Quote:
|
Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey
I know next to nothing about Philippino weaponry, but I do know a little bit about pattern welding and about the technology of the keris in Indonesia.
In those cultures where twist pattern blades were produced, the twist pattern was the result of necessary improvement to inferior material in order to make it useable for a weapon quality blade.
A further reason for the twist pattern is that in maritime South East Asia iron was a scarce and expensive material in some areas; good quality iron could be extended by welding and twisting with lower quality locally smelted iron, or imported iron of lower quality. Locally smelted iron from some local SE Asian operations was fragile high phospherous iron, and when this was combined with better quality iron, the result was a pattern in high contrast
With the passing of time the pattern became a gaurantee of quality, thus the twist pattern continued in production long after better quality material became available and the original need to manipulate the material to improve it no longer existed.
In early blades with a twist pattern it is likely that the pattern was the result of necessity.
In later blades with a twist pattern it is likely that the twist pattern is the result of a marketing strategy.
|
Alan,
You are spot on, for the reason for Pattern Welding. The history of it is nicely delt with in Manfred Sachse's book referenced in the original post. It is still costly which was what I was getting at. The books I have read stated the Philippino showed their wealth/status with the handle, not the blade. Which is a reason you see elaborate handles with mediocre blades. So why the switch from handle to blade?