>In TFA it is stated that before bronze (i.e. copper-tin alloy) copper was used for tools.
> Before bronze, for several millennia tools were made from alloys of copper and arsenic or antimony
So do you have an actual point, or just a pedantic nit to pick over the author using "copper tools" as short-hand for "copper alloy tools"?
HN at its finest
The article doesn't mean copper alloy tools though, it means copper tools, including weapons. At least that's how I read this:
"Copper was accessible enough and easy enough to work that it allowed early proto-states to reliably arm their warriors with something better than stone weaponry, which often chips or breaks under impact. Copper is a soft metal, hence its use in pipes and wiring today. But it generally won’t break, and though it does bend easily it can also be bent back into shape."
But I think the article is right.