Indian Crucible Steel vs. Pattern Welding

[ariel]

Nice summary.
But the question that Emanuel asked was about any special term for mechanical damaskus. Indians made a lot of it, and some examples were highly sophisticated. Were such blades distinguished from wootz and plain steel?

[Emanuel]

Actually Ariel you bring me to one reason for my questions

Was there any such thing as plain steel? Besides crucible and pattern welding what other methods were there?
We do know that some crucible came out without pattern but it was still crucible.

This is excluding the European trade blades that were "plain" steel.

[Emanuel]

Earlier in "Indian and Oriental Arms and Armour" Egerton uses "jauhar" specifically referring to the pattern in crucible steel.

"It is then allowed to subside, and the crucible is placed on the ground to cool gradually, so that the particles form crystals, from which the "jauhar", or beautiful combinations so much prized in the sword blades, are obtained."

So in 19th century English writing, we have the term "jauhar" being used to refer to the pattern in both crucible steel and pattern-welding.

You seem to confirm this AJ, that in the Persian context, "Jawhar" refers to the patterning or "watering" effect.

The question remains, was there any distinction between the two methods, or were they both "folAd e jawhardAr " or "pulad/fulad" + "jauhar/jawhar/johar" -steel with more or less good pattern?

[ariel]

Originally Posted by Emanuel

Actually Ariel you bring me to one reason for my questions

Was there any such thing as plain steel? Besides crucible and pattern welding what other methods were there?
We do know that some crucible came out without pattern but it was still crucible.

This is excluding the European trade blades that were "plain" steel.

Surely, forging crucible steel at high temperatures would eliminate the pattern and the final product would become "plain"

However, Indians also used furnaces that produced bloomery iron, i.e. plain steel. Infinitely more economical, quicker and simpler than wootz.

I do not see much mechanical difference between plain steel and wootz. Indeed, plain European blades were highly valued in India since the Contact, and modern steels leave wootz in the dust. My guess is that wootz was highly prized primarily for its esthetic ( johar) appeal mixed with highly developed Eastern sacral imagery and the effort that went into its production. Not for nothing do we read about Japanese and Indonesian smiths forging a single blade in several weeks and artificially delaying the final product. Caucasian smiths were making a plain shashka blade in a couple of days, but refused orders for a damascus one: far too much coal and far too much effort.

[Emanuel]

Originally Posted by ariel

However, Indians also used furnaces that produced bloomery iron, i.e. plain steel. Infinitely more economical, quicker and simpler than wootz.

Yes they did. Was the result known as fulad/faulad as well? Or lauha/loha? Or something else?

[ariel]

My understanding that any steel blade was defined as made of "loha": steel in West India .
This comes from consultations with my Indian colleagues. One of them consulted with her parents, retired language professors in India. They specifically stated that they were uninformed about terminology used in East India; thus my rather awkward first paragraph.

They also stated that the word pulad was an adopted term from Farsi, and also referred to just steel in general.

I could not elucidate from them whether there was a special term for mechanical damaskus, but that might have been a result of their rather commonplace ignorance of metallurgical terminology. I am sure 99% of American language professors also wouldn't know the correct answer in English:-)

[AJ1356]

Originally Posted by Emanuel

Was there any such thing as plain steel? Besides crucible and pattern welding what other methods were there?
We do know that some crucible came out without pattern but it was still crucible.

This is excluding the European trade blades that were "plain" steel.

From my understanding there were regular plain steel besides crucible steel, that would be used for cheaper made swords, knives, regular everyday tool and such. I have quite a few (I don't know the exact count) arrow tips from various eras, that are made of either regular steel, iron and some that I think are high carbide since they have not rusted, even after being buried or in the same bag as iron ones.