Meteoric iron used for keris's vs. for Indian weapons

BSMStar · 13th February 2005, 07:36 PM

nechesh,

Trace elements are a give away for cosmic origin... which is why chemical analysis is important. Yes... we can tell.

I find it troubling to use feel as a way to determine... since these blades are older and are likely to have been etched many times, where does the pattern or surface profile from etching fit in to this approach?

Is there no visually pattern reserved for this pamor?

Jens... I'm with you, more than a bit confussed.

I agree meteoritic pamor is not critical... but of historically importance and value.

nechesh · 13th February 2005, 08:39 PM

Wayne, i realize you are a scientist and when you refer to "yes...we can tell" i assume you are referring to the scientific community in general. I don't mean to challenge you on this point, but what are your experiences with metalurgy. I understand that you are a color chemist, which sounds really cool even if i don't know quite what you do, but does this qualify you to make this statement? Are you familar with Prof. Piaskowski's work? He has done years of study and compilation of data on this very subject and it is his belief, apparently, that you can not tell cosmic origin in keris metals that have been forged and welded. I know that scientists are apt to disagree, but until i hear research from another scientist who has actually tried to determine these factors with as many forged keris as Prof. Piaskowski has done i am inclined to lean towards his position on the matter, not being of the mind or abilities to do such research for myself.

Jim McDougall · 13th February 2005, 09:24 PM

I think the study of the use of meteoric metal from scientific perspective is fascinating, and the discussion here with those of you expert in keris and Indonesian weapons is excellent!
While somewhat digressing from the scientific perspective, I am wondering if the references and descriptions applied to these blades in earlier narratives referring to 'meteoric steel' may have been intended aesthetically. It seems that in the glossaries of keris jargon there are terms that apply specifically to such blades.

In "The Sword in Anglo Saxon England" by H.R.Ellis Davidson , N.Y. 1962,
on p.22 the author notes, "...Forbes suggested that the damask patterns might have been inspired by meteorites, which are covered with a thin film of iron oxide and when forged at low temperatures produce a distant pattern".

*"Metallurgy in Antiquity" R.J.Forbes, Leiden, 1950

While acknowledging that there were actually blades forged with this extra terrestrial material included with regular materials, I am wondering if possibly the term 'meteoric' may refer to a certain pattern or appearance in pamor.

Concerning the empirical approach to examining these blades metallurgically, after being faithfully hooked on the television series C.S.I. and the compelling forensics dramas, I cannot imagine that extra terrestrial origins of certain components could not be discovered in the labratory!!!

I sure wouldnt want to volunteer one of my prize weapons though!!! That is if I DID have one of these beautiful keris!

Best regards,
Jim

nechesh · 13th February 2005, 09:43 PM

I hate to be the one to break it to you Jim, but if you ever talked to anyone who actually does CSI type work you would find out pretty quickly just how much of that show borders on science fiction.

As far as i know there are no elements present in meteoric pamor that can not be found on earth. I think any recognizable crystalline structure that would ID a metal as meteoric would be destryed through the forging and welding process. So what would be the clue that remains to ID such metals as being of cosmic origin?
You theory about the term being an aesthetic reference is interesting, but i think this is more a case of early writers misunderstandings and repetition of the mistakes of others. I don't think meteoric pamor is meant to refer to a particular pattern or design in the pamor.

BSMStar · 13th February 2005, 10:08 PM

nechesh,

Thank you for keeping me honest. I have been out of that "community" for a long time... and I do not mean present my self as an "expert" to compete with any one, especially with Dr. Piaskowski. I mean "we" as the scientific community.

The Electron Micro Probe has been the main tool used in diagnosing meteorites for sometime now... just ask your friends who collect meteorites and send them in to Universities around the world for analysis. I use Arizona State University (ASU) in Tempe, AZ (Center for Meteorite Studies) because that’s where I went to school. Dr. Lewis also holds and analyzed many of the lunar samples gathered by NASA there at the Lab. I am sure Dr. Piaskowski is aware of this and the "EMP" techniques and data analysis. The question would be the sample (or how dilute the meteoritic material would be in a forged blade, then picking out parts per million of trace elements can be a challenge).

But the trace elements are a definite fingerprint for cosmic origin!

Jim,

You are right. There is no question about it. If there is enough meteoritic material, it can be detected. But like you... I would have second thoughts about testing for it too (even though it is not destructive, it creates a blemish).

fearn · 13th February 2005, 10:55 PM

Adding to what BSM said, the "fingerprint" is in the ratios of isotopes of elements. Although all planets and asteroids (and meteorites) presumably originated at the beginning of the solar system, they contain different ratios of the isotopes of various elements.

A big reason for this is that earth has a molten core kept that way by radioactivity, whereas most asteroids are too small for this process. The molten core melts material, causing isotopes to fractionate. Lavas from different volcanoes are, to some degree, recognizable from their isotopic fingerprints (there was an article on this in Science News recently, if you want an accessible source). Also, radioactivity at the core might produce breakdown products from fissioning heavy elements...

To make a long story short, one can distinguish between a meteorite and a rock, simply on the basis of the isotopic fingerprint. A blade is another story.

I'm just guessing that Prof. Piaskowski can't distinguish meteoric iron in Keris blades either because a) he hasn't found a genuine one yet (this is a provenance question) and/or b) the meteoric iron is mixed with terrestrial iron and/or nickel in order to form one layer of the pamor. Since the earth is definitely not uniform in isotopic signatures, mixing metals could easily hide the partially extraterrestrial origin of some blade. A purely meteoric blade would be easy to identify, but one of mixed origin would be difficult.

For the whiskey and wine crowd on this board, this is analogous to the problem of identifying the parent materials in a blended whiskey or wine, based on taste.

And before Nechesh asks, I'm a professional ecologist. I don't deal with metal isotopic chemistry at all, but I'm familiar with isotopes of lighter elements.

Fearn

BSMStar · 13th February 2005, 11:23 PM

fearn,

You make an old Geologist proud (OK, I’m not one any more). We didn't work with isotopes unless we were dating the material. Pure chemistry was enough, generally reported in oxides for non-metallic materials, for example :FeO, SiO2, MgO, Al2O3, Na2O, K2O, P2O5 and so on. But keep in mind the time frame... isotopes were not carrying the weight if importance as they may have today (I'm old or I feel that way).

nechesh,

You will have to forgive me, I have been in the Paint industry for 29 year now... meteorites and tektites are just a hobby now (just a few too many hobbies).

Jim McDougall · 13th February 2005, 11:24 PM

Oh no!! next you'll tell me Jerry Springer is staged!!!

Just kidding. I know there isnt much reality in the media in general, I work for the airlines so I can totally relate!!

I appreciate the detailed explanations on these technical studies. These topics have always been pretty intimidating, and you guys make things much more understandable. Thanks!

All the best,
Jim

nechesh · 14th February 2005, 12:32 AM

Jim, i hate to tell you this, but not just Springer, professional wrestling too!

When you're feeling stronger we'll have a talk about that Santa Claus guy.

Fearn, if i remember correctly, your 2nd suggestion for the difficulty in IDing meteoric material in keris is the one. If i'm not mistaken, this material must be mixed with terrestrial iron inorder to make use of it.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

13th February 2005, 07:36 PM	#1
BSMStar Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Kansas City, MO USA Posts: 312	nechesh, Trace elements are a give away for cosmic origin... which is why chemical analysis is important. Yes... we can tell. I find it troubling to use feel as a way to determine... since these blades are older and are likely to have been etched many times, where does the pattern or surface profile from etching fit in to this approach? Is there no visually pattern reserved for this pamor? Jens... I'm with you, more than a bit confussed. I agree meteoritic pamor is not critical... but of historically importance and value.

13th February 2005, 08:39 PM	#2
nechesh Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 940	Wayne, i realize you are a scientist and when you refer to "yes...we can tell" i assume you are referring to the scientific community in general. I don't mean to challenge you on this point, but what are your experiences with metalurgy. I understand that you are a color chemist, which sounds really cool even if i don't know quite what you do, but does this qualify you to make this statement? Are you familar with Prof. Piaskowski's work? He has done years of study and compilation of data on this very subject and it is his belief, apparently, that you can not tell cosmic origin in keris metals that have been forged and welded. I know that scientists are apt to disagree, but until i hear research from another scientist who has actually tried to determine these factors with as many forged keris as Prof. Piaskowski has done i am inclined to lean towards his position on the matter, not being of the mind or abilities to do such research for myself.

13th February 2005, 09:24 PM	#3
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,281	I think the study of the use of meteoric metal from scientific perspective is fascinating, and the discussion here with those of you expert in keris and Indonesian weapons is excellent! While somewhat digressing from the scientific perspective, I am wondering if the references and descriptions applied to these blades in earlier narratives referring to 'meteoric steel' may have been intended aesthetically. It seems that in the glossaries of keris jargon there are terms that apply specifically to such blades. In "The Sword in Anglo Saxon England" by H.R.Ellis Davidson , N.Y. 1962, on p.22 the author notes, "...Forbes suggested that the damask patterns might have been inspired by meteorites, which are covered with a thin film of iron oxide and when forged at low temperatures produce a distant pattern". *"Metallurgy in Antiquity" R.J.Forbes, Leiden, 1950 While acknowledging that there were actually blades forged with this extra terrestrial material included with regular materials, I am wondering if possibly the term 'meteoric' may refer to a certain pattern or appearance in pamor. Concerning the empirical approach to examining these blades metallurgically, after being faithfully hooked on the television series C.S.I. and the compelling forensics dramas, I cannot imagine that extra terrestrial origins of certain components could not be discovered in the labratory!!! I sure wouldnt want to volunteer one of my prize weapons though!!! That is if I DID have one of these beautiful keris! Best regards, Jim

13th February 2005, 09:43 PM	#4
nechesh Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 940	I hate to be the one to break it to you Jim, but if you ever talked to anyone who actually does CSI type work you would find out pretty quickly just how much of that show borders on science fiction. As far as i know there are no elements present in meteoric pamor that can not be found on earth. I think any recognizable crystalline structure that would ID a metal as meteoric would be destryed through the forging and welding process. So what would be the clue that remains to ID such metals as being of cosmic origin? You theory about the term being an aesthetic reference is interesting, but i think this is more a case of early writers misunderstandings and repetition of the mistakes of others. I don't think meteoric pamor is meant to refer to a particular pattern or design in the pamor.

13th February 2005, 10:08 PM	#5
BSMStar Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Kansas City, MO USA Posts: 312	nechesh, Thank you for keeping me honest. I have been out of that "community" for a long time... and I do not mean present my self as an "expert" to compete with any one, especially with Dr. Piaskowski. I mean "we" as the scientific community. The Electron Micro Probe has been the main tool used in diagnosing meteorites for sometime now... just ask your friends who collect meteorites and send them in to Universities around the world for analysis. I use Arizona State University (ASU) in Tempe, AZ (Center for Meteorite Studies) because that’s where I went to school. Dr. Lewis also holds and analyzed many of the lunar samples gathered by NASA there at the Lab. I am sure Dr. Piaskowski is aware of this and the "EMP" techniques and data analysis. The question would be the sample (or how dilute the meteoritic material would be in a forged blade, then picking out parts per million of trace elements can be a challenge). But the trace elements are a definite fingerprint for cosmic origin! Jim, You are right. There is no question about it. If there is enough meteoritic material, it can be detected. But like you... I would have second thoughts about testing for it too (even though it is not destructive, it creates a blemish).

13th February 2005, 10:55 PM	#6
fearn Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 1,247	Adding to what BSM said, the "fingerprint" is in the ratios of isotopes of elements. Although all planets and asteroids (and meteorites) presumably originated at the beginning of the solar system, they contain different ratios of the isotopes of various elements. A big reason for this is that earth has a molten core kept that way by radioactivity, whereas most asteroids are too small for this process. The molten core melts material, causing isotopes to fractionate. Lavas from different volcanoes are, to some degree, recognizable from their isotopic fingerprints (there was an article on this in Science News recently, if you want an accessible source). Also, radioactivity at the core might produce breakdown products from fissioning heavy elements... To make a long story short, one can distinguish between a meteorite and a rock, simply on the basis of the isotopic fingerprint. A blade is another story. I'm just guessing that Prof. Piaskowski can't distinguish meteoric iron in Keris blades either because a) he hasn't found a genuine one yet (this is a provenance question) and/or b) the meteoric iron is mixed with terrestrial iron and/or nickel in order to form one layer of the pamor. Since the earth is definitely not uniform in isotopic signatures, mixing metals could easily hide the partially extraterrestrial origin of some blade. A purely meteoric blade would be easy to identify, but one of mixed origin would be difficult. For the whiskey and wine crowd on this board, this is analogous to the problem of identifying the parent materials in a blended whiskey or wine, based on taste. And before Nechesh asks, I'm a professional ecologist. I don't deal with metal isotopic chemistry at all, but I'm familiar with isotopes of lighter elements. Fearn

13th February 2005, 11:23 PM	#7
BSMStar Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Kansas City, MO USA Posts: 312	fearn, You make an old Geologist proud (OK, I’m not one any more). We didn't work with isotopes unless we were dating the material. Pure chemistry was enough, generally reported in oxides for non-metallic materials, for example :FeO, SiO2, MgO, Al2O3, Na2O, K2O, P2O5 and so on. But keep in mind the time frame... isotopes were not carrying the weight if importance as they may have today (I'm old or I feel that way). nechesh, You will have to forgive me, I have been in the Paint industry for 29 year now... meteorites and tektites are just a hobby now (just a few too many hobbies).

13th February 2005, 11:24 PM	#8
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,281	Oh no!! next you'll tell me Jerry Springer is staged!!! Just kidding. I know there isnt much reality in the media in general, I work for the airlines so I can totally relate!! I appreciate the detailed explanations on these technical studies. These topics have always been pretty intimidating, and you guys make things much more understandable. Thanks! All the best, Jim

14th February 2005, 12:32 AM	#9
nechesh Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 940	Jim, i hate to tell you this, but not just Springer, professional wrestling too! When you're feeling stronger we'll have a talk about that Santa Claus guy. Fearn, if i remember correctly, your 2nd suggestion for the difficulty in IDing meteoric material in keris is the one. If i'm not mistaken, this material must be mixed with terrestrial iron inorder to make use of it.