The travels of a very important dagger

Ann Feuerbach · 19th March 2005, 04:43 PM

The research of crucible steel production in Central Asia is quite new. I studied the material from Merv, Turkmenistan, and Thilo Rehren and Olga Papakristu have been studing the remains from Uzbekistan. At Merv we have small scale production but in Uzbekistan they have at least 100,000 crucible, from centuries of production. I reviewed every ethnographic account of crucible steel production I could find. Yes, furnaces are different but some things appear the same...check out http://moltenmuse.home.att.net for some information on the differences and similarities. It seems the fine indian pattern is due to the fact that they tool the crucibles out when the steel was liquid, which caused fast solidification, small dendrites, which means closer dendrite spaces, and Verhoeven et al found that the cementite aligns along these dendrites. In Central Asia, the ingots solidified slowly, this produces larger dendrites, bigger spacing between them and therefore you can have thicker patterns. Of course forging also plays a part. Also, Mn was deliberatly added sometimes in Central Asia, which would make the lines darker when etched. This still needs more research but we are working on it!

Rick · 19th March 2005, 05:03 PM

Okay , now I'm getting confused (nothing new in that

) .
Pictured below is a Bokhara karud with what I consider a very tight pattern .

Using the Occam's Razor approach shouldn't this be Uzbek crucible steel simply by virtue of the proximity of Bokhara to Uzbekistan ?

Ann Feuerbach · 19th March 2005, 06:40 PM

OOO nice blade!

The coarse Central Asia, fine India theory is not full proof. Also you can make a coarse one finer, but you can not make a fine one coarser. Also, forging plays a part as well as individual craftsmen. It is just that with the little evidence we have (a few ingots and crucibles from archaeological sites in India, Sri Lanka and Central Asia), we see differences in the microstructure of the ingots due to solidification rates.

19th March 2005, 05:03 PM	#2
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,336	Okay , now I'm getting confused (nothing new in that ) . Pictured below is a Bokhara karud with what I consider a very tight pattern . Using the Occam's Razor approach shouldn't this be Uzbek crucible steel simply by virtue of the proximity of Bokhara to Uzbekistan ? Attached Images

19th March 2005, 04:43 PM	#1
Ann Feuerbach Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 133	The research of crucible steel production in Central Asia is quite new. I studied the material from Merv, Turkmenistan, and Thilo Rehren and Olga Papakristu have been studing the remains from Uzbekistan. At Merv we have small scale production but in Uzbekistan they have at least 100,000 crucible, from centuries of production. I reviewed every ethnographic account of crucible steel production I could find. Yes, furnaces are different but some things appear the same...check out http://moltenmuse.home.att.net for some information on the differences and similarities. It seems the fine indian pattern is due to the fact that they tool the crucibles out when the steel was liquid, which caused fast solidification, small dendrites, which means closer dendrite spaces, and Verhoeven et al found that the cementite aligns along these dendrites. In Central Asia, the ingots solidified slowly, this produces larger dendrites, bigger spacing between them and therefore you can have thicker patterns. Of course forging also plays a part. Also, Mn was deliberatly added sometimes in Central Asia, which would make the lines darker when etched. This still needs more research but we are working on it!

19th March 2005, 06:40 PM	#3
Ann Feuerbach Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 133	OOO nice blade! The coarse Central Asia, fine India theory is not full proof. Also you can make a coarse one finer, but you can not make a fine one coarser. Also, forging plays a part as well as individual craftsmen. It is just that with the little evidence we have (a few ingots and crucibles from archaeological sites in India, Sri Lanka and Central Asia), we see differences in the microstructure of the ingots due to solidification rates.