When in India "died" wootz?

Emanuel · 21st February 2016, 04:03 PM

I hope our forum smiths do chime in on this. If you polish and etch an old wootz cake/ingot you see the pattern. No forging required. Wootz steel was indeed very high carbon content. I was not aware however that a crystalline structure could be induced through annealing. Grain size yes, but not the dendritic carbide structure.

Ariel I don't see the converting of wootz into a blade being still a mistery. Lots of smiths i Russia and the US and elsewhere do so now with great results

estcrh · 21st February 2016, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Emanuel

I hope our forum smiths do chime in on this. If you polish and etch an old wootz cake/ingot you see the pattern. No forging required.

Emanuel, I have never seen an old wootz cake so I could not respond to this but what happens once you start forging this old wootz cake, you can not make a blade from a polished and etched unforged wootz cake/ingot, it needs to be forged. Are you suggesting that anyone can forge a watered steel blade from it or did it take specialized knowledge in order to do this?

mahratt · 21st February 2016, 04:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Emanuel

If you polish and etch an old wootz cake/ingot you see the pattern. No forging required.

Yes, it is. And, too, there is about this in the articles of the 1840s.

estcrh · 21st February 2016, 05:04 PM

Microstructure of Steels and Cast Irons, Madeleine Durand-Charre, 2013

ariel · 21st February 2016, 06:23 PM

The issue of inherent ingot patterns and the final blade patterns was discussed extensively on a Russian forum with professional bladesmiths, including the "dean" of Rusiian blademakers, Mr. Leonid Arkhangelsky. According to them, there is no doubt that the inherent structure is important, but only a true master is capable of creating complicated patterns seen on Persian and later Indian blades.

Only Persians with their secret tricks of forging were able to create rich and complicated patterns like Taban or Khorasan.. Indian masters were using a different technique: their hallmark was the "salt-and-pepper" pattern in which dendrites were crushed into small spheroidal segments. After ~17th century there was an inflow of Persian masters into India, and the patterns of Indian blades switched to the complicated Persian examples. Syrian pattern is well-known as Shams: low-contrast, short, almost straight lines.

They all used the same Indian ingots, but the final results were different.

Why?

As bladesmiths told me it all likely depended on the technique of forging: turning the billet in a predetermined way to create twisted patterns of dendrites, keeping the pounding in the same position/direction for the Shams, or beating the hell out of it to obtain the Indian "crystalline" wootz. And on top of it, heating the billet to a certain color between forgings was also crucial.

Even on the same blade one can see different patterns: even the best Taban blades always have almost "shams-y" pattern close to the edge, the result of more vigorous pounding in one direction.

And that is what happens now: metallurgists can make beautiful wootz ingots with a pattern indistinguishable from the old Indian ones, but the bladesmiths do not have secret "protocols of forging" that were worked out over multiple generations by Persian masters.

Anosov figured out how to make wootz ingots, but his blades had coarse and simple pattern: he did not know how to forge his material.

And that is the real secret of wootz.

Emanuel · 21st February 2016, 08:45 PM

No Eric, of course I am not suggesting that.

My apologies as I am no smith and all I write is based on what I've learned from others. What I have been saying again and again is that the fine watery pattern seen on wootz metal is a result of the initial smelting process. Yes the pattern can be modified mechanically through forging of the cake/ingot/billet into a bar or blade, or whatever at a later stage. The point is that if the smelting process was successful, the basic pattern will be there in the cake as soon as you remove it from the crucible. Temperature control and correct charging of the crucible seem to be the critical factors to getting a good quality steel with a pattern.

The forging process is a separate thing altogether. Temperature control is again key to maintain small grain in the material. Large grain will make it brittle. The process for forging a wootz vs. non-wootz billet will be similar but the range of temperature a wootz billet will take is smaller since the pattern breaks down at higher temperatures. A bladesmith that does not know these temperature constraints will ruin the fine wootz pattern no matter what he does.

Here is a nice summary of the process from Greg Obach, who is also on this forum.
http://users.unitz.ca/gthomas/myweb4...n_of_wootz.htm

mahratt · 21st February 2016, 10:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ariel

Anosov figured out how to make wootz ingots, but his blades had coarse and simple pattern: he did not know how to forge his material.

And that is the real secret of wootz.

It is a common misconception. There is information that the blades of wootz steel Anosov, very appreciated in the Orient (at local residents).

Jim McDougall · 22nd February 2016, 02:17 AM

It sounds to me like Pavel Anosov (1796-1851) was primarily involved in research on the technology of crucible steel creating bulat/wootz while he was working at Zlatoust. The apparently highly regarded swords that were created using his findings in creating bulat were not only regarded as examples of 'fine art' but superior in their combat performance vs. those with steel from Solingen, Toledo and London .

From what I read he found four ways of producing the bulat steel, including direct reduction from ore; decarburization of cast iron with iron oxide; melting cast steel into mold and reacting iron and carbon in crucible.
As, again, I am not a metallurgist I would note only that these do not seem to include 'forging'.

Yet the bulat steel blades used with his processes seem profoundly highly regarded, and as 'art', so I miss the point on any deficiency regarding his not knowing how to forge the steel. Apparantly he made some blades himself for some of the more prominent researchers also engaged in wootz studies, and those were also highly regarded.

Also it seems that the noted detractions in his research material were apparently deliberate as he was guarding the secrets of his discoveries, which were indeed 'lost' again for a time after his death.

It certainly sounds like his blades, and research were highly regarded, and again most interesting to learn more about the bulat history. I had heard of it before but was not sure of connections in the wootz matters.

ariel · 22nd February 2016, 03:09 AM

Jim,
Anosov shoud be honored for his re-discovery of the process of obtaining raw wootz material and his insight that it should be forged at low temperatures. However, he simply did not have access to the old "recipe" of forging complex patterns ( akin to Taban/Khorasan). In his defence, only one of the contemporary wootz smiths is capable of doing it, and doing it with long blades.

There is a lot of information on Anosov's blades in the new book by Kirill Rivkin. He also characterizes them as pretty simple .

AFAIK, his blades were never produced for mass use or export; he made only a few examples. I am unaware of his blades being used as fighting implements anywhere in the world.

He published his report in 1841, but was transferred as a governor to Tomsk in 1847, where he could not continue his work.

After his departure production of bulat in Zlatoust has stopped: his instructions about the process were deliberately brief and incomplete. A couple of workers in Zlatoust who actually did the job, produced a small number of blades, and then it was just like in India and Iran: skill transfer stopped and the secret was lost again.

As an example of Anosov's bulat ( wootz) work, here is his famous hunting knife that he presented to British geologist Murchison who visited Zlatoust.
It was sold at Sothebys (?) for something like 50,000 GBP ( I might be wrong here, but the sum was obscenely high)

Another one is his shashka: look at the pattern, pretty coarse and simple.

It is bulat, no doubt, but in the best possible case it is Sham.

Jim McDougall · 21st February 2016, 05:15 PM

Excellent, and thank you guys again for responses to my questions. This discussion has truly developed dimensionally by the various and most salient angles you have all brought up.
While the original query tendered in this thread by Mahratt seemed to be rather straightforward and answerable in a similar response, it seemed to defy such an answer.

While it became almost frustratingly clear that a direct answer to the exact or defined disappearance of old wootz making skills was not exactly placeable to such a defined time, especially universal to all wootz locations, it has been fascinating to see all these angles and facets to the problem.

Mahratt, I must thank you for bringing up this most interesting topic, and for me, for prompting me to finally approach a subject I have admittedly long avoided. I also appreciate that you continue to reiterate the interactions between you and others posting as to the salient points you are discussing. Most helpful to keep the thread topic on course.

Ariel, I really liked the factor you brought up as plausibly being associated in this situation, that of life span and generation diminishing of skills in accord with that of demand. While the pro and con of this theory were of course addressed , it is fascinating to see critical thinking and well presented responses placed........this is true historical detection, and all of you guys carry it through perfectly!

Emanuel and Estrcrh, again thank you guys for your patient and most intriguing explanations and descriptions on the actual wootz making processes.......I think I really am starting to understand this stuff!

Estcrh, you continue to amaze me at your incredible abilities at locating all these articles and material and posting the segments here, thank you!

Outstanding work everyone!

Ibrahiim al Balooshi · 23rd February 2016, 12:06 PM

Salaams All, There is compelling evidence from all quarters in this very excellent thread for reasoned thoughts on the decline of Wootz including the invasion of central Asia thus the drop in demand..and the demographic detail illustrated graphically on the suspected demise of participants...I believe all of them. I suggest one was the trigger (drop in demand) and the other caused the specialty to vanish.(see paragraph 3 below)

On the demise of Wootz in particular I would point to the traditional aspect in craftsmanship of taking the children into a apprenticeship routine from a very young age and passing them out at about 16 years old as fully trained artesans. This means that the graph illustrated above is not so much floored but enhanced since the apprentice age factor or the point in the graph between perhaps 5 and 10 years old (at the point the Wootz making stops) breaks the traditional passing down of the technique... and destroys the apprenticeship concept. Thus as Ariel points out ..."It Withers".

How quickly can a passed down tradition vanish?... Take the Omani Weaving specialization which all but vanished and except for the intervention my one single individual it would have sunk without trace. The same could be said about silver-making in Oman when the leader of the country had to intervene by having at least one son of the silver-maker learn the apprenticeship... It is therefor very easy to lose these traditional methods very quickly since the apprentice window is very narrow and in particular when they are not written down. It would appear that Wootz blade manufacture fell under similar constraints. Without the demand and then without the apprenticeships the art was lost.

In support of the very quickly lost art of Wootz manufacturing please see http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/jom...even-9809.html
( also noted at #132 by Emanuel)
Quote."The smiths that produced the high-quality blades would most likely have kept the process for making these blades a closely guarded secret to be passed on only to their apprentices".Unquote.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

21st February 2016, 05:04 PM	#4
estcrh Member Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: USA Posts: 1,492	Microstructure of Steels and Cast Irons, Madeleine Durand-Charre, 2013 Attached Images

21st February 2016, 06:23 PM	#5
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	The issue of inherent ingot patterns and the final blade patterns was discussed extensively on a Russian forum with professional bladesmiths, including the "dean" of Rusiian blademakers, Mr. Leonid Arkhangelsky. According to them, there is no doubt that the inherent structure is important, but only a true master is capable of creating complicated patterns seen on Persian and later Indian blades. Only Persians with their secret tricks of forging were able to create rich and complicated patterns like Taban or Khorasan.. Indian masters were using a different technique: their hallmark was the "salt-and-pepper" pattern in which dendrites were crushed into small spheroidal segments. After ~17th century there was an inflow of Persian masters into India, and the patterns of Indian blades switched to the complicated Persian examples. Syrian pattern is well-known as Shams: low-contrast, short, almost straight lines. They all used the same Indian ingots, but the final results were different. Why? As bladesmiths told me it all likely depended on the technique of forging: turning the billet in a predetermined way to create twisted patterns of dendrites, keeping the pounding in the same position/direction for the Shams, or beating the hell out of it to obtain the Indian "crystalline" wootz. And on top of it, heating the billet to a certain color between forgings was also crucial. Even on the same blade one can see different patterns: even the best Taban blades always have almost "shams-y" pattern close to the edge, the result of more vigorous pounding in one direction. And that is what happens now: metallurgists can make beautiful wootz ingots with a pattern indistinguishable from the old Indian ones, but the bladesmiths do not have secret "protocols of forging" that were worked out over multiple generations by Persian masters. Anosov figured out how to make wootz ingots, but his blades had coarse and simple pattern: he did not know how to forge his material. And that is the real secret of wootz. Last edited by ariel; 21st February 2016 at 06:55 PM.

22nd February 2016, 03:09 AM	#9
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Jim, Anosov shoud be honored for his re-discovery of the process of obtaining raw wootz material and his insight that it should be forged at low temperatures. However, he simply did not have access to the old "recipe" of forging complex patterns ( akin to Taban/Khorasan). In his defence, only one of the contemporary wootz smiths is capable of doing it, and doing it with long blades. There is a lot of information on Anosov's blades in the new book by Kirill Rivkin. He also characterizes them as pretty simple . AFAIK, his blades were never produced for mass use or export; he made only a few examples. I am unaware of his blades being used as fighting implements anywhere in the world. He published his report in 1841, but was transferred as a governor to Tomsk in 1847, where he could not continue his work. After his departure production of bulat in Zlatoust has stopped: his instructions about the process were deliberately brief and incomplete. A couple of workers in Zlatoust who actually did the job, produced a small number of blades, and then it was just like in India and Iran: skill transfer stopped and the secret was lost again. As an example of Anosov's bulat ( wootz) work, here is his famous hunting knife that he presented to British geologist Murchison who visited Zlatoust. It was sold at Sothebys (?) for something like 50,000 GBP ( I might be wrong here, but the sum was obscenely high) Another one is his shashka: look at the pattern, pretty coarse and simple. It is bulat, no doubt, but in the best possible case it is Sham. Attached Images Last edited by ariel; 22nd February 2016 at 04:13 AM.

23rd February 2016, 12:06 PM	#11
Ibrahiim al Balooshi Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Buraimi Oman, on the border with the UAE Posts: 4,408	Salaams All, There is compelling evidence from all quarters in this very excellent thread for reasoned thoughts on the decline of Wootz including the invasion of central Asia thus the drop in demand..and the demographic detail illustrated graphically on the suspected demise of participants...I believe all of them. I suggest one was the trigger (drop in demand) and the other caused the specialty to vanish.(see paragraph 3 below) On the demise of Wootz in particular I would point to the traditional aspect in craftsmanship of taking the children into a apprenticeship routine from a very young age and passing them out at about 16 years old as fully trained artesans. This means that the graph illustrated above is not so much floored but enhanced since the apprentice age factor or the point in the graph between perhaps 5 and 10 years old (at the point the Wootz making stops) breaks the traditional passing down of the technique... and destroys the apprenticeship concept. Thus as Ariel points out ..."It Withers". How quickly can a passed down tradition vanish?... Take the Omani Weaving specialization which all but vanished and except for the intervention my one single individual it would have sunk without trace. The same could be said about silver-making in Oman when the leader of the country had to intervene by having at least one son of the silver-maker learn the apprenticeship... It is therefor very easy to lose these traditional methods very quickly since the apprentice window is very narrow and in particular when they are not written down. It would appear that Wootz blade manufacture fell under similar constraints. Without the demand and then without the apprenticeships the art was lost. In support of the very quickly lost art of Wootz manufacturing please see http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/jom...even-9809.html ( also noted at #132 by Emanuel) Quote."The smiths that produced the high-quality blades would most likely have kept the process for making these blades a closely guarded secret to be passed on only to their apprentices".Unquote. Regards, Ibrahiim al Balooshi. Last edited by Ibrahiim al Balooshi; 23rd February 2016 at 12:31 PM.

21st February 2016, 04:03 PM	#1
Emanuel Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 1,242	I hope our forum smiths do chime in on this. If you polish and etch an old wootz cake/ingot you see the pattern. No forging required. Wootz steel was indeed very high carbon content. I was not aware however that a crystalline structure could be induced through annealing. Grain size yes, but not the dendritic carbide structure. Ariel I don't see the converting of wootz into a blade being still a mistery. Lots of smiths i Russia and the US and elsewhere do so now with great results

21st February 2016, 08:45 PM	#6
Emanuel Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 1,242	No Eric, of course I am not suggesting that. My apologies as I am no smith and all I write is based on what I've learned from others. What I have been saying again and again is that the fine watery pattern seen on wootz metal is a result of the initial smelting process. Yes the pattern can be modified mechanically through forging of the cake/ingot/billet into a bar or blade, or whatever at a later stage. The point is that if the smelting process was successful, the basic pattern will be there in the cake as soon as you remove it from the crucible. Temperature control and correct charging of the crucible seem to be the critical factors to getting a good quality steel with a pattern. The forging process is a separate thing altogether. Temperature control is again key to maintain small grain in the material. Large grain will make it brittle. The process for forging a wootz vs. non-wootz billet will be similar but the range of temperature a wootz billet will take is smaller since the pattern breaks down at higher temperatures. A bladesmith that does not know these temperature constraints will ruin the fine wootz pattern no matter what he does. Here is a nice summary of the process from Greg Obach, who is also on this forum. http://users.unitz.ca/gthomas/myweb4...n_of_wootz.htm

22nd February 2016, 02:17 AM	#8
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,189	It sounds to me like Pavel Anosov (1796-1851) was primarily involved in research on the technology of crucible steel creating bulat/wootz while he was working at Zlatoust. The apparently highly regarded swords that were created using his findings in creating bulat were not only regarded as examples of 'fine art' but superior in their combat performance vs. those with steel from Solingen, Toledo and London . From what I read he found four ways of producing the bulat steel, including direct reduction from ore; decarburization of cast iron with iron oxide; melting cast steel into mold and reacting iron and carbon in crucible. As, again, I am not a metallurgist I would note only that these do not seem to include 'forging'. Yet the bulat steel blades used with his processes seem profoundly highly regarded, and as 'art', so I miss the point on any deficiency regarding his not knowing how to forge the steel. Apparantly he made some blades himself for some of the more prominent researchers also engaged in wootz studies, and those were also highly regarded. Also it seems that the noted detractions in his research material were apparently deliberate as he was guarding the secrets of his discoveries, which were indeed 'lost' again for a time after his death. It certainly sounds like his blades, and research were highly regarded, and again most interesting to learn more about the bulat history. I had heard of it before but was not sure of connections in the wootz matters.

21st February 2016, 05:15 PM	#10
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,189	Excellent, and thank you guys again for responses to my questions. This discussion has truly developed dimensionally by the various and most salient angles you have all brought up. While the original query tendered in this thread by Mahratt seemed to be rather straightforward and answerable in a similar response, it seemed to defy such an answer. While it became almost frustratingly clear that a direct answer to the exact or defined disappearance of old wootz making skills was not exactly placeable to such a defined time, especially universal to all wootz locations, it has been fascinating to see all these angles and facets to the problem. Mahratt, I must thank you for bringing up this most interesting topic, and for me, for prompting me to finally approach a subject I have admittedly long avoided. I also appreciate that you continue to reiterate the interactions between you and others posting as to the salient points you are discussing. Most helpful to keep the thread topic on course. Ariel, I really liked the factor you brought up as plausibly being associated in this situation, that of life span and generation diminishing of skills in accord with that of demand. While the pro and con of this theory were of course addressed , it is fascinating to see critical thinking and well presented responses placed........this is true historical detection, and all of you guys carry it through perfectly! Emanuel and Estrcrh, again thank you guys for your patient and most intriguing explanations and descriptions on the actual wootz making processes.......I think I really am starting to understand this stuff! Estcrh, you continue to amaze me at your incredible abilities at locating all these articles and material and posting the segments here, thank you! Outstanding work everyone!