It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

King Tut knife made from meteorite

page: 4
80
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 04:50 PM
link   
A bad omen falls from the heavens and realize it a rock, and the king said I want a sword from it. Then the smith tried and realized it was alot easier the it was supposed to be. Probably thought it was harder then some mystical beasts hide or could ward of evil.

But it just an ordinary roc.
edit on 2-6-2016 by Specimen because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 05:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: onequestion

originally posted by: Skywatcher2011
a reply to: UnBreakable

They had some pretty cool forging technology back then. But I wonder if their alien friends (who helped build the pyramids) brought this meteoritic metal from space as a gift to King Tut?..heheh


I think it's more likely that the Egyptians were inheritors of the pyramids from a much older civilization.

If it wasn't for Sultan Hassan we might actually know the truth.


Yeah, those hundreds of radiocarbon readings from the Fifth dynasty must just be planted by the authorities to throw all the unqualified pseudo historians off



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 05:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: Wolfenz

They could not have forged it. It was probably grinded into the blade using stones.


hmm where did you get that conclusion ?


Well they Smelted the meteorite Perhaps ..

and Forged the Piece into a Dagger
...


ANTHONY BOURDAIN MELTS A METEORITE TO MAKE A BEAUTIFUL BLADE
nerdist.com...


Something to think about !


Before Iron, Greenland had a 'METEORITE Age': Prehistoric Eskimos mined giant space rocks to make tools and weapons
Danish archaeologists found evidence that early Eskimo hunters broke iron from giant meteorites on the Greenland ice sheet using basalt stones
A meteorite broke apart and fell onto the ice sheet around 10,000 years ago
The iron it contained was used to make knives and harpoons for centuries
Iron from the Greenland meteorite has been found as far away as Canada
Scientists say the huge chunks of meteorite kickstarted Greenland's Iron Age long before Norse settlers brought iron ore from Earth to the island


Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk... ons.html#ixzz4ASnvGH6s
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
www.dailymail.co.uk... ons.html



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 09:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Wolfenz

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: Wolfenz

They could not have forged it. It was probably grinded into the blade using stones.


hmm where did you get that conclusion ?


Well they Smelted the meteorite Perhaps ..

and Forged the Piece into a Dagger
...


ANTHONY BOURDAIN MELTS A METEORITE TO MAKE A BEAUTIFUL BLADE
nerdist.com...


Something to think about !


Before Iron, Greenland had a 'METEORITE Age': Prehistoric Eskimos mined giant space rocks to make tools and weapons
Danish archaeologists found evidence that early Eskimo hunters broke iron from giant meteorites on the Greenland ice sheet using basalt stones
A meteorite broke apart and fell onto the ice sheet around 10,000 years ago
The iron it contained was used to make knives and harpoons for centuries
Iron from the Greenland meteorite has been found as far away as Canada
Scientists say the huge chunks of meteorite kickstarted Greenland's Iron Age long before Norse settlers brought iron ore from Earth to the island


Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk... ons.html#ixzz4ASnvGH6s
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
www.dailymail.co.uk... ons.html




If m right the problem with early attempts to forge iron was due to heat.


Appearent lay you need more heat to seperates ore from rock than you do to forge a sword. Meaning that if you had a pure source of iron (aka a iron meteorite) then a Bronze Age culture could achieve the heat need to forge a blade.


Meaning you really did have "magic" swords forged from a fallin star, that were the best weapons in the planet.



posted on Jun, 2 2016 @ 10:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: Wolfenz

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: Wolfenz

They could not have forged it. It was probably grinded into the blade using stones.


hmm where did you get that conclusion ?


Well they Smelted the meteorite Perhaps ..

and Forged the Piece into a Dagger
...


ANTHONY BOURDAIN MELTS A METEORITE TO MAKE A BEAUTIFUL BLADE
nerdist.com...


Something to think about !


Before Iron, Greenland had a 'METEORITE Age': Prehistoric Eskimos mined giant space rocks to make tools and weapons
Danish archaeologists found evidence that early Eskimo hunters broke iron from giant meteorites on the Greenland ice sheet using basalt stones
A meteorite broke apart and fell onto the ice sheet around 10,000 years ago
The iron it contained was used to make knives and harpoons for centuries
Iron from the Greenland meteorite has been found as far away as Canada
Scientists say the huge chunks of meteorite kickstarted Greenland's Iron Age long before Norse settlers brought iron ore from Earth to the island


Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk... ons.html#ixzz4ASnvGH6s
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
www.dailymail.co.uk... ons.html




If m right the problem with early attempts to forge iron was due to heat.


Appearent lay you need more heat to seperates ore from rock than you do to forge a sword. Meaning that if you had a pure source of iron (aka a iron meteorite) then a Bronze Age culture could achieve the heat need to forge a blade.


Meaning you really did have "magic" swords forged from a fallin star, that were the best weapons in the planet.


Right I know this ,, being a Certified Welder you tend to know the Basics of Metallurgy





Meaning you really did have "magic" swords forged from a fallin star, that were the best weapons in the planet.


LOL yeah, Excalibur for sure ....

I understand this what i mean for Forging is the Principle of Hammering the Metal into Layers .. to make it Stronger ..

Im not Sure if This Dagger of Tuts has been examine of the Process of how it was actually made ..

interesting if was Multiple Layered,


well according ...

Well According to Science Alert ...



"Meteoric iron is clearly indicated by the presence of a high percentages of nickel," team leader Daniela Comelli from Milan Polytechnic in Italy told Discovery News. "The nickel and cobalt ratio in the dagger blade is consistent with that of iron meteorites that have preserved the primitive chondritic ratio during planetary differentiation in the early solar system." Next, the team set out to find the actual meteor that the blade might have been made from. To pull this off, they investigated every meteor site around the area. "We took into consideration all meteorites found within an area of 2,000 km in radius centred in the Red Sea, and we ended up with 20 iron meteorites," Comelli said. "Only one, named Kharga, turned out to have nickel and cobalt contents which are possibly consistent with the composition of the blade."



The dagger’s discovery predates the start of the Iron Age by about 100 years. And since it’s constructed so well, researchers say its existence hints at the fact that ancient Egyptians had an understanding of iron long before the rest of humanity did.


www.sciencealert.com...



posted on Jun, 3 2016 @ 02:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: Wolfenz

The dagger’s discovery predates the start of the Iron Age by about 100 years. And since it’s constructed so well, researchers say its existence hints at the fact that ancient Egyptians had an understanding of iron long before the rest of humanity did.


www.sciencealert.com...


The Egyptians did not produce the daggers. They, and the Mesopotamians, knew of "metal from the sky", but there is nothing to indicate that the Egyptians were themselves producing anything but the crudest objects from meteoric iron (beads), where as there is every evidence that the Hittites were.

There were two daggers, both stylistically and technically the same, but one was made of iron, the other gold. They've tested the iron, what about the gold? Where did that come from? Most metals can now be tested, against a vast database, and their geographical origin estimated with some accuracy.



posted on Jun, 3 2016 @ 10:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: Anaana

originally posted by: Wolfenz

The dagger’s discovery predates the start of the Iron Age by about 100 years. And since it’s constructed so well, researchers say its existence hints at the fact that ancient Egyptians had an understanding of iron long before the rest of humanity did.


www.sciencealert.com...


The Egyptians did not produce the daggers.


Actually, they did -- and by the way, other scholars have confirmed what I thought I remembered: that we've known for over 50 years that the dagger was made from a meteorite. Dave Lightbody posted a list of references on Facebook (link here... I think the image is set public) showing that there was at least one earlier small blade as well as other objects made from meteoric iron.

There's a nice little book on Egyptian metallurgy from Shire Egyptology that's available for free download here. Although they worked iron they didn't smelt iron until relatively late in their history, preferring to use imported iron.



posted on Jun, 3 2016 @ 11:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: Byrd

originally posted by: Anaana

originally posted by: Wolfenz

The dagger’s discovery predates the start of the Iron Age by about 100 years. And since it’s constructed so well, researchers say its existence hints at the fact that ancient Egyptians had an understanding of iron long before the rest of humanity did.


www.sciencealert.com...


The Egyptians did not produce the daggers.


Actually, they did -- and by the way, other scholars have confirmed what I thought I remembered: that we've known for over 50 years that the dagger was made from a meteorite. Dave Lightbody posted a list of references on Facebook (link here... I think the image is set public) showing that there was at least one earlier small blade as well as other objects made from meteoric iron.

There's a nice little book on Egyptian metallurgy from Shire Egyptology that's available for free download here. Although they worked iron they didn't smelt iron until relatively late in their history, preferring to use imported iron.


just wondering..

where could that Imported Iron came from . Sumerian ( UR ) or Hittites ? or somewhere else..

probably either OR as the Hittites were the first of Many much like the Sumerians ..

from what I gather ..


I some where read ( online ) they looked around at 50 meteorites ..

and just found one match that resembles the Tut Dagger in Question ..

indeed that must of been hard to find .. and they did..



posted on Jun, 3 2016 @ 02:07 PM
link   
Meteoric Iron, having spent all of time spinning through the Cosmos,
possibly molten at times when it encountered extreme heat, is so pure
that oxidation barely is visible after the eons.

Simply polishing the knife after forging it would require high technology.
When molten, iron will absorb oxygen creating slag so the processing and
firing of the piece would require an attention to detail that the ancient
peoples that made the thing would have to have exercised. Forming the
knife with cold working would probably not result in the same knife. If
it is true the ancients were mining and smelting metal as well as creating
megalithic construction, then they might have had the ovens needed to
reach the temperature to melt meteoric iron.

Notice the fine gold work on the handle, with a transparent haft that has
gold dots embedded in it.

a reply to: Wolfenz

edit on 3-6-2016 by Drawsoho because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2016 @ 02:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Wolfenz

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

originally posted by: Wolfenz

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: Wolfenz

They could not have forged it. It was probably grinded into the blade using stones.


hmm where did you get that conclusion ?


Well they Smelted the meteorite Perhaps ..

and Forged the Piece into a Dagger
...


ANTHONY BOURDAIN MELTS A METEORITE TO MAKE A BEAUTIFUL BLADE
nerdist.com...


Something to think about !


Before Iron, Greenland had a 'METEORITE Age': Prehistoric Eskimos mined giant space rocks to make tools and weapons
Danish archaeologists found evidence that early Eskimo hunters broke iron from giant meteorites on the Greenland ice sheet using basalt stones
A meteorite broke apart and fell onto the ice sheet around 10,000 years ago
The iron it contained was used to make knives and harpoons for centuries
Iron from the Greenland meteorite has been found as far away as Canada
Scientists say the huge chunks of meteorite kickstarted Greenland's Iron Age long before Norse settlers brought iron ore from Earth to the island


Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk... ons.html#ixzz4ASnvGH6s
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
www.dailymail.co.uk... ons.html




If m right the problem with early attempts to forge iron was due to heat.


Appearent lay you need more heat to seperates ore from rock than you do to forge a sword. Meaning that if you had a pure source of iron (aka a iron meteorite) then a Bronze Age culture could achieve the heat need to forge a blade.


Meaning you really did have "magic" swords forged from a fallin star, that were the best weapons in the planet.


Right I know this ,, being a Certified Welder you tend to know the Basics of Metallurgy





Meaning you really did have "magic" swords forged from a fallin star, that were the best weapons in the planet.


LOL yeah, Excalibur for sure ....

I understand this what i mean for Forging is the Principle of Hammering the Metal into Layers .. to make it Stronger ..

Im not Sure if This Dagger of Tuts has been examine of the Process of how it was actually made ..

interesting if was Multiple Layered,


well according ...

Well According to Science Alert ...



"Meteoric iron is clearly indicated by the presence of a high percentages of nickel," team leader Daniela Comelli from Milan Polytechnic in Italy told Discovery News. "The nickel and cobalt ratio in the dagger blade is consistent with that of iron meteorites that have preserved the primitive chondritic ratio during planetary differentiation in the early solar system." Next, the team set out to find the actual meteor that the blade might have been made from. To pull this off, they investigated every meteor site around the area. "We took into consideration all meteorites found within an area of 2,000 km in radius centred in the Red Sea, and we ended up with 20 iron meteorites," Comelli said. "Only one, named Kharga, turned out to have nickel and cobalt contents which are possibly consistent with the composition of the blade."



The dagger’s discovery predates the start of the Iron Age by about 100 years. And since it’s constructed so well, researchers say its existence hints at the fact that ancient Egyptians had an understanding of iron long before the rest of humanity did.


www.sciencealert.com...
if I'm right you only need to layer really crappy ore. Japan had pig (crap) iron. So they had to layer it to achieve the right grade of metal.

A meterite sword could be molded or beaten and sharpened. No need to have folding tech.



posted on Jun, 3 2016 @ 02:38 PM
link   
a reply to: UnBreakable

cool stuff

The swords and blades we hear of in mythology and tales of old were often forged from meteorite metal. It was highly sought after for use by important people in antiquity. Demon sword smiths and angelic gift bearers, gods bestowing to demi-gods who in turn bestowed to kings and heroes various "heavenly" instruments of war.

one element is the metal, the other is the tradesmen and crafting industry that sought out and used this meteoric metal. The latter being interesting since the first accounts were always of godly or demonic smiths making the arms and then latter human masters forging them who were employed by kings (rulers).



posted on Jun, 3 2016 @ 02:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Byrd
Actually, they did --


Did they? Is that a conclusion that has been reached by recent scholarship? It could be an attempt by Egyptian craftsmen to imitate a Hittite blade, but seems more likely that, to be buried with such prestige, that it would be an actual Hittite blade given as tribute, something that we know from the correspondence of King Hattusilis III, that the Hittites were prone to do with their customers.


originally posted by: Byrd
and by the way, other scholars have confirmed what I thought I remembered: that we've known for over 50 years that the dagger was made from a meteorite. Dave Lightbody posted a list of references on Facebook (link here... I think the image is set public) showing that there was at least one earlier small blade as well as other objects made from meteoric iron.

There's a nice little book on Egyptian metallurgy from Shire Egyptology that's available for free download here. Although they worked iron they didn't smelt iron until relatively late in their history, preferring to use imported iron.


Yes, I know, hence my incredulity at you stating that the Egyptians were smelting iron and that it had become "quite common" in the Levant by that time. It wasn't a matter of them preferring to use imported iron but that they lacked the technology to work it into anything but basic tools, such as, the two chisel blades also found in Tutankhamun's tomb. The Hittites on the other hand did have the technology. Working iron is not the same as working bronze and copper, and no hop-skip-and a jump from one to the other, even with iron of meteoric origin, not to produce an object of such high standard and finish. The Egyptians may have made the hilt, and the gold dagger in imitation, but the iron one, you're going to have to convince me.

The link that you provide refers to the dagger in the OP, if you have information regarding another iron dagger then I would love further information on that, whatever you've got, it is not an iron artefact that I am aware of, and I have dug very deep on the subject.



posted on Jun, 3 2016 @ 03:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Anaana

I thought the major barrier to the tech was heat. It took more heat to seperate rock from iron than it did to forge the purer iron from a meteorite.

Meaning a copper/bronze culture could work meteor iron, they just couldn't create a pure enough form from terrestrial rock.

I'm just parroting this from documentaries, and from memory at that, so...lol.



posted on Jun, 3 2016 @ 03:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: Anaana

I thought the major barrier to the tech was heat. It took more heat to seperate rock from iron than it did to forge the purer iron from a meteorite.

Meaning a copper/bronze culture could work meteor iron, they just couldn't create a pure enough form from terrestrial rock.

I'm just parroting this from documentaries, and from memory at that, so...lol.


Yes you can work it, to get an edge or into a rough shape by cold beating, but to get that standard of finish requires much more than that.



posted on Jun, 3 2016 @ 04:06 PM
link   
It's pretty clear from the archeology that the Hittites were smelting iron from raw ore and had refined their production techniques before the Egyptians started smelting ore for themselves.
The biggest hinderence to smelting iron for the egyptians, or any early culture fro that matter, is the availability of WOOD. It takes something like 400lbs of good hardwood charcoal to make 1 lb of raw iron(that would be 1600lb of dryed wood to make one pound of iron), so you can see how even if the AE knew the techniquies they would have had a hard time coming up with the wood for any large scale refining operations.
Meteoric iron is much harder to work than terrestrial iron and way harder to work than steel, beacuse of its extremly high melting and critical temps, it doesnt even start to get workable until almost 2000 deg F, which is extremely hard to achieve in a primative open air hearth.

As to Tut's dagger, it is clearly an Egyptian object, the stylistic differences between the Hittite and AE craftsmen make that plainly evident, and there are stylistic commonalities with some ancient egyptian stone knives.

One thing to consider though, since AE was a multi ethnic/multi cultural society, it could very well be that it was Hittite craftsmen working in egypt, for egyptians, that crafted some of the earliest iron objects.



posted on Jun, 3 2016 @ 04:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: punkinworks10

As to Tut's dagger, it is clearly an Egyptian object, the stylistic differences between the Hittite and AE craftsmen make that plainly evident, and there are stylistic commonalities with some ancient egyptian stone knives.

One thing to consider though, since AE was a multi ethnic/multi cultural society, it could very well be that it was Hittite craftsmen working in egypt, for egyptians, that crafted some of the earliest iron objects.



One of the reasons that I disagree with it being Egyptian is because of how much it differs from any other Egyptian blade, stone or metal, whereas, it is similar to both Hittite and Assyrian knives of that period and the successive period. I am open to evidence to suggest otherwise.



posted on Jun, 3 2016 @ 05:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

if I'm right you only need to layer really crappy ore. Japan had pig (crap) iron. So they had to layer it to achieve the right grade of metal

A meterite sword could be molded or beaten and sharpened. No need to have folding tech.


No, you are not right at all.
The japanese smiths used the best grade of Fe ore, iron sand which is nearly pure magnatite and 73% iron by weight, while other cultures used ore obtained from the banded iron formations which is at best only 30% magnatite by weight.

The folding techniques they used were a hold over from very early times, from even before there were "japanese", and in this sense your are correct, the raw iron was folded and beaten to drive out impurities, that were not present in classic japanese steel making, and in that statement is the real difference between japanese smiths and others. They were making very high grade steel alloys 600 years before an industrial equvilent.
And only the core of the sword was extensively folded, from gray cast iron.



Grey cast iron is characterised by its graphitic microstructure, which causes fractures of the material to have a grey appearance. It is the most commonly used cast iron and the most widely used cast material based on weight. Most cast irons have a chemical composition of 2.5–4.0% carbon, 1–3% silicon, and the remainder iron. Grey cast iron has less tensile strength and shock resistance than steel, but its compressive strength is comparable to low- and medium-carbon steel. These mechanical properties are controlled by the size and shape of the graphite flakes present in the microstructure and can be characterised according to the guidelines given by the ASTM.


And they were not so much folding to drive out impurities,as they were folding to drive in alloying elements, such as carbon and other trace elements they knew nothing about, but were affecting the qualities of their steels, like vanadium, chromium and and the silicon that was already present in the iron sands.
By repeated folding they transformed the cast iron into a low carbon steel.

On a side note, on soe history channel show, a few years ago, some american guy claming to be a "master japanese swordswith", made a blade and loused it up completely. He was so wrong on so many levels it was astounding.
First he claimed the curve of the samarai sword was from distortion during heat treating, for him it was, BECAUSE HE WAS DOING IT WRONG. He was applying the insulating clay, i have forgotten what the japanese term is, to the edge,
WTF,
And in doing so the edge never was able to get to critical temp and properly harden, and he missed the important secondary reason for the clay mixture, to form a hard carbon case(case hardening, like in a chisel or hammer) to protect the sides and back material.
The clay was mixed with ground up horse hooves, charcoal, hair dry grass or leaves, each smithing school and many individual smiths had their own secret recipes. The organic matter provided the carbon nescesary to form the carbon case, as it was being heated for hardening. And swords from true masters didnt need secondary tempering to achieve the proper blade characteristics.



posted on Jun, 3 2016 @ 05:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Anaana

I am certainly not an expert in hittite or egyptian weapons, but i am some what of a edgeophile, have been sword and knife interested all my life, but to me the style of tuts dagger is not hittite.
Hittite bladed weapons have straighter sides and much more taper, being almost rapier like, while AE blades have shallow convex sides(willow leaf shaped), and have stylistic corralaries in the levant.



posted on Jun, 3 2016 @ 05:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Anaana

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: Anaana

I thought the major barrier to the tech was heat. It took more heat to seperate rock from iron than it did to forge the purer iron from a meteorite.

Meaning a copper/bronze culture could work meteor iron, they just couldn't create a pure enough form from terrestrial rock.

I'm just parroting this from documentaries, and from memory at that, so...lol.


Yes you can work it, to get an edge or into a rough shape by cold beating, but to get that standard of finish requires much more than that.



What if your just trying to make a weapon superior to competing bronze weapons??


That would be the measure for a "magic" sword, imho.

If it was superior to its bronze contemporaries....



This dagger looks , even after millinia, like it was superior to a bronze, stone equivalent. IMHO making it a magic dagger.



posted on Jun, 3 2016 @ 06:09 PM
link   
a reply to: BASSPLYR

I bet they saw waaaay more meteorite action than we could with all the light pollution we have. I bet they saw stuff fall out of the sky on a nightly basis.







 
80
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join