their original excavation and context were not well-recorded, or preserved for a BC date range & the style of the pottery is Sassanid dynasy 224-640 AD , & they may have not been found together at all & the original reason for assumi...
their original excavation and context were not well-recorded, or preserved for a BC date range & the style of the pottery is Sassanid dynasy 224-640 AD , & they may have not been found together at all & the original reason for assuming electroplating was a mistake as art works were fire-gilded (with mercury) & there is absolutely no evidence for electroplating in this region at the time not a single archaeologist believed that these were batteries in one informal 2012 poll
Khujut Rabu dig or Baghdad Museum two conflicting 1930' origin stories by Wilhelm Konig for the assumed Parthian bagdad “battery” that had ONE iron rod external terminal projecting outside of the asphalt plug, but the copper tube did not, making it impossible to connect wires to make a circuit & the metals combined to make a high maintinance liquid electrolyte gass emmiting wet cell BUT the jar was sealed with asphalt ?! ,
proving that something was feasible does not equal scientific proof that it ever happened. It's fun to speculate, just so long as nobody gets confused and mistakes the speculation for hard evidence. like Seleucia vessels were a writing scroll storage vessel & matched the inner parts , sort of? ,
in the original papaer Wilhelm Konig himself said A scroll would be wrapped around a wood or iron pin, then slipped inside a copper tube for storage
my work is transformative in nature as a criticism so some usage of the original is required but uses no more of the original than is necessary & this has no negative affect on the market for the original work its self & my..