Any sources on non-moro Philippine forging?

[kino]

Originally Posted by ShazamsLaw

I don't recall Visayan blades having that type of quality steel. More or less they mostly worked with iron "as breakable as glass" which they imported from china.

The above quote is from another thread, discussing a "Giant Tenegre".
The statement was so preposterous that I just ignored it.

Shazam, where do you get your information from?

[ShazamsLaw]

Originally Posted by kino

The above quote is from another thread, discussing a "Giant Tenegre".
The statement was so preposterous that I just ignored it.

Shazam, where do you get your information from?

There is a source from a document on the pre-hispanic blades of Filipinos by William Henry Scott recorded in his book "Barangay"

It was recorrded in his book that the major source of iron used was cast iron which was imported from China.
This type of iron was described by Bornean pilot to be "as easy to break as glass with any blow they give it" which William believes to be only a slight exaggeration. Never the less, cast iron is a type of metal considered to be to be the best fit for making swords and tools.

[xasterix]

Originally Posted by ShazamsLaw

There is a source from a document on the pre-hispanic blades of Filipinos by William Henry Scott recorded in his book "Barangay"

It was recorrded in his book that the major source of iron used was cast iron which was imported from China.
This type of iron was described by Bornean pilot to be "as easy to break as glass with any blow they give it" which William believes to be only a slight exaggeration. Never the less, cast iron is a type of metal considered to be to be the best fit for making swords and tools.

Hi Shazam,

With all due respect to sir Henry Scott, there's been much criticism from academicians regarding his claims / interpretation of pre-colonial Philippine history. Personally, I take it with a grain of salt, as what he's based it on isn't in turn verified by historians as authentic, definite documents. There have been instances before when fake documents are taken as 'authentic'- see the Code of Maragtas regarding this.

I think the best basis for discussion here, and the most tangible as well, would be to assess the oldest Philippine blades that have been shown in this forum.

[Sajen]

We have discussed not long ago the exceptional tenegre from our member Roland, see here: http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...hlight=tenegre
At end of this thread Roland mentioned already that it is a wootz blade, I've seen the sword not long ago in person, like Ian in the above thread I was more as doubtfully that this could be possible. But to my great surprise I have to agree, the blade is wootz!
Here with the permission from Roland a close-up picture taken as documentation for the restoration steps.
So bad are Visayan blades!

[Sajen]

Soon as Roland has finished his work will follow more and better pictures!

[Battara]

I also wonder if folks think that since northern blades are not laminated like the southern blades, they must be scrap crap. The problem with this is that the Spanish and others shared techniques that refined steel to better tolerances than the south, and thus no need for the type of laminations that were needed by the southern Philippines, Indonesia, and even Malaysia needed at one time.

What also made this worse is the use in WWII of leaf spring steel for blades (which oddly enough is not bad steel).

[ShazamsLaw]

Originally Posted by Battara

I also wonder if folks think that since northern blades are not laminated like the southern blades, they must be scrap crap. The problem with this is that the Spanish and others shared techniques that refined steel to better tolerances than the south, and thus no need for the type of laminations that were needed by the southern Philippines, Indonesia, and even Malaysia needed at one time.

What also made this worse is the use in WWII of leaf spring steel for blades (which oddly enough is not bad steel).

I think by the time Filipinos started using spanish steel, the use of swords mostly as weapons have died off as it was preferred that the natives and spainards used rifles or guns to fight the moros.

[mross]

Originally Posted by Battara

I also wonder if folks think that since northern blades are not laminated like the southern blades, they must be scrap crap. The problem with this is that the Spanish and others shared techniques that refined steel to better tolerances than the south, and thus no need for the type of laminations that were needed by the southern Philippines, Indonesia, and even Malaysia needed at one time.

What also made this worse is the use in WWII of leaf spring steel for blades (which oddly enough is not bad steel).

Battara, I'm afraid like my bad penny analogy earlier the dreaded laminated vs mono steel will keep coming up. Laminate looks cooler than mono steel but that is really all it has going for it. Laminate as you mentioned came about as a necessity, the available steel was rare and the other metal was not very good. So combined they made something useful. Unfortunately many are still enamored by magic and ignore technology. I still hear that today's current smiths cannot do what the smiths of history did. Ancient lost secrets and all that. It's usually debated by those that are mostly clueless about metallurgy. The heat treat is more important than the steel. But that's a discussion for another day. For the record leaf springs are usually 5160 steel. Philippines smiths (the more modern ones) like to use ball bearings which are 52100.

[ShazamsLaw]

Originally Posted by xasterix

Hi Shazam,

With all due respect to sir Henry Scott, there's been much criticism from academicians regarding his claims / interpretation of pre-colonial Philippine history. Personally, I take it with a grain of salt, as what he's based it on isn't in turn verified by historians as authentic, definite documents. There have been instances before when fake documents are taken as 'authentic'- see the Code of Maragtas regarding this.

I think the best basis for discussion here, and the most tangible as well, would be to assess the oldest Philippine blades that have been shown in this forum.

I've actually never heard of any criticism towards Scott's works, in fact he was the one that debunked the Code of Maragtas or "code of kalantiaw". When Scott was examining prehispanic sources for the study of Philippine history he demonstrated that the code was a forgery committed by Marco. He even published his findings debunking the code in his book Prehispanic Source Materials for the Study of Philippine History.

Under what topic or source had historians took Williams claims into questioning?