When in India "died" wootz?

ariel · 25th February 2016, 12:06 AM

I contacted Kirill Rivkin and asked him about Anosov's bulat. Kirill inspected Hermitage collection and many other collections of Anosov's blades and has first-hand knowledge.
Here is his e-mail:
__________________________________________________ ________
Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2016 3:38 PM
To: Barkan, Ariel
Attachments:

Anosov claimed that he reproduced 11 different types of Bulat patterns;
the problem is that his definition of what each pattern means is very
different from what we tend to use today. For example, there is a sword in
Tsarskoe Selo collection which is signed "Amal Taban" which was held by
many as the definition of Taban pattern. However, this blade is not even
wootz; in fact most likely its a Georgian imitation of Assad Allah. During
Anosov's time the definition of wootz was very wide; he personally
included Japanese swords in this class, as well as many swords that were
classified in old Russian records as "red bulat" - but which today most
would not consider to be wootz. But even today people there are still
arguments, at the core of which is how separate are the terms "crucible
steel" and wootz. If we are to include some very basic crucible steel
patterns as wootz, then practically all Sheffield cutlery is wootz, it
just needs lots of acid, etc. If we are to concentrate of first class
Persian+ patterns from XVIIIth century as the "standard" of wootz, then it
is a much more narrow field.
Regarding the production of Zlatoust bulat, including those specifically
signed as Anosov's bulat, almost all was done in 1841-1845, i.e. a
relatively short time period. It is very low contrast (actually mechanical
damascus ones from the same period are much more showy), with relatively
short, straight lines (typically longer on higher quality swords, but
approaching "salt and pepper" on lower end stuff). Sometimes the lines are
curving a little. It is not that similar to what we would consider to be a
true Persian Taban today.

__________________________________________________ ______-

In view of this information obtained from a knowledgeable professional, quotations from Anosov's works as well as re-tellings of Anosov's testimonials by other people become highly questionable and cannot be relied upon.

Thus, actual documented examples of his "bulat" need to be seen by our own eyes.

25th February 2016, 12:06 AM	#11
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	I contacted Kirill Rivkin and asked him about Anosov's bulat. Kirill inspected Hermitage collection and many other collections of Anosov's blades and has first-hand knowledge. Here is his e-mail: __________________________________________________ ________ Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2016 3:38 PM To: Barkan, Ariel Attachments: Anosov claimed that he reproduced 11 different types of Bulat patterns; the problem is that his definition of what each pattern means is very different from what we tend to use today. For example, there is a sword in Tsarskoe Selo collection which is signed "Amal Taban" which was held by many as the definition of Taban pattern. However, this blade is not even wootz; in fact most likely its a Georgian imitation of Assad Allah. During Anosov's time the definition of wootz was very wide; he personally included Japanese swords in this class, as well as many swords that were classified in old Russian records as "red bulat" - but which today most would not consider to be wootz. But even today people there are still arguments, at the core of which is how separate are the terms "crucible steel" and wootz. If we are to include some very basic crucible steel patterns as wootz, then practically all Sheffield cutlery is wootz, it just needs lots of acid, etc. If we are to concentrate of first class Persian+ patterns from XVIIIth century as the "standard" of wootz, then it is a much more narrow field. Regarding the production of Zlatoust bulat, including those specifically signed as Anosov's bulat, almost all was done in 1841-1845, i.e. a relatively short time period. It is very low contrast (actually mechanical damascus ones from the same period are much more showy), with relatively short, straight lines (typically longer on higher quality swords, but approaching "salt and pepper" on lower end stuff). Sometimes the lines are curving a little. It is not that similar to what we would consider to be a true Persian Taban today. __________________________________________________ ______- In view of this information obtained from a knowledgeable professional, quotations from Anosov's works as well as re-tellings of Anosov's testimonials by other people become highly questionable and cannot be relied upon. Thus, actual documented examples of his "bulat" need to be seen by our own eyes.