A question about blade materials

Rivkin · 18th March 2006, 01:12 AM

Imho, I would completely disagree with almost everything said above.

1. Most smiths were buying steel/iron. In Caucasus in XIXth century for example they used iron files, rails and even needles. Before, it was not unusual for a smith to receive metal from a customer, either as an old sword to be completely reworked or simply as nails etc. It was also not unusual to buy iron/steel from caravans, including those from China and India. Therefore the same artisans could work with drastically different materials, even through each of them had their own preferences.

2. B. Zschokke, Du Damasse it des Lames de Damas, Rev. Met. vol. 21,635-69(1924) shows that wootz sword have neither hard edge (since it is not martensite but a very high carbon steel), neither as flexible as modern (XXth century) steel. It is also inferior to modern mechanical damascus.

Sincerely yours,

Kirill Rivkin

18th March 2006, 01:12 AM	#6
Rivkin Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 655	Imho, I would completely disagree with almost everything said above. 1. Most smiths were buying steel/iron. In Caucasus in XIXth century for example they used iron files, rails and even needles. Before, it was not unusual for a smith to receive metal from a customer, either as an old sword to be completely reworked or simply as nails etc. It was also not unusual to buy iron/steel from caravans, including those from China and India. Therefore the same artisans could work with drastically different materials, even through each of them had their own preferences. 2. B. Zschokke, Du Damasse it des Lames de Damas, Rev. Met. vol. 21,635-69(1924) shows that wootz sword have neither hard edge (since it is not martensite but a very high carbon steel), neither as flexible as modern (XXth century) steel. It is also inferior to modern mechanical damascus. Sincerely yours, Kirill Rivkin