Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Ethnographic Weapons
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 4th February 2016, 11:00 AM   #1
kronckew
Member
 
kronckew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Room 101, Glos. UK
Posts: 4,152
Default

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.
kronckew is offline  
Old 4th February 2016, 11:22 AM   #2
mahratt
Member
 
mahratt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Russia
Posts: 1,042
Default

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 ....
mahratt is offline  
Old 4th February 2016, 04:38 PM   #3
kronckew
Member
 
kronckew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Room 101, Glos. UK
Posts: 4,152
Default

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.)

Last edited by kronckew; 4th February 2016 at 04:57 PM.
kronckew is offline  
Old 4th February 2016, 06:35 PM   #4
mahratt
Member
 
mahratt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Russia
Posts: 1,042
Default

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?
mahratt is offline  
Old 4th February 2016, 09:55 PM   #5
Jim McDougall
Arms Historian
 
Jim McDougall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 9,785
Default

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 ?
Jim McDougall is offline  
Old 4th February 2016, 11:11 PM   #6
ariel
Member
 
ariel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
Default

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).
ariel is offline  
Old 5th February 2016, 12:09 AM   #7
kronckew
Member
 
kronckew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Room 101, Glos. UK
Posts: 4,152
Default

ariel, what you are saying is happening now, the traditional skills of khukuri making in nepal are passed down by word of mouth and experience, the colour to heat a blade for hardening, the use of a tea kettle of boiling water to quench and harden the edge while leaving the spine less hard at just the right moment is not easy to document without doing it consistently time oafter time. as demand goes down, the people with the knowledge get older and the young want to move to the big city and be doctors, ghurkahs or computer techs, not low caste steel pounders.

one anecdote for steel in india early 19c. by the time of the sepoy mutiny in the 1840's, a lot of surplus 1796 LC sabre blades were converted to tulwars for the indian troops of the east india company. the local sword makers just could not compete.

the troops then rebelled. the british troops who fought them with their newer pattern swords complained that the indians had better and sharper swords that were more effective. turned out that the indian troops actually put a decent edge on their old 1796 lc sabre blades, and kept them in leather/wood scabbards which did not dull the edges like the brits steel scabbards. the brits there after put wood liners in the metal scabbards or wood/leather ones.

by the time of the american civil war, it was extremely rare for two sides to get close enough to actually use swords, and when they did most were fairly inexperienced in their use and few were even sharpened, so sword cuts were rare. the brits who fought a lot of native troops armed with swords and spears, as in the mahdis troops at ombdurman did use theirs to effect, but most of the mahdis casualties were due to artillery and the new machine guns. even winston churchill used a mauser pistol when he charged with the lancers and not his sword.

the boer wars kind of put paid to the sword, boers did not play fair, shooting brits in their red or white uniforms at a thousand yards from cover.

tho it was still used occasionally during ww1, and even more limited in ww2 (except for mad jack churchill - no relation to winston - who not only captured a company of germans with just his sword, but was credited with actually using an english longbow to kill a german sergeant in battle. he walked ashore at normandy on d-day sword drawn and followed by a piper.

the US navy eliminated swords for officers at one point in ww2 to save metal to build battleships. the officers ignored the order & got them reinstated. even the humble cutlass is again in ceremonial use now in the USN for enlisted.sadly they tend to use stainless steel blades which are brittle but look good.

the filipino marines still use a sword for jungle combat against the rebels where, on jungle trails and thick brush, suddenly may bring two sides together in surprise, and where even a carbine may be too long to swing around in the vegetation. they use a ginunting in close quarters to good effect, as do the ghurkahs with their khuks.

seems the sword will never completely die out. and there is still a place for wootz, if we can figure it'as secrets.
kronckew is offline  
Old 5th February 2016, 02:36 AM   #8
Jim McDougall
Arms Historian
 
Jim McDougall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 9,785
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ariel
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).


Ariel, thank you for the well explained detail on this conundrum. I remain bewildered by how in the world such forging techniques could be lost, and in such a relatively short time. It does seem like a microcosm of the kind of subtle but somewhat monumental change that has happened here in the U.S. in many aspects over relatively short time. One day I took my truck (a 1987) in for a tuneup (this was about 20 yrs ago). The young guy opened the hood and exclaimed , 'what is that?' , looking at the engine . Surprised, I said, 'its a carburator' !!!
The kid had never worked on one of these!!! he only knew fuel injection!!

How many young people today cannot imagine when we did not have DVDs and CDs or cell phones etc. and this has been only over 30 years.

I guess in that way, something like such a metallurgical process could vanish, just as we have lost so many aspects of everyday life several decades ago.
Jim McDougall is offline  
Old 7th March 2016, 12:21 PM   #9
Roland_M
Member
 
Roland_M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Germany
Posts: 523
Default

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

Last edited by Roland_M; 7th March 2016 at 01:54 PM.
Roland_M is offline  
Old 7th March 2016, 03:01 PM   #10
Richard Furrer
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Sturgeon Bay, Wisconsin
Posts: 163
Default

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
Richard Furrer is offline  
Old 7th March 2016, 03:22 PM   #11
ariel
Member
 
ariel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
Default

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.
ariel is offline  
Old 7th March 2016, 04:55 PM   #12
Jim McDougall
Arms Historian
 
Jim McDougall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 9,785
Default

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
Jim McDougall is offline  
Old 7th March 2016, 11:55 PM   #13
Richard Furrer
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Sturgeon Bay, Wisconsin
Posts: 163
Default

Jim,
I have been smithing for 26? years and making crucible steel for some 15-17 now and it may be that I have closed my mind to ideas and techniques outside what I currently use....I am not the gate keeper of this information so one can only take my word for so much.
That said I am forging some 22 pounds of crucible steel this week into swords. Just killed a $200 carbide saw blade cutting one ingot apart to see its inside structure.

I have read most of what has been written and translated in English and some which has not, but my major push for research ended some years ago and I now have settled on a technique which works for me. What I see from travelers accounts of old may be taken with a grain of salt...some read poorly and some read fancifully and some read like VCR instructions. We all chose to believe the ones with which we agree.
I know quote a bit about Japanese sword making and yet when I get the odd chance to sit down with a Japanese tosho I always come away with more picky questions than answers and such the nature of the minutia. I wish I could have a window into an old fort smithy in Jodhpur or Isfahan when they were in business, but such is not to be. I can say this with some argument :They knew their material better than we ever will. What I do is guess and experiment and guess some more. Having not grown up in an unbroken tradition means that some things will simply never be known.

I think swords were a specialty and not a common blacksmith item to produce. Surely there were production centers and blade makers got the steel from steelmakers. Blade making is not a common blacksmith trade...if you made general smithed goods such as kitchen utensils/horse shoes then you did not also make swords...swords are a speciality.

Ariel....I would think it VERY rare for one man to do it all.
Though I may make a few ingots from time to time and also make bloomery steel with a mud stack and charcoal I think more likely that the blade maker would purchase the steel and not make it themselves. Production centers may have it all in line...what we call "horizontal manufacturing" today where raw material comes in one end and finished goods out the other. I would think some areas had this, but a lone smith was far too isolated to do such and think a sword maker alone would be rather out of luck to do it all himself. Weapons are something a government controls and weapon makers would be under some laws.......certainly if a village smith were making the odd sword the villagers would be asking for whom he is making it and why that person needs a sword. No I rather think swords were done by groups who specialized in it......till war comes and then EVERYONE is conscripted into some form of weapon production or civil service (wagon parts, general metal items of need).
Ariel you are only one state away.....yet you never visit. Then again I do not get many visitor at all...location location location.

Mahratt,
I have no answer for you. Have not seen any document that would give an end date to crucible steel production nor a reason why such occurred. I would think it like many other trades...it waxes and wains with utility and cost and fashion. I think the lack of a raw material (ore source running out) for such a large production area and time period just plane wrong. I think it far more likely that there is a political and economic reason rather than the elimination of a single ore source.

Ric
Richard Furrer is offline  
Old 8th March 2016, 03:26 AM   #14
estcrh
Member
 
estcrh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 1,497
Default

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
Attached Images
 
estcrh is offline  
Old 8th March 2016, 04:46 AM   #15
ariel
Member
 
ariel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
Default

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.
ariel is offline  
Old 8th March 2016, 06:37 PM   #16
kronckew
Member
 
kronckew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Room 101, Glos. UK
Posts: 4,152
Default

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.
kronckew is offline  
Old 8th March 2016, 08:40 PM   #17
ariel
Member
 
ariel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
Default

True enough.
ariel is offline  
Closed Thread


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:45 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.