Shashka: wootz???
 

Folks, I need your help, especially the "metallurgists"
I have a shashka ( no scabbard). The blade is of obviously "European" pattern, but very light and very "bendable" ( returns to true like a lightning). It has no markings.
What is interesting here is the blade , and I cannot decide, is it a Sham-type wootz ( bulat) or mechanical damascus.
If it is wootz, it would most likely be of Anosov's-era Zlatoust production, a rarity. If mechanical, could anybody suggest the source of such a pattern. Obviously, it is no superficial etching; the pattern is seen thru the blade, spine included.
Will be most grateful for opinions.

Hmm, reminds me of my Bowie knife...
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=8292

Yes, indeed. quite reminiscent.
I spoke with Russian collectors: all told me that Anosov's "bulat" was a very, very coarse wootz.
That is why I am so confused: will the "very, very coarse" wootz look like that?

Reminds me of this one: http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=8118

Interesting
 

Ariel,

I did notice some time back a Karabela hilted Shamshir that had the exact same pattern through the blade...so at a guess I'd say your on the money with this one, incidentally it sold for huge bucks.

Gav

I am not a metallurgist - actually quite the opposite, but I vote - sham wootz. This is probably mostly due to wishful thinking on my part, as I have a kindjal with a similar pattern visible throughout the blade - pictures attached.
Regards,
Teodor

My vote is sham wootz also :)

Nice blades!
Could be shear steel, the 'other' pre-Bessemer way to make steel from iron.
Here is a pic of a lightly etched wood chisel made of shear steel, the laminations can be coase or fine depending on the amount of processing. It can look almost exactly like sham wootz ;)

Could well be shear steel. I had a victorian carver which accidently had vinegar (from pickled onions) spilled on it. Didn't know until several hours later, washed it off to see faint sham wootz patterning :confused: ....but the 'impressed' wording of "shear steel" on the blade ...sorta took the 'wind from my sails' :o

Nice piece

Regards David

Thanks to everyone of you for your intest and opinion.
What bugs me a bit, is the complete absense of markings: to my knowledge, most, if not all mass-produced military blades carried manufacturers' IDs.
Second, passing the blade between the fingers, it has irregular "bumps" in thickness: that makes me believe it was hand-made.
Third, I went through my ( limited) supply of books on European blades 19-20 centuries and could not find an analogue.
Fourth, the Bessemer theory is interesting: but were there mass-produced Bessemer blades?Where, what pattern, similar to this one?
Overall, I get a feeling it is not a standard, regimented saber blade, but rather an experimental, one-of-a-kind pattern.
As you see, I shamelessly try to sway your opinion toward it being wootz-y. I really want to have an example of Anosov's sword :-)
But go ahead, disabuse me of my notion.....

Ariel, my vote is for sham wootz. A bit too bold for shear steel, in my opinion. Wether Anosov's hand - an inteligent guess without any markings or similar references.
-
The similar linear pattern can be seen on this kilij: http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...highlight=pala
especially at the base of the blade (3rd and 6th pictures from the top). Even though it has some mechanical appearance, it is unmistakenly wootz.

BIG FAVOR:

If anyone has in his/her possession actual blades or photographs of Anosov'e bulat, please post them here!

Bonham’s auctioned off one of Anosov’s blades in Nov. ’08 ($72K), he gave it to a famous geologist…I saved these two photos but if someone has the catalog there might be a better view.
Also, hopefully the article cited below would have some images – available through Springerlink if someone has the subscription fee…
Theoretically there should be some diagnostic differences between Sham wootz and shear steel due to the different manufacturing techniques, I’ll see what I can come up with on that front. ;)

Structure of three Zlatoust bulats (Damascus-steel blades)
Schastlivtsev, V. M.; Gerasimov, V. Yu.; Rodionov, D. P.
The Physics of Metals and Metallography, Volume 106, Issue 2, pp.179-185
Chemical composition, structure, and hardness of samples of three Zlatoust bulats (Damascus steels), namely, an Anosov bulat blade (1841), Obukhov bulat blade (1859), and a Shvetsov forged bulat-steel blank (crucible steel) have been investigated. The Anosov bulat possesses all signs of the classical Damascus steel; this is a hypereutectoid carbon steel with a structure formed from chains of carbides against the background of fine pearlite (troostite). A banded pattern is revealed on the surface of the blade. The Obukhov blade cannot be referred to classical Damascus steel. The pattern on the surface of the blade is absent, despite the fact that the initial steel is hypereutectoid. The structure of the blade does not correspond to the structure of classical Damascus steel; this is bainite with numerous cementite particles. The Shvetsov sample cannot be regarded as Damascus steel since it is made from a hypereutectoid steel alloyed by managanese and tungsten. The pattern on the surface of the metal is a consequence of the dendritic structure of the ingot which is developed during forging. The structure of this pattern differs from classical damascene pattern, since the latter is formed due to a specific arrangement of a variety of carbide particles against the pearlitic or some other background obtained during heat treatment.