He didn't say much about the pieces of metal he put into the crucible.
I assume they were from the bloom iron- the spongy mass of glass and
iron that is the normal product of smelting back then. Repeated forge
welding this mass produced wrought iron which had the slag inclusions
they were talking about that were in common swords of the time.. This
Iron can have any level of carbon content which is controlled by the %
iron in the ore and the amount or ratio of charcoal to ore ratio (by
weight) and probably by some of the dynamic particulars of the furnace
dimensions. So How did he (and they) determine how much carbon to put
in and what was his final carbon content of the sword he recreated? They
didn't say. Of course in medieval times, they could not have known this
type of data, AND they (medieval) measured everything by volume which
mucked with the systems and made the smelting technology not very
transportable. As far as proof of Frankish origin, I think the video
said that the word Ulfberht was of Frankish origin, but that how and
where they were made and by who (over 200 yeas time) was the big misery.
- I so want to smelt some Iron. About ready to throw in the towel
on finding ore and buying some Iron oxide used in clay glazes ant trying
to make some fake ore.
On 9/26/2013 9:23 AM, Jenna wrote:
> So, how many people spent 55 minutes drooling in front of "Secret of the Viking Sword" on PBS last night? The joy I experienced was great.
> I for one must firmly disagree with any scholars who think that the crosses in the inlaid name on the blade prove the blades were of Frankish origin. The fact that these magnificent high-tech blades have only been found in Norse sites pretty much negates that theory in my mind. I should delight to hear discussion on this and other matters related to the program and that lovely, wovely, gorgeous sword.