when reading Verhoeven's study on " the key role of impurities in damascus blades" .... he bases his idea on wootz from the Zschokke blades..... yet he totally discounts the analysis of sword no. 8 because it was hypoeutectic.....
Before this moment in time..... that sword was concidered wootz !!... obviously so because it was a selected sample for testing and characterizing wootz steel.....
-- it must have showed typical wootz pattern with a watered surface !!
--. So ....if the observable features of this sword fooled the scientists in this study.... do you think that the Ancient Indians could be more thorough ?? and discriminatory
.... now after being discluded from the acceptable ranges of wootz steel is this study.... it is here by declared " Not Wootz "
at university, they drummed it into my head to ask the question " Why "..... and to test all theories for repeatability....
the modern definition of wootz is holding less and less water, for me !
Greg
|