-
The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is ready to order! See this thread for details: https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/bladeforums-2024-traditional-knife.2003187/
Price is$300$250 ea (shipped within CONUS). If you live outside the US, I will contact you after your order for extra shipping charges.
Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/ - Order as many as you like, we have plenty.
How good were the sword steels of old?
- Thread starter GREENJACKET
- Start date
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2000
- Messages
- 1,363
Keeping this thread as broad and as general as possible, Japanese swords blades were built fairly stiff compared to let us say the much later European Broadsword.
I know tradition, swordplay, armour, gunpowder and tactics have a huge influence to play, but how much was it due to the limitations of the raw materials and technology?
Europeans went from Roman short stabbing; to longer slashing, back to more ridged thrusting to counter plate armour; on to the rapier, back to basket-hilted broadswords, and everything in between. They seemed to be less stuck with their metallugy and could produce whatever was the flavour of the month.
How tough were old swords, and if we know that, is anyone bettering them? Were they not that great, so its not that difficult to improve on them?
A reproduction is one thing, but a light sabre another. Is there a 21st centry sword? Just for the hell of it.
I know tradition, swordplay, armour, gunpowder and tactics have a huge influence to play, but how much was it due to the limitations of the raw materials and technology?
Europeans went from Roman short stabbing; to longer slashing, back to more ridged thrusting to counter plate armour; on to the rapier, back to basket-hilted broadswords, and everything in between. They seemed to be less stuck with their metallugy and could produce whatever was the flavour of the month.
How tough were old swords, and if we know that, is anyone bettering them? Were they not that great, so its not that difficult to improve on them?
A reproduction is one thing, but a light sabre another. Is there a 21st centry sword? Just for the hell of it.
If the person's widow still has the sword, and if I can borrow my son's digicam, I will take some photos and have him help me post them. Yes it was most impressive. If my memory serves, the blade was only very slightly tapered and was fullered. It was also rather thin and light, as you may imagine.
------------------
Walk in the Light,
Hugh Fuller
------------------
Walk in the Light,
Hugh Fuller
- Joined
- Jan 13, 1999
- Messages
- 1,422
It is probably not that difficult to make tougher swords than those of the Dark Ages/early Medieval periods. Unfortunately we have very little in the way of evidence to make anything more than conjecture.
Craig (I don't recall his last name) of Arms & Armor said many of the Medieval swords he examined were not made of steel but iron, and often only the first half of the sword was steel welded onto iron. Some of the swords, even the ones made of high quality steel were apparently not heat-treated.
It is of course possible that the aforementioned swords were "munitions grade" -- mass-produced and made by the lowest bidder for the poor bloody infantry. However, it is also possible that high quality swords, at least in the early Middle Ages, were something of an oddity.
There is an anecdotal reference in the Song of Roland. When Roland lay dying in a battle, he wanted to destroy his prized sword Durandal so that it does not fall into enemy hands. He smashed a heavy rock onto the blade, but to his amazement, Durandal did not break.
Roland was the champion of Emperor Charlemagne. A sword befitting of his station must represent the very best available in his day. The sword's historical existance is not relevant, but as an object of legend the tale of how it survived such punishment evidently impressed warriors of the early Middle Ages who were intimately familiar with the limitations of real swords. Therefore it is reasonable to assume most swords of the early Middle Ages would not stand up to such abuse.
On the other hand, I think it highly likely a well-made sword today would easily take such a punishment.
I think it was Dr. Jim Hrisoulas who said if he could take 5 tons of 5160 steel back in time with him, he would make the best swords in the land.
Since metallurgy and heat treat technology has improved immensely over the past thousand years, this is probably of no surprise. Yet even the best swords made today have obvious limits, which leads me to believe that the majority of performance legends surrounding swords of antiquity are rooted more in myth than reality; and that their performance, in the context of toughness as we associate with today, were probably not all that impressive.
[This message has been edited by tallwingedgoat (edited 09-01-2000).]
Craig (I don't recall his last name) of Arms & Armor said many of the Medieval swords he examined were not made of steel but iron, and often only the first half of the sword was steel welded onto iron. Some of the swords, even the ones made of high quality steel were apparently not heat-treated.
It is of course possible that the aforementioned swords were "munitions grade" -- mass-produced and made by the lowest bidder for the poor bloody infantry. However, it is also possible that high quality swords, at least in the early Middle Ages, were something of an oddity.
There is an anecdotal reference in the Song of Roland. When Roland lay dying in a battle, he wanted to destroy his prized sword Durandal so that it does not fall into enemy hands. He smashed a heavy rock onto the blade, but to his amazement, Durandal did not break.
Roland was the champion of Emperor Charlemagne. A sword befitting of his station must represent the very best available in his day. The sword's historical existance is not relevant, but as an object of legend the tale of how it survived such punishment evidently impressed warriors of the early Middle Ages who were intimately familiar with the limitations of real swords. Therefore it is reasonable to assume most swords of the early Middle Ages would not stand up to such abuse.
On the other hand, I think it highly likely a well-made sword today would easily take such a punishment.
I think it was Dr. Jim Hrisoulas who said if he could take 5 tons of 5160 steel back in time with him, he would make the best swords in the land.
Since metallurgy and heat treat technology has improved immensely over the past thousand years, this is probably of no surprise. Yet even the best swords made today have obvious limits, which leads me to believe that the majority of performance legends surrounding swords of antiquity are rooted more in myth than reality; and that their performance, in the context of toughness as we associate with today, were probably not all that impressive.
[This message has been edited by tallwingedgoat (edited 09-01-2000).]
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2000
- Messages
- 941
If you want my honest opinion, we CAN achieve equal or even better quality swords than were made in the past. However some people think it's only because we have better steels. I think it's primarily because of a higher working knowledge of the steels we have, with a greater degree of control and capability with thermal treatment. Not to mention we have a lot more consistency with modern steel sources.
However, I am still generally an uptight traditionalist.
Shinryû.
However, I am still generally an uptight traditionalist.
Shinryû.
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2000
- Messages
- 52
Craig prefers to use the high carbon steels rather than any Spring steels. We had a lively debate going on the NetSword Forum about the medieval sword makers and their weapons awhile back.
Wootz Steel was to heat black magnetite ore the presence of carbon in a sealed clay crucible inside a charcoal furnace. The carbon used is from bamboo or other plants. Then the crucible was stacked with some others and heated in a furnace in a blast of air for a couple of hours or so. The ore was reduced to iron, whch then absorbed the carbon. The molten iron was reduced to a "button' of metal that could be reheated and cooled again four or five times (according to some accounts) to let cool in the furnace for several days. The result was a 5 inch round "cake" of steely iron and about 2 pounds. Some of the wootz was exported as rods instead of cakes...At least this was the way the Hyderabad region of India made it since about 600bc. They traded this wootz to the Romans. Persia also made steely cakes using a similar process.
The way the Western Smiths did it was like casehardening so that you had a softer core of iron with an outside of steely iron. Then the smith could take a bundle of rods, twist and forgeweld them...the result would produce a 'pattern' from the twisting. The best pattern welded blades were built up of carburized bars and with cutting edges of carburized iron. Not all the patternwelded blades were of good quality and some were found that might not have been tempered at all but the finest of them were extremely flexible and could cut like a razor.
Davidson's "The Sword in Anglo Saxon England" goes into great detail about these swords and the quality of many of the ones found up to that point. From the Vimose, Nydam and other finds. But the about the Ninth century, patternwelding went into the decline with the advent of better ores, furnaces, more settled times compared to the Migration period/Vendal period.
There are also other records from those who knew the difference between the European and Eastern style blades. One writer, Al-Kindi, describes the Frankish blades as being made of soft iron and steel, forged together, with the patterns formed by this mixing of metals. another writer, Al-Biruni, apparently knew a great deal about the making of blades himself and writes the Rus also made swords and found the damascened Eastern "steel could not stand their cold of their winters". So the Rus made their swords by making a central panel of tow sorts of iron, soft iron an dsteely ron, welding the two together. But, the smiths made the patterns themselves rather than from just the automatic way the Eastern damascus patterning was developed.
These swords were so well thought of that another Arabic writer, Ibn Miskawaih (died about 1043) records that after the Rus lost power in one district..."the Moslems disturbed their graves and brought out a number of swords, which were in great demand to this day for their sharpness and excellence." Frankish swordblades were in great demand but forbidden to be exported to the East so they were smuggled out. Well, the Frankish swords were also forbidden to be sold to Vikings/Scandinavians too but they got them anyway. That Al-Biruni lived in Afghanistan and yet knew about the Western smiths is a testiment to the fame and renown of the Western smiths of the time.
Wootz Steel was to heat black magnetite ore the presence of carbon in a sealed clay crucible inside a charcoal furnace. The carbon used is from bamboo or other plants. Then the crucible was stacked with some others and heated in a furnace in a blast of air for a couple of hours or so. The ore was reduced to iron, whch then absorbed the carbon. The molten iron was reduced to a "button' of metal that could be reheated and cooled again four or five times (according to some accounts) to let cool in the furnace for several days. The result was a 5 inch round "cake" of steely iron and about 2 pounds. Some of the wootz was exported as rods instead of cakes...At least this was the way the Hyderabad region of India made it since about 600bc. They traded this wootz to the Romans. Persia also made steely cakes using a similar process.
The way the Western Smiths did it was like casehardening so that you had a softer core of iron with an outside of steely iron. Then the smith could take a bundle of rods, twist and forgeweld them...the result would produce a 'pattern' from the twisting. The best pattern welded blades were built up of carburized bars and with cutting edges of carburized iron. Not all the patternwelded blades were of good quality and some were found that might not have been tempered at all but the finest of them were extremely flexible and could cut like a razor.
Davidson's "The Sword in Anglo Saxon England" goes into great detail about these swords and the quality of many of the ones found up to that point. From the Vimose, Nydam and other finds. But the about the Ninth century, patternwelding went into the decline with the advent of better ores, furnaces, more settled times compared to the Migration period/Vendal period.
There are also other records from those who knew the difference between the European and Eastern style blades. One writer, Al-Kindi, describes the Frankish blades as being made of soft iron and steel, forged together, with the patterns formed by this mixing of metals. another writer, Al-Biruni, apparently knew a great deal about the making of blades himself and writes the Rus also made swords and found the damascened Eastern "steel could not stand their cold of their winters". So the Rus made their swords by making a central panel of tow sorts of iron, soft iron an dsteely ron, welding the two together. But, the smiths made the patterns themselves rather than from just the automatic way the Eastern damascus patterning was developed.
These swords were so well thought of that another Arabic writer, Ibn Miskawaih (died about 1043) records that after the Rus lost power in one district..."the Moslems disturbed their graves and brought out a number of swords, which were in great demand to this day for their sharpness and excellence." Frankish swordblades were in great demand but forbidden to be exported to the East so they were smuggled out. Well, the Frankish swords were also forbidden to be sold to Vikings/Scandinavians too but they got them anyway. That Al-Biruni lived in Afghanistan and yet knew about the Western smiths is a testiment to the fame and renown of the Western smiths of the time.
Laurie,
Wootz is really amazing stuff. Remember the thread I posted about my friend's Shamshir?
The blade is only 3-4 mm thick at it's thickest area, just infront of the hilt. And it has a continous distal taper, and yet it come out fine with cutting a piece of pig's spine!
When the sword first arrived, it was slightly bent to one side. (We practice iaido and have bent quite a bit of antique nihonto back to normal, most of them are almost dead soft.) As the blade is so thin, we are reuctant at first to bend the blade, as if it is hard enough to use, then it may snap in bending, if it is resistant to snapping, with such a thin X-section, it is useless.
After 2 days of thinking, we drawn our conclusion. We have to try and bend it back to straight. The resistance to bending it back is very strong but up to a certain point, it can be straigtened. That's amazing!! With that kind of resistance to bending, I would have expected it to snap.
My friend has done a preliminary light etching, and found that maybe, just maybe at the moment, the blade is differentially heat-treated as the back etched a bit faster than the back. And then he tried to use his ats-55 pocket knife to cut into the edge and the back of the sword. The knife can cut into the back but not the edge??!! But he'll do another slow etch to see.
He decided to only do a very very light edge, just to show a little bit of the wootz pattern as this seemed to be a using weapon when it was made.
I've read some posting on rec.knives newsgroup (mostly posted by Dr. Hrisoulas) a few years back about this stuff, but only up to now that I know truely how amazig this stuff is.
Laurie,
Do you know if the smiths will forge-fold wootz? As I read that this stuff is very hot-short and forging it alone required great skill.
Joe
Wootz is really amazing stuff. Remember the thread I posted about my friend's Shamshir?
The blade is only 3-4 mm thick at it's thickest area, just infront of the hilt. And it has a continous distal taper, and yet it come out fine with cutting a piece of pig's spine!
When the sword first arrived, it was slightly bent to one side. (We practice iaido and have bent quite a bit of antique nihonto back to normal, most of them are almost dead soft.) As the blade is so thin, we are reuctant at first to bend the blade, as if it is hard enough to use, then it may snap in bending, if it is resistant to snapping, with such a thin X-section, it is useless.
After 2 days of thinking, we drawn our conclusion. We have to try and bend it back to straight. The resistance to bending it back is very strong but up to a certain point, it can be straigtened. That's amazing!! With that kind of resistance to bending, I would have expected it to snap.
My friend has done a preliminary light etching, and found that maybe, just maybe at the moment, the blade is differentially heat-treated as the back etched a bit faster than the back. And then he tried to use his ats-55 pocket knife to cut into the edge and the back of the sword. The knife can cut into the back but not the edge??!! But he'll do another slow etch to see.
He decided to only do a very very light edge, just to show a little bit of the wootz pattern as this seemed to be a using weapon when it was made.
I've read some posting on rec.knives newsgroup (mostly posted by Dr. Hrisoulas) a few years back about this stuff, but only up to now that I know truely how amazig this stuff is.
Laurie,
Do you know if the smiths will forge-fold wootz? As I read that this stuff is very hot-short and forging it alone required great skill.
Joe