Wootz: Persian or Indian?

Rivkin · 6th January 2007, 06:22 AM

Ariel, since when do you read Persian Mirror ? Now I am no bulat-knower, but the article is filled with strange things. The art of making bulat was lost and rediscovered by Anosov, who yet somehow managed to collect/supervise first hand observations of bulat production and had working in his factory bulat makers from different areas. It would be very interesting to know how exactly Anosov's swords outperformed Toledo, solingen and others, because all I have read is a comparison between super-expensive, individually made Anosov's swords (which btw involved such complex procedures that no one was able to reproduce them) and pretty much simply good quality "western" steel. How they performed during Caucasus war ? What was the unit that carried them ? And why such facts where so poorly known to the russian people that even in XXth century they made their decisions to change military patterns with no reference to this fact (I have a really great presentation made before RKKA on the adoption of a new cavalry weapon. One can find a ton of references to "volchok" there, but not a single one to Anosov).
In all, russian work on bulats in XIXth century is actually a great example of bulat failure (they where not adopted as a standard steel for russian weapons, despite all their promise).

Again, I like bulats, but somehow even significant scientists, like Wadsworth, when they start talking about bulats - goodbuy science, hello magic.

ariel · 6th January 2007, 03:03 PM

We have already flogged the " quality of wootz" horse to death on another thread.
And, of course, RKKA was correct rejecting the idea of arming every Red Cavalry unit with bulat blades: far too expensive, time consuming and counterproductive. Even at that time the idea of cavalry charges was viewed as obsolete and supported only by semiliterate dinosaurs like Budyonny. The new breed of military commanders ( Tukhachevsky, Yakir) were hell bent on modernization: tanks, artillery, airforce etc.
But, I guess, even they would love to have a real Bulat saber! It is very pretty!
" Bulat is for show, AK-47 is for dough"

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

6th January 2007, 06:22 AM	#1
Rivkin Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 655	Ariel, since when do you read Persian Mirror ? Now I am no bulat-knower, but the article is filled with strange things. The art of making bulat was lost and rediscovered by Anosov, who yet somehow managed to collect/supervise first hand observations of bulat production and had working in his factory bulat makers from different areas. It would be very interesting to know how exactly Anosov's swords outperformed Toledo, solingen and others, because all I have read is a comparison between super-expensive, individually made Anosov's swords (which btw involved such complex procedures that no one was able to reproduce them) and pretty much simply good quality "western" steel. How they performed during Caucasus war ? What was the unit that carried them ? And why such facts where so poorly known to the russian people that even in XXth century they made their decisions to change military patterns with no reference to this fact (I have a really great presentation made before RKKA on the adoption of a new cavalry weapon. One can find a ton of references to "volchok" there, but not a single one to Anosov). In all, russian work on bulats in XIXth century is actually a great example of bulat failure (they where not adopted as a standard steel for russian weapons, despite all their promise). Again, I like bulats, but somehow even significant scientists, like Wadsworth, when they start talking about bulats - goodbuy science, hello magic.

6th January 2007, 03:03 PM	#2
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	We have already flogged the " quality of wootz" horse to death on another thread. And, of course, RKKA was correct rejecting the idea of arming every Red Cavalry unit with bulat blades: far too expensive, time consuming and counterproductive. Even at that time the idea of cavalry charges was viewed as obsolete and supported only by semiliterate dinosaurs like Budyonny. The new breed of military commanders ( Tukhachevsky, Yakir) were hell bent on modernization: tanks, artillery, airforce etc. But, I guess, even they would love to have a real Bulat saber! It is very pretty! " Bulat is for show, AK-47 is for dough"