It sounds right what you write about the test, only a professor would probably love it if you can guarantee him that at least one of the blade is of meteoric iron – the problem is no one seems to be able to :(

Jens

I think fearn hit the nail on the head. The only way to be positive would involve the distruction of the keris. :( Personally i'd rather just keep wondering. Is the keris beautiful, does it feel good in your hand, do you love it? Life needs to hold on to a few of it's mysteries to keep it interesting. Talk to the blade and it will tell you. Do you really need to prove it to anyone else? ;)

Electron Micro Probe...
 

I do not believe that the test has to be totally destructive. A small area can be "polished" and tested with an Electron Micro Probe... that will give you a chemical analysis good enough to determine cosmic origin. I really would not want to do it to my high end Keris. Also, the rub is getting it done.

Hey folks, I'm new. (Note to self... be slightly skeptical :rolleyes: )

OK. That's what I basically understood from the thread Rick brought up and other comments. But as a pamor, is there a specific "pattern" to pamor Prambanan (like other pamors) or is it time for me to give up?

Recently the work of the Polish metalurgist Prof. Jerzy Piaskowski has come to my attention. He has done considerable work in the analysis of keris structure. It is my understanding that even if you were to destroy a piece of a keris for analysis you would not be able to determine extra-terrestial origin after the materials have gone through the forging and welding process. Does anyone else know of any reputatable researcher who has actually worked on this subject that has a different answer to this question?
I find the concept of meteoric pamor to be very enticing like, i believe, most do. I certainly wouldn't mind owning a keris with such pamor. But i find the focus on this subject as relating to keris a bit troublesome. Why? So many reference books make mention of it, countless dealers lay claim to it in their keris. The facts as can best be sorted out is that meteoric pamor was used for a SELECT FEW keris beginning in the 19th century. So it was used for a relatively short period of time (100+yrs.) and even then it was far from the majority of keris being produced even in that century. It has done nothing to increase the artist level of keris making and though i can see why it might increase the spiritual value of a keris, this attribute of the blade did not begin nor end with the use of such a pamor material. I guess what i am driving at is that meteoric pamor is quite a bit over-valued as an aspect of keris study. It becomes a distraction of sorts. And unfortunately, unless it is a recently made blade that you had a part in the making of, or a court blade with considerable provenence (few and far between), one can never know for sure whether it's "star metal" or not.

Wolviex wrote: Forgive me this question of ignorant European - how we can recognize meteoric iron or nickel on the blade?

From the discussion it seems as if we can't be sure, but I did somewhere read that some could feel a prickle in the fingers when toutching meteoric iron. This does however not give any garantee as you can't prove that the blade is made of meteoric iron - besides I think that a strongly magbetic blade could/would give the same feeling.

Jens

nechesh,

Trace elements are a give away for cosmic origin... which is why chemical analysis is important. Yes... we can tell.

I find it troubling to use feel as a way to determine... since these blades are older and are likely to have been etched many times, where does the pattern or surface profile from etching fit in to this approach?

Is there no visually pattern reserved for this pamor?

Jens... I'm with you, more than a bit confussed.

I agree meteoritic pamor is not critical... but of historically importance and value.

Wayne, i realize you are a scientist and when you refer to "yes...we can tell" i assume you are referring to the scientific community in general. I don't mean to challenge you on this point, but what are your experiences with metalurgy. I understand that you are a color chemist, which sounds really cool even if i don't know quite what you do, but does this qualify you to make this statement? Are you familar with Prof. Piaskowski's work? He has done years of study and compilation of data on this very subject and it is his belief, apparently, that you can not tell cosmic origin in keris metals that have been forged and welded. I know that scientists are apt to disagree, but until i hear research from another scientist who has actually tried to determine these factors with as many forged keris as Prof. Piaskowski has done i am inclined to lean towards his position on the matter, not being of the mind or abilities to do such research for myself.

I think the study of the use of meteoric metal from scientific perspective is fascinating, and the discussion here with those of you expert in keris and Indonesian weapons is excellent!
While somewhat digressing from the scientific perspective, I am wondering if the references and descriptions applied to these blades in earlier narratives referring to 'meteoric steel' may have been intended aesthetically. It seems that in the glossaries of keris jargon there are terms that apply specifically to such blades.

In "The Sword in Anglo Saxon England" by H.R.Ellis Davidson , N.Y. 1962,
on p.22 the author notes, "...Forbes suggested that the damask patterns might have been inspired by meteorites, which are covered with a thin film of iron oxide and when forged at low temperatures produce a distant pattern".

*"Metallurgy in Antiquity" R.J.Forbes, Leiden, 1950

While acknowledging that there were actually blades forged with this extra terrestrial material included with regular materials, I am wondering if possibly the term 'meteoric' may refer to a certain pattern or appearance in pamor.

Concerning the empirical approach to examining these blades metallurgically, after being faithfully hooked on the television series C.S.I. and the compelling forensics dramas, I cannot imagine that extra terrestrial origins of certain components could not be discovered in the labratory!!! :)

I sure wouldnt want to volunteer one of my prize weapons though!!! That is if I DID have one of these beautiful keris!

Best regards,
Jim

I hate to be the one to break it to you Jim, but if you ever talked to anyone who actually does CSI type work you would find out pretty quickly just how much of that show borders on science fiction. ;)
As far as i know there are no elements present in meteoric pamor that can not be found on earth. I think any recognizable crystalline structure that would ID a metal as meteoric would be destryed through the forging and welding process. So what would be the clue that remains to ID such metals as being of cosmic origin?
You theory about the term being an aesthetic reference is interesting, but i think this is more a case of early writers misunderstandings and repetition of the mistakes of others. I don't think meteoric pamor is meant to refer to a particular pattern or design in the pamor.

nechesh,

Thank you for keeping me honest. I have been out of that "community" for a long time... and I do not mean present my self as an "expert" to compete with any one, especially with Dr. Piaskowski. I mean "we" as the scientific community.

The Electron Micro Probe has been the main tool used in diagnosing meteorites for sometime now... just ask your friends who collect meteorites and send them in to Universities around the world for analysis. I use Arizona State University (ASU) in Tempe, AZ (Center for Meteorite Studies) because that’s where I went to school. Dr. Lewis also holds and analyzed many of the lunar samples gathered by NASA there at the Lab. I am sure Dr. Piaskowski is aware of this and the "EMP" techniques and data analysis. The question would be the sample (or how dilute the meteoritic material would be in a forged blade, then picking out parts per million of trace elements can be a challenge).

But the trace elements are a definite fingerprint for cosmic origin!

Jim,

You are right. There is no question about it. If there is enough meteoritic material, it can be detected. But like you... I would have second thoughts about testing for it too (even though it is not destructive, it creates a blemish).

Adding to what BSM said, the "fingerprint" is in the ratios of isotopes of elements. Although all planets and asteroids (and meteorites) presumably originated at the beginning of the solar system, they contain different ratios of the isotopes of various elements.

A big reason for this is that earth has a molten core kept that way by radioactivity, whereas most asteroids are too small for this process. The molten core melts material, causing isotopes to fractionate. Lavas from different volcanoes are, to some degree, recognizable from their isotopic fingerprints (there was an article on this in Science News recently, if you want an accessible source). Also, radioactivity at the core might produce breakdown products from fissioning heavy elements...

To make a long story short, one can distinguish between a meteorite and a rock, simply on the basis of the isotopic fingerprint. A blade is another story.

I'm just guessing that Prof. Piaskowski can't distinguish meteoric iron in Keris blades either because a) he hasn't found a genuine one yet (this is a provenance question) and/or b) the meteoric iron is mixed with terrestrial iron and/or nickel in order to form one layer of the pamor. Since the earth is definitely not uniform in isotopic signatures, mixing metals could easily hide the partially extraterrestrial origin of some blade. A purely meteoric blade would be easy to identify, but one of mixed origin would be difficult.

For the whiskey and wine crowd on this board, this is analogous to the problem of identifying the parent materials in a blended whiskey or wine, based on taste.

And before Nechesh asks, I'm a professional ecologist. I don't deal with metal isotopic chemistry at all, but I'm familiar with isotopes of lighter elements.

Fearn

fearn,

You make an old Geologist proud (OK, I’m not one any more). We didn't work with isotopes unless we were dating the material. Pure chemistry was enough, generally reported in oxides for non-metallic materials, for example :FeO, SiO2, MgO, Al2O3, Na2O, K2O, P2O5 and so on. But keep in mind the time frame... isotopes were not carrying the weight if importance as they may have today (I'm old or I feel that way).

nechesh,

You will have to forgive me, I have been in the Paint industry for 29 year now... meteorites and tektites are just a hobby now (just a few too many hobbies).

Oh no!! next you'll tell me Jerry Springer is staged!!! :)

Just kidding. I know there isnt much reality in the media in general, I work for the airlines so I can totally relate!!

I appreciate the detailed explanations on these technical studies. These topics have always been pretty intimidating, and you guys make things much more understandable. Thanks!

All the best,
Jim

Jim, i hate to tell you this, but not just Springer, professional wrestling too! ;) When you're feeling stronger we'll have a talk about that Santa Claus guy. :D
Fearn, if i remember correctly, your 2nd suggestion for the difficulty in IDing meteoric material in keris is the one. If i'm not mistaken, this material must be mixed with terrestrial iron inorder to make use of it.

This is what made me start the topic:
Arms and Jewellery of the Indian Mughuls, Lahor 1947, written by Abdul Aziz.
In the book he tells about Shah Jahangir, and about a falling meteor. The meteor fell around 10 April 1621 close to a village called Jalandhar. The meteor was dug up and presented to Shah Jahangir:
I ordered Master (Ustad) Daud to make a sword, a dagger and a knife out of it, and bring them to me. He represented that it would not stand below the hammer, and fell too pieces. I told him in that case to mix it with other iron and make use of it. As I had told him, he mixed three parts of lightening-iron and one of other iron, and having made two swords, one dagger, and one knife, brought them to me. From the mixing of other iron he had brought out its quality (watering). According to the manner of the excellent swords of Yaman and [the swords of] the South, it could be bent, and became straight again. I ordered him to test it in my presence. It cut very well, equal to true swords.
What Shah Jahangir means by saying 'a true sword' I don't know, but it is clear that meteoric iron had to be mixed, at least with the knowledge they had at the time.

So fearn, here we have a problem, as it seems as if you won't find a pure meteoric blade. From you posts, like with the posts of others, I more and more got the feeling, that you knew much more about the subject than most of us.
Thank you for taking your time to explain it to us - so far in a language which most of us can follow :rolleyes: .
Nechesh, the above should answer your question as well.

Jens

Hi Jens,
The event you are citing from the Aziz book is descibed almost verbatum in Pant (p.218), with the combining of three parts 'lightning iron' as the meteoric material is termed and one of other iron.

In the original post you noted that meteoric iron is discussed in other references in edged weapons blades, especially the keris, but not incidents or applications from India. In Pant, (p.218) he notes.
"...no special study of weapons made of meteoric iron has been made in India so far. However a sword at present in the Alwar Museum, Alwar (Rajasthan) is said to have been made of meteoric iron".
He also notes that in one of the early dealers here in the U.S. catalog, Robert Abels (Catalog #32, p.87, #700) there is an Indian sword with 21" meteoric blade. Despite the obvious scepticism, it would be interesting to see if these swords actually did have such blades. The one in the catalog obviously is long gone, Abels was dealing in the 60's and 70's, but possibly the museum example is still there.

A note concerning aesthetics : from Stone (p.664)
"...the most brilliant watering is in Malayan blades made by piling alternate layers of mild steel and an alloy of iron and nickel containing about 3% nickel.
These are welded and twisted in various ways and then etched with a mixture of lime jiuc and arsenous acid".
"..in the old blades the nickel alloy was meteoric iron, in some of the later ones it was Krupps nickel steel".

This it seems the nickel was one key ingredient for the pamor, and if the appearance was 'meteoric'..all the better. Since nickel is an earthly element it does seem it would be difficult to differentiate between the earthly matter and extraterrestrial.
Question: are there unidentified elements or minerals found only in extraterrestrial material, such as the rocks from mars or the moon?

Best regards,
Jim

Hi Jim,

We have, in some of the earlier posts heard about how difficult it is to recognise meteoric iron, especially if it is mixed, so how Pant could come with a statement like that, about a blade he has never seen, I don’t know. Maybe the museum in Alwar has such a sword, but here too the metal for the blade would be mixed. Should the museum have the sword, it is a question if they would let it be tested.
I know of the Pant book you quote from, but I don’t have it, so I did not know what he wrote on the subject.

Jens

Hi Jim,

You will find there are no "unearthly" elements in meteorites. What sets them appart is the "chemical mix" in which they were formed (and the physical conditions of formation as well).

If you were to see a meteorite sitting on the ground for any time at all, you may very well pass it up as a common rock (I am including all meteorite types). As you may have noticed that all of the meteorites mentioned in this thread that were used as sword making material, were witnessed falls. The cosmic connection was made becaused of an observed event. If they had not been observed, even if some kind of crater forming event occured... I think someone would have scrached their head and not reconize the interesting stones laying there as being from above. I believe this is apart of the issue at hand. By simple observation, how do we tell if a Keris or sword contains meteoric iron.

For me, I do not need meteoric iron to make a cosmic connection, take a look around you... everything you see, the elements that make us and everything around us were forged in a star.

I have seen some of the Gibeon meteorites that had simply been hammered into shape to make a spear... and when polished and acid etched, still showed the Widmanstatten structure, meaning it had not been forged or heated to any large degree or it would have destroyed this internal crystal structure. I am not an expert... so correct me if I am wrong, it maybe that the finer crystal structural octahedrites (vs. medium and coarse) may be more malleable (Gibeon is a fine octahedrite type IVA)?

If the meteorite in India would not stand below the hammer, and fell too pieces, then it was the "luck of the fall" or is it draw? :)

Hi Jens,
You are right, the statements and comments that Pant has presented concerning the study of meteoric iron in India are simply presented as a point of reference, not necessarily conclusive. It would be difficult for him to prove that absolutely no study of any kind has been made on this topic in India, however we would presume that such published material was limited as not readily found. Therefore, the subject of meteoric iron in India is clearly not much discussed. As for the swords he has cited, the one in the museum he is apparantly relaying the caption with the weapon in the museum. ...we could only hope the weapon has some sort of provenance or historical data that would explain the 'meteoric' label.
As for the item listed in the Abels catalog, I would hardly consider a sales catalog used for reference in an academic discussion :) so again, that was simply an example cited which would just as well have been left out :) it just seemed interesting to note.

Best regards,
Jim

BSM,
Thank you so much!!! Beautifully explained!!!
This stuff gets more and more fascinating!!!
All the best,
Jim

Hi BSMStar,

When you write 'I believe this is apart of the issue at hand.' I have to say no, this is a part of the understanding of the whole thing - so it is right on target :p .

I would like to thank you and the others who participate in this discussion, for explaning the things so clearly. Since I started this thread - which get more end more interesting - I have learned a lot, knowledge I which would have taken me a long time to gather - if I ever could - thank you very much.

Jens

Jim posted this quote from Stone: A note concerning aesthetics : from Stone (p.664)
"...the most brilliant watering is in Malayan blades made by piling alternate layers of mild steel and an alloy of iron and nickel containing about 3% nickel.
These are welded and twisted in various ways and then etched with a mixture of lime jiuc and arsenous acid".
"..in the old blades the nickel alloy was meteoric iron, in some of the later ones it was Krupps nickel steel".

With all due respect to Stone, the last part of this quote just is not correct. This is part of the problem with this subject, we can find many accounts by scholars of an earlier time that are misleading at best and just dead wrong at worst. There is just NO evidence for meteoric pamor before the 19thC. Period. Maybe Stone meant something else by the phrase "old blades", but i would say old means pre-19thC. Not only that, Prof. Paiskowski's research has proven conclusively that much of the contrasting pamor in early keris is actually created by the use of high and low phosphorous iron, NO nickel at all. This is an important point to consider in evaluating the evolution of the keris blade.
I think it is a good thing that we have the reference material that we do when studying this material. But some of this info needs to be taken with a grain of salt. On this matter i have seen various authors who seem to pick up and pass along the same misinformation on this subject in a continuous chain of reference material. We can't just accept something because it is written, as clearly, sometimes these writers are wrong.

Great discussion.

I am no expert but we may be taking the "meteoric iron" term too literally. Meteoric iron or steel is another term used for Nickel steel, and has nothing to do with its origins. The iron from a meteor usually has Ni at 5-15%, It is not the trace elements in it that identifies it as a meteor, rather what elements are not present ie lack of other alloying elements. Nickel steel manufactured here on terra firma usually has 3-5% Nickel. So if an e-bay seller is saying his Keris has "meteoric iron" he may not be embellishing his item, but, may be using a out of date term.

Just my 5 cents worth (pre 1964).
Jeff

Jeff, though i like to see the best in every man, i don't think that is what eBay dealers are doing. However, i do think the majority of them are just misguided having heard the myth somewhere that ALL keris are made this way or reading about it in some reference book with outdated information. And then there are a few who tend to act knowledgable and make the claim that theirs truly is a meteorite blade, really, and if you were as smart as they are you would know it was true. ;)

Hi Nechesh,

You are of course correct. But like you I like to give everyone the benefit of doubt. Unless, of course, it is my good money taken in a scam. It also ties in Jim's Stone quote of Krupp manufacturing meteoric iron, it also may be the reason the outdated books use the term which now has a new meaning as the original term became outdated and not used in its original context.

All the best.
Jeff

Hi Jeff,
It's always good to see you come in, and I especially like your 'nickel's worth comment !:)



As Jeff has noticed, my placing the Stone quote was intended to illustrate the early use of terminology as pertains to 'meteoric'. I thought the reference to Krupps as a source for nickel in later blades was an interesting note to the importance of the nickel in achieving certain blade pamor aesthetically(perhaps I should have noted that specifically :)
Whenever Stone is used as a reference in discussion, most of us recognize that this is an venerable work that is typically considered in its context, as benchmark material that has in many cases, been superceded.
The material found in Stone presents interesting perspective as earlier research that can offer clues to continuing investigations. For example, as in the case of geneological research, it is typically necessary to rely on early and outdated maps, charts and historical data to seek information within key locations as counties, townships and cities have changed names, thus one cannot find information under the current names.

It is similarly sometimes important to know what theories, beliefs and material were regarded in references in contemporary times. This is why early narratives are considered so important in weapons research, contemporary observations.

I think it is extremely important to respect the work of the early authors and qualify data that has since been found incorrect (which has been done here with Nechesh's notes, thus achieving exactly that).

It is interesting to note from the foreward in the venerable volume we all know simply as 'Stone':
"...I am fully aware that this book is far from complete or perfect, but I trust that it may be an incentive to someone better qualified than I to write another on similar lines that will give more accurate information".
-George Cameron Stone, 1934

So here we all are, trying to do just that, and grateful to Mr. Stone for showing us the direction to follow.

All best regards,
Jim

Hi guys,

This is quite different form the discussion. I was just wondering, is there danger of emmision of dangerous gasses or other substance during forging a meteorite? Some meteorites contain xenon etc. I dont know this is dangerous or not. However, I heard one guy fainted and was admitted to the hospital while trying melting a meteorite. The exact cause i dont know. Curently i have a nickel-iron metorite from Nantan, China and i'm thinking of making a keris from it. Any comment?

Jim, you are, of course, right about the importance of early work, however flawed, in aiding our continued research on the subject. Perhaps you noted that i started my comment on your posted quote "With all due respect to Stone" and that was indeed a sincere remark.
It is interesting to note that the certain blade pamor aesthetic that the import of nickel was trying to achieve seems to have been a European one, not a traditional one. Groneman, for instance, was trying to reproduce the higher nickel pamor effect of meteorite when he imported nickel for keris production, a look that was to his taste.
Rasdan, nice to see you are back from holiday. I will be sending you a message soon. At least if you do make a keris from your meteorite that will be one example we can be sure of. :)

Hi rasdan,

Will you have the meteor analysed before you take the decision?
If you do please let us know what different metals it consists of, I am sure many will be interested in knowing.

Jens

Jens, you beat me to it!

Yes, Rasdan, by all means, have some sort of chemical analysis done. It's for more than our curiosity--it might also be useful to the empu who does the work, to know what's in the meteorite you bring him before he starts working on it. It will be interesting to see how the pamor develops in such a blade.

Nechesh, thanks for discussing Prof. Piakowski's work. Now, if some chemist in the group will explain how arsenic binds differentially to phosphorus to produce the light and dark pamor bands, I'll be happy :D

Fearn

I must say that I had started to wonder why this question was not asked, but maybe it has something to do with different time zones. But who asks the questions if of no difference, the interesting thing is to get the answers.

Jens

Rasdan,

I believe the Nantan has already been analyzed.

www.greatwallct.com/nantan.htm

The average Chemical composition in the Nantan meteorites are: Fe 92.35%, Ni 6.96%, belonging to IIICD type of iron meteorite based on the taxonomy of Wasson and others (1980). The following trace elements have been detected: C, Cu, Co, S, P, Cr, Ga, Ge, As, Sb, W, Re, Ir, Au, Ru, Pd, Os, Pr, and Mn. Ag, Cd, and Pb isotopes have been analyzed by Prof. Wang Daode and others (1993). http://www.pgrgem.com/color/datasheets/pgrmold.html

You may find more info surfing the net... but it looks like this meteorite may be a poor choice due to weathering. :o



fearn,

I'm going out on a limb here... so correct me if I am wrong. Realgar and Orpiment are an Arsenic Sulfide. In an acidic environment, the sulfur is released and bonds to the iron creating an Iron Sulfide (the brownish black color that is difficult to reproduce). Phosphorus will react to make a Phosphorus Sulfide, which is a pale yellow in color.

Here are some interesting links

http://forums.swordforum.com/showthr...readid=4873&s=
http://www.sanztrust.org.nz/archives/knife.html
http://epswww.unm.edu/iom/Howto.htm

BMStar

BSMStar, this is most interesting, although you loose me when you ask fearn the question about arsenic.
So you did know about analyze.
Maybe we need an explanation for the most common metals – what is Fe and so on, I am sure that not all can follow – maybe a sticky – what about it Andrew, I hope you are ‘listening’.

Jens

This link might be of some help Jens . :)

http://www.chemicool.com/

Hi Jens,

I'm sorry to be confusing... I was not asking about arsenic, it’s that I am making an assumption on the chemistry involved. I am assuming (a bad thing to do) the simplest reaction here (maybe someone will jump in and say this is an exotic organic salt of arsenic being formed with the lime juice instead. :rolleyes: )

Keep in mind that 99.31% (according to this analysis) is iron (Fe) and Nickel (Ni). That means 0.69% will be other elements... they are present only in very small amounts. Check out carbon steel, I believe you will fine that it is not as "pure" or (in other words) that it will have other "stuff" in it, in larger amounts (it is an alloy after all). Nickel-iron meteorites were not "designed" or "created" for the same purpose or use as alloyed steel. That's why most of them (un-alloyed) are not very "workable" in a forging process.

BSMStar

Hi Nechesh,
Well said! I didn't mean to take exception to what you were saying, but a guy like me who has cradled that book for this many years develops a distinct bond with it :) I guess I got a bit defensive, my apologies.
I think both of our views together are pretty good perspective, and that Stone himself would very much approve of the work we are all doing here.
I like the way you define and support the material being discussed, and we all benefit from the knowledge shared.
Back to work!!! :)

All the best,
Jim

Hi guys,

Regarding the composition of Nantan Meteorites, my only worry is that some of the elements in it might be dangerous when melted. However i read that the Chineese had melted them and use them as weapons a long time ago. I suppose theres no danger in doing that. If anybody have any information regarding this can u please tell me. I dont wanna cause trouble to my keris smith. Thanks. :)

Hi BSMStar,
Don’t worry I try to follow as best I can, and I think it is interesting what you write. Yes I know about the carbon steel, and remember my surprise when I first saw it, that such a small concentration could have such a big influence.

Hi rasdan,
In 1621 a meteor was found in India and brought to Shah Jahangir who said: 'I ordered Master (Ustad) Daud to make a sword, a dagger and a knife out of it, and bring them to me. He represented that it would not stand below the hammer, and fell too pieces'.
If he had this knowledge, he must have tried to work with meteoric iron before, and lived to use his knowledge about the iron. I don't think you need to be afraid, but to be on the safe side, I think that an analyze would show if there is any danger.

Rick,
Thank you for the link. I almost fell off my chair when I opened the link, but after some time - getting used to all the colours ;) I vagely began to understand a little, although I still miss a lot - hopefully the understanding will come.

Jens

Hi rasdan!

I understand, I think you are Ok with the metallic part of the Nantan. There shouldn't be any volatile components there... but there may be a small amount volatile inclusions scatter through the meteorite. It is not wise to breathe the vapors from "hot" iron... so if the smith is using adequate ventilation and proper procedures.....
You may want to be sure you are working with an un-oxidized meteorite. Nantan is and old "fall" and has weathered for 400 years. Most of the pieces will mainly be iron oxides rather than workable metallic iron. Your Smith will know when they go to forge it and it will "fall apart under the hammer."


Best of luck and let us know how it goes! :D

BSMStar

Depending to the books of Tammens there should be a lot of keris made from meteorite iron.

Tammens wrote in his books about different colors of pamor depending on the kind of metalls that were used. Tammens wrote also about research on the metal of keris and older keris showed after analysis that during the forging-proces meteorite pamor was used. Meteorite metal contains nickle in different degrees. Tammens, part 1, chapter Pamor, the soul of the kris.