hi tim,
you may be right, that this process was used, but i still dont think it was in this particular case. it has been some time since i saw the sword that jens owns, but i am sure (almost positive) that if it was of a different construction to the pieces i consider 'normal' chevrons, then this would have stuck in my memory. no, i feel it too was made from different billets. it is unusual, in that the first section is 'lengthened' and the chevrons are not even all the way along the blade. also, i played with the image i posted, in order to enhance what was blurred. from a distance, you would not notice these join marks. also, with age and polishing, they tend to disappear.
as far as i am aware, clay heat treatments were not really adopted in india, but this isnt my field (metallurgy) so maybe i am wrong. all the accounts i have read tend to concentrate more on wootz, as this was particular to india and so of recordable interest to the europeans over there. the indians infuriatingly used a traditional approach to bladesmithing, which never changed throughout centuries (annoying from a dating point of view). these chevron swords were completely different to these traditions, which is partly why i date them to the latter half of the 19thC, when the bladesmiths began to be recognised within the durbars and european led 'competitions'. these events brought out the best and gave these smiths a chance to show their true abilities.
in my last post, i was more critical of the dating used for these pieces, than the process (or meant to be). but, this too, is just a specualtive opinion.
as i said, hopefully jens will pipe in and let us know for sure.
|