Why did iron production in India stop?

Rick · 23rd April 2005, 04:14 PM

I could agree with Tom , in that the idea for the colonizing powers was to open new markets for the products of their homeland/s .

A lot of the Great Game (aside from the potential invasion of India by Russia) was all about who got to sell their national wares in the disputed territories .

I would not be surprised if the British discouraged , or did not support , ore mining and smelting in India . That was not what they were after as they had plenty of good steel at home . England wanted the exotic stuff that only India and the Far East could offer .

I often wonder how prized the wootz of India really was to the English , they must have destroyed a hell of a lot of it when they broke up the nation states .

Why bother making steel in India when you had masses of unemployed at home who needed jobs ?

Jens Nordlunde · 23rd April 2005, 05:04 PM

I think you are right Rick, besides it takes a lot of charcoal to make a ton of iron – and they made many hundreds of tons of iron – over the years thousands of tons.

See what the author writes in a footnote:
In sixteenth century England there was a flourishing village melting industry. But in 1558 and Act forbade the felling of timber for charcoal and the opening of new works anywhere save in Surry, Kent and Sussex. In 1585 these counties were also included. Foreign iron began to be imported, and from 1665-1740 the number of native furnaces fell from 300 to 59. In the middle of the eighteenth century, the iron works were moved from the woods to the coalfields, and the modern iron industry began.

I think we can conclude, that the lack of iron production in India, was not due to lack of iron ore, as often mentioned before – the reason was quite different.

Rick · 23rd April 2005, 05:13 PM

Also Jens , during that time England needed all the wood it could get its hands on for the Royal Navy , England's Wooden Walls .

Before the American Revolution and after there was a brisk business in New England supplying timber for shipbuilding . Mast stock was a specialty of New England's timber industry .

God help the Yankee colonial who cut down an Eastern White Pine marked with the King's broad arrow .

tom hyle · 23rd April 2005, 05:43 PM

Protectionism for native Brittish industry may have played a role, and also the English may not have considered the Hindoos "civilized" enough (ie. industrialized enough) at the time to operate such factories properly, and I'm certainly not saying I'd agree with this, but it seems like maybe typical ethnocentric thinking for humans. Real good question though, Jens, and I wonder about it, too. As for 19th and early 20th century W European attitudes towards wootz, they seem to be a blend of horror/fear at the deeds its weilders could do with it, and the contempt in which most traditional (including European traditional) material culture was then held by an emergent culture mostly unmixedly proud of its own relatively new industrialism.

Rick · 23rd April 2005, 07:07 PM

"Protectionism for native Brittish industry may have played a role, "

>May have ? I think that's what Imperialism was all about ; enriching the Mother country .

"and also the English may not have considered the Hindoos "civilized" enough (ie. industrialized enough) at the time to operate such factories properly, and I'm certainly not saying I'd agree with this, but it seems like maybe typical ethnocentric thinking for humans."

>If we consider the majority of steel E.W.'s coming out of India even today we are looking at spotty quality control at the best .

" Real good question though, Jens, and I wonder about it, too. As for 19th and early 20th century W European attitudes towards wootz, they seem to be a blend of horror/fear at the deeds its weilders could do with it, and the contempt in which most traditional (including European traditional) material culture was then held by an emergent culture mostly unmixedly proud of its own relatively new industrialism . "

> I would submit that the swords of Islam struck the Crusader era Europeans with awe and horror. When we get to the 19th 20th c. 'then' the ignorance and contempt becomes more apparent with the critical exception of the art connoisseur . Have you read Elgood's book on Hindu Arms ? In it he cites various on scene sources that said the native states were for the most part quite inefficient at war .

Anyway , my two cents worth .

tom hyle · 23rd April 2005, 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rick

> I would submit that the swords of Islam struck the Crusader era Europeans with awe and horror. When we get to the 19th 20th c. 'then' the ignorance and contempt becomes more apparent with the critical exception of the art connoisseur . Have you read Elgood's book on Hindu Arms ? In it he cites various on scene sources that said the native states were for the most part quite inefficient at war .

Anyway , my two cents worth .

Yeah; I think it was more of an industrial attitude toward traditional technology than anything else. I still encounter a lot of an attitude among current N Americans that while old cutlery is interesting and all it is not of the quality of today's. I know in some fields this just ain't so. Now, as to what's possible today; maybe so, but industry seems to have a way of both creating the possible and finding it uneconomic..........Hindoo blade work is, as Rick says of......was it spotty quality control or something? That is, though, somewhat in the nature of it still being somewhat done in traditional small work-shop settings, though I suppose that's on it's way out everywhere..... And some of it is really nice, too....

Jens Nordlunde · 27th April 2005, 09:16 AM

In the book mentioned above, the author writes about ores in different places, telling about the colour and quality of the different ores, and whether the ore was found mixed with earth, clay or maybe in stones, which had to be granulated before the melting. In some of the ores the iron quality was so poor, that things made of the iron would break quickly.

The huts where they melted the ores were with a roof, but without walls, but within time, the walls build themselves, as all the slag was thrown just outside the hut. This information’s he got from the Agaria’s – and they should know, having lived from iron producing for many generations.

There were different ways the Agria’s used, when they needed to find new iron ores. One was by dreaming where they would find it, and another one was, to go out in the wood and shoot a red arrow in the air, where it landed they started to dig. Not very scientific I would say, but on the other hand, if it worked, the whole area must have been one big iron ore, covered with more or less earth.
It should also be mentioned that the iron the Agaria’s made, was mostly, if not all, used locally, and that the Agaria’s mostly were operating in a belt between Orissa and Rajastan.

The iron export was mainly from the western and southern part of India, as well as from the northern part, probably along the Silk Road.
We mostly tend to focus on Indian steel export going west, but the caravans travelling the Silk Road have, most likely, taken ingots and maybe blades east too, just as the boats from the east and south India sailed westward with their cargos of Indian steel, they most probably also sailed eastwards with the same kind of cargoes, even more so, as the Indians had colonies in their eastern neighbour countries, in the early times – as far away as Japan, it is said.

When we come to discus the Indian export of blades and ingots to Persia and Syria it has been mentioned earlier, that a minor part of the ingots were of inferior quality. This meant that the Persian merchants wanted their own people in India, to test the ingots before they were shipped – but it also meant, that Indian merchants traded in the Persian and Syrian bazaars, guaranteeing the quality of the ingots/blades sold. Also, we must not forget, that the Persian/Syrian markets were not the only markets on which the Indians sold ingots/blades – I don’t know, but should I guess, I would think that the African market at times could have been as big, if not bigger.

23rd April 2005, 07:07 PM	#5
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,336	Quotes and Responses "Protectionism for native Brittish industry may have played a role, " >May have ? I think that's what Imperialism was all about ; enriching the Mother country . "and also the English may not have considered the Hindoos "civilized" enough (ie. industrialized enough) at the time to operate such factories properly, and I'm certainly not saying I'd agree with this, but it seems like maybe typical ethnocentric thinking for humans." >If we consider the majority of steel E.W.'s coming out of India even today we are looking at spotty quality control at the best . " Real good question though, Jens, and I wonder about it, too. As for 19th and early 20th century W European attitudes towards wootz, they seem to be a blend of horror/fear at the deeds its weilders could do with it, and the contempt in which most traditional (including European traditional) material culture was then held by an emergent culture mostly unmixedly proud of its own relatively new industrialism . " > I would submit that the swords of Islam struck the Crusader era Europeans with awe and horror. When we get to the 19th 20th c. 'then' the ignorance and contempt becomes more apparent with the critical exception of the art connoisseur . Have you read Elgood's book on Hindu Arms ? In it he cites various on scene sources that said the native states were for the most part quite inefficient at war . Anyway , my two cents worth .

23rd April 2005, 04:14 PM	#1
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,336	I could agree with Tom , in that the idea for the colonizing powers was to open new markets for the products of their homeland/s . A lot of the Great Game (aside from the potential invasion of India by Russia) was all about who got to sell their national wares in the disputed territories . I would not be surprised if the British discouraged , or did not support , ore mining and smelting in India . That was not what they were after as they had plenty of good steel at home . England wanted the exotic stuff that only India and the Far East could offer . I often wonder how prized the wootz of India really was to the English , they must have destroyed a hell of a lot of it when they broke up the nation states . Why bother making steel in India when you had masses of unemployed at home who needed jobs ?

23rd April 2005, 05:04 PM	#2
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	I think you are right Rick, besides it takes a lot of charcoal to make a ton of iron – and they made many hundreds of tons of iron – over the years thousands of tons. See what the author writes in a footnote: In sixteenth century England there was a flourishing village melting industry. But in 1558 and Act forbade the felling of timber for charcoal and the opening of new works anywhere save in Surry, Kent and Sussex. In 1585 these counties were also included. Foreign iron began to be imported, and from 1665-1740 the number of native furnaces fell from 300 to 59. In the middle of the eighteenth century, the iron works were moved from the woods to the coalfields, and the modern iron industry began. I think we can conclude, that the lack of iron production in India, was not due to lack of iron ore, as often mentioned before – the reason was quite different.

23rd April 2005, 05:13 PM	#3
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,336	Also Jens , during that time England needed all the wood it could get its hands on for the Royal Navy , England's Wooden Walls . Before the American Revolution and after there was a brisk business in New England supplying timber for shipbuilding . Mast stock was a specialty of New England's timber industry . God help the Yankee colonial who cut down an Eastern White Pine marked with the King's broad arrow .

23rd April 2005, 05:43 PM	#4
tom hyle Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 1,254	Protectionism for native Brittish industry may have played a role, and also the English may not have considered the Hindoos "civilized" enough (ie. industrialized enough) at the time to operate such factories properly, and I'm certainly not saying I'd agree with this, but it seems like maybe typical ethnocentric thinking for humans. Real good question though, Jens, and I wonder about it, too. As for 19th and early 20th century W European attitudes towards wootz, they seem to be a blend of horror/fear at the deeds its weilders could do with it, and the contempt in which most traditional (including European traditional) material culture was then held by an emergent culture mostly unmixedly proud of its own relatively new industrialism.

27th April 2005, 09:16 AM	#7
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	In the book mentioned above, the author writes about ores in different places, telling about the colour and quality of the different ores, and whether the ore was found mixed with earth, clay or maybe in stones, which had to be granulated before the melting. In some of the ores the iron quality was so poor, that things made of the iron would break quickly. The huts where they melted the ores were with a roof, but without walls, but within time, the walls build themselves, as all the slag was thrown just outside the hut. This information’s he got from the Agaria’s – and they should know, having lived from iron producing for many generations. There were different ways the Agria’s used, when they needed to find new iron ores. One was by dreaming where they would find it, and another one was, to go out in the wood and shoot a red arrow in the air, where it landed they started to dig. Not very scientific I would say, but on the other hand, if it worked, the whole area must have been one big iron ore, covered with more or less earth. It should also be mentioned that the iron the Agaria’s made, was mostly, if not all, used locally, and that the Agaria’s mostly were operating in a belt between Orissa and Rajastan. The iron export was mainly from the western and southern part of India, as well as from the northern part, probably along the Silk Road. We mostly tend to focus on Indian steel export going west, but the caravans travelling the Silk Road have, most likely, taken ingots and maybe blades east too, just as the boats from the east and south India sailed westward with their cargos of Indian steel, they most probably also sailed eastwards with the same kind of cargoes, even more so, as the Indians had colonies in their eastern neighbour countries, in the early times – as far away as Japan, it is said. When we come to discus the Indian export of blades and ingots to Persia and Syria it has been mentioned earlier, that a minor part of the ingots were of inferior quality. This meant that the Persian merchants wanted their own people in India, to test the ingots before they were shipped – but it also meant, that Indian merchants traded in the Persian and Syrian bazaars, guaranteeing the quality of the ingots/blades sold. Also, we must not forget, that the Persian/Syrian markets were not the only markets on which the Indians sold ingots/blades – I don’t know, but should I guess, I would think that the African market at times could have been as big, if not bigger.