I am not necessarily trying to get at the metalurgy; but, rather trying to understand the underlying economics which were in play during the last several centuries with respect to ethnographic blades. The steel had to produce somewhere by some process, relative to each area of edge weapons manufacture. I am not convinced that the average smith would have access to multiple sources of steel produced under a diverse set of technologies. That would imply a steel grading system, branding, and distribution system much like what we have in a post industrialized world. Most likely the smiths made knives according to tradition using the time tested methods repetitively; so if a knife is made in region A from layer forged steel, it would be safe to assume that all knives from that region, at that point of time, were made with the same technology.
The implication would be that even if two examples outwardly resemble each other, they could not date from the same region, nor the same period if the chemistry of the blade is materially different. On the other hand, knives which may outwardly seem very different could be very closely linked, so as to have been made by the same people.
n2s
|