King Tut's dagger--a blade of meteroritic iron

Timo Nieminen · 8th June 2016, 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

The King Tut blade is a large, serious, very well made blade, something that without prior knowledge could very well be attributed to a much later time.

I believe that it will eventually be confirmed that this blade is of forge welded construction.

That would be no surprise. Given that it's hot-forged*, it's not a big step to welding. Either folded and welded for homogeneity, or separate pieces welded together to get a larger piece of iron. Or both.

* The best information I've been able to find is that it isn't cold-forged (unlike the other iron objects from the tomb).

A. G. Maisey · 8th June 2016, 02:51 PM

Timo, have you ever tried to forge weld?

I was taught basic blacksmithing by a man who came out of his apprenticeship in 1947, in a NSW country town. He was one of the last traditionally trained smiths in Australia. He taught me to forge weld iron and mild steel.

At that time (1980) I was unable to find anybody in the greater Sydney area who could teach me to forge weld iron with high carbon steel or with nickel. This included the very few tech college teachers who were teaching blacksmithing at that time.

In the 19th century text books that I was using back then, mention was made that in most towns in England where there were several smiths, one smith was usually recognised as the welding specialist and he accepted welding jobs from the other smiths in his area.

Forge welding in coke or charcoal is not at all easy.

It took me about 12 months of trial and error to teach myself to weld iron + nickel + high carbon steel , in the forge. Subsequently I taught a number of other people.

The step from ordinary forge work to welding in the forge is a very big step, and the step from welding iron to welding materials with different weld temperatures is immense.

To weld meteoritic material in the forge is a step further again.

These days most people who can forge weld are using gas forges, and this welding is about as difficult as making a chocolate cake, but welding in a traditional forge is not something that is easy to do.

Timo Nieminen · 8th June 2016, 10:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Forge welding in coke or charcoal is not at all easy.
[...]
The step from ordinary forge work to welding in the forge is a very big step, and the step from welding iron to welding materials with different weld temperatures is immense.

To weld meteoritic material in the forge is a step further again.

I don't mean to say that it's a trivial step. But IMO it's a much smaller inventive step than going from cold-forging to hot-forging. Cold-forging iron (with or without annealing) is just the application of existing techniques for forging copper and copper alloys to a new metal. Hot-forging is something different. Don't underestimate the difficulty of that step.

Is it a big inventive step from hot forging to welding? At welding temperatures, iron/steel is sticky. (I've had to remove tools with hammers, and that's just accidental sticking, not deliberate welding.) I don't think it's extraordinary to deliberately investigate welding iron after noticing that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Timo, have you ever tried to forge weld?
[...]
It took me about 12 months of trial and error to teach myself to weld iron + nickel + high carbon steel , in the forge. Subsequently I taught a number of other people.

From working in research, I'd say that if you can learn to do it, by yourself, in 12 months, it isn't that hard.

Of course, that's 12 months starting with knowing how to forge weld already. But you say that's an immense step from welding iron, compared to a merely big step from forging to forge welding iron.

I haven't tried it.

Jim McDougall · 9th June 2016, 03:32 AM

As someone who has pretty much zero knowledge or experience in metallurgy welding etc. I must say this discussion is fascinating! and I especially appreciate the outstanding manner maintained in differences in opinion or perspective......textbook!!!

I was surprised to see the notes suggesting that this dagger may have been forged later and placed in the tomb at later date. I had always thought that the tomb of King Tut was unique in that it was quite undisturbed from its original time of interment.

Interesting notes from David affirming that any intrusion into the tomb was of course to rob, not deposit items and these events were very close to the time of interment.....that makes sense.
Also, as well noted, the dagger was in the sarcophagus, not elsewhere in the array of items placed with the burial.

It does seem to me that the fact that King Tut's dagger was indeed of meteoric iron has been well known for decades, and that that iron was known to the Egyptians as they did not have access to supplies of iron nor those skills. I had understood that the iron weapons such as sickle swords (khopesh) were from those acquired from Canaanites (?).

What was key in this 'news' was that apparently a study of meteorites which had fallen in Red Sea and environs revealed about 20 cases, and that in 2000, one which had hit in a limestone plateau near Mersa Matruh, a seaport about 150 miles west of Alexandria.
It was noted in the article I read that this particular meteorite had been named 'Kharga' and that scientific testing revealed that the nickel and cobalt composition was in accord with that of the King Tut dagger.
It was noted that the high quality of the blade of this dagger showed that Egyptian iron smithing was at a much higher level in 14th c. B.C. than previously thought

It also noted that among the Tut artifacts was a scarab amulet of what Carter (in 1922) thought was greenish yellow chalcedony.....however further tests on this object revealed it to be desert silica glass from Libya. This material is consistent with sites of meteor or comet impact.

Therefore it would seem that the discovery confirming these characteristics would preclude the notion that this blade might have been from a period later than Tut's original interment.

Kubur · 9th June 2016, 07:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

I was surprised to see the notes suggesting that this dagger may have been forged later and placed in the tomb at later date. I had always thought that the tomb of King Tut was unique in that it was quite undisturbed from its original time of interment.
Interesting notes from David affirming that any intrusion into the tomb was of course to rob, not deposit items and these events were very close to the time of interment.....that makes sense.

I agree it's impossible that people added an object later.
Kharga is also a very famous Egyptian oasis. Maybe the place of origin for this iron, meteroritic or not...
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...90997716300050

Ibrahiim al Balooshi · 9th June 2016, 02:56 PM

Jahingir’s Meteor Dagger

Given to him by a loyal tax collector, Mughal Emperor Jahangir had a meteorite forged into a pair of swords and this dagger.

Like his Empire, he saw it as a gift from God. The tax collector said that as his men dug from the meteorite, the ground grew hot and the stone was molten; his men had to wait for it to cool before moving it.

Showing below.....James Sowerby was a noted artist and historian of natural science, even hosting his own museum that had meteorites on display. As a gift for Czar Alexander I, Sowerby had the Cape of Good Hope meteorite forged into a gift for the Emperor. It took years for the Czar to receive the sword, and for a time it was lost.

Both exhibits and detail from http://www.ripleys.com/blog/meteorite-swords/

Ian · 10th June 2016, 08:42 PM

I want to join with Jim and thank everyone for their thoughtful inputs into this discussion and for their expression of diverse opinions that reflect the spectrum of ideas that this dagger has generated since its discovery in the 1920s.

It seems there is much more to be learn about the origins of this dagger, how it was made, and how it ended up in an Egyptian tomb that was undisturbed for more than 3,300 years.

Ian

9th June 2016, 02:56 PM	#6
Ibrahiim al Balooshi Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Buraimi Oman, on the border with the UAE Posts: 4,408	Jahingir’s Meteor Dagger Given to him by a loyal tax collector, Mughal Emperor Jahangir had a meteorite forged into a pair of swords and this dagger. Like his Empire, he saw it as a gift from God. The tax collector said that as his men dug from the meteorite, the ground grew hot and the stone was molten; his men had to wait for it to cool before moving it. Showing below.....James Sowerby was a noted artist and historian of natural science, even hosting his own museum that had meteorites on display. As a gift for Czar Alexander I, Sowerby had the Cape of Good Hope meteorite forged into a gift for the Emperor. It took years for the Czar to receive the sword, and for a time it was lost. Both exhibits and detail from http://www.ripleys.com/blog/meteorite-swords/ Attached Images Last edited by Ibrahiim al Balooshi; 9th June 2016 at 03:08 PM.

8th June 2016, 02:51 PM	#2
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,015	Timo, have you ever tried to forge weld? I was taught basic blacksmithing by a man who came out of his apprenticeship in 1947, in a NSW country town. He was one of the last traditionally trained smiths in Australia. He taught me to forge weld iron and mild steel. At that time (1980) I was unable to find anybody in the greater Sydney area who could teach me to forge weld iron with high carbon steel or with nickel. This included the very few tech college teachers who were teaching blacksmithing at that time. In the 19th century text books that I was using back then, mention was made that in most towns in England where there were several smiths, one smith was usually recognised as the welding specialist and he accepted welding jobs from the other smiths in his area. Forge welding in coke or charcoal is not at all easy. It took me about 12 months of trial and error to teach myself to weld iron + nickel + high carbon steel , in the forge. Subsequently I taught a number of other people. The step from ordinary forge work to welding in the forge is a very big step, and the step from welding iron to welding materials with different weld temperatures is immense. To weld meteoritic material in the forge is a step further again. These days most people who can forge weld are using gas forges, and this welding is about as difficult as making a chocolate cake, but welding in a traditional forge is not something that is easy to do.

9th June 2016, 03:32 AM	#4
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,281	As someone who has pretty much zero knowledge or experience in metallurgy welding etc. I must say this discussion is fascinating! and I especially appreciate the outstanding manner maintained in differences in opinion or perspective......textbook!!! I was surprised to see the notes suggesting that this dagger may have been forged later and placed in the tomb at later date. I had always thought that the tomb of King Tut was unique in that it was quite undisturbed from its original time of interment. Interesting notes from David affirming that any intrusion into the tomb was of course to rob, not deposit items and these events were very close to the time of interment.....that makes sense. Also, as well noted, the dagger was in the sarcophagus, not elsewhere in the array of items placed with the burial. It does seem to me that the fact that King Tut's dagger was indeed of meteoric iron has been well known for decades, and that that iron was known to the Egyptians as they did not have access to supplies of iron nor those skills. I had understood that the iron weapons such as sickle swords (khopesh) were from those acquired from Canaanites (?). What was key in this 'news' was that apparently a study of meteorites which had fallen in Red Sea and environs revealed about 20 cases, and that in 2000, one which had hit in a limestone plateau near Mersa Matruh, a seaport about 150 miles west of Alexandria. It was noted in the article I read that this particular meteorite had been named 'Kharga' and that scientific testing revealed that the nickel and cobalt composition was in accord with that of the King Tut dagger. It was noted that the high quality of the blade of this dagger showed that Egyptian iron smithing was at a much higher level in 14th c. B.C. than previously thought It also noted that among the Tut artifacts was a scarab amulet of what Carter (in 1922) thought was greenish yellow chalcedony.....however further tests on this object revealed it to be desert silica glass from Libya. This material is consistent with sites of meteor or comet impact. Therefore it would seem that the discovery confirming these characteristics would preclude the notion that this blade might have been from a period later than Tut's original interment.

10th June 2016, 08:42 PM	#7
Ian Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Aussie Bush Posts: 4,396	I want to join with Jim and thank everyone for their thoughtful inputs into this discussion and for their expression of diverse opinions that reflect the spectrum of ideas that this dagger has generated since its discovery in the 1920s. It seems there is much more to be learn about the origins of this dagger, how it was made, and how it ended up in an Egyptian tomb that was undisturbed for more than 3,300 years. Ian