prove
• 21:00 - 21:30 either one correct but i think the majority of  archaeologists are leaning towards invention   for the following reasons. Metalworking exists  across a really wide area of west Africa by the   first millennium bce, maybe it's possible for iron  working to diffuse through the Sahara and spread   quickly, but we don't have evidence of that  contact, we don't have evidence of that trade.   Several sites in the Adamawa region of central  Africa have really early iron working dates. Maybe   all these sites are flawed, maybe they're all  compromised by old wood, but surely the more sites
• 21:30 - 22:00 we find in those date ranges the less likely that  would be? Even outside of Africa, the history of   metallurgy is, is becoming a lot more complicated.  The bronze age proper kicked off in mesopotamia,   in anatolia, in the near east, but the earliest  bronze working we've found so far archaeologically   dates from the neolithic Vinca culture in  what is now Serbia. Now I know that's not
• 22:00 - 22:30 iron working and iron working is harder, it  comes with those extra technological steps,   those extra leaps of imagination you would have  to take, but it is a good illustration that   history is complicated and the more we excavate  the more we learn and who knows what is uh missing   in our understanding of west Africa. I'm no  metal working expert so i can't possibly say   whether copper working knowledge is a 100%  necessary prerequisite of ironworking, but   let's say that it is. Africa had copper working  cultures. Maybe those can be pushed further
• 22:30 - 23:00 back in time, maybe we can understand better the  contacts between copper workers and iron workers.   Who knows, who knows what could be unearthed. It  could go either way. I can't come to a definitive   conclusion i'm afraid but uh who knows maybe  both are right in their way? I mean, Africa   is a huge place some people could have invented  ironworking themselves others could have been in   a contact with the mediterranean world, with north  Africa in ways that we don't quite understand yet.
• 23:00 - 23:30 I don't know, i don't know. Thank  you to my patrons for voting on   this topic. This is the end of the video, i'm  gonna leave you with that stale meme. Goodbye. [Stefan] I don't know man i think this is  a pretty stale meme. I think it's a pretty   bad idea. [Miserable Intern] I, I think  people will get it. [Stefan] i don't know,   i don't think people still watch Samuel  Chowder, not the kids these days aren't   watching him. [Miserable Intern] kids aren't  into samuel chowder? [Stefan] no, oh well.