You see the case is not so easy, because Piaskowski and Photos both
show that there was smelting in ancient times from laterites, and some
of these laterites contain quite a lot of nickel, so your geologist is
not correct. He does not know the archaeological literature in which
nickel-iron prills can be found, for example, from excavated sites
(see Photos, date around 1993, can't recall the date but have a look
online under E. Photos, iron-nickel alloys of antiquity and Google
will get there). This is the problem you see, if we have a few
percent of nickel we are unsure if it is smelted iron made by man or
from the skies......all the best.....David
Quoting David Peterson <[log in to unmask]>:
> Excuse me, that should me "meteoritic" iron in both cases. D
>
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 2:49 PM, David Peterson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> This has been a very interesting discussion for me since I have been
>> analyzing a LBA-EIA spearhead from the Karashamb cemetery in Armenia that
>> was suspected to be meteoric iron. I was able to get a hold of the 1996
>> report on the King Tut dagger, and the XRF results indeed say there is 2.8%
>> nickel. I contacted a meteor geologist who said that although an iron
>> meteorite would not have less than 4-5% Ni, there should be no more than a
>> few tenths of a percent of it in terrestrial iron, so there is a strong
>> possibility this could be meteoric after all.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Dave
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 6:02 PM, Aaron Shugar <[log in to unmask]>wrote:
>>
>>> I have had good success doing in situ polishing on some artifacts for
>>> microscopy using a small dowel with polishing clothes attached to the
>>> end and run on a drill press. The spot is relatively small and good
>>> enough for a high quality microscopic examination... something to
>>> think about in any case.
>>>
>>> Aaron
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 7:56 PM, David Scott <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>> > large slag stringers may indeed show up on an x-radiograph but if not,
>>> the
>>> > blade obviously cannot be cut in any way to investigate as we would
>>> normally
>>> > do. As this technology is available in Egypt, although it may not be
>>> > sufficient to answer the question, it would be a start.....all the
>>> > best...David
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Quoting Lee & Elizabeth Sauder <[log in to unmask]>:
>>> >
>>> >> I'm sure this is a really stupid question, but maybe one of you would
>>> take
>>> >> the time to answer it.
>>> >>
>>> >> From the photos on the internet, it looks like the dagger is in
>>> fabulous
>>> >> condition, with uncorroded metal showing. Why can't you just look for
>>> slag
>>> >> stringers to tell you if it's smelted or meteoric?
>>> >>
>>> >> Lee
>>> >>
>>> >> -----Original Message----- From: David Scott
>>> >> Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 6:37 PM
>>> >> To: [log in to unmask]
>>> >> Subject: Re: King Tut's iron blade
>>> >>
>>> >> It is sometimes possible to see microstructural detail in an x-ray
>>> >> radiograph....especially if the artefact in question might have a
>>> >> slightly corroded Widmanstatten pattern if meteoric....different
>>> >> phases in the Fe-Ni series may show up in a blade in the same way as
>>> >> pattern welded sword blades have done in the past, with different iron
>>> >> and iron-carbon or iron-phosphorus regions, so this might be possible
>>> >> in Egypt if the conservators can get to work on it.....all the
>>> >> best...david
>>> >>
>>> >> ....Quoting Michael Notis <[log in to unmask]>:
>>> >>
>>> >>> Ok-I will chime in. There is a synchrotron in Jordan that Egypt has a
>>> >>> cooperative program with
>>> >>> (this is a broad international effort). The problem is that no matter
>>> >>> what photon energy source you use
>>> >>> the escape depth is still limited to the near surface layer so that
>>> it
>>> >>> holds little benefit over a handheld XRF.
>>> >>> XRD (which does produce thru-thickness diffraction patterns) will
>>> give
>>> >>> you information on the structure
>>> >>> of the crystalline phases but these must be present in significant
>>> >>> quantity.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> I agree that LA-ICPMS seems to be the way to go.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Mike Notis
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On 10/18/12 1:56 PM, Ernst Pernicka wrote:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Since you cannot bring a synchrotron to Egypt this would require
>>> >>>> temporary
>>> >>>> export. This is not possible, but if it were, LA-ICP-MS would still
>>> be
>>> >>>> the
>>> >>>> method of choice. It can be performed on large objects too.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>>> >>>> Von: Arch-Metals Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Im
>>> Auftrag
>>> >>>> von
>>> >>>> Killick, David J - (killick)
>>> >>>> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 18. Oktober 2012 19:20
>>> >>>> An: [log in to unmask]
>>> >>>> Betreff: Re: King Tut's iron blade
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> I agree with Ernst that LA-ICPMS would be ideal, but unfortunately
>>> there
>>> >>>> is
>>> >>>> no chance that anyone would be allowed to drill samples like the King
>>> >>>> Tut
>>> >>>> blade. Perhaps synchrotron radiation would be best, but I know little
>>> >>>> about
>>> >>>> it. I do know that it is non-destructive, can be done on whole
>>> >>>> artefacts,
>>> >>>> yields chemical composition for both major and trace elements (but to
>>> >>>> what
>>> >>>> detection limits??) and - most interestingly for meteoritic iron -
>>> can
>>> >>>> also
>>> >>>> provide metallographic parameters such as grain size, residual stress
>>> >>>> and
>>> >>>> spatial distribution of elements. If Brian Newberry or Leslie Frame
>>> are
>>> >>>> reading this, could they comment on the potential application of the
>>> >>>> synchrotron to this problem?
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> ________________________________________
>>> >>>> From: [log in to unmask] [[log in to unmask]]
>>> >>>> Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 9:40 AM
>>> >>>> To: Arch-Metals Group; Killick, David J - (killick)
>>> >>>> Cc: [log in to unmask]
>>> >>>> Subject: Re: King Tut's iron blade
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> From the site of Kerkenes Dag we have some iron we are looking at,
>>> >>>> from Anatolia but from the 7th century BC, a little later. Regarding
>>> >>>> the analytical determination of whether the iron is smelted
>>> >>>> iron-nickel alloy or meteoric, this could still be hard to do, for
>>> >>>> example the Mundrabilla fall in Western Australia has 7.7%
>>> nickel,59.5
>>> >>>> ppm gallium, 196 ppm germanium and only 0.87 ppm iridium, so on
>>> >>>> corroded archaeological artefacts determining here the amount of Ir
>>> at
>>> >>>> less than 1ppm would not be easy..certainly worth trying and a pity
>>> >>>> that the hand-held XRF instruments would not really be able to help
>>> >>>> here....all the best...david
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Quoting "Killick, David J - (killick)" <[log in to unmask]>:
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>>> Many thanks to Thilo for making this copy available. Unfortunately,
>>> >>>>> as Ernst points out, it does not solve the problem of whether this
>>> >>>>> is smelted or terrestrial iron. This question really needs to be
>>> >>>>> properly investigated. If I remember correctly, Michel Valloggia
>>> >>>>> discusses (in Mediterranean Archaeology 14, 2001) the slightly
>>> >>>>> earlier letter from Armana in which a Hittite ruler makes excuses to
>>> >>>>> his Egyptian counterpart for not sending the iron that the latter
>>> >>>>> had requested, and he (Valloggia) argues that the Tutankhamum
>>> >>>>> dagger is one such gift. Why is it necessary to know whether this
>>> >>>>> object is meteoritic or smelted iron? Because it is one of the
>>> >>>>> best-preserved iron objects from the period when iron was just
>>> >>>>> starting to become available to elites in Anatolia (during the New
>>> >>>>> Hittite period, 1400-1200 BCE). There are few contemporary iron
>>> >>>>> artefacts known from Anatolia itself - most of what we know about
>>> >>>>> Hittite iron is from contemporary documents.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Non-destructive measurement of Ga, PGE and Co on the blade could be
>>> >>>>> done either by PIXE or by synchrotron radiation. Unfortunately, as
>>> >>>>> far as I have been able to determine by asking Egyptologists,
>>> >>>>> neither technique is available in Egypt, and Egyptian policy on
>>> >>>>> antiquities prohibits the temporary export of artefacts for
>>> >>>>> scientific analysis. This is why the study of archaeometallurgy in
>>> >>>>> Egypt lags so far behind that in the rest of Eurasia and Africa. As
>>> >>>>> Michel Wuttman wrote (also in Mediterranean Archaeology 14, 2001) we
>>> >>>>> know little more today about the development of metallurgy in Egypt
>>> >>>>> than we did in 1960.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> =
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Aaron Shugar
>>> [log in to unmask]
>>> [log in to unmask]
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> David L. Peterson, Ph.D.
>> Assistant Professor, Anthropology
>> 157 Graveley Hall
>> Idaho State University
>> Pocatello, Idaho 83209-8005
>> (208) 282-4017
>>
>> On the web: http://www.isu.edu/anthro/peterson.shtml
>> <http://www.isu.edu/anthro/peterson.shtml>See the latest on the Marmarik
>> Valley Project on Facebook:
>> http://www.facebook.com/MarmarikArchaeologyProject
>>
>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is intended only for the use of the
>> Addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential.
>> If you are not the intended recipient, dissemination of this communication
>> is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
>> please notify me immediately and erase all copies of the message and its
>> attachments.
>>
>> Quote me as saying I was mis-quoted. *Groucho Marx*
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> David L. Peterson, Ph.D.
> Assistant Professor, Anthropology
> 157 Graveley Hall
> Idaho State University
> Pocatello, Idaho 83209-8005
> (208) 282-4017
>
> On the web: http://www.isu.edu/anthro/peterson.shtml
> <http://www.isu.edu/anthro/peterson.shtml>See the latest on the Marmarik
> Valley Project on Facebook:
> http://www.facebook.com/MarmarikArchaeologyProject
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is intended only for the use of the
> Addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential.
> If you are not the intended recipient, dissemination of this communication
> is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
> please notify me immediately and erase all copies of the message and its
> attachments.
>
> Quote me as saying I was mis-quoted. *Groucho Marx*
>
|