Damascus Steel

[Alanus]

Nearly no historian or archeologist is able to determine the differences between welded steels (pattern welded or welded blade constructions where the pattern is secondary)and the family of the asian crucible steels

I just finished reading the Master's Thesis link posted above, the author stating that, "While pattern welded swords have been around since the late iron age, they did not become popular until the second century [AD]."

First, I don't find any difference in terminalogy between "late iron age" and the 2nd century AD, the definition is nebulous. Second, I agree with XorX from his quote above. We all know where I stand: that it's odd that the incidence of welded swords diametrically increases with the time-frame of the Migration period (as noted in the Master's Thesis). :dizzy:

It certainly appears that the technology seems to spread from East to West. Folded steel blades start showing up during the Warring States Period in China. That's prior to 220 BC. The Type 1 Sarmatian sword has its root in China. (see 2 sources, Truesdale and Simonenko) By the 1st century AD, we find the Chinese forging sanmai blades, three layers of folded material, two of very mild steel on the outside (even iron) with a central layer of folded high-carbon steel. For more on Chinese blades, you can Google the subject Chinese Sword History, Thomas Chen.

What I'm getting at is the more than distinct probability that pattern-welded or folded steel technology appears to reach Europe-- the Romans, the Saxons, etc.-- from the migration waves which coincidentally (or not) brought the Sarmatians and Goths into the Western European sphere. This also follows tha same route and time-frame as "Migration Art," all those gem stones that came in from India and the Orient.

All I'm saying is that folded steel technology seems to follow a historically known route, and that the root was Asian.

Am I totally wrong? And if I am, where along that 5,000 mile route am I wrong? :whistle: