When in India "died" wootz?

Jim McDougall · 19th February 2016, 05:50 AM

Ariel, thank you for taking the time to assemble the very detailed synopsis on the material which has come from the book by Manoucher. I have not seen the book, but it seems to have remarkably cited references which provide interesting perspective on the manufacturing of wootz blades in Iran.
Good point on the demise of the quality and nature of a certain trade such as production of wootz and it would seem of the blades as well. It does seem we see evidence of that disappointing phenomenon around us constantly, despite advances in technology.

As I have noted, this subject is admittedly outside my usual scope of study, but I find it very interesting, and I am learning considerably thanks to the core discussion here and those who have entered relevant observations and notes.

Returning to the original topic of wootz production in India, it seems curious to me that a considerable number* of the works of European scientists and writers who were studying and trying to duplicate the significant character of Indian wootz were writing in the beginning to near mid 19th century. With the profound British presence in India throughout the regions noted for their wootz production , why would they not have simply visited and observed and analyzed these processes?
Is it possible that the known locations in Hyderabad, Deccani areas, Mysore, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and others had indeed exhausted sources of ore, in addition to depletion of work forces and had indeed ceased?
This is I think one of the things that seems to evade specific mention in the references.

* I observed this in a lengthy bibliography in an article on Indian wootz online

In the often cited article on wootz (Damascus) steels by Verhoefen, he suggests that the last blades of 'high quality' damascene patterns is uncertain, but probably would range to about c. 1750.

While perhaps the notation of 'high' quality might suggest that the continued blade production may have been lesser quality, but it does not specify, nor note that it had ceased.

It seems the problem of identifying the more defined range of the end of the production of wootz in India in the conventional manner in which it had been produced since ancient times in extremely problematic .

Again, I think that perhaps a more direct answer to this question may reside within the text of the apparently considerable references that are listed in volume in many of these articles and books.

I really do appreciate the efforts placed here in discussing this, and must say it has encouraged me personally to try to look further into those.
As Mahratt has well noted, one cannot know everything......I guess that's why we keep looking

mahratt · 19th February 2016, 07:19 AM

I found another interesting article in 1842. It's called: "Notes on forged wootz steel in Bukhara". The author - Colonel of the Russian army - Butenev. The author writes that according to his information wootz in Bukhara Khanate unknown how to smelt. But of imported wootz - made blades. Wootz brought to Bukhara (according to him) from Persia.

ariel · 19th February 2016, 10:58 AM

Jim,
India is currently #4 producer of steel in the world. Iron ore is plentiful there.
Thus, I do not think that wootz production 200 years ago ceased because of the exhaustion of raw materials. Rather , the need in wootz and the skills in making it must have vanished. Of course, British industrial policies did not help either:-)

mahratt · 19th February 2016, 12:38 PM

Jim,
I always thought that not every iron ore is suitable for the production of wootz steel ... Maybe I'm wrong. Correct me please.

Jim McDougall · 19th February 2016, 03:42 PM

Good points Ariel, the exhaustion or depletion of iron ore in one location would not preclude further deposits in other regions. So then we return to the abandonment of the skills required in processing the wootz..
If the demand for the regular forms of steel in accord with the development of British industry in India became the primary demand, then of course the skilled workers in wootz would have diminished.

Mahratt, that is an interesting thought, and again, I am very much a novice at metallurgy so bear with me. While it does seem possible that ore may have differences in its content, I had thought that the processing of wootz had more to do with the manner of smelting. The methods of placement in crucibles with the ore and other components, temperatures and cooling as well as the carburizing components...wood, leaves etc. seem to have varied in the different locations producing wootz.

I know there are some very knowledgeable metallurgists and skilled metal workers in our ranks here in addition to you guys and those who have already entered here, so maybe they might add some perspective as well.

Emanuel · 19th February 2016, 04:29 PM

I am in general agreement with you Ariel. I just pointed out that crucible steel production and the production of blades with this material might have continued in very small quantities and on a non-industrial basis. Not just Rajput Rajas used and collected these objects, as I mentioned, and not finding any published ones from the Rajput royal collections does not mean they didn't exist

. Again, just looking at Sikh craftsmen and their ability to maintain their craft into the 21st century suggests that somewhere on some scale however small, the production of wootz and wootz blades continued until relatively late.

Regarding the skill vanishing, my understanding is that the skill and knowledge required to produce this metal in both India and Central Asia was concentrated in key production hubs, under the patronage of powerful groups. Once that hub was destroyed, or the patronage was removed for whatever reason, be it military, economical, political or fashionable, the concentrated skill was rendered obsolete and the skill dispersed.

So I agree that the need and desire for wootz/bulat/pulad changed, and the concentrated skill just had to move on.

Ann Feuerbach, and Anosov before her documented numerous ways of making crucible steel with more or less pronounced patterns. The type of ore did not seem to matter too much, but cleaner iron ore certainly made the process easier. Dr. Ann found documented evidence of relatively poor material used in crucible furnaces in both India and Central Asia (Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan). Running out of cleaner ore did not mean the ore with more impurities could not be refined further before the crucible process.

ariel · 19th February 2016, 05:33 PM

Emanuel and Jim,

Agree. I only doubt we can use modern Pakistani creations as an argument: the metallurgy of crucible steel is far too well known now and there were no wootz blades from that area until the sudden emergence of commercial interest in them :-) Finding occasional wootz blades on obviously new-ish sabers and chooras proves nothing: they were most likely remounted. Wootz forging is a complex craft; even now modern wootz examples from the best bladesmiths cannot compare in their pattern with the old ones. Maintaining proficiency while forging one blade every couple of years is unlikely.

We shall wait for Elgood's Jodhpur collection book to widen the net. Would be nice to have similarly well-researched accounts from other royal arsenals, but that's what we have.

As to South Indian examples, they (surprisingly, taken into account Sri Lanka, Golconda etc. sources of wootz ingots) forged their blades primarily from plain steel. Wootz was rarely if ever used. Why it was so, I do not know.

Perhaps, they knew something about comparative worth of wootz vs. steel blades :-)))

Ibrahiim al Balooshi · 25th February 2016, 02:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ariel

Jim,
India is currently #4 producer of steel in the world. Iron ore is plentiful there.
Thus, I do not think that wootz production 200 years ago ceased because of the exhaustion of raw materials. Rather , the need in wootz and the skills in making it must have vanished. Of course, British industrial policies did not help either:-)

Salaams Ariel I think that is a fair comment and supported by According to Vibha Tripathi on;

http://www.ghadar.in/gjh_html/?q=con...eel-metallurgy

Quote“With industrialization and imperial designs of foreign rule a decline set in…….. The iron industry could not withstand the onslaught of the colonial forces working against its interests in a planned way. Once the blast furnaces came into existence in Britain, production started at a much cheaper rate…It could hardly compete with the cheap British pig iron being imported. ….

The laws enforcing non-felling of trees in the forest deprived the charcoal based indigenous iron industry of its very basic raw material. It made production of iron impossible.

The powerful lobby in Britain succeeded.” The colonizers succeeded in enslaving the Indian sub-continent in every sense of the word by systematically destroying the manufacturing capacity of India.

Both the authors also ascribe the decline to the reluctance of master craftsmen to document the technological secrets and to share the knowledge with others except with their favored apprentices. Hence some of the technologies could not be developed further and declined with the decline of the fortunes of the select group of families who knew the process secrets".Unquote.

see also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blast_furnace

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

19th February 2016, 07:19 AM	#2
mahratt Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Russia Posts: 1,042	I found another interesting article in 1842. It's called: "Notes on forged wootz steel in Bukhara". The author - Colonel of the Russian army - Butenev. The author writes that according to his information wootz in Bukhara Khanate unknown how to smelt. But of imported wootz - made blades. Wootz brought to Bukhara (according to him) from Persia. Attached Images

19th February 2016, 05:50 AM	#1
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,190	Ariel, thank you for taking the time to assemble the very detailed synopsis on the material which has come from the book by Manoucher. I have not seen the book, but it seems to have remarkably cited references which provide interesting perspective on the manufacturing of wootz blades in Iran. Good point on the demise of the quality and nature of a certain trade such as production of wootz and it would seem of the blades as well. It does seem we see evidence of that disappointing phenomenon around us constantly, despite advances in technology. As I have noted, this subject is admittedly outside my usual scope of study, but I find it very interesting, and I am learning considerably thanks to the core discussion here and those who have entered relevant observations and notes. Returning to the original topic of wootz production in India, it seems curious to me that a considerable number* of the works of European scientists and writers who were studying and trying to duplicate the significant character of Indian wootz were writing in the beginning to near mid 19th century. With the profound British presence in India throughout the regions noted for their wootz production , why would they not have simply visited and observed and analyzed these processes? Is it possible that the known locations in Hyderabad, Deccani areas, Mysore, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and others had indeed exhausted sources of ore, in addition to depletion of work forces and had indeed ceased? This is I think one of the things that seems to evade specific mention in the references. * I observed this in a lengthy bibliography in an article on Indian wootz online In the often cited article on wootz (Damascus) steels by Verhoefen, he suggests that the last blades of 'high quality' damascene patterns is uncertain, but probably would range to about c. 1750. While perhaps the notation of 'high' quality might suggest that the continued blade production may have been lesser quality, but it does not specify, nor note that it had ceased. It seems the problem of identifying the more defined range of the end of the production of wootz in India in the conventional manner in which it had been produced since ancient times in extremely problematic . Again, I think that perhaps a more direct answer to this question may reside within the text of the apparently considerable references that are listed in volume in many of these articles and books. I really do appreciate the efforts placed here in discussing this, and must say it has encouraged me personally to try to look further into those. As Mahratt has well noted, one cannot know everything......I guess that's why we keep looking

19th February 2016, 10:58 AM	#3
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Jim, India is currently #4 producer of steel in the world. Iron ore is plentiful there. Thus, I do not think that wootz production 200 years ago ceased because of the exhaustion of raw materials. Rather , the need in wootz and the skills in making it must have vanished. Of course, British industrial policies did not help either:-)

19th February 2016, 12:38 PM	#4
mahratt Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Russia Posts: 1,042	Jim, I always thought that not every iron ore is suitable for the production of wootz steel ... Maybe I'm wrong. Correct me please.

19th February 2016, 03:42 PM	#5
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,190	Good points Ariel, the exhaustion or depletion of iron ore in one location would not preclude further deposits in other regions. So then we return to the abandonment of the skills required in processing the wootz.. If the demand for the regular forms of steel in accord with the development of British industry in India became the primary demand, then of course the skilled workers in wootz would have diminished. Mahratt, that is an interesting thought, and again, I am very much a novice at metallurgy so bear with me. While it does seem possible that ore may have differences in its content, I had thought that the processing of wootz had more to do with the manner of smelting. The methods of placement in crucibles with the ore and other components, temperatures and cooling as well as the carburizing components...wood, leaves etc. seem to have varied in the different locations producing wootz. I know there are some very knowledgeable metallurgists and skilled metal workers in our ranks here in addition to you guys and those who have already entered here, so maybe they might add some perspective as well.

19th February 2016, 04:29 PM	#6
Emanuel Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 1,242	I am in general agreement with you Ariel. I just pointed out that crucible steel production and the production of blades with this material might have continued in very small quantities and on a non-industrial basis. Not just Rajput Rajas used and collected these objects, as I mentioned, and not finding any published ones from the Rajput royal collections does not mean they didn't exist . Again, just looking at Sikh craftsmen and their ability to maintain their craft into the 21st century suggests that somewhere on some scale however small, the production of wootz and wootz blades continued until relatively late. Regarding the skill vanishing, my understanding is that the skill and knowledge required to produce this metal in both India and Central Asia was concentrated in key production hubs, under the patronage of powerful groups. Once that hub was destroyed, or the patronage was removed for whatever reason, be it military, economical, political or fashionable, the concentrated skill was rendered obsolete and the skill dispersed. So I agree that the need and desire for wootz/bulat/pulad changed, and the concentrated skill just had to move on. Ann Feuerbach, and Anosov before her documented numerous ways of making crucible steel with more or less pronounced patterns. The type of ore did not seem to matter too much, but cleaner iron ore certainly made the process easier. Dr. Ann found documented evidence of relatively poor material used in crucible furnaces in both India and Central Asia (Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan). Running out of cleaner ore did not mean the ore with more impurities could not be refined further before the crucible process.

19th February 2016, 05:33 PM	#7
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Emanuel and Jim, Agree. I only doubt we can use modern Pakistani creations as an argument: the metallurgy of crucible steel is far too well known now and there were no wootz blades from that area until the sudden emergence of commercial interest in them :-) Finding occasional wootz blades on obviously new-ish sabers and chooras proves nothing: they were most likely remounted. Wootz forging is a complex craft; even now modern wootz examples from the best bladesmiths cannot compare in their pattern with the old ones. Maintaining proficiency while forging one blade every couple of years is unlikely. We shall wait for Elgood's Jodhpur collection book to widen the net. Would be nice to have similarly well-researched accounts from other royal arsenals, but that's what we have. As to South Indian examples, they (surprisingly, taken into account Sri Lanka, Golconda etc. sources of wootz ingots) forged their blades primarily from plain steel. Wootz was rarely if ever used. Why it was so, I do not know. Perhaps, they knew something about comparative worth of wootz vs. steel blades :-)))