When in India "died" wootz?

mahratt · 4th February 2016, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kronckew

i gather it just died out for economical reasons, excellent easily worked steel and alloys in europe and being exported slowly killed off the more expensive wootz/bulat, it was just easier and cheaper to mass produce high quality weapons almost as good as if not better than wootz.

Of course you're right! I agree with you. But the question is, when exactly was "killed" wootz?

Why did talk about the middle of the 19th century, rather than the beginning of the 20th century?

And who of the researchers wrote on the subject, proving his words, not just voicing assumptions.

kronckew · 4th February 2016, 11:00 AM

try this: http://www.wirralmodelengineeringsoc...er_Process.pdf

looks like it started about 1865 when the commercial production of bessimer process steel was commercially available.

mahratt · 4th February 2016, 11:22 AM

Again, you're right. Thank you for the interesting article. But I am interested to know whether there is a direct mention to the fact that wootz steel production ceased in those years, the 19th century. Stating the reasons

We are now argue that damask steel production was a long and expensive process. I agree. From the point of view of Europeans. But, do manual work is now in India dearly valued? I doubt that 150 years ago the situation was different ....

kronckew · 4th February 2016, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mahratt

... But, do manual work is now in India dearly valued? I doubt that 150 years ago the situation was different ....

india and pakistan are still major suppliers of 'damascus' pattern welded steel sword and knife blades. they still command a premium over a monosteel blade of the same shape.

i would however assume it's the distributor that makes the most money, paying relatively little to the poor kami hammering on the anvil. the kamis and sarkis who forged the blades and made the scabbards and fittings were and are of the 'untouchables', the lowest of low caste in that most nasty of social ranking systems. most employers pay them on the piece work system, so the faster the items are made, and the more items they make per day, the more they get paid.

western smiths are better educated, better paid and expect far more than eastern ones. as you say, likely not far different than in the 19c, even under queen victoria, and her extended family, the kings, kaisers and tsars of the other european nations.

...and the rising use of steam and later electric powered machinery rather than hand tools makes a difference too.

there are a variety of ever changing and mutating conditions, economic, historical, social, political, and scientific all playing their part. it will be interesting to see if anyone comes up with any precise reasonings in the maelstrom.

i have also read somewhere that the mines where the ore used for wootz were playing out, so with the source drying up, and other ore sources not having it's peculiar chemical composition (some say it was a trace of vanadium that made all the difference), some people hid away blooms justincase, which occasionally still show up. hence the wootz blades made in more modern times, using the old blobs of material whose mfg. process had been lost. tracking down the source and date of that theory would be rather difficult. (i do seem to recall a billet of wootz (or maybe bulat) of a few kilos going for an outrageous price on a well known internet auction site.)

mahratt · 4th February 2016, 06:35 PM

You talk absolutely true. I agree with many of your words. But, I'm not talking about our reasoning (even though they are very correct).
I'm curious to know what was written in the 19th - early 20th century, the British researchers. How could they not notice an event such as the cessation of production of wootz steel and its causes?
Or all the conclusions that the wootz in India stopped producing in the middle of the 19th century, is based solely on circumstantial evidence?

Jim McDougall · 4th February 2016, 09:55 PM

I agree Mahratt, what Kronckew is expressing is exactly right, and I recognize much of the factual data (even though I don't fully understand it

). I also understand that you are seeking cited references in the literature which expressly note the demise of the Indian wootz industry and if they specify a more finite date or period.

Kronckew, what I have difficulty in grasping is that metal work in India of course involving wootz, were there other metal or steel products produced concurrently in the same areas, or was it only wootz?

While wootz production stopped, or so we are told, were other types of regular steel or iron still produced ?

ariel · 4th February 2016, 11:11 PM

Jim,
The decline in making wootz ingots was due to a dwindling demand: by the middle of the 19th century both Brits and Germans flooded the market with cheaper and more reliable mono steel blades. The Westernization of Persian military with the introduction of European-pattern sabers did not help either.

But let's not forget a human factor: wootz blade is valuable and desirable not only because of its metallurgical composition, but mainly because of its beauty that depended in large measure on forging skills of the bladesmith. This is why Anosov's bulat blades were pretty primitive visually and why AFAIK only one modern bladesmith can make a shamshir equal in its beauty to the best Persian blades.
Since there was no demand for the wootz blades, the skills began their decline and got lost in a generation or two.
Was there at the end of 19 century some Ahmed Baba somewhere in a village near Shiraz or Haiderabad who knew to what color it is permissible to heat wootz ingot and how to turn the half-made blade on the anvil, and how forcefully to pound it and in which direction? Perhaps. But any skill gets lost if not exercised constantly and by many people. And who would like to become his pupil with no prospect for money and fame?

Estcrh's comment on Anosov was right on the money. Anosov published his bulat study in 1837, but in 1841 captain Massalski published full description of the process he observed in "Persia" ( not known where exactly). Did Anosov have his informants? Unknown. But after his death bulat manufacture in Russia also dwindled to virtual zero ( there are some vague stories of former Anosov's workers making something similar, but their efforts also went nowhere and vanished with them).

Roland_M · 7th March 2016, 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mahratt

Again, you're right. Thank you for the interesting article. But I am interested to know whether there is a direct mention to the fact that wootz steel production ceased in those years, the 19th century. Stating the reasons

According to old sources in most cases wootz was either hard and brittle or soft and easily to bend (Egerton, Oriental arms and armour).

I know that just a few wootz blades from Persia and maybe the Ottoman empire, were able reach the european toughness and they were extremely valuable.

I would say, this is the main reason, european steel was much cheaper and had better characteristics from technical point of view.
I am also convinced, that a top quality wootz sword (Assad Allah for example) is more difficult to forge, than a top class japanese katana (Hizen Kuni Mutsu no kami Tadayoshi quality).

The industrial production of european crucible steel begun in the middle of the 19th century.

In my opinion Indian wootz is a good steel for daggers but unsuitable for swords and sabers.

In all times, a good blacksmith was always very expensive, whether in India, Japan or Europe, everywhere.

Roland

Richard Furrer · 7th March 2016, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roland_M

In my opinion Indian wootz is a good steel for daggers but unsuitable for swords and sabers.

In all times, a good blacksmith was always very expensive, whether in India, Japan or Europe, everywhere.

Roland

Roland, Then why were so many swords made from that material? Pretty only?

Ric

ariel · 7th March 2016, 03:22 PM

Richard,

Perhaps, crucible technology was the only one available to them in the pre-industrial age. Any small time village smith could construct an oven in his backyard and put there a dozen or two of crucibles.

Jim McDougall · 7th March 2016, 04:55 PM

Thank you Richard for entering in on this, and it is I think a key thing to have an actual blacksmith's view on the matters we have been discussing here. Your entries are absolutely fascinating, and the observations that begun the thread with Mahratt's original question and the quite dynamic discussions have brought this entire topic to what I think is a pretty exciting and comprehensive look into this mysterious steel.

It has been clear that experienced collectors and researchers such as Mahratt and Ariel would have often different perspectives, and these as well as those who have also joined the discussions have really brought much of the 'mystery' into a most viably understandable topic.

As I have noted, I began here with virtually zero comprehension of wootz itself beyond the obvious classifications and terms in descriptions. Others, such as Ibrahiim, who have had varying degrees of knowledge have also continued researching material and literature for ideas and answers.

This includes of course Roland who has just come in and of course with sound observations, and Alex, Gav, and others whose input has been great in facilitating the discussion.
As always, Estcrh adds vibrant visual aid with the amazing illustrations he provides and accompanied by excellent insights.

I did not mean this to sound like movie credits

but just wanted to note what a magnificent learning opportunity has been created here by the expertise and teamwork of all of you, and to thank you.

Please keep going!!! It is fascinating and fun to learn more.

Very best regards
Jim

estcrh · 8th March 2016, 03:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roland_M

According to old sources in most cases wootz was either hard and brittle or soft and easily to bend (Egerton, Oriental arms and armour).

I know that just a few wootz blades from Persia and maybe the Ottoman empire, were able reach the european toughness and they were extremely valuable..........

I would say, this is the main reason, european steel was much cheaper and had better characteristics from technical point of view..............

The industrial production of european crucible steel begun in the middle of the 19th century............
Roland

Roland, actually crucible steel was known and made in England much earlier than the mid 19th century. So if England had crucible steel since the 1700s why were they still looking for the secret of Indian crucible steel? Perhaps because they thought of Indian crucible steel as being a superior steel, why else?

A History of Small Business in America, Mansel G. Blackford, 2003

ariel · 8th March 2016, 04:46 AM

Not every steel obtained by crucible technology is equivalent to wootz.
For example, steel from Sheffild "pots" was poured off immediately after melting; slow cooling was not practiced. Forging of Sheffield steel was done at high temperature.
I was told that old Sheffield blades may show very faint, simple and patchy damaskus pattern if etched severely , but nobody ever managed to elicit real wootz-y pattern.

kronckew · 8th March 2016, 06:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ariel

Not every steel obtained by crucible technology is equivalent to wootz.
For example, steel from Sheffild "pots" was poured off immediately after melting; slow cooling was not practiced. Forging of Sheffield steel was done at high temperature.
I was told that old Sheffield blades may show very faint, simple and patchy damaskus pattern if etched severely , but nobody ever managed to elicit real wootz-y pattern.

english crucible steel was good,but it wasn't quite carling. (local uk joke)

i suspect the best true indian wootz may have had a crucial alloying element like vanadium that the UK didn't discover was usefull till much later.

i also suspect that, as i mentioned earlier, the secrets were NOT past down and were lost because a generation went to the city and got easier and better paid jobs in industry, offices, factories etc. where they could hide their low caste and rise above it. we do not realise in the west how limiting the indian caste system was (and is in places) and how attractive breaking out of it into a western meritocracy system that did not force them to pound iron for pennies all their lives would be. in the uneducated and illiterate environment, there was no way to 'store' the knowledge if your son did not want to learn it and ran off.

4th February 2016, 11:00 AM	#2
kronckew Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Room 101, Glos. UK Posts: 4,224	try this: http://www.wirralmodelengineeringsoc...er_Process.pdf looks like it started about 1865 when the commercial production of bessimer process steel was commercially available.

4th February 2016, 11:22 AM	#3
mahratt Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Russia Posts: 1,042	Again, you're right. Thank you for the interesting article. But I am interested to know whether there is a direct mention to the fact that wootz steel production ceased in those years, the 19th century. Stating the reasons We are now argue that damask steel production was a long and expensive process. I agree. From the point of view of Europeans. But, do manual work is now in India dearly valued? I doubt that 150 years ago the situation was different ....

4th February 2016, 06:35 PM	#5
mahratt Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Russia Posts: 1,042	You talk absolutely true. I agree with many of your words. But, I'm not talking about our reasoning (even though they are very correct). I'm curious to know what was written in the 19th - early 20th century, the British researchers. How could they not notice an event such as the cessation of production of wootz steel and its causes? Or all the conclusions that the wootz in India stopped producing in the middle of the 19th century, is based solely on circumstantial evidence?

4th February 2016, 09:55 PM	#6
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,281	I agree Mahratt, what Kronckew is expressing is exactly right, and I recognize much of the factual data (even though I don't fully understand it ). I also understand that you are seeking cited references in the literature which expressly note the demise of the Indian wootz industry and if they specify a more finite date or period. Kronckew, what I have difficulty in grasping is that metal work in India of course involving wootz, were there other metal or steel products produced concurrently in the same areas, or was it only wootz? While wootz production stopped, or so we are told, were other types of regular steel or iron still produced ?

4th February 2016, 11:11 PM	#7
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Jim, The decline in making wootz ingots was due to a dwindling demand: by the middle of the 19th century both Brits and Germans flooded the market with cheaper and more reliable mono steel blades. The Westernization of Persian military with the introduction of European-pattern sabers did not help either. But let's not forget a human factor: wootz blade is valuable and desirable not only because of its metallurgical composition, but mainly because of its beauty that depended in large measure on forging skills of the bladesmith. This is why Anosov's bulat blades were pretty primitive visually and why AFAIK only one modern bladesmith can make a shamshir equal in its beauty to the best Persian blades. Since there was no demand for the wootz blades, the skills began their decline and got lost in a generation or two. Was there at the end of 19 century some Ahmed Baba somewhere in a village near Shiraz or Haiderabad who knew to what color it is permissible to heat wootz ingot and how to turn the half-made blade on the anvil, and how forcefully to pound it and in which direction? Perhaps. But any skill gets lost if not exercised constantly and by many people. And who would like to become his pupil with no prospect for money and fame? Estcrh's comment on Anosov was right on the money. Anosov published his bulat study in 1837, but in 1841 captain Massalski published full description of the process he observed in "Persia" ( not known where exactly). Did Anosov have his informants? Unknown. But after his death bulat manufacture in Russia also dwindled to virtual zero ( there are some vague stories of former Anosov's workers making something similar, but their efforts also went nowhere and vanished with them).

7th March 2016, 03:22 PM	#10
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Richard, Perhaps, crucible technology was the only one available to them in the pre-industrial age. Any small time village smith could construct an oven in his backyard and put there a dozen or two of crucibles.

7th March 2016, 04:55 PM	#11
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,281	Thank you Richard for entering in on this, and it is I think a key thing to have an actual blacksmith's view on the matters we have been discussing here. Your entries are absolutely fascinating, and the observations that begun the thread with Mahratt's original question and the quite dynamic discussions have brought this entire topic to what I think is a pretty exciting and comprehensive look into this mysterious steel. It has been clear that experienced collectors and researchers such as Mahratt and Ariel would have often different perspectives, and these as well as those who have also joined the discussions have really brought much of the 'mystery' into a most viably understandable topic. As I have noted, I began here with virtually zero comprehension of wootz itself beyond the obvious classifications and terms in descriptions. Others, such as Ibrahiim, who have had varying degrees of knowledge have also continued researching material and literature for ideas and answers. This includes of course Roland who has just come in and of course with sound observations, and Alex, Gav, and others whose input has been great in facilitating the discussion. As always, Estcrh adds vibrant visual aid with the amazing illustrations he provides and accompanied by excellent insights. I did not mean this to sound like movie credits but just wanted to note what a magnificent learning opportunity has been created here by the expertise and teamwork of all of you, and to thank you. Please keep going!!! It is fascinating and fun to learn more. Very best regards Jim

8th March 2016, 04:46 AM	#13
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Not every steel obtained by crucible technology is equivalent to wootz. For example, steel from Sheffild "pots" was poured off immediately after melting; slow cooling was not practiced. Forging of Sheffield steel was done at high temperature. I was told that old Sheffield blades may show very faint, simple and patchy damaskus pattern if etched severely , but nobody ever managed to elicit real wootz-y pattern.