Interesting Tribal Shaska with wootz blade

Jim McDougall · 6th December 2004, 02:34 AM

Ariel,
The award concept I was thinking of was concerning a Daghestani shashka that had an oval with serrated trim and was said to be a sort of tribal award. Weren't the other awards you note used on Russian shashkas and more as military honors?
I tend to agree with your observation that this is likely a Persian shamshir blade. Is there any key notes that would help distinguish a shashka such as this as Chechen vs. Daghestani by hilt characteristics? I know that the decorated niello and embossed hilts are said to be distinguished by some variation in the vegetal decor and depth of relief etc.
Best regards,
Jim

ariel · 6th December 2004, 04:17 PM

By the way, is it really wootz? I understand that the appearance of wootz is that of very small, tight and compact elongated grains. That was , at least, what I saw each and every time when I handled a real wootz sword and that is how all the examples in the Fiegel's book look like.
This one, in contrast, looks like longish, loose and haphazard threads. I would vote for Shams rather than Wootz.
Metallurgists, correct me!

RSWORD · 7th December 2004, 08:24 PM

Gentleman:

Thank you for the feedback thusfar. The teardrop decoration on the handle is inlayed with silver. I do not know if this is simply a decorative affectation or due to the precious metal, a sign of rank or symbol status. The combination of a wootz blade and silver inlay on the handle would make one think it was owned by someone that could afford those qualities.

Ariel,

It is definitely wootz. Sham is a terminology to describe a type of wootz. Wootz patterns come in a wide variety. Most authors on the subject divide wootz into no less than 4 or 5 categories based on pattern. Wootz that is termed sham typically has the long flowing grain with little contrast. Typically, Syrian or Turkish blades often feature this style and are termed sham. This blade has a bit more activity overall and has a very good color contrast so I would probably not label it as Sham.

ariel · 7th December 2004, 10:10 PM

My understanding is that the term "wootz" (or "ukku") refers strictly to crystalline damascus, whereas "shams" is a variety of the mechanical damascus. These are two totally different animals.
By the way, "shams" (not "sham") has nothing to do with "sham" as "fake" ot "imitation". Shams means Syrian.

Jeff D · 7th December 2004, 11:01 PM

As collectors we have considered sham a type of wootz. It is not a mechanical pattern. However Verhoeven, while analysing Zschokkes blades determined that his blade number 8, which has the sham pattern, is hypoeutectoid and therefore not capable of forming Fe3C particles which give true wootz its patterns. Sham therefore is not a "true wootz" but is made from superfical bands of ferrite in a pearlite matrix. I will leave it to the chemical engineers to explain the rest as I am not qualified.

Jeff

P.S. the pattern shown on this great piece does appear to be sham.

RSWORD · 8th December 2004, 02:37 AM

It is definately difficult to try and classify wootz as there are a lot of opinions on how to classify. If you look at Manfred Sachse book "Damascus Steel" he breaks wootz down into 5 categories:
1) Stripy damask or Sham
2) Water damask
3) Wavy damask
4) chequered mottle (network) damask
5) Ladder (vertebrae) damask

If you look at the examples of wootz posted on this(p. 72 in the book), my example is much closer to Water damask than Sham based on Sachse classification.

Ann Feuerbach · 24th January 2006, 04:26 PM

Hi all,
From a technological point of view Sham is a type of wootz/pulad as it is crucible steel, however it is made of hypoeutectoid steel (less than 0.8% Carbon), whereas Verhoevens "true" spheroid crucible steel patterns needs to have above 0.8% carbon (hypereutecotid) for that type of microstructure to occur. For those who are interested, arguabley...The Sham pattern is caused by ferrite/pearlite banding whereas the other types (kara Khorasan for example) the pattern is made from the alignment of the cementite (the stripes) in a pearlitic/ferritic matric (background). So from a ancient technology point of view Sham is a type of wootz/pulad as it is made of crucible steel. In ancient times (and even today when doing backyard production) it would be dificult to control the carbon content to such a small degree (0.05% difference would change the microstructure) so, in theory, the same craftsmen could make Shan and Kara Khorasan blades from the same crucible firing, just one handful of plant matter contained more carbon than the other.

6th December 2004, 02:34 AM	#1
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,192	Ariel, The award concept I was thinking of was concerning a Daghestani shashka that had an oval with serrated trim and was said to be a sort of tribal award. Weren't the other awards you note used on Russian shashkas and more as military honors? I tend to agree with your observation that this is likely a Persian shamshir blade. Is there any key notes that would help distinguish a shashka such as this as Chechen vs. Daghestani by hilt characteristics? I know that the decorated niello and embossed hilts are said to be distinguished by some variation in the vegetal decor and depth of relief etc. Best regards, Jim

6th December 2004, 04:17 PM	#2
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	By the way, is it really wootz? I understand that the appearance of wootz is that of very small, tight and compact elongated grains. That was , at least, what I saw each and every time when I handled a real wootz sword and that is how all the examples in the Fiegel's book look like. This one, in contrast, looks like longish, loose and haphazard threads. I would vote for Shams rather than Wootz. Metallurgists, correct me!

7th December 2004, 08:24 PM	#3
RSWORD Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Greensboro, NC Posts: 1,086	Gentleman: Thank you for the feedback thusfar. The teardrop decoration on the handle is inlayed with silver. I do not know if this is simply a decorative affectation or due to the precious metal, a sign of rank or symbol status. The combination of a wootz blade and silver inlay on the handle would make one think it was owned by someone that could afford those qualities. Ariel, It is definitely wootz. Sham is a terminology to describe a type of wootz. Wootz patterns come in a wide variety. Most authors on the subject divide wootz into no less than 4 or 5 categories based on pattern. Wootz that is termed sham typically has the long flowing grain with little contrast. Typically, Syrian or Turkish blades often feature this style and are termed sham. This blade has a bit more activity overall and has a very good color contrast so I would probably not label it as Sham.

7th December 2004, 10:10 PM	#4
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	My understanding is that the term "wootz" (or "ukku") refers strictly to crystalline damascus, whereas "shams" is a variety of the mechanical damascus. These are two totally different animals. By the way, "shams" (not "sham") has nothing to do with "sham" as "fake" ot "imitation". Shams means Syrian.

7th December 2004, 11:01 PM	#5
Jeff D Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: B.C. Canada Posts: 473	As collectors we have considered sham a type of wootz. It is not a mechanical pattern. However Verhoeven, while analysing Zschokkes blades determined that his blade number 8, which has the sham pattern, is hypoeutectoid and therefore not capable of forming Fe3C particles which give true wootz its patterns. Sham therefore is not a "true wootz" but is made from superfical bands of ferrite in a pearlite matrix. I will leave it to the chemical engineers to explain the rest as I am not qualified. Jeff P.S. the pattern shown on this great piece does appear to be sham.

8th December 2004, 02:37 AM	#6
RSWORD Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Greensboro, NC Posts: 1,086	It is definately difficult to try and classify wootz as there are a lot of opinions on how to classify. If you look at Manfred Sachse book "Damascus Steel" he breaks wootz down into 5 categories: 1) Stripy damask or Sham 2) Water damask 3) Wavy damask 4) chequered mottle (network) damask 5) Ladder (vertebrae) damask If you look at the examples of wootz posted on this(p. 72 in the book), my example is much closer to Water damask than Sham based on Sachse classification.

24th January 2006, 04:26 PM	#7
Ann Feuerbach Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 133	Hi all, From a technological point of view Sham is a type of wootz/pulad as it is crucible steel, however it is made of hypoeutectoid steel (less than 0.8% Carbon), whereas Verhoevens "true" spheroid crucible steel patterns needs to have above 0.8% carbon (hypereutecotid) for that type of microstructure to occur. For those who are interested, arguabley...The Sham pattern is caused by ferrite/pearlite banding whereas the other types (kara Khorasan for example) the pattern is made from the alignment of the cementite (the stripes) in a pearlitic/ferritic matric (background). So from a ancient technology point of view Sham is a type of wootz/pulad as it is made of crucible steel. In ancient times (and even today when doing backyard production) it would be dificult to control the carbon content to such a small degree (0.05% difference would change the microstructure) so, in theory, the same craftsmen could make Shan and Kara Khorasan blades from the same crucible firing, just one handful of plant matter contained more carbon than the other.