Did 3000BC Egyptians use meteoric iron weapons? The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InDid a nuclear blast devastate Port Chicago on July 17, 1944?Did ancient Indians invent guns, lasers, radars and nuclear weapons?Did the Ancient Egyptians use twenty-sided dice?Did people use to urinate everywhere at fancy balls?Did priests use maces because they did not spill blood?Did ancient Peru use electroplating?Did the ancient Egyptians call aloe vera “the plant of immortality”?Did Jesus use cannabis?What evidence would remain of the use of atomic/nuclear weapons 26,000 years ago?Did 120,000 Egyptians die building the Suez Canal?

Identify boardgame from Big movie

Can one be advised by a professor who is very far away?

Are there any other methods to apply to solving simultaneous equations?

One word riddle: Vowel in the middle

Why not take a picture of a closer black hole?

Return to UK after being refused entry years previously

Falsification in Math vs Science

Did Scotland spend $250,000 for the slogan "Welcome to Scotland"?

Is bread bad for ducks?

Lightning Grid - Columns and Rows?

Right tool to dig six foot holes?

Do these rules for Critical Successes and Critical Failures seem Fair?

How to save as into a customized destination on macOS?

How to deal with fear of taking dependencies

How technical should a Scrum Master be to effectively remove impediments?

When should I buy a clipper card after flying to OAK?

Protecting Dualbooting Windows from dangerous code (like rm -rf)

Geography at the pixel level

What does ひと匙 mean in this manga and has it been used colloquially?

Write faster on AT24C32

Why can Shazam fly?

Shouldn't "much" here be used instead of "more"?

Apparent duplicates between Haynes service instructions and MOT

Why was M87 targetted for the Event Horizon Telescope instead of Sagittarius A*?



Did 3000BC Egyptians use meteoric iron weapons?



The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InDid a nuclear blast devastate Port Chicago on July 17, 1944?Did ancient Indians invent guns, lasers, radars and nuclear weapons?Did the Ancient Egyptians use twenty-sided dice?Did people use to urinate everywhere at fancy balls?Did priests use maces because they did not spill blood?Did ancient Peru use electroplating?Did the ancient Egyptians call aloe vera “the plant of immortality”?Did Jesus use cannabis?What evidence would remain of the use of atomic/nuclear weapons 26,000 years ago?Did 120,000 Egyptians die building the Suez Canal?










15















Citing Wikipedia's article on Metallurgy




Egyptian weapons made from meteoric iron in about 3000 BC were highly prized as "daggers from heaven".[11]




The listed source is:
11. W. Keller (1963) The Bible as History. p. 156. ISBN 0-340-00312-X



I wasn't able to find this book online, but the description on Open Library suggests it's rather a "Biblical Archeology" book than a mainstream historical book.



Q1: Were 3000 BC Egyptians really using weapons made from meteoric iron?
Q2: If so, were these really called "daggers from heaven"?



If possible, give the actual archeological findings confirming this.










share|improve this question









New contributor




Przemysław Czechowski is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




















  • Is the claim "they used meteoric weapons" or "they were called daggers from heaven"?

    – pipe
    10 hours ago











  • @pipe good point, I split the question into two parts.

    – Przemysław Czechowski
    10 hours ago















15















Citing Wikipedia's article on Metallurgy




Egyptian weapons made from meteoric iron in about 3000 BC were highly prized as "daggers from heaven".[11]




The listed source is:
11. W. Keller (1963) The Bible as History. p. 156. ISBN 0-340-00312-X



I wasn't able to find this book online, but the description on Open Library suggests it's rather a "Biblical Archeology" book than a mainstream historical book.



Q1: Were 3000 BC Egyptians really using weapons made from meteoric iron?
Q2: If so, were these really called "daggers from heaven"?



If possible, give the actual archeological findings confirming this.










share|improve this question









New contributor




Przemysław Czechowski is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




















  • Is the claim "they used meteoric weapons" or "they were called daggers from heaven"?

    – pipe
    10 hours ago











  • @pipe good point, I split the question into two parts.

    – Przemysław Czechowski
    10 hours ago













15












15








15








Citing Wikipedia's article on Metallurgy




Egyptian weapons made from meteoric iron in about 3000 BC were highly prized as "daggers from heaven".[11]




The listed source is:
11. W. Keller (1963) The Bible as History. p. 156. ISBN 0-340-00312-X



I wasn't able to find this book online, but the description on Open Library suggests it's rather a "Biblical Archeology" book than a mainstream historical book.



Q1: Were 3000 BC Egyptians really using weapons made from meteoric iron?
Q2: If so, were these really called "daggers from heaven"?



If possible, give the actual archeological findings confirming this.










share|improve this question









New contributor




Przemysław Czechowski is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.












Citing Wikipedia's article on Metallurgy




Egyptian weapons made from meteoric iron in about 3000 BC were highly prized as "daggers from heaven".[11]




The listed source is:
11. W. Keller (1963) The Bible as History. p. 156. ISBN 0-340-00312-X



I wasn't able to find this book online, but the description on Open Library suggests it's rather a "Biblical Archeology" book than a mainstream historical book.



Q1: Were 3000 BC Egyptians really using weapons made from meteoric iron?
Q2: If so, were these really called "daggers from heaven"?



If possible, give the actual archeological findings confirming this.







history






share|improve this question









New contributor




Przemysław Czechowski is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question









New contributor




Przemysław Czechowski is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 10 hours ago







Przemysław Czechowski













New contributor




Przemysław Czechowski is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 12 hours ago









Przemysław CzechowskiPrzemysław Czechowski

17615




17615




New contributor




Przemysław Czechowski is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Przemysław Czechowski is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Przemysław Czechowski is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.












  • Is the claim "they used meteoric weapons" or "they were called daggers from heaven"?

    – pipe
    10 hours ago











  • @pipe good point, I split the question into two parts.

    – Przemysław Czechowski
    10 hours ago

















  • Is the claim "they used meteoric weapons" or "they were called daggers from heaven"?

    – pipe
    10 hours ago











  • @pipe good point, I split the question into two parts.

    – Przemysław Czechowski
    10 hours ago
















Is the claim "they used meteoric weapons" or "they were called daggers from heaven"?

– pipe
10 hours ago





Is the claim "they used meteoric weapons" or "they were called daggers from heaven"?

– pipe
10 hours ago













@pipe good point, I split the question into two parts.

– Przemysław Czechowski
10 hours ago





@pipe good point, I split the question into two parts.

– Przemysław Czechowski
10 hours ago










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















17














tl;dr As commonly understood, the claim is a bit exaggerated by a few hundred years. They had iron artefacts at the time and a few resemble weapons. This cannot be regarded as widespread use of weapons made from meteoric iron at the time 3000BCE.




Wikipedia lists the famous




Tutankhamun's meteoric iron dagger



No Egyptian archaeological evidence exists of iron smelting until the 6th century BC. The earliest known example of the use of metallic iron in Egypt dates to approximately 3400 BC.



The other iron objects were wrapped with Tutankhamun’s mummy; these include a miniature headrest contained inside the golden death mask, an amulet attached to a golden bracelet and a dagger blade with gold haft. All were made by relatively crude methods with the exception of the dagger blade which is clearly expertly produced.
This suggests that the dagger was probably imported to Egypt perhaps as a royal gift from a neighboring territory, indicating that at this time Egypt’s knowledge and skills of iron production were relatively limited. Only further analytical testing can confirm if all of these artifacts are made from meteorite iron but they do appear to suggest that iron was a material used to indicate high status at the time of Tutankhamun’s death in approximately 1327 BC.




Other examples for




Meteoric iron
Bronze Age

Many examples of iron working from the Bronze Age have been confirmed to be meteoritic in origin.9

In ancient Egypt an iron metal bead was found in a graveyard near Gerzeh that contained 7.5% Ni.[10][11] Dated to around 3200 BC, Geochemical analysis of the Gerzeh iron beads, based on the ratio of nickel to iron and cobalt, confirms that the iron was meteoritic in origin.9



  • Dated to around 2500 BC, an iron dagger from Alaca Höyük in Turkey was confirmed to be meteoritic in origin through geochemical analysis.9

  • Dated to around 2300 BC, an iron pendant from Umm el-Marra in Syria was confirmed to be meteoritic in origin through geochemical analysis.9

  • Dated to around 1400 BC, an iron axe from Ugarit in Syria was found to be meteoritic in origin.9

  • Dated to around 1400 BC, several iron axes from the Shang Dynasty in China were also confirmed to be meteoritic in origin.9

  • Dated to around 1350 BC, an iron dagger, bracelet and headrest from the tomb of Tutankhamun were confirmed to be meteoritic in origin.9 The Tutankhamun dagger consists of similar proportions of metals (iron, nickel and cobalt) to a meteorite discovered in the area, deposited by an ancient meteor shower.[12][13][14]



This "many examples" should be read as 'comparatively many' in the context of archaeology. These "highly prized weapons" weren't issued for general use in the armies of the day.

It seems at first it was made primarily into beads and other jewellery. Its rarity making this iron a precious metal. Although quite quickly metal workers also used iron to complement metal edges.



A decidedly non-biblical archaeology source would be
Otto Johannsen: "Geschichte des Eisens. Stahleisen: Düsseldorf, 31953.



Although this older work lists a Sumerian urudu-an-bar (meaning copper of the skies/heavens) from 3100 BCE as the oldest find.




Meteoric iron was also available to lithic people. This usually contains about 10% Ni and is therefore much harder and more difficult to work. The nickel content varies from 4 to 26%, and can be easily detected as there seem to be no ores capable of giving this level of nickel in a homogeneous form by direct smelting.

It has been calculated that there are at least 250 t of meteoric material extant, and that 99.4% of this is malleable." However, the problems are much the same as with native copper. When cold hammered, the material tends to crack along well-defined crystal planes. With care and annealing, or by hot forging, small artefacts can be made and lithic peoples in the Cape York area of West Greenland have been making tools from meteoric material containing about 8%Ni. While prolonged heat treatment at elevated temperatures will destroy the structure of meteoric iron in time, the material will be always recognizable by its composition.



R. F. Tylecote: "A History Of Metallurgy", Maney: London, 21992.




H. H. COGHLAN: "Notes on prehistoric and early iron in the Old World", 1977, (2 ed.), Pitt Rivers Museum Occ. Paper No.8, Oxford




In summary we have to note that strictly speaking, iron was known at that time and a few artefacts would qualify as "weapons". But the iron from that time is at once much too rare and expensive (paid for in gold, six time the weight of gold judged as inadequate payment); and on the other hand of really inferior quality as a real world weapon, with bronze and even copper having better material qualities than the iron: so, practically speaking:



No, around 3000BCE the Egyptians didn't use enough iron weapons to really allow answering the question in the positive.



This became only widespread after 1400BCE, with smelted and forged iron and steel, starting most probably from Anatolia (the Hittites).



(GA Wainwright: "The coming of iron", Antiquity, Volume 10, Issue 37 March 1936 , pp. 5-24 DOI)



This is graphically summarised (notice the isolated meteoric iron spots in Egypt and Mesopotamia) in




enter image description here
Ünsal Yalçin "Zum Eisen der Hethiter". (PDF) In: Ü. Yalçın, C. Pulak & R. Slotta (Hrsg.): Das Schiff von Uluburun - Welthandel vor 3000 Jahren, Ausstellungskatalog, Bochum 2005, 493-502.







share|improve this answer




















  • 4





    I think it's worth adding that this "[9]" source in Wikipedia/Meteoric+iron you quoted is something that seems more reliable than The Bible as History and is also available online. I mean my question was already questioning Wikipedia so I'd rather see some primary sources examined than other Wiki articles. But apart from that this is a great answer, thanks.

    – Przemysław Czechowski
    11 hours ago







  • 5





    "the dagger blade [was] clearly expertly produced. This suggests that the dagger was probably imported to Egypt perhaps as a royal gift from a neighboring territory, indicating that at this time Egypt’s knowledge and skills of iron production were relatively limited." Is it known that any of the neighboring territories (or anywhere else in the world) had such advanced smithing capabilities at that time?

    – Kevin
    8 hours ago











  • @Kevin This is mainly retro-reasoning since Egypt is generally considered last to really enter the iron age. But Kish, Ur, Anatolia, Syria seemed to be a bit ahead in using meteoric iron to form into tools and blades that look as if they were above (or really beneath) 'ceremonial use only'. Alaca Hüyük seems to be the oldest 'sword'. Isolated artefacts of iron edge in bronze then also start to appear in China before the iron age started there. But anything iron seems to indicate that the Hittites were really the most advanced.

    – LangLangC
    2 hours ago











  • @BarryHarrison The complex objects seem to appear somewhat out of nowhere (in Egypt), therefore they reason it has to be imported. But post-hoc this isn't entirely convincing as in Gerzeh the Egyptians started much earlier with simple ones and they might as well import raw material (or have their own, see picture) and import the technology, the craftsmen, not just the finished product. The 'retro-reasoning' might be right, but it is not the only plausible option on the table.

    – LangLangC
    2 hours ago


















1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









17














tl;dr As commonly understood, the claim is a bit exaggerated by a few hundred years. They had iron artefacts at the time and a few resemble weapons. This cannot be regarded as widespread use of weapons made from meteoric iron at the time 3000BCE.




Wikipedia lists the famous




Tutankhamun's meteoric iron dagger



No Egyptian archaeological evidence exists of iron smelting until the 6th century BC. The earliest known example of the use of metallic iron in Egypt dates to approximately 3400 BC.



The other iron objects were wrapped with Tutankhamun’s mummy; these include a miniature headrest contained inside the golden death mask, an amulet attached to a golden bracelet and a dagger blade with gold haft. All were made by relatively crude methods with the exception of the dagger blade which is clearly expertly produced.
This suggests that the dagger was probably imported to Egypt perhaps as a royal gift from a neighboring territory, indicating that at this time Egypt’s knowledge and skills of iron production were relatively limited. Only further analytical testing can confirm if all of these artifacts are made from meteorite iron but they do appear to suggest that iron was a material used to indicate high status at the time of Tutankhamun’s death in approximately 1327 BC.




Other examples for




Meteoric iron
Bronze Age

Many examples of iron working from the Bronze Age have been confirmed to be meteoritic in origin.9

In ancient Egypt an iron metal bead was found in a graveyard near Gerzeh that contained 7.5% Ni.[10][11] Dated to around 3200 BC, Geochemical analysis of the Gerzeh iron beads, based on the ratio of nickel to iron and cobalt, confirms that the iron was meteoritic in origin.9



  • Dated to around 2500 BC, an iron dagger from Alaca Höyük in Turkey was confirmed to be meteoritic in origin through geochemical analysis.9

  • Dated to around 2300 BC, an iron pendant from Umm el-Marra in Syria was confirmed to be meteoritic in origin through geochemical analysis.9

  • Dated to around 1400 BC, an iron axe from Ugarit in Syria was found to be meteoritic in origin.9

  • Dated to around 1400 BC, several iron axes from the Shang Dynasty in China were also confirmed to be meteoritic in origin.9

  • Dated to around 1350 BC, an iron dagger, bracelet and headrest from the tomb of Tutankhamun were confirmed to be meteoritic in origin.9 The Tutankhamun dagger consists of similar proportions of metals (iron, nickel and cobalt) to a meteorite discovered in the area, deposited by an ancient meteor shower.[12][13][14]



This "many examples" should be read as 'comparatively many' in the context of archaeology. These "highly prized weapons" weren't issued for general use in the armies of the day.

It seems at first it was made primarily into beads and other jewellery. Its rarity making this iron a precious metal. Although quite quickly metal workers also used iron to complement metal edges.



A decidedly non-biblical archaeology source would be
Otto Johannsen: "Geschichte des Eisens. Stahleisen: Düsseldorf, 31953.



Although this older work lists a Sumerian urudu-an-bar (meaning copper of the skies/heavens) from 3100 BCE as the oldest find.




Meteoric iron was also available to lithic people. This usually contains about 10% Ni and is therefore much harder and more difficult to work. The nickel content varies from 4 to 26%, and can be easily detected as there seem to be no ores capable of giving this level of nickel in a homogeneous form by direct smelting.

It has been calculated that there are at least 250 t of meteoric material extant, and that 99.4% of this is malleable." However, the problems are much the same as with native copper. When cold hammered, the material tends to crack along well-defined crystal planes. With care and annealing, or by hot forging, small artefacts can be made and lithic peoples in the Cape York area of West Greenland have been making tools from meteoric material containing about 8%Ni. While prolonged heat treatment at elevated temperatures will destroy the structure of meteoric iron in time, the material will be always recognizable by its composition.



R. F. Tylecote: "A History Of Metallurgy", Maney: London, 21992.




H. H. COGHLAN: "Notes on prehistoric and early iron in the Old World", 1977, (2 ed.), Pitt Rivers Museum Occ. Paper No.8, Oxford




In summary we have to note that strictly speaking, iron was known at that time and a few artefacts would qualify as "weapons". But the iron from that time is at once much too rare and expensive (paid for in gold, six time the weight of gold judged as inadequate payment); and on the other hand of really inferior quality as a real world weapon, with bronze and even copper having better material qualities than the iron: so, practically speaking:



No, around 3000BCE the Egyptians didn't use enough iron weapons to really allow answering the question in the positive.



This became only widespread after 1400BCE, with smelted and forged iron and steel, starting most probably from Anatolia (the Hittites).



(GA Wainwright: "The coming of iron", Antiquity, Volume 10, Issue 37 March 1936 , pp. 5-24 DOI)



This is graphically summarised (notice the isolated meteoric iron spots in Egypt and Mesopotamia) in




enter image description here
Ünsal Yalçin "Zum Eisen der Hethiter". (PDF) In: Ü. Yalçın, C. Pulak & R. Slotta (Hrsg.): Das Schiff von Uluburun - Welthandel vor 3000 Jahren, Ausstellungskatalog, Bochum 2005, 493-502.







share|improve this answer




















  • 4





    I think it's worth adding that this "[9]" source in Wikipedia/Meteoric+iron you quoted is something that seems more reliable than The Bible as History and is also available online. I mean my question was already questioning Wikipedia so I'd rather see some primary sources examined than other Wiki articles. But apart from that this is a great answer, thanks.

    – Przemysław Czechowski
    11 hours ago







  • 5





    "the dagger blade [was] clearly expertly produced. This suggests that the dagger was probably imported to Egypt perhaps as a royal gift from a neighboring territory, indicating that at this time Egypt’s knowledge and skills of iron production were relatively limited." Is it known that any of the neighboring territories (or anywhere else in the world) had such advanced smithing capabilities at that time?

    – Kevin
    8 hours ago











  • @Kevin This is mainly retro-reasoning since Egypt is generally considered last to really enter the iron age. But Kish, Ur, Anatolia, Syria seemed to be a bit ahead in using meteoric iron to form into tools and blades that look as if they were above (or really beneath) 'ceremonial use only'. Alaca Hüyük seems to be the oldest 'sword'. Isolated artefacts of iron edge in bronze then also start to appear in China before the iron age started there. But anything iron seems to indicate that the Hittites were really the most advanced.

    – LangLangC
    2 hours ago











  • @BarryHarrison The complex objects seem to appear somewhat out of nowhere (in Egypt), therefore they reason it has to be imported. But post-hoc this isn't entirely convincing as in Gerzeh the Egyptians started much earlier with simple ones and they might as well import raw material (or have their own, see picture) and import the technology, the craftsmen, not just the finished product. The 'retro-reasoning' might be right, but it is not the only plausible option on the table.

    – LangLangC
    2 hours ago















17














tl;dr As commonly understood, the claim is a bit exaggerated by a few hundred years. They had iron artefacts at the time and a few resemble weapons. This cannot be regarded as widespread use of weapons made from meteoric iron at the time 3000BCE.




Wikipedia lists the famous




Tutankhamun's meteoric iron dagger



No Egyptian archaeological evidence exists of iron smelting until the 6th century BC. The earliest known example of the use of metallic iron in Egypt dates to approximately 3400 BC.



The other iron objects were wrapped with Tutankhamun’s mummy; these include a miniature headrest contained inside the golden death mask, an amulet attached to a golden bracelet and a dagger blade with gold haft. All were made by relatively crude methods with the exception of the dagger blade which is clearly expertly produced.
This suggests that the dagger was probably imported to Egypt perhaps as a royal gift from a neighboring territory, indicating that at this time Egypt’s knowledge and skills of iron production were relatively limited. Only further analytical testing can confirm if all of these artifacts are made from meteorite iron but they do appear to suggest that iron was a material used to indicate high status at the time of Tutankhamun’s death in approximately 1327 BC.




Other examples for




Meteoric iron
Bronze Age

Many examples of iron working from the Bronze Age have been confirmed to be meteoritic in origin.9

In ancient Egypt an iron metal bead was found in a graveyard near Gerzeh that contained 7.5% Ni.[10][11] Dated to around 3200 BC, Geochemical analysis of the Gerzeh iron beads, based on the ratio of nickel to iron and cobalt, confirms that the iron was meteoritic in origin.9



  • Dated to around 2500 BC, an iron dagger from Alaca Höyük in Turkey was confirmed to be meteoritic in origin through geochemical analysis.9

  • Dated to around 2300 BC, an iron pendant from Umm el-Marra in Syria was confirmed to be meteoritic in origin through geochemical analysis.9

  • Dated to around 1400 BC, an iron axe from Ugarit in Syria was found to be meteoritic in origin.9

  • Dated to around 1400 BC, several iron axes from the Shang Dynasty in China were also confirmed to be meteoritic in origin.9

  • Dated to around 1350 BC, an iron dagger, bracelet and headrest from the tomb of Tutankhamun were confirmed to be meteoritic in origin.9 The Tutankhamun dagger consists of similar proportions of metals (iron, nickel and cobalt) to a meteorite discovered in the area, deposited by an ancient meteor shower.[12][13][14]



This "many examples" should be read as 'comparatively many' in the context of archaeology. These "highly prized weapons" weren't issued for general use in the armies of the day.

It seems at first it was made primarily into beads and other jewellery. Its rarity making this iron a precious metal. Although quite quickly metal workers also used iron to complement metal edges.



A decidedly non-biblical archaeology source would be
Otto Johannsen: "Geschichte des Eisens. Stahleisen: Düsseldorf, 31953.



Although this older work lists a Sumerian urudu-an-bar (meaning copper of the skies/heavens) from 3100 BCE as the oldest find.




Meteoric iron was also available to lithic people. This usually contains about 10% Ni and is therefore much harder and more difficult to work. The nickel content varies from 4 to 26%, and can be easily detected as there seem to be no ores capable of giving this level of nickel in a homogeneous form by direct smelting.

It has been calculated that there are at least 250 t of meteoric material extant, and that 99.4% of this is malleable." However, the problems are much the same as with native copper. When cold hammered, the material tends to crack along well-defined crystal planes. With care and annealing, or by hot forging, small artefacts can be made and lithic peoples in the Cape York area of West Greenland have been making tools from meteoric material containing about 8%Ni. While prolonged heat treatment at elevated temperatures will destroy the structure of meteoric iron in time, the material will be always recognizable by its composition.



R. F. Tylecote: "A History Of Metallurgy", Maney: London, 21992.




H. H. COGHLAN: "Notes on prehistoric and early iron in the Old World", 1977, (2 ed.), Pitt Rivers Museum Occ. Paper No.8, Oxford




In summary we have to note that strictly speaking, iron was known at that time and a few artefacts would qualify as "weapons". But the iron from that time is at once much too rare and expensive (paid for in gold, six time the weight of gold judged as inadequate payment); and on the other hand of really inferior quality as a real world weapon, with bronze and even copper having better material qualities than the iron: so, practically speaking:



No, around 3000BCE the Egyptians didn't use enough iron weapons to really allow answering the question in the positive.



This became only widespread after 1400BCE, with smelted and forged iron and steel, starting most probably from Anatolia (the Hittites).



(GA Wainwright: "The coming of iron", Antiquity, Volume 10, Issue 37 March 1936 , pp. 5-24 DOI)



This is graphically summarised (notice the isolated meteoric iron spots in Egypt and Mesopotamia) in




enter image description here
Ünsal Yalçin "Zum Eisen der Hethiter". (PDF) In: Ü. Yalçın, C. Pulak & R. Slotta (Hrsg.): Das Schiff von Uluburun - Welthandel vor 3000 Jahren, Ausstellungskatalog, Bochum 2005, 493-502.







share|improve this answer




















  • 4





    I think it's worth adding that this "[9]" source in Wikipedia/Meteoric+iron you quoted is something that seems more reliable than The Bible as History and is also available online. I mean my question was already questioning Wikipedia so I'd rather see some primary sources examined than other Wiki articles. But apart from that this is a great answer, thanks.

    – Przemysław Czechowski
    11 hours ago







  • 5





    "the dagger blade [was] clearly expertly produced. This suggests that the dagger was probably imported to Egypt perhaps as a royal gift from a neighboring territory, indicating that at this time Egypt’s knowledge and skills of iron production were relatively limited." Is it known that any of the neighboring territories (or anywhere else in the world) had such advanced smithing capabilities at that time?

    – Kevin
    8 hours ago











  • @Kevin This is mainly retro-reasoning since Egypt is generally considered last to really enter the iron age. But Kish, Ur, Anatolia, Syria seemed to be a bit ahead in using meteoric iron to form into tools and blades that look as if they were above (or really beneath) 'ceremonial use only'. Alaca Hüyük seems to be the oldest 'sword'. Isolated artefacts of iron edge in bronze then also start to appear in China before the iron age started there. But anything iron seems to indicate that the Hittites were really the most advanced.

    – LangLangC
    2 hours ago











  • @BarryHarrison The complex objects seem to appear somewhat out of nowhere (in Egypt), therefore they reason it has to be imported. But post-hoc this isn't entirely convincing as in Gerzeh the Egyptians started much earlier with simple ones and they might as well import raw material (or have their own, see picture) and import the technology, the craftsmen, not just the finished product. The 'retro-reasoning' might be right, but it is not the only plausible option on the table.

    – LangLangC
    2 hours ago













17












17








17







tl;dr As commonly understood, the claim is a bit exaggerated by a few hundred years. They had iron artefacts at the time and a few resemble weapons. This cannot be regarded as widespread use of weapons made from meteoric iron at the time 3000BCE.




Wikipedia lists the famous




Tutankhamun's meteoric iron dagger



No Egyptian archaeological evidence exists of iron smelting until the 6th century BC. The earliest known example of the use of metallic iron in Egypt dates to approximately 3400 BC.



The other iron objects were wrapped with Tutankhamun’s mummy; these include a miniature headrest contained inside the golden death mask, an amulet attached to a golden bracelet and a dagger blade with gold haft. All were made by relatively crude methods with the exception of the dagger blade which is clearly expertly produced.
This suggests that the dagger was probably imported to Egypt perhaps as a royal gift from a neighboring territory, indicating that at this time Egypt’s knowledge and skills of iron production were relatively limited. Only further analytical testing can confirm if all of these artifacts are made from meteorite iron but they do appear to suggest that iron was a material used to indicate high status at the time of Tutankhamun’s death in approximately 1327 BC.




Other examples for




Meteoric iron
Bronze Age

Many examples of iron working from the Bronze Age have been confirmed to be meteoritic in origin.9

In ancient Egypt an iron metal bead was found in a graveyard near Gerzeh that contained 7.5% Ni.[10][11] Dated to around 3200 BC, Geochemical analysis of the Gerzeh iron beads, based on the ratio of nickel to iron and cobalt, confirms that the iron was meteoritic in origin.9



  • Dated to around 2500 BC, an iron dagger from Alaca Höyük in Turkey was confirmed to be meteoritic in origin through geochemical analysis.9

  • Dated to around 2300 BC, an iron pendant from Umm el-Marra in Syria was confirmed to be meteoritic in origin through geochemical analysis.9

  • Dated to around 1400 BC, an iron axe from Ugarit in Syria was found to be meteoritic in origin.9

  • Dated to around 1400 BC, several iron axes from the Shang Dynasty in China were also confirmed to be meteoritic in origin.9

  • Dated to around 1350 BC, an iron dagger, bracelet and headrest from the tomb of Tutankhamun were confirmed to be meteoritic in origin.9 The Tutankhamun dagger consists of similar proportions of metals (iron, nickel and cobalt) to a meteorite discovered in the area, deposited by an ancient meteor shower.[12][13][14]



This "many examples" should be read as 'comparatively many' in the context of archaeology. These "highly prized weapons" weren't issued for general use in the armies of the day.

It seems at first it was made primarily into beads and other jewellery. Its rarity making this iron a precious metal. Although quite quickly metal workers also used iron to complement metal edges.



A decidedly non-biblical archaeology source would be
Otto Johannsen: "Geschichte des Eisens. Stahleisen: Düsseldorf, 31953.



Although this older work lists a Sumerian urudu-an-bar (meaning copper of the skies/heavens) from 3100 BCE as the oldest find.




Meteoric iron was also available to lithic people. This usually contains about 10% Ni and is therefore much harder and more difficult to work. The nickel content varies from 4 to 26%, and can be easily detected as there seem to be no ores capable of giving this level of nickel in a homogeneous form by direct smelting.

It has been calculated that there are at least 250 t of meteoric material extant, and that 99.4% of this is malleable." However, the problems are much the same as with native copper. When cold hammered, the material tends to crack along well-defined crystal planes. With care and annealing, or by hot forging, small artefacts can be made and lithic peoples in the Cape York area of West Greenland have been making tools from meteoric material containing about 8%Ni. While prolonged heat treatment at elevated temperatures will destroy the structure of meteoric iron in time, the material will be always recognizable by its composition.



R. F. Tylecote: "A History Of Metallurgy", Maney: London, 21992.




H. H. COGHLAN: "Notes on prehistoric and early iron in the Old World", 1977, (2 ed.), Pitt Rivers Museum Occ. Paper No.8, Oxford




In summary we have to note that strictly speaking, iron was known at that time and a few artefacts would qualify as "weapons". But the iron from that time is at once much too rare and expensive (paid for in gold, six time the weight of gold judged as inadequate payment); and on the other hand of really inferior quality as a real world weapon, with bronze and even copper having better material qualities than the iron: so, practically speaking:



No, around 3000BCE the Egyptians didn't use enough iron weapons to really allow answering the question in the positive.



This became only widespread after 1400BCE, with smelted and forged iron and steel, starting most probably from Anatolia (the Hittites).



(GA Wainwright: "The coming of iron", Antiquity, Volume 10, Issue 37 March 1936 , pp. 5-24 DOI)



This is graphically summarised (notice the isolated meteoric iron spots in Egypt and Mesopotamia) in




enter image description here
Ünsal Yalçin "Zum Eisen der Hethiter". (PDF) In: Ü. Yalçın, C. Pulak & R. Slotta (Hrsg.): Das Schiff von Uluburun - Welthandel vor 3000 Jahren, Ausstellungskatalog, Bochum 2005, 493-502.







share|improve this answer















tl;dr As commonly understood, the claim is a bit exaggerated by a few hundred years. They had iron artefacts at the time and a few resemble weapons. This cannot be regarded as widespread use of weapons made from meteoric iron at the time 3000BCE.




Wikipedia lists the famous




Tutankhamun's meteoric iron dagger



No Egyptian archaeological evidence exists of iron smelting until the 6th century BC. The earliest known example of the use of metallic iron in Egypt dates to approximately 3400 BC.



The other iron objects were wrapped with Tutankhamun’s mummy; these include a miniature headrest contained inside the golden death mask, an amulet attached to a golden bracelet and a dagger blade with gold haft. All were made by relatively crude methods with the exception of the dagger blade which is clearly expertly produced.
This suggests that the dagger was probably imported to Egypt perhaps as a royal gift from a neighboring territory, indicating that at this time Egypt’s knowledge and skills of iron production were relatively limited. Only further analytical testing can confirm if all of these artifacts are made from meteorite iron but they do appear to suggest that iron was a material used to indicate high status at the time of Tutankhamun’s death in approximately 1327 BC.




Other examples for




Meteoric iron
Bronze Age

Many examples of iron working from the Bronze Age have been confirmed to be meteoritic in origin.9

In ancient Egypt an iron metal bead was found in a graveyard near Gerzeh that contained 7.5% Ni.[10][11] Dated to around 3200 BC, Geochemical analysis of the Gerzeh iron beads, based on the ratio of nickel to iron and cobalt, confirms that the iron was meteoritic in origin.9



  • Dated to around 2500 BC, an iron dagger from Alaca Höyük in Turkey was confirmed to be meteoritic in origin through geochemical analysis.9

  • Dated to around 2300 BC, an iron pendant from Umm el-Marra in Syria was confirmed to be meteoritic in origin through geochemical analysis.9

  • Dated to around 1400 BC, an iron axe from Ugarit in Syria was found to be meteoritic in origin.9

  • Dated to around 1400 BC, several iron axes from the Shang Dynasty in China were also confirmed to be meteoritic in origin.9

  • Dated to around 1350 BC, an iron dagger, bracelet and headrest from the tomb of Tutankhamun were confirmed to be meteoritic in origin.9 The Tutankhamun dagger consists of similar proportions of metals (iron, nickel and cobalt) to a meteorite discovered in the area, deposited by an ancient meteor shower.[12][13][14]



This "many examples" should be read as 'comparatively many' in the context of archaeology. These "highly prized weapons" weren't issued for general use in the armies of the day.

It seems at first it was made primarily into beads and other jewellery. Its rarity making this iron a precious metal. Although quite quickly metal workers also used iron to complement metal edges.



A decidedly non-biblical archaeology source would be
Otto Johannsen: "Geschichte des Eisens. Stahleisen: Düsseldorf, 31953.



Although this older work lists a Sumerian urudu-an-bar (meaning copper of the skies/heavens) from 3100 BCE as the oldest find.




Meteoric iron was also available to lithic people. This usually contains about 10% Ni and is therefore much harder and more difficult to work. The nickel content varies from 4 to 26%, and can be easily detected as there seem to be no ores capable of giving this level of nickel in a homogeneous form by direct smelting.

It has been calculated that there are at least 250 t of meteoric material extant, and that 99.4% of this is malleable." However, the problems are much the same as with native copper. When cold hammered, the material tends to crack along well-defined crystal planes. With care and annealing, or by hot forging, small artefacts can be made and lithic peoples in the Cape York area of West Greenland have been making tools from meteoric material containing about 8%Ni. While prolonged heat treatment at elevated temperatures will destroy the structure of meteoric iron in time, the material will be always recognizable by its composition.



R. F. Tylecote: "A History Of Metallurgy", Maney: London, 21992.




H. H. COGHLAN: "Notes on prehistoric and early iron in the Old World", 1977, (2 ed.), Pitt Rivers Museum Occ. Paper No.8, Oxford




In summary we have to note that strictly speaking, iron was known at that time and a few artefacts would qualify as "weapons". But the iron from that time is at once much too rare and expensive (paid for in gold, six time the weight of gold judged as inadequate payment); and on the other hand of really inferior quality as a real world weapon, with bronze and even copper having better material qualities than the iron: so, practically speaking:



No, around 3000BCE the Egyptians didn't use enough iron weapons to really allow answering the question in the positive.



This became only widespread after 1400BCE, with smelted and forged iron and steel, starting most probably from Anatolia (the Hittites).



(GA Wainwright: "The coming of iron", Antiquity, Volume 10, Issue 37 March 1936 , pp. 5-24 DOI)



This is graphically summarised (notice the isolated meteoric iron spots in Egypt and Mesopotamia) in




enter image description here
Ünsal Yalçin "Zum Eisen der Hethiter". (PDF) In: Ü. Yalçın, C. Pulak & R. Slotta (Hrsg.): Das Schiff von Uluburun - Welthandel vor 3000 Jahren, Ausstellungskatalog, Bochum 2005, 493-502.








share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited 2 hours ago

























answered 12 hours ago









LangLangCLangLangC

16.6k46684




16.6k46684







  • 4





    I think it's worth adding that this "[9]" source in Wikipedia/Meteoric+iron you quoted is something that seems more reliable than The Bible as History and is also available online. I mean my question was already questioning Wikipedia so I'd rather see some primary sources examined than other Wiki articles. But apart from that this is a great answer, thanks.

    – Przemysław Czechowski
    11 hours ago







  • 5





    "the dagger blade [was] clearly expertly produced. This suggests that the dagger was probably imported to Egypt perhaps as a royal gift from a neighboring territory, indicating that at this time Egypt’s knowledge and skills of iron production were relatively limited." Is it known that any of the neighboring territories (or anywhere else in the world) had such advanced smithing capabilities at that time?

    – Kevin
    8 hours ago











  • @Kevin This is mainly retro-reasoning since Egypt is generally considered last to really enter the iron age. But Kish, Ur, Anatolia, Syria seemed to be a bit ahead in using meteoric iron to form into tools and blades that look as if they were above (or really beneath) 'ceremonial use only'. Alaca Hüyük seems to be the oldest 'sword'. Isolated artefacts of iron edge in bronze then also start to appear in China before the iron age started there. But anything iron seems to indicate that the Hittites were really the most advanced.

    – LangLangC
    2 hours ago











  • @BarryHarrison The complex objects seem to appear somewhat out of nowhere (in Egypt), therefore they reason it has to be imported. But post-hoc this isn't entirely convincing as in Gerzeh the Egyptians started much earlier with simple ones and they might as well import raw material (or have their own, see picture) and import the technology, the craftsmen, not just the finished product. The 'retro-reasoning' might be right, but it is not the only plausible option on the table.

    – LangLangC
    2 hours ago












  • 4





    I think it's worth adding that this "[9]" source in Wikipedia/Meteoric+iron you quoted is something that seems more reliable than The Bible as History and is also available online. I mean my question was already questioning Wikipedia so I'd rather see some primary sources examined than other Wiki articles. But apart from that this is a great answer, thanks.

    – Przemysław Czechowski
    11 hours ago







  • 5





    "the dagger blade [was] clearly expertly produced. This suggests that the dagger was probably imported to Egypt perhaps as a royal gift from a neighboring territory, indicating that at this time Egypt’s knowledge and skills of iron production were relatively limited." Is it known that any of the neighboring territories (or anywhere else in the world) had such advanced smithing capabilities at that time?

    – Kevin
    8 hours ago











  • @Kevin This is mainly retro-reasoning since Egypt is generally considered last to really enter the iron age. But Kish, Ur, Anatolia, Syria seemed to be a bit ahead in using meteoric iron to form into tools and blades that look as if they were above (or really beneath) 'ceremonial use only'. Alaca Hüyük seems to be the oldest 'sword'. Isolated artefacts of iron edge in bronze then also start to appear in China before the iron age started there. But anything iron seems to indicate that the Hittites were really the most advanced.

    – LangLangC
    2 hours ago











  • @BarryHarrison The complex objects seem to appear somewhat out of nowhere (in Egypt), therefore they reason it has to be imported. But post-hoc this isn't entirely convincing as in Gerzeh the Egyptians started much earlier with simple ones and they might as well import raw material (or have their own, see picture) and import the technology, the craftsmen, not just the finished product. The 'retro-reasoning' might be right, but it is not the only plausible option on the table.

    – LangLangC
    2 hours ago







4




4





I think it's worth adding that this "[9]" source in Wikipedia/Meteoric+iron you quoted is something that seems more reliable than The Bible as History and is also available online. I mean my question was already questioning Wikipedia so I'd rather see some primary sources examined than other Wiki articles. But apart from that this is a great answer, thanks.

– Przemysław Czechowski
11 hours ago






I think it's worth adding that this "[9]" source in Wikipedia/Meteoric+iron you quoted is something that seems more reliable than The Bible as History and is also available online. I mean my question was already questioning Wikipedia so I'd rather see some primary sources examined than other Wiki articles. But apart from that this is a great answer, thanks.

– Przemysław Czechowski
11 hours ago





5




5





"the dagger blade [was] clearly expertly produced. This suggests that the dagger was probably imported to Egypt perhaps as a royal gift from a neighboring territory, indicating that at this time Egypt’s knowledge and skills of iron production were relatively limited." Is it known that any of the neighboring territories (or anywhere else in the world) had such advanced smithing capabilities at that time?

– Kevin
8 hours ago





"the dagger blade [was] clearly expertly produced. This suggests that the dagger was probably imported to Egypt perhaps as a royal gift from a neighboring territory, indicating that at this time Egypt’s knowledge and skills of iron production were relatively limited." Is it known that any of the neighboring territories (or anywhere else in the world) had such advanced smithing capabilities at that time?

– Kevin
8 hours ago













@Kevin This is mainly retro-reasoning since Egypt is generally considered last to really enter the iron age. But Kish, Ur, Anatolia, Syria seemed to be a bit ahead in using meteoric iron to form into tools and blades that look as if they were above (or really beneath) 'ceremonial use only'. Alaca Hüyük seems to be the oldest 'sword'. Isolated artefacts of iron edge in bronze then also start to appear in China before the iron age started there. But anything iron seems to indicate that the Hittites were really the most advanced.

– LangLangC
2 hours ago





@Kevin This is mainly retro-reasoning since Egypt is generally considered last to really enter the iron age. But Kish, Ur, Anatolia, Syria seemed to be a bit ahead in using meteoric iron to form into tools and blades that look as if they were above (or really beneath) 'ceremonial use only'. Alaca Hüyük seems to be the oldest 'sword'. Isolated artefacts of iron edge in bronze then also start to appear in China before the iron age started there. But anything iron seems to indicate that the Hittites were really the most advanced.

– LangLangC
2 hours ago













@BarryHarrison The complex objects seem to appear somewhat out of nowhere (in Egypt), therefore they reason it has to be imported. But post-hoc this isn't entirely convincing as in Gerzeh the Egyptians started much earlier with simple ones and they might as well import raw material (or have their own, see picture) and import the technology, the craftsmen, not just the finished product. The 'retro-reasoning' might be right, but it is not the only plausible option on the table.

– LangLangC
2 hours ago





@BarryHarrison The complex objects seem to appear somewhat out of nowhere (in Egypt), therefore they reason it has to be imported. But post-hoc this isn't entirely convincing as in Gerzeh the Egyptians started much earlier with simple ones and they might as well import raw material (or have their own, see picture) and import the technology, the craftsmen, not just the finished product. The 'retro-reasoning' might be right, but it is not the only plausible option on the table.

– LangLangC
2 hours ago



Popular posts from this blog

Reverse int within the 32-bit signed integer range: [−2^31, 2^31 − 1]Combining two 32-bit integers into one 64-bit integerDetermine if an int is within rangeLossy packing 32 bit integer to 16 bitComputing the square root of a 64-bit integerKeeping integer addition within boundsSafe multiplication of two 64-bit signed integersLeetcode 10: Regular Expression MatchingSigned integer-to-ascii x86_64 assembler macroReverse the digits of an Integer“Add two numbers given in reverse order from a linked list”

Category:Fedor von Bock Media in category "Fedor von Bock"Navigation menuUpload mediaISNI: 0000 0000 5511 3417VIAF ID: 24712551GND ID: 119294796Library of Congress authority ID: n96068363BnF ID: 12534305fSUDOC authorities ID: 034604189Open Library ID: OL338253ANKCR AUT ID: jn19990000869National Library of Israel ID: 000514068National Thesaurus for Author Names ID: 341574317ReasonatorScholiaStatistics

Kiel Indholdsfortegnelse Historie | Transport og færgeforbindelser | Sejlsport og anden sport | Kultur | Kendte personer fra Kiel | Noter | Litteratur | Eksterne henvisninger | Navigationsmenuwww.kiel.de54°19′31″N 10°8′26″Ø / 54.32528°N 10.14056°Ø / 54.32528; 10.14056Oberbürgermeister Dr. Ulf Kämpferwww.statistik-nord.deDen danske Stats StatistikKiels hjemmesiderrrWorldCat312794080n790547494030481-4