|  | 
|  9th January 2009, 03:45 PM | #1 | 
| Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI 
					Posts: 5,503
				 |  Is it wootz (sham)? | 
|   |   | 
|  9th January 2009, 04:21 PM | #2 | 
| Member Join Date: Jan 2006 
					Posts: 936
				 |   
			
			My first guess was for wootz. Not the best quality pattern, but I think it is wootz... if judging by appearance. The chemanalysis would propably not confirm it:-) Sham is by definition low contrast, and the contrast is high here, hence I'd not vote for sham. Last edited by ALEX; 9th January 2009 at 06:36 PM. | 
|   |   | 
|  9th January 2009, 04:50 PM | #3 | |
| Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Paris (FR*) Cairo (EG) 
					Posts: 1,142
				 |   Quote: 
  à + Dom | |
|   |   | 
|  9th January 2009, 05:49 PM | #4 | 
| Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Greensboro, NC 
					Posts: 1,093
				 |   
			
			In the woostz spectrum, most patterns with a very elongated grain, like this one, I would typically refer to as sham.  As Alex states, most sham tends to have low contrast but I have seen over the years some with bolder contrast but all always have the real elongated pattern.
		 | 
|   |   | 
|  9th January 2009, 10:43 PM | #5 | 
| Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI 
					Posts: 5,503
				 |   
			
			OK, next step: This is an old Russian dagger. Would it be Anosov/Chernov's bulat? | 
|   |   | 
|  | 
| 
 | 
 |