My main reason for posting the article on King Tut's dagger is that the data it presents--that the blade comes from meteoritic iron and shows a degree of ironwork more advanced than evidenced by other examples of Egyptian iron work from that period--was to emphasize that a scientific approach to analyzing the blade has resolved, as far as possible, the origins of the iron from which it was made. One item of debate has been settled.
There has indeed been much speculation about the origins of this knife and whether it may have been a gift from another culture. Whether the Hittites had more advanced knowledge of iron working is possible, but such examples are lacking. So we are largely left with conjecture. Separating facts from myths is difficult given the distance of time.
Ian
|