Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post - King Tut's dagger--a blade of meteroritic iron

A. G. Maisey · 8th June 2016, 10:51 AM

After reading more from the sources that Timo has indicated, as well as a number of other on-line sources, I'm inclined to agree that a blade could be forged cold from meteoritic material, but with the qualification that the meteoritic material would need to be of the correct composition to permit this forging, and if only forging was to be used, the shape and size of the material would need to be very close to the finished article.

There can never be any dispute about the cold forging of simple blades from iron, or preferably mild steel, this is a standard blacksmithing technique.

A careful reading of the Buchwald & Mosdel link indicates that the material used in the Greenland blades was indeed capable of being cold hammered, and that it was quite thin in the first place, probably fragments that had split off from the main body of the meteorite.

In a previous post to this thread I used the term "stock removal". We usually tend to think of stock removal in the modern terms of files and mechanical grinders, but stock removal is actually the reduction of any large piece of material by cold removal of some of the original body of material. This can be achieved by splitting or by grinding with a stone or wet sand and wood.

The Buchwald & Mosdel work does seem to indicate that stock removal did take place, either by the splitting off of meteor fragments at the time of impact (spallation), or by the human agency of splitting off fragments.

It also seems that quite high temperatures were at least sometimes used (P.16).

Here is a link to another source that is well worth attention:-

http://www.ironfromthesky.org/?p=310

Once we understand that the composition of the meteorite used in the Greenland blades was such that it permitted a degree of shaping by cold hammering, and that the fragments of meteorite that were turned into blades were quite small and thin to begin with, the entire Greenland blade matter becomes clear.

However, there is a vast difference between the Greenland blades and the King Tut blade.

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.

8th June 2016, 10:51 AM	#25
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,703	After reading more from the sources that Timo has indicated, as well as a number of other on-line sources, I'm inclined to agree that a blade could be forged cold from meteoritic material, but with the qualification that the meteoritic material would need to be of the correct composition to permit this forging, and if only forging was to be used, the shape and size of the material would need to be very close to the finished article. There can never be any dispute about the cold forging of simple blades from iron, or preferably mild steel, this is a standard blacksmithing technique. A careful reading of the Buchwald & Mosdel link indicates that the material used in the Greenland blades was indeed capable of being cold hammered, and that it was quite thin in the first place, probably fragments that had split off from the main body of the meteorite. In a previous post to this thread I used the term "stock removal". We usually tend to think of stock removal in the modern terms of files and mechanical grinders, but stock removal is actually the reduction of any large piece of material by cold removal of some of the original body of material. This can be achieved by splitting or by grinding with a stone or wet sand and wood. The Buchwald & Mosdel work does seem to indicate that stock removal did take place, either by the splitting off of meteor fragments at the time of impact (spallation), or by the human agency of splitting off fragments. It also seems that quite high temperatures were at least sometimes used (P.16). Here is a link to another source that is well worth attention:- http://www.ironfromthesky.org/?p=310 Once we understand that the composition of the meteorite used in the Greenland blades was such that it permitted a degree of shaping by cold hammering, and that the fragments of meteorite that were turned into blades were quite small and thin to begin with, the entire Greenland blade matter becomes clear. However, there is a vast difference between the Greenland blades and the King Tut blade. 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.