Iron in Egyptian Relics Came from Space

Michael Natsch 6/6/13

Earth Science Core: C-Even

Mrs. Davies 

Marchant, Jo, and Nature Magazine. "Iron in Egyptian Relics Came from Space." Scientific American 29 May 2013: n. pag. Scientific American Online. Web. 6 June 2013. <http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=iron-egyptian-relics-came-from-space>.

The article titled “Iron in Egyptian Relics Came from Space” talks about how a research team proved that iron in ancient Egyptian artifacts had celestial origins. It was strange to find these small beads made of iron, because in the period of time that they were dated to (about 5,000 years ago) iron smelting had not yet been developed in the region. There were nine of these bead-like objects found in a cemetery in 1911 about 70 miles south of Cairo Egypt and they are dated to about 3,300 B.C. which makes them the oldest known Egyptian artifacts that are made of iron. After being discovered, a study was conducted in 1928 which found that the iron in the beads had a high nickel content (which is common in iron meteorites). This discovery led to the suggestion that the iron originated from meteorites, but scholars in the 1980s argued that this high-nickel iron could have been due to accidental smelting, and also, more recent analysis’ were conducted and found that the surface of the beads had a low nickel content. Even with evidence against celestial origins building up, a meteorite scientist in the UK, Diane Johnson, and her colleagues, “used scanning electron microscopy and computed tomography to analyze one of the beads.” Although they were not able to cut the artifact open (because it is an artifact and is irreplaceable), they found areas on the surface of the artifact that had weathered away with time, which provided Johnson with small windows to peer inside the artifact to get a look at the better preserved metal on the inside of the bead. This new research showed that the nickel content of the inner iron was very high (up to 30%), indicating that the iron really did come from a meteorite. Also, the research team observed that the iron had a unique crystalline structure which was only found in iron meteorites that cooled inside their parent asteroids as the Solar System was formed. This confirmed the evidence that the iron originated from the stars. Before iron smelting was developed in the area (around the 6th century B.C.) there have not been many iron artifacts found and the only ones were in tombs of high-status Egyptians, such as the pharaoh Tutankhamen. Based on these finds, it is believed that these meteorites played a major role in the religious system of the time. The meteorites were believed to guarantee its owners’ priority in passage into the afterlife, which is why many high-class Egyptians were buried with them. Also Campbell Price, a curator of Egypt based at the Manchester Museum, points out that nothing can be known for sure about the Egyptian religion before the availability of written word. But, he says that later in time, it was believed that the Egyptian gods had bones made of iron (believed by ancient Egyptians). It is probably that this belief originated from the meteorites falling from the sky, which the Egyptians might have thought to be the bones of their gods falling to earth.

I found this article very interesting, primarily because it relates Earth Science with History. It is not often that these two can be paired together, but this article and the discovery of how meteorites affected Egyptian culture does. The article is important, because it fills a mystery that existed in history which was: where did these metal objects come from, if iron smelting had not been discovered in this region? With the use of modern technology and scientific minds, we are able to understand the origins of these mysteries and solve them. Usually, we use Earth Science to explain how the world was physically in the past, but this article is just one example showing how our surroundings in the world affect the development of our culture. 

Overall, the article was easy to understand and the topic was enjoyable to learn about. The article addresses the fact that much of what the scientists are saying about the religion of ancient Egypt is only based on speculation, which is one of the articles strong points. Also, the author includes and explains the reasoning behind both sides of the argument of where the metal came from (one side saying it was from meteorites and the other saying it was from early, accidental smelting). I think that this is another strong point of the article, because talking about opposing viewpoints to a topic is essential in creating an unbiased article. Even with all of these strengths to the article, there was still room for improvement. One thing that the article lacked was a description of what the beads looked like. There was a picture and a very short description, but it would have been better if the article had gone into more detail about how the metal was manipulated to suit the needs of the bead. The authors could also have explained why the nickel content on the outside of the artifact went down overtime and also why some parts of the artifact weathered away with time. With these questions being answered, the article would have been more thorough and more informative. Apart from these few improvements that could be made, it was very interesting to learn about the relationship between meteorites and ancient Egyptian society from a scientific point of view.