Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post

ariel · 28th April 2016, 01:51 AM

Beautiful Indian wootz!

Persians figured out how to make "twisted" patterns, likely by adjusting the direction and the force of pounding. The dendrites were "arranged" in a controlled fashion. Old Indian wootz was exactly like Roland's katar: they just pounded the hell out of it, breaking the dendrites into small fragments. Only in ~ 17th century did they start producing Persian variety: the Mughals imported Persian masters and the standards of beauty have shifted to the more elaborately organized patterns.

I have been told by the bladesmiths that mechanically Indian wootz was heads and shoulders better than the Persian one. This is, of course, purely theoretical assertion: AFAIK, no head-to-head competition was ever conducted. Even funnier, I am unaware of any similar test versus mechanical damascus or even high-carbon monosteel:-)

Anyone here has such information?

28th April 2016, 01:51 AM	#6
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Beautiful Indian wootz! Persians figured out how to make "twisted" patterns, likely by adjusting the direction and the force of pounding. The dendrites were "arranged" in a controlled fashion. Old Indian wootz was exactly like Roland's katar: they just pounded the hell out of it, breaking the dendrites into small fragments. Only in ~ 17th century did they start producing Persian variety: the Mughals imported Persian masters and the standards of beauty have shifted to the more elaborately organized patterns. I have been told by the bladesmiths that mechanically Indian wootz was heads and shoulders better than the Persian one. This is, of course, purely theoretical assertion: AFAIK, no head-to-head competition was ever conducted. Even funnier, I am unaware of any similar test versus mechanical damascus or even high-carbon monosteel:-) Anyone here has such information?