![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 2,718
|
![]()
I always thought ingots were like the round one you show Gene, but after having read Ann’s article in Minerva Magazine No. 13, issue 4, 2002, I was wiser, ingots can be found in many shapes and sizes, the ones made in Merv weighted according to Ann’s article about 2 kg.
Gene how many different ingots do you have, and do they have the same weight? Is there any writing or marking on them? I remember to have seen a picture of a round ingot with some writing on it. Ann, do you know if the shape of the ingots was a kind of ‘trademark’ for a region? Would the kind of clay used, ‘porcelain’ clay vs. other types of clay, have any influence on the ingot? Maybe we should start another thread on ingots. Somewhere I saw, that in one of al-Biruni’s (973-1048) books, I think it must be in Kitab al-Hind that he describes iron/iron production(?) in India. Do you know if it is in this book? Jens |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Deceased
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: USA, DEEP SOUTH, GEORGIA, Y'all hear?
Posts: 121
|
![]()
JENS
This is the link to the wootz bar I had and made it into a Bowie by Al Pendray and also tested by Verhoeven. The end with the inscription is still with Pendray, at least it was the last time I saw him. http://www.vikingsword.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/002326.html Gene |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 2,718
|
![]()
Gene, the ingot you show on the link seems to be round and flat. The one I saw a picture of was shaped like the round one you show on a picture on this topic, but larger - I think. The writing was on top of it, and looked, as I recall it, like the writing on the one you show on the link.
Jens |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 133
|
![]()
Thanks Gene for the generous offer!
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 2,718
|
![]()
A small knife I have, in a scabbard together with a katar, is very magnetic, but the katar is not.
The picture to the left shows the tip of the blade, and the one to the right the compass at the base of the blade. The small knife is made in the first quarter of 1600, the katar is newer. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 655
|
![]()
When magnetic moments are positioned alongside a line (good approximation for thin swords), there are basically two stable configurations - all magnetic moments are oriented along the line, parallel to each other, or they are all perpendicular to the line, and anti-parallel to each other, i.e. +-+-.
What you have most likely shows that you physically have different steels (most likely phases or chemistry) at the tip and for the rest of the blade, so you've these two macrodomains anti-parallel to each other. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 2,718
|
![]()
Rivkin, thank you for your answer. I understand what the words, but I have a feeling, that I don't understand the whole meaning. I understand, that when we have come as far as we have, and want to go further, the language is likely to get more complicated. Is it possible for you to explain it in another way?
Here is a picture of the katar and the little knife. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|