Quote Originally Posted by certifiedbodyman View Post
I've read a paper (can't remember the author) on the very subject of Damascus steel and its edge keeping tendencies. From the article, the jest of it was that Dmamscus steel did hold an edge better. This was due to the production of the metal and the carbon in it taking the form of carbon nanotubes that were filled with a slightly harder material and the overall structure was called "cementite" if my memory serves. Basically, the Indians (of the country India) who were making the steel for import to Damscus inadvertently found a way (unknown to them) to forge the steel that had something close to the modern day kevlar in it but it was a tube filled with a compound almost like plaster that came from the wood itself that was usued for the carbon. I wish I had the article but alas, I do not.
Here is a citation of the original article:

Nature 444, 286 (16 November 2006) | doi:10.1038/444286a; Received 24 July 2006; Accepted 25 October 2006; Published online 15 November 2006

Materials: Carbon nanotubes in an ancient Damascus sabre

M. Reibold1,2, P. Paufler1, A. A. Levin1, W. Kochmann1, N. Pätzke1 & D. C. Meyer1

Top of page
The steel of Damascus blades, which were first encountered by the Crusaders when fighting against Muslims, had features not found in European steels — a characteristic wavy banding pattern known as damask, extraordinary mechanical properties, and an exceptionally sharp cutting edge. Here we use high-resolution transmission electron microscopy to examine a sample of Damascus sabre steel from the seventeenth century and find that it contains carbon nanotubes as well as cementite nanowires. This microstructure may offer insight into the beautiful banding pattern of the ultrahigh-carbon steel created from an ancient recipe that was lost long ago.

Top of page
Institut fur Strukturphysik, Technische Universität Dresden, 01062 Dresden, Germany
Triebenberg Laboratory, Technische Universität Dresden, 01062 Dresden, Germany
Krüllsstrasse 4b, 06766 Wolfen, Germany


These folks were originally looking for cementite wires and found the nanotubes when they dissolved away the steel matrix with hydrochloric acid. John Verhoeven, another notable wootz researcher, has some questions about this because it is possible for cementite to form rods which would look like tubes. Another criticism is the use of the tunneling electron microscope which could form tubes and/or contaminate the sample. There wasn't any discussion of sharpness or edge holding. The end results remain under discussion even by the metallurgists that found this phenomena.

Manufacturing wootz requires a crucible heated to above the melting temperature of iron. Any carbon source, most likely charcoal, only amounts to 1.4% (or so) of the total melt with slight variation. No wood is going to be left over. That was long gone when the collier made the charcoal.

While technically cementite is defined by some chemists as a ceramic, it's an iron carbide that is only viewed well at the microscopic level. I can't recall any articles discussing plasters. I dunno where that came from unless you read about a recipe for making wootz that included something like plaster (calcium carbonate) to be consumed as a flux or slag reformer. That could be true. I use similar compounds when smelting steel. That would have been consumed during the melt and not included in the button of steel.

Wootz does have some cutting efficiency that is better than some modern steels but that is due to the increased number of carbides in the pearlite matrix that holds them. This was true up through the early nineties based on the CATRAL studies in the UK. The new crucible particle metals (CPM) are showing some cutting efficiency and abrasion resistance that is as good as or better than classic wootz. The nanotube article does not mention any cutting tests.

And lastly true, the ancient metallurgists did some amazing things without knowing what we know today. In this modern internet era, it's entirely too possible for a slurry of information to develop that's made up of bits and pieces that do not give a wholly accurate picture. This has been well discussed here on SRP for something as simple as the advertising claims where metallurgical concepts (Manganese, Magnetic, Damascus, and etc.) appear on razors that have nothing to do with the likely contents of the steels used. Modern blade makers are not far removed from those temptations too.

I only want to help keep the myth and magic from mixing too well so we can't separate the things we now know from the things they didn't know then.