Need example of Pamors: Meteor, Luwu, and modern Nickel

[Neo]

Hello Everyone

Hope it's a good day according to Javanese Calendar to ask about pamor

A friend told me that one critical factor in recognizing an old keris from a new one (well, at least from the material perspective) is by looking at the pamor - old materials will have uneven shades of darker and brighter regions, indicating impurities in the pamor material. Nice info. The problem is I haven't seen adequate examples.

I would greatly appreciate if anyone could post images contrasting the differences between the pamors - meteorite, luwu, and modern nickel.

Many thanks for your time.

[A. G. Maisey]

Its actually a wee bit more complicated than that, Neo.

The most common old type of pamor is high phosphoric iron, or "white iron". This gives a rather subdued tone in greys to a pamor.

Once you move from this to the various other materials used in pamor it becomes somewhat more difficult to differentiate by sight alone.

Pamor Luwu owes its contrasting qualities to nickel content, and that nickel content can cover a pretty broad range, so if you get some Luwu with high nickel content, it doesn't look a whole lot different to European nickel.

With meteoritic pamor it depends on how its made, as to how it looks, and again, its not easy to judge from just looking at it --- we need to feel it.

Then we have pamor that used Dutch coins as the contrasting material, and as with meteoritic pamor, you really need to feel the material to have some idea of what it might be.

I've only mentioned the simple, easy stuff above. It can get a whole lot more difficult when you have pamor that has been worked in non-standard ways, or where some unusual material has been used.

I'm talking about sight judgement in the physical presence of the blade, not sight judgement from photos, and most certainly not sight judgement from images on a computer screen.

[Neo]

Thank you for the reply, Mr. Maisey.

By "feel it", did you mean using the finger to run through the pamor to get the physical sense of the texture? Or were you referring to the "feel" as in "guoyo"?

I would like to know a lot more about "pamor that has been worked in non-standard ways", but I guess that's the part where I need to have people physically show me many examples of such things ...

My dream is to have a decent collection of Majapahit or other tangguh sepuh kerises (in addition to the finely made new ones), but there are lots of fakes out there and I have *a lot* to learn. Looks like it's going to be a long, challenging journey ... I would greatly appreciate pointers and advices about what to do to develop my keris discrimination skills - museums to visit, books to read, people to meet, etc. So far I have the following books: Bambang Harsrinuksmo's encyclopedia, Pak Haryono's book, and soon-to-come, the Keris For the World exhibition book. It would be far simpler if there is such a thing as "wesi aji course" complete with lab and case studies from each tangguh ... If they have it for wines, they should also have it for kerises!!

Well, enough complaining.. I will be grateful for suggestions of a "course plan" or "self study syllabus" to improve my keris skills

[Rick]

Of course there are a lot more oenophiles(sp?) than there are kerisophiles .

Then again, that's a good thing .

Hopefully we can help you Neo .

[A. G. Maisey]

By feel, I mean touching the blade with your fingers.

Some pamors have a greasy feel, others have a very slightly prickly feel, with others you can feel the topography --- they all feel different, so you combine how it looks with how it feels. But it can still be extremely difficult to be sure about pamor material.

There is really only one way to learn keris, and that is to have somebody with immense knowledge and patience, together with adequate physical examples, teach you. This is simply not available to everybody, so the knowledge we gain then needs to be of a different type, and that is gained by intelligent collection and personal study over an extended period of time.

Probably the most important thing for anybody to learn is how to identify quality in a keris, and you do not really need to be able to play the tangguh game to do that.

On "non standard ways", Ill see if I can post a couple of pics that may clarify, within a day or so.

In the mean time, you may care to have a look at the old "good keris" thread in the archives of this Forum.

[Neo]

Thanks for the replies.

Rick: Yes, indeed it is something to be grateful about

Mr. Maisey: "In the mean time, you may care to have a look at the old "good keris" thread in the archives of this Forum". That's exactly what I've been doing. I guess thoroughly understanding the ricikan and dhapur characteristics from the books will make it easier to absorb new info when I get the opportunity to physically encounter kerises.

All these desire to learn about tangguh is mostly because I really hate to get "pretenders". I am happy enough to know that the keris is authentic and so for now, all I'd like get out of the "tangguh game" is to be confident to a certain degree about the approximate *ERA* the kris was from.

Well, some tangguh skill will also enable me to better enjoy exhibitions like "Kris for the World" that I just attended ... It was baffling for me to see some large kelengan krisses that look like they were just made couple decades ago being labeled as "Singosari" by the judges.

I'm looking forward to your info about "non standard ways", if you can find it.

[A. G. Maisey]

I can find what I want to show you OK, Neo, I just need time to do the pics. Maybe Saturday.

[David]

Originally Posted by Neo

All these desire to learn about tangguh is mostly because I really hate to get "pretenders". I am happy enough to know that the keris is authentic and so for now, all I'd like get out of the "tangguh game" is to be confident to a certain degree about the approximate *ERA* the kris was from.

I think that Mr. Maisey will agree that it is pretty much impossible to learn to identify the tangguh of keris without hands-on experience with a teacher. The "tangguh game" is also a greatly misused one and tangguh really only applies to a select few keris. Once you get outside the area of kraton made keris tangguh becomes somewhat meaningless.

[A. G. Maisey]

Yes David, I do agree.

You need hands on tuition from somebody with a lot of knowledge and experience, and access to examples.

Its not quite meaningless when you move outside the area of quality, it can still be applied to a degree, for instance, tangguh Segaluh is extremely recognisable, it has almost never been copied in later periods, but it is hardly ever a high quality or expensive tangguh; Pajajaran, Tuban, Mataram Matesih, Godean --- and other tangguh --- are generally speaking not of exceptional quality, and not particularly expensive. But when you start to use the system on anything other than very good keris, it becomes more a rough indicator of age and value than anything else.

I personally like to think of it as a system of classification that can assist with an appraisal of value.

In Jawa it is regarded as the foundation of understanding, but in the rest of the world it is pretty much irrelevant.

There is much we can learn about keris without getting too involved with tangguh --- unless we live in Jawa.

[Boedhi Adhitya]

Hello Neo,

Some pictures would certainly help, but I believe not as much as you would need. And anyway, you may find that the definition on pamor meteor, Luwu, sanak, etc would differ from one person to another which could end to confusion, no to say frustration. Needless to say, today keris makers have do their homework. They could match today's pamor appearance to the older blades. Not perfect, but the higher the new keris quality, the harder it is to discern, especially to the nem-neman tangguh. But yet, I will not say that studying pamor materials is useless. I just say it isn't everything you need. There is a lot, lot more.

Good books could help, but don't expect that much. What you really need is a hand-on, first experience on handling keris. A lot. The higher the keris quality that you handle, the better. But yes, unfortunately, there are a lot definitions on what so called "high-quality kerises".

Thus, before you invest a lot of your time and fortune on keris, I suggest you define clearly your "underlying motivation" on keris collecting. It is your guide. It will be your collection, not anybody else, and hence, it should serve your purpose. Keris collecting seems simple, but you will be amazed on how many motivation behind it.

Certainly, I'm not discouraging you. But I find a lot of peoples become confused and frustrated in the swirling world of keris. Others get angry from it's fraud. And I don't want it to be you, or any of us.

[Neo]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

I personally like to think of it as a system of classification that can assist with an appraisal of value.

This is interesting. So people can determine the age and value of keris without using the tangguh standards? I thought the tangguh game is the only way to ascertain the authenticity of a keris. I am ten times more interested in authenticity than I am in luxury. While it is great to have a finely made Mataram Senopaten Nagasasra with finely detailed kinatah, I would rather use the same amount of money to purchase several authentic, nicely preserved krisses (with simpler dapur) from Pajajaran, Tuban, Majapahit, and some robust, healthy new kerises.

The thing is, like I said earlier, these days people fake everything - even the simple brojol with pejetan ... I just spent about Rp13jt on what seems to be a "pretender" keris and I'd like to make sure it doesn't happen again.

So, let's say I want to find an authentic simple "Sombro" style or a Tuban tilam upih with wos wutah ... how do I tell if a piece is authentic if I have no idea what the tangguh says about the ricikan, pamor, and wesi characteristics of krisses from the respective style?

Sorry if you find these questions very uninformed ... I'm just trying to be more prepared and structured so I could make my direct learning more productive. Greatly appreciate your info and advices so far ...

[Jussi M.]

Greetings Neo,

I guess what Mr. Maisey has tried to bring across is the fact that the tangguh system is such a multilayered and complex system of intertwined and interdependent "things" for a lack of a better word that it is pretty much impossible to get a good grasp of it without a long time real life tutelage of a true expert who knows the breakdown of the system by heart.

I am afraid this is something that will evade most if not all modern collectors.

If I am mistaken please correct me as I do not now if I got this right myself?

Thanks,

[A. G. Maisey]

Neo, everything that Pak Boedhi has said has my complete endorsement.

I strongly recommend that you take note of all of his words.

The "underlaying motivation" is important, however, over the time I have studied the keris, my underlaying motivation has changed direction a number of times, and I feel that this could be true of many of us who have devoted a great deal of time and money to the study of the keris. There are many facets to the keris, and those many facets reflect the many reasons that people have and maintain an interest in the keris.

The problem of misrepresentation is a real one. It sounds as if you might have been bitten already, and this is unfortunate, however, if it will make you feel any better, you can be assured that everybody who has had an interest in keris for more than 5 minutes, has also been bitten.This includes some of the biggest and most respected names associated with keris.

In fact, the man who a few years ago was recognised as perhaps the most knowledgeable man in respect of keris, in Indonesia, was also recognised by the Solo Keris Mafia as a very soft target for forgeries. To trap him, all that was necessary was to present something for his approval that had all the appearance of age, but was of a type or style that had not been previously seen.

I could quote a number of other examples of highly respected authorities being fooled, however, all you need to remember is that as long as you maintain an interest in keris, you will continue to see keris being presented as other than what they really are.

The only protection is knowledge, experience, and extreme caution.

It appears that you are resident in Indonesia, and this makes things both easier for you, and more difficult for you.

Easier, because you are within reach of teachers.

More difficult , because you need to apply different and far more difficult standards to your search for knowledge:- that which serves as knowledge within the keris collecting community outside Jawa is only of minimal value for a collector who lives in Jawa.

You have asked this question:-

So people can determine the age and value of keris without using the tangguh standards?

There are a number of answers to this question, all of which are correct, and all of which are flawed.

I suggest that you should keep an open mind.

Tangguh means exactly what it says:- it is an estimate, or an opinion.

Many people say "tangguh nggak sungguh"

In other words, it is not real.

My teacher was Empu Suparman Supowijoyo (Alm.), he was 100% kejawen. For him if a keris was tangguh Majapahit, that meant it was made in Majapahit. However, Pak Parman's standards to classify something as Majapahit were very, very much more stringent than most people apply, so perhaps he was right when he considered a keris he classified as Majapahit as having been produced during the Majapahit era. My own approach is not as inflexible as my teacher's, and this is undoubtedly because my knowledge and experience are only as drops of water, compared to an ocean.

Amongst people who understand tangguh, we can be relatively confident that a keris of an old classification will not be classified as a more recent classification. There can often be differences of opinion as to exactly what tangguh a keris might be, and these differences of opinion multiply when we move away from very good quality keris in good condition, and attempt to apply the guidelines for tangguh classification to lower quality keris in poor condition.

The question of "quality" in a keris can be open to a degree of interpretation, but when we consider the concept of keris quality in purely physical terms, we find that there is remarkably little difference of opinion in respect of this matter amongst knowledgeable people of equivalent experience.

Neo, it appears that you are resident in Indonesia. In my opinion the course of action that you should follow is to find a knowledgeable and experienced person to teach you. This will not be easy, and it could take a very long time to find somebody with the requisite level of knowledge who is also willing and able to teach. Possibly involvement with a local keris study society may be of some assistance in helping to open some doors for you.

You can be certain of this:- there are not enough days of your life to gain even the beginning of keris knowledge.

Jussi:-

Yes, that's one of the problems, but perhaps a bigger problem is that different people have different opinions.

Nobody with any knowledge will ever classify Pajajaran as Mataram Sultan Agung, however, you might easily find the situation where some people will classify Koripan as Mataram Sultan Agung.

At its core, the tangguh system has a solid foundation to assist analysis, but this solid foundation is not widely known or used, and we get the situation where people will say that something is , for example, Pajang, without being able to say precisely why they classify it as Pajang, except that it looks and feels like Pajang.

[A. G. Maisey]

Herewith five examples of pamor.

I know exactly what the material is in each case, and exactly how it was made, because I either made it, or was involved in the making.

Would anybody care to identify which examples are mlumah, which are miring, which ones use modern mild steel, which use wrought iron, and the quality of the iron, which use European nickel, and which use meteoritic material?

This is a guessing game. I'm the only one who knows the correct answers. The point of the exercise is to try to show that we cannot tell much from images, especially images on a computer screen.

See how many you can get right.

[lemmythesmith]

Hi Alan, I'll have a go............ at getting them wrong.

A-mlumah, iron/nickel. Iron not washed too much.
B-mlumah, meteoric-looks similar in texture and colour to one I did.
C-mlumah, mild and nickel.
D-mlumah, iron, nickel. Iron looks extensively washed and refined.
E-miring, iron, nickel. Iron not washed too much.

Regards, Graham.

[A. G. Maisey]

Thank you very much for your response Graham.

You are the most knowledgeable person likely to respond to this question, so I won't delay my response.However, I will make this comment:- your experience is filling in the gaps that cannot be seen in the images --- I do exactly the same thing:- I see things that are not there in the image, because I instinctively know they are there in the object. Somebody lacking our level of experience does not have this advantage.

As would be expected, some of it you've got right, but some of it you're a bit off track with.

This reinforces the point I was trying to make:- images are not good enough to learn from. Yes, they can help, but you need the hands-on experience.

Here is what these pamors are:-

A--- the contrasting material in this is pure nickel, the iron is very hot short tyre . It started as very large pieces of tyre that were not washed at all, and the nickel was welded straight in, it then went through the washing process until it did not throw off sparks, plus a couple of extra welds --- this material was absolutely clean and tight when the core was welded in --- but the nickel had run up into the cracks caused by the hotshortness of the iron. This pamor material was doubled and welded in excess of 12 times.Following completion, this blade was soaked in an erosive medium to give an aged look to the surface.

B--- yes, meteoritic. The meteor was from Arizona and was many small pieces; I welded these many small pieces into one solid , clean lump, this was then combined with iron that came from an old bridge, and that combination of meteoritic material and old iron formed the pamor. This blade was soaked in an erosive medium.

C--- yes, mild and nickel. The mild was bought as second hand material in Solo, and my memory of it is that it was from some sort of old, heavy strapping. It was not washed at all.Yes, mlumah.This blade was not soaked in an erosive medium but was washed heavily with lime juice.

D--- the material used in this blade is exactly the same as the material used in "C", again, not washed at all, however, it is not mlumah, it is miring. It started life as lawe setukal, but did not survive the forging, so the grains realigned and it looks like mlumah.This blade was not exposed to any erosive medium at all, it was only stained.

E--- the contrasting material in this is an iron/nickel alloy; I have forgotten the analysis of the alloy; it was something used in the factory where my son was working at the time; the iron is high quality carriage strapping, it is wrought iron, and it was washed heavily, ie, more than 7 times folded and welded. The orientation is miring. This blade was given a light wash with hydrochloric acid.

I have two other blades that have material judged to be meteoritic material according to Javanese standards. "B" above, and the other two blades all look different, one from the other.

I have had blades with pamor that was judged to have been made from Dutch coins. This pamor looks exactly like meteoritic pamor in respect of colour, disregard the texture in example "B", because that is the product surface manipulation and etching. But the difference between the Dutch coin pamor and the meteoritic pamor is that the coin pamor is smooth and greasy to the touch, the meteoritic pamor is "prickly" to the touch.

I have in my possession and have seen pamors made from bicycle spokes, motorbike exhausts, bicycle rims --- and various other materials. All these oddly assorted materials can look like one or another of the old traditional materials of high phosphoric iron, or coins, or pamor luwu, or meteorite.

I've been misled by a first impression many times, and that's with the blade in my hand.

Images on a computer screen, or even in hard copy, are just not good enough.

[Neo]

It's a jaw-dropping learning experience ... I now see that my perception of things has been wayyyyy too simple. I deduce from friends and books that meteoric pamor will have shades of gray and brighter tones instead of a uniform, almost evenly distributed color.

So, based on my novice-level understanding, I was prepared to guess that either A, B, and C are some sort of modern nickel aloy while D and E are possibly natural meteoric ... Prior to your post, I have totally NO IDEA how mild and nickel and iron and nickel will look like when being used as pamor.

I need quite some time just to properly absorb the material you presented in this thread alone ... The last time I met with Pak Haryono he said it would be a good idea to create a graduate study program in kerisology. NOW I understand the need for such idea!! Many many thanks for your information. It's time to turn off the PC and make some calls to improve my network

[Marcokeris]

I agree: many many thanks for your information

[A. G. Maisey]

OK.

That was the easy stuff :- pamor that I knew exactly what it was.

Now we'll up the ante a little bit.

With the following examples I know exactly what one of these is made from, with the other five I can quote the consensus of opinion that comes from four very experienced people. With these other five there is no certainty, because none of the people involved saw the material being made, there is only an opinion that represents a total of around 200 years total experience in the field of Javanese keris.

Anybody want to name what we have here?

[David]

Brilliant thread gentlemen.

[kai]

Ok, I'll bite...

All except #3 appear to be mlumah (viewing only a small part of the blade makes pinning down miring-type pamor which looks like mlumah tough).

All except #4 have the typical Jawa surface and without additional hints from the whole blade, I could only guess which is genuinely old and which received treatment to artificially age it... #4 seems to have been extensively reground/repolished with a little bit of prior corrosion still left at places - doesn't look like Alan's work though.

#2-6 all appear to be forged with nickel or high nickel alloys of whatever source. #1 could possibly be phosphorous iron (or low-nickel alloy?) but the many pamor layers make it tough to get a clear picture of the utilized materials.

#3 has interesting pamor material - meteoric from a Javanese perspective? Also the iron utilized looks interesting; and old. (Or does the heavy etching fool me?

Maybe in #1 and #5 the iron got washed more extensively prior to doing the pamor. Or rather mild steel?

All in all, I like #1 and #3 best.

Regards,
Kai

[kai]

Let's hear some more opinions, folks!

Thanks for the exercise, Alan!

[A. G. Maisey]

Thanks for coming to the party Kai.

I'm not going to hand out the drinks yet, I'd like a few more people through the door first.

[Neo]

I have been trying my best to post some opinion, but apparently most of my efforts have mostly been at DIGESTING the bulk of rich, new information here

It will probably be another week or two of going back and forth between reading book and looking at the images again in my spare time before I can post any learned opinion aside from wild guess ... So I just decide to throw in the white towel from my corner to avoid being rude (because I started this thread) ...

Meanwhile, I completely don't mind if we wait for some more informed folks to join the party before Mr. Maisey hands out the drink

[A. G. Maisey]

I'd really like Graham to come back and try to knock the duckies down.

Graham is a man with knowledge and experience in this field and I believe his opinion is probably as close to as good as anybody is going to give, who has not had very close experience with the Javanese keris world.

I'll let it go a little bit longer, but I must admit that for a thread which seems to be drawing some attention, I'm a little disappointed that so few people are prepared to give an opinion.

This whole exercise is not about being right or wrong.

It is not about trying to impart information, because what we see in these pictures will not necessarily give a guide to what we might see in other pictures. In effect, the pics are pretty close to useless as a vehicle of knowledge.

It is about trying to demonstrate that pictures are simply not good enough to learn this subject from.

[lemmythesmith]

Hi Alan, I've been meaning to reply on the new lot of pics-got sidetracked with a work in progress (not a keris!) so.............

1-could be meteoric, I've noticed that meteoric can sometimes develop a "coppery" tone, only very slight but this pamor looks that way. Mlumah

2-pamor with a higher proportion of nickel material, could be pure nickel. Mlumah

3-looks like a ferrous nickel alloy without too much nickel , I'll go for native smelted metal-luwu. Miring

4-same as 2. Has a melted look to the nickel, low layer count. Miring

5-could be meteoric, may be high nickel content ferrous alloy. Mlumah.

6-I'll say the same as 3. Mlumah.

I'll try and post a couple of pics myself, the pics may not all be keris blades but they will all be pamor alloys found on keris,
C'mon guys....step up to the plate, have a go!! A good fun learning experience.

Regards, Graham.

[Gustav]

I simply don't have enough knowledge about forging work, different pamor material and staining to say something at all.

About #1 I also thought, it could be metheoritic, becouse of very thin, sometimes almost transparent layers. I have also heard about colour variations, but isn't this colour coming from rust and/or staining?

I thought, #5 could be nickel.

#4 looks like a combination of mlumah and miring.

As #3 is pamor poleng, it couldn't be older then 30 years (?). Is the surface treatened in this way, because it could be an old looking dhapur?

[A. G. Maisey]

Thanks for your answers Graham and Gustav.

As previously advised, only one of these pamors is known for certain, the other pamor information is opinion, but probably as good an opinion as you can get, and it is Javanese keris expert opinion, in three cases from men who have made Javanese keris, in one case from a dealer in Javanese keris, the total experience represented is about 200 years.

Where I have noted "consensus of opinion", this refers to the material, whether the pamor is miring or mlumah is known with certainty as this can be clearly seen in the physical presence of the blade. Somebody with experience in this field does not need to see more than an inch or so of blade to be able to know with certainty whether it is miring or mlumah, but you need to see the blade, not an image of the blade. From an image it is extremely difficult to know anything.

1. --- meteoritic, attributed to Empu Jayasukadgo, surface manipulated pamor mlumah.Consensus of opinion

2. --- meteoritic, attributed to Empu Jayasukadgo, mlumah. Consensus of opinion.

3. --- believed to be motor bike muffler and mild steel, current era, Sumenep Madura, miring. Consensus of opinion

4. --- luwu, mlumah; this blade is a Bugis "chieftain" keris, probably second half of the 19th century, appears to have been removed from point of origin soon after manufacture. Provenance is partly known which supports the consensus of opinion.

5. --- European nickel and mild steel, current era production by a leading Surakarta pandai keris, surface manipulated mlumah. This pamor is known for certain.

6. --- believed to be motor bike muffler and mild steel, current era, Sumenep Madura, mlumah.Consensus of opinion.

Graham is obviously pretty good at this game, but even his knowledge and experience does not give a perfect result.

Given the same images , but without personal knowledge, I doubt that I would even come as close as has Graham.

What chance has a person without extensive knowledge and experience of hands

[A. G. Maisey]

Thanks for your answers Graham and Gustav.

As previously advised, only one of these pamors is known for certain, the other pamor information is opinion, but probably as good an opinion as you can get, and it is Javanese keris expert opinion, in three cases from men who have made Javanese keris, in one case from a dealer in Javanese keris, the total experience represented is about 200 years.

Where I have noted "consensus of opinion", this refers to the material, whether the pamor is miring or mlumah is known with certainty as this can be clearly seen in the physical presence of the blade. Somebody with experience in this field does not need to see more than an inch or so of blade to be able to know with certainty whether it is miring or mlumah, but you need to see the blade, not an image of the blade. From an image it is extremely difficult to know anything.

1. --- meteoritic, attributed to Empu Jayasukadgo, surface manipulated pamor mlumah.Consensus of opinion

2. --- meteoritic, attributed to Empu Jayasukadgo, mlumah. Consensus of opinion.

3. --- believed to be motor bike muffler and mild steel, current era, Sumenep Madura, miring. Consensus of opinion

4. --- luwu, mlumah; this blade is a Bugis "chieftain" keris, probably second half of the 19th century, appears to have been removed from point of origin soon after manufacture. Provenance is partly known which supports the consensus of opinion.

5. --- European nickel and mild steel, current era production by a leading Surakarta pandai keris, surface manipulated mlumah. This pamor is known for certain.

6. --- believed to be motor bike muffler and mild steel, current era, Sumenep Madura, mlumah.Consensus of opinion.

Graham is obviously pretty good at this game, but even his knowledge and experience does not give a perfect result.

Given the same images , but without personal knowledge, I doubt that I would even come as close as has Graham.

What chance has a person without extensive knowledge and experience of hands on forge work in this medium got of learning anything at all from pictures?

[rasdan]

G'day Alan,

Sorry i'm a bit late. Thank you very much for your explanation. From what i see, i think i can conclude that it is impossible to differentiate pure nickel and nickel ferro pamor from pictures. I'm afraid i only have rookie questions on this issues. Sorry..

1. What do you think is the contributor to the prickly feel to meteor pamor as compared to nickel?

2. How do we differentiate an old iron that is folded numerous times to make a dense material and modern iron which is already dense? Probably the folding lines, but if it is very dense i would imagine that the line would disappear. No?

3. How can we differentiate the lines of fibrous inclusions found naturally in wrought iron to the folding lines produced by repeated folding or mbesut process?

Thank you..