When in India "died" wootz?

[ariel]

The REAL modern wootz!

I give you examples of bulat blades by a Georgian master Zaqro Nonikashvili.

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by ariel

The REAL modern wootz!

I give you examples of bulat blades by a Georgian master Zaqro Nonikashvili.

Here is a link to an excellent article which explains Zaqro Nonikashvili's "Georgian crucible steel technique".

http://ceroart.revues.org/2557?lang=en

[Emanuel]

Mind you, my comment is specifically about the kirk narduban, not the kara khorasan.

Thank you Ariel and Eric! Magnificent stuff!

[ariel]

Indeed, magnificent!

Just to think that the guy managed to reproduce the most difficult wootz patterns without having any theoretical ( written) or practical ( apprenticeship) help.

This is a work of a true genius. He is a Mozart of wootz.

[ALEX]

Originally Posted by ariel

The REAL modern wootz!

I give you examples of bulat blades by a Georgian master Zaqro Nonikashvili.

Ariel,
I do not believe the top 2 images shown in above Post#140 are modern production. The lower image is more like it. I think the 2 above are closeups of genuine antique blades added for marketing purposes, as to show what wootz/bulat looks like, casually adding Zaqro Nonikashvili name into association.

[ALEX]

Originally Posted by ALEX

Ariel,
I do not believe the top 2 images shown in above Post#140 are modern production. The lower image is more like it. I think the 2 above are closeups of genuine antique blades added for marketing purposes, as to show what wootz/bulat looks like, casually adding Zaqro Nonikashvili name into association.

... just to be clear on who's who.

[ALEX]

here's closeup of a modern Indian-made Kard that can be picked up for under $200, and not the best by far. There are wootz(?) ingots with better "structure" readily available for less than $100. I do not understand what is the big deal with Russian geniuses creating unimaginable bulat masterpieces? Are they any different or am I missing something?

[Jim McDougall]

Ibrahiim, thank you for that outstanding synopsis bringing the essential theme topic back into the discussion. It has been an amazing discussion bringing together the many facets of this industry and the mysterious watered steel so sought after. It is amazing that even into our times there is research continuing.

I think that the focus on the Russian scientific and craftsmanship factors is most interesting and most likely the case because of the notable instances which pertain to the rediscovery of much of the wootz mystery. While obviously there are a good number of other areas involved, the work by Anosov in the research angles is of course key.

As with most industry and craftsmanship, there are likely to be many levels and degrees of quality and production. It is extremely interesting to see these pointed out in the observations and illustrations that continue being presented here.
Thank you!

[ariel]

I contacted Kirill Rivkin and asked him about Anosov's bulat. Kirill inspected Hermitage collection and many other collections of Anosov's blades and has first-hand knowledge.
Here is his e-mail:
__________________________________________________ ________
Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2016 3:38 PM
To: Barkan, Ariel
Attachments:



Anosov claimed that he reproduced 11 different types of Bulat patterns;
the problem is that his definition of what each pattern means is very
different from what we tend to use today. For example, there is a sword in
Tsarskoe Selo collection which is signed "Amal Taban" which was held by
many as the definition of Taban pattern. However, this blade is not even
wootz; in fact most likely its a Georgian imitation of Assad Allah. During
Anosov's time the definition of wootz was very wide; he personally
included Japanese swords in this class, as well as many swords that were
classified in old Russian records as "red bulat" - but which today most
would not consider to be wootz. But even today people there are still
arguments, at the core of which is how separate are the terms "crucible
steel" and wootz. If we are to include some very basic crucible steel
patterns as wootz, then practically all Sheffield cutlery is wootz, it
just needs lots of acid, etc. If we are to concentrate of first class
Persian+ patterns from XVIIIth century as the "standard" of wootz, then it
is a much more narrow field.
Regarding the production of Zlatoust bulat, including those specifically
signed as Anosov's bulat, almost all was done in 1841-1845, i.e. a
relatively short time period. It is very low contrast (actually mechanical
damascus ones from the same period are much more showy), with relatively
short, straight lines (typically longer on higher quality swords, but
approaching "salt and pepper" on lower end stuff). Sometimes the lines are
curving a little. It is not that similar to what we would consider to be a
true Persian Taban today.

__________________________________________________ ______-

In view of this information obtained from a knowledgeable professional, quotations from Anosov's works as well as re-tellings of Anosov's testimonials by other people become highly questionable and cannot be relied upon.

Thus, actual documented examples of his "bulat" need to be seen by our own eyes.

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by ariel

For example, there is a sword in Tsarskoe Selo collection which is signed "Amal Taban" which was held by many as the definition of Taban pattern. However, this blade is not even wootz; in fact most likely its a Georgian imitation of Assad Allah.

Ariel, thank you very much for the message from Kirill Rivkin. It is very interesting. Kirill has sent you a photo of the sword from the Hermitage? Or is he simply expressed his opinion?

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Ibrahiim, thank you for that outstanding synopsis bringing the essential theme topic back into the discussion. It has been an amazing discussion bringing together the many facets of this industry and the mysterious watered steel so sought after. It is amazing that even into our times there is research continuing.

I think that the focus on the Russian scientific and craftsmanship factors is most interesting and most likely the case because of the notable instances which pertain to the rediscovery of much of the wootz mystery. While obviously there are a good number of other areas involved, the work by Anosov in the research angles is of course key.

As with most industry and craftsmanship, there are likely to be many levels and degrees of quality and production. It is extremely interesting to see these pointed out in the observations and illustrations that continue being presented here.
Thank you!

Salaams Jim. Thank you ...this has become one of the leading information sites with fine input from all and from my viewpoint purely as an observer I have learned volumes from its content. ...I discovered a great website with superb references at;

http://www.geostudio.pl/wordpress/?p=830

And a brilliant paper at file:///C:/Users/LENOVO/Downloads/102-103-1-PB%20(1).pdf

May I add...and this is not a complaint !! The thread comes in at master class level and leaves a lot of potential students somewhat in its wake...I therefor add a brief note on the background so that members can quickly get up to flying speed on this subject. Here is the rendition from Wikepedia which sets down some basic principles and groundwork viz;

Quote"Bulat is a type of steel alloy known in Russia from medieval times; regularly being mentioned in Russian legends as the material of choice for cold steel. The name булат is a Russian transliteration of the Persian word fulad, meaning steel. This type of steel was used by the armies of the nomadic people who were struggling to develop their smithing techniques. Bulat steel was the main type of steel used for swords in the armies of Genghis Khan, the great emperor of the Mongolian Empire. The technique used in making wootz steel has been lost for centuries and the bulat steel used today makes use of a more recently developed technique.

Contents
1 History
2 Structure
3 Bibliography
4 See also
History
The secret of bulat manufacturing was lost by the beginning of the 19th century. Pavel Anosov eventually managed to duplicate the qualities of that metal in 1838, when he completed ten years of study into the nature of Damascus steel swords. Bulat became popular in cannon manufacturing, until the Bessemer process was able to make the same quality steels for far less money.

Anosov had entered the Saint Petersburg Mine Cadet School in 1810, where a Damascus steel sword was stored in a display case. He became enchanted with the sword, and was filled with stories of them slashing through their European counterparts. In November 1817 he was sent to the factories of Zlatoust mining region in the southern Urals, where he was soon promoted to the inspector of the "weapon decoration department".

Here he again came into contact with Damascus steel of European origin (which was in fact pattern welded steel, and not at all similar), but quickly found that this steel was quite inferior to the original from the Middle East.

Anosov had been working with various quenching techniques, and decided to attempt to duplicate Damascus steel with quenching. He eventually developed a methodology that greatly increased the hardness of his steels.

Structure
Carbon steel consists of two components: pure iron, in the form of ferrite, and cementite or iron carbide, a compound of iron and carbon. Cementite is very hard and brittle; its hardness is about 640 by the Brinell hardness test, whereas ferrite is only 200. The amount of the carbon and the cooling regimen determine the crystalline and chemical composition of the final steel. In bulat, the slow cooling process allowed the cementite to precipitate as micro particles in between ferrite crystals and arrange in random patterns. The color of the carbide is dark while steel is grey. This mixture is what leads to the famous patterning of Damascus steel.

Cementite is essentially a ceramic, which accounts for the sharpness of the Damascus (and bulat) steel. Cementite is unstable and breaks down between 600–1100 °C into ferrite and carbon, so working the hot metal must be done very carefully.

Bibliography;
The Mystery of Damascus Blades, by John D. Verhoeven in Scientific American, No 1, pages 74–79, 2001.
History of Metallography: The Development of Ideas on the Structure of Metals before 1890. Cyril S. Smith. MIT Press, 1988.
On Damascus Steel. Leo S. Figiel. Atlantis Arts Press, 1991.
Archaeotechnology: The Key Role of Impurities in Ancient Damascus Steel Blades. J. D. Verhoeven, A. H. Pendray and W. E. Dauksch in
JOM: A Publication of the Minerals, Metals and Materials Society, Vol. 50, No. 9, pages 58–64; September 1998. Available at http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM...even-9809.html "Unquote.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[estcrh]

This shows that an ingot of crucible made in the proper manner had the necessary ingredients to forge a watered steel blade but Ann Feuerbach in "Crucible Damascus Steel: A Fascination for Almost 2,000 Years" says that not all ingots would necessarily produce a pattern.




Pattern formation in wootz damascus steel swords and blades - John Verhoeven

[ariel]

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

Here is the rendition from Wikepedia which sets down some basic principles and groundwork viz;

Quote: Bulat steel was the main type of steel used for swords in the armies of Genghis Khan, the great emperor of the Mongolian Empire. The technique used in making wootz steel has been lost for centuries and the bulat steel used today makes use of a more recently developed technique.

Bulat became popular in cannon manufacturing, until the Bessemer process was able to make the same quality steels for far less money.


Anosov.... eventually developed a methodology that greatly increased the hardness of his steels.


Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Ibrahiim,
This blurb from Wiki contains so many silly errors that I am sorely tempted not to use Wiki again even for a question whether tigers are vegetarians :-))))

Mongols of 13th century had no wootz ( bulat)

Nobody, EVER made barrels of firearms from wootz.

Anosov's bulat process did not depend on quenching. He did not increase hardness of bulat: all "bulats" ( wootz) have Rockwell C hardness in the range between 20 and 35.

[estcrh]

Dagger with wootz steel blade by Zaqro Nonikashvili.

[ALEX]

Originally Posted by estcrh

Dagger with wootz steel blade by Zaqro Nonikashvili.

Wootz is refferred as Bulat in Russian. I am not sure of definition of Bulat related to wootz, but in terms of clasical wootz - i'd not call this blade as such. I know some people would call wootz anything crucible. I am not going by process or components, but by visual pattern, and this is not wootz pattern to me.
Granted, some modern masters produce wootz blades, and of relatively decent pattern, but still lacking complexity and effect of old "twootz of legend".

[ariel]

Alex,
King Erekle saber is a modern product with blade by Nonikashvili.
The "shams-y" bulat is, of course, on par with Anosov's. Nothing to write home about.

[ALEX]

Originally Posted by ariel

Alex,
King Erekle saber is a modern product with blade by Nonikashvili.
The "shams-y" bulat is, of course, on par with Anosov's. Nothing to write home about.

Ariel,
Is that closeup really of that "new" sword? I do not think so. I believe it is of old Persian blade on original saber or else. Also, how do we know the "new" blade is actually modern? Did he make several like this, or this is only one he made, or did he use old wootz blade, applied gold inscriptions and fittings and called: "I made it".

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by ariel

Alex,
King Erekle saber is a modern product with blade by Nonikashvili.
The "shams-y" bulat is, of course, on par with Anosov's. Nothing to write home about.

Here is the new replica sword by Studio Gotscha, 2009 and the original, the question is whether the second close up image is of the reproduction or the original, to me it appears to be a detailed image of the original.

[Gavin Nugent]

Originally Posted by ALEX

Wootz is refferred as Bulat in Russian. I am not sure of definition of Bulat related to wootz, but in terms of clasical wootz - i'd not call this blade as such.

Very early in the 19th century, the term Foulad was also used for Wootz.

Gavin

[ALEX]

Originally Posted by Gavin Nugent

Very early in the 19th century, the term Foulad was also used for Wootz.

Gavin

Yes, just another variation.
What I meant is that Russians used (and still do) the term Bulat for wootz and non-wootz patterns alike, like Anosov's examples and some modern blades similar to Kindjal shown here earlier. They seemingly combined broader specter of Damascus under this term. Kirill Rivkin stated the differences of wootz definitions between Anosov's time and our's. My statement is that it still continues under the term "Bulat".

[mahratt]

Thank you, Emanuel!!!