The Baghdad Battery or Parthian Battery is a set of three artifacts which were found together: a ceramic pot, a tube of copper, and a rod of iron. It was discovered in modern Khujut Rabu, Iraq, close to the metropolis of Ctesiphon, the capital of the Parthian (150 BC – 223 AD) and Sasanian (224–650 AD) empires, and it is considered to date from either of these periods.
Its origin and purpose remain unclear, and further evidence is needed to explain its purpose. It was hypothesized by some researchers that the object functioned as a galvanic cell, possibly used for electroplating, or some kind of electrotherapy, but there is no electroplated object known from this period. An alternative explanation is that it functioned as a storage vessel for sacred scrolls.
Physical description and datingEdit
The artifacts consist of terracotta pots approximately 130 mm (5 in) tall (with a one-and-a-half-inch mouth) containing a cylinder made of a rolled copper sheet, which houses a single iron rod. At the top, the iron rod is isolated from the copper by bitumen, with plugs or stoppers, and both rod and cylinder fit snugly inside the opening of the jar. The copper cylinder is not watertight, so if the jar were filled with a liquid, this would surround the iron rod as well. The artifact had been exposed to the weather and had suffered corrosion.
König thought the objects might date to the Parthian period, between 250 BC and AD 224, but according to St John Simpson of the Near Eastern department of the British Museum, their original excavation and context were not well-recorded, and evidence for this date range is very weak. Furthermore, the style of the pottery is Sassanid (224-640).
Theories concerning operationEdit
Its origin and purpose remain unclear. Wilhelm König was an assistant at the National Museum of Iraq in the 1930s. He had observed a number of very fine silver objects from ancient Iraq, plated with very thin layers of gold, and speculated that they were electroplated. In 1938 he authored a paper offering the hypothesis that they may have formed a galvanic cell, perhaps used for electroplating gold onto silver objects. This interpretation is rejected by skeptics.
Some believe that wine, lemon juice, grape juice, or vinegar was used as an acidic electrolyte solution to generate an electric current from the difference between the electrode potentials of the copper and iron electrodes.
After the Second World War, a man named Willard Gray demonstrated current production by a reconstruction of the inferred battery design when filled with grape juice. W. Jansen experimented with benzoquinone (some beetles produce quinones) and vinegar in a cell and got satisfactory performance.
In 1978, Arne Eggebrecht reportedly reproduced the electroplating of gold onto a small statue. There are no (direct) written or photographic records of this experiment. [a] The only records are segments of a television show.
Controversies over useEdit
The artifacts do not form a useful battery for several reasons:[original research?]
- Gas is evolved at an iron/copper/electrolyte junction. Bubbles form a partial insulation of the electrode. Thus the battery's functionality decreases the more it is used.
- Although several volts can be produced by connecting batteries in series, the voltage generated by iron/copper/electrolyte cell is below 1 volt.
Also the jar was sealed with asphalt, making it enormously difficult to refill the liquid electrolyte. and the presumed “battery” also has no terminals. The iron rod did project outside of the asphalt plug, but the copper tube did not, making it impossible to connect wires to make a circuit. 
König himself seems to have been mistaken on the nature of the objects he thought were electroplated. They were apparently fire-gilded (with mercury). Paul Craddock of the British Museum said "The examples we see from this region and era are conventional gold plating and mercury gilding. There’s never been any irrefutable evidence to support the electroplating theory".
David A. Scott, senior scientist at the Getty Conservation Institute and head of its Museum Research Laboratory, wrote that "There is a natural tendency for writers dealing with chemical technology to envisage these unique ancient objects of two thousand years ago as electroplating accessories (Foley 1977). but this is clearly untenable, for there is absolutely no evidence for electroplating in this region at the time."
Paul T. Keyser of the University of Alberta noted that Eggebrecht used a more efficient, modern electrolyte, and that using only vinegar, or other electrolytes available at the time assumed, the battery would be very feeble, and for that and other reasons concludes that even if this was in fact a battery, it could not have been used for electroplating. However, Keyser still supported the battery theory, but believed it was used for some kind of mild electrotherapy such as pain relief, possibly through electroacupuncture.
Bitumen as an insulatorEdit
A bitumen seal, being thermoplastic, would be extremely inconvenient for a galvanic cell, which would require frequent topping up of the electrolyte (if they were intended for extended use).
The artifacts strongly resemble another type of object with a known purpose – storage vessels for sacred scrolls from nearby Seleucia on the Tigris. Since these vessels were exposed to the elements,[b][improper synthesis?] it is possible that any papyrus or parchment inside had completely rotted away, perhaps leaving a trace of slightly acidic organic residue. Although the Seleucia vessels do not have the outermost clay jar, they are otherwise almost identical.[b]
In March 2012, Professor Elizabeth Stone of Stony Brook University, an expert on Iraqi archaeology, returning from the first archaeological expedition in Iraq after 20 years, stated that she does not know a single archaeologist who believed that these were batteries.
In the mediaEdit
The idea that the terracotta jars in certain circumstances could have been used to produce usable levels of electricity has been put to the test at least twice. On the third episode of the 1980 British Television series Arthur C. Clarke's Mysterious World, Egyptologist Arne Eggebrecht created a voltaic cell using a jar filled with grape juice, to produce half a volt of electricity, demonstrating for the programme that jars used this way could electroplate a silver statuette in two hours, using a gold cyanide solution. Eggebrecht speculated that museums could contain many items mislabelled as gold when they are merely electroplated.
The Discovery Channel program MythBusters built replicas of the jars to see if it was indeed possible for them to have been used for electroplating or electrostimulation. On MythBusters' 29th episode (March 23, 2005), ten hand-made terracotta jars were fitted to act as batteries. Lemon juice was chosen as the electrolyte to activate the electrochemical reaction between the copper and iron. Connected in series, the batteries produced 4 volts of electricity. When linked in series, the cells had sufficient power to electroplate a small token and deliver a minor electric shock to MythBusters co-host Adam Savage. Archaeologist Ken Feder commented on the show noting that no archaeological evidence has been found either for connections between the jars (which were necessary to produce the required voltage) or for their use for electroplating.
- In Arran Frood's BBC article: "There does not exist any written documentation of the experiments which took place here in 1978," says Dr Bettina Schmitz, currently a researcher based at the same Roemer and Pelizaeus Museum. "The experiments weren't even documented by photos, which really is a pity," she says. "I have searched through the archives of this museum and I talked to everyone involved in 1978 with no results."
- Arran Frood's BBC article: "The artifact had been exposed to the weather and had suffered corrosion, although mild given the presence of an electrochemical couple.
- Frood, Arran (February 27, 2003). "Riddle of 'Baghdad's batteries'". BBC News. Archived from the original on April 7, 2012. Retrieved April 6, 2012.
- Paul T. Keyser, "The Purpose of the Parthian Galvanic Cells: A First-Century A. D. Electric Battery Used for Analgesia", Journal of Near Eastern Studies, vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 81-98, April 1993. Includes images of the artifact and similar objects.
- König, Wilhelm (1938): Ein Galvanisches Element aus der Partherzeit?, Forschungen und Fortschritte, 14: 8–9. (pdf).
- König, Wilhelm (1939): Im Verlorenen Paradies-Neun Jahre Irak, pp. 166-68, Munich and Vienna.
- Baghdad batteries on the Bad Archaeology Network website.
- "Erich von Däniken's Chariots of the Gods: Science or Charlatanism?", Robert Sheaffer. First published in the "NICAP UFO Investigator", October/November, 1974.
- Welfare, S. and Fairley, J. Arthur C. Clarke's Mysteries (Collins 1980), pp. 62–64.
- Scott, David A. (2002). Copper and Bronze in Art: Corrosion, Colorants, Conservation. Getty Publications. pp. 16–18. ISBN 978-0-89236-638-5.
- Oxford University, Elizabeth Frood editor (on eScholarship website): Eggebrecht's account
- the Baghdad Battery on The Iron Skeptic website
- "The Baghdad Battery – and Ancient Electricity". Michigan State University students website. October 12, 2010. Archived from the original on November 9, 2013. Retrieved March 9, 2015. MSU students cite the now offline SkepticWorld.com website article (archived January 16, 2012) and offer their viewpoint.
- Keith Fitzpatrick-Matthews (26 December 2009). "The batteries of Babylon: evidence for ancient electricity?". Bad Archaeology. Retrieved 17 December 2016.
- Lenny Flank (Feb 10, 2015). "The Baghdad Battery: An Update". Daily Kos.
- Haughton, Brian (26 December 2006). Hidden History: Lost Civilizations, Secret Knowledge, and Ancient Mysteries. Red Wheel/Weiser – via Google Books.
- Stone, Elizabeth (March 23, 2012). "Archaeologists Revisit Iraq". Science Friday (Interview). Interviewed by Flatow, Ira. Retrieved April 6, 2012.
My recollection of it is that most people don't think it was a battery. ...It resembled other clay vessels... used for rituals, in terms of having multiple mouths to it. I think it's not a battery. I think the people who argue it's a battery are not scientists, basically. I don't know anybody who thinks it's a real battery in the field.
- Prof. Stone's statement, listed as a 'red flag' among 5 red flags why it was not a battery (with sources, on Archaeology Fantasies website)
- Docu BoX TR. "Arthur C. Clarke Mysterious World S01 E03 "Ancient Wisdom" (video)". DailyMotion. Retrieved 16 March 2018.
- John Fairley; Simon Welfare (1 September 2000). Arthur C. Clarke's Mysteries. Prometheus Books. pp. 64–66. ISBN 978-1-57392-833-5. (snippet view only)
- Ancient batteries episode on MythBusters.
- "Ancient Alien Astronauts: Interview with Ken Feder". Monster Talk Podcast. July 27, 2011. Retrieved June 1, 2013.