http://www.angelfire.com/journal2/firefromsteel/
If you don't see exactly what you want and you have a picture of it, email it to Mike and I'm sure he'll make it. As far as I know he doesn't charge a premium for custom pieces unless it requires a lot more work to forge. I've been using one of his steels for over a year now, and it's far better than the ones many vendors carry.
Here's a source for correct fire steels
Moderator: Glen K
-
Otto von Teich
- Archive Member
- Posts: 17388
- Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2000 2:01 am
- Location: The Great State of Texas.
-
Thomas Powers
- Archive Member
- Posts: 13112
- Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2000 1:01 am
- Location: Socorro, New Mexico
Very nicely done, though to be completely accurate these are correct in design; but not made out of the same material as the originals. Of course carb urizing wrought iron or finding a high carbon section of a bloom iwould greatly add to the ammount of effort to make them and so the price for "correct" would be quite high!
Just remember to say "this *design" or "style" of striker dates to the period rather than this is what was used"
They probably work better thqan most of the originals too!
Thomas
Just remember to say "this *design" or "style" of striker dates to the period rather than this is what was used"
They probably work better thqan most of the originals too!
Thomas
-
Destichado
- Archive Member
- Posts: 5623
- Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2000 1:01 am
Oh come now, isn't that stretching it a bit?
After a certain point, steel is steel is steel. The stone doesn't care. If you actualy requare that degree of authenticity before feeling comfortable, might I suggest purchasing an orriginal? They generaly aren't all that expensive, you know, and they're not likely to wear out, either.
After a certain point, steel is steel is steel. The stone doesn't care. If you actualy requare that degree of authenticity before feeling comfortable, might I suggest purchasing an orriginal? They generaly aren't all that expensive, you know, and they're not likely to wear out, either.
-
Thomas Powers
- Archive Member
- Posts: 13112
- Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2000 1:01 am
- Location: Socorro, New Mexico
Yes I see a difference in what was actually used and what just "looks like it". I have no problem with using substitutes as lone as one is clear about them being a substitute and doesn't mislead others.
Are you sure the originals work quite as well as ones made from modern steels? Does this make a difference?
Would you be ok with folks wearing "linen look" materials and telling folks they are just the same? Most LH groups seem to have some variant of the 5' rule and so they get to thinking that stuff that meet that rule are representative of the time period even if they are actually made from materials that weren't available till 500 years later. I try to remember that "good enough" is a minimum standard and it can be fun to try to gradually tweak things a bit higher on the authenticity scale (I see authenticity as a sliding scale not a binary---there is always room for improvement.)
As for gett ing an original, well I plan to forge one from some of the wrought iron I'm smelting.
So I would say there are "correctly styled" and quite usable but one could aspire to one in the correct style made of the correct material---or even from one of those to an original and perhaps from an original to one provanenced to your place and time of interest.
This very discussion has probably opened people to the fact that there was a radical change in iron/steel making that occured in the mid 1800's and that medieval and renaissance iron/steel *was* different---I'm all for education!
Thomas
Are you sure the originals work quite as well as ones made from modern steels? Does this make a difference?
Would you be ok with folks wearing "linen look" materials and telling folks they are just the same? Most LH groups seem to have some variant of the 5' rule and so they get to thinking that stuff that meet that rule are representative of the time period even if they are actually made from materials that weren't available till 500 years later. I try to remember that "good enough" is a minimum standard and it can be fun to try to gradually tweak things a bit higher on the authenticity scale (I see authenticity as a sliding scale not a binary---there is always room for improvement.)
As for gett ing an original, well I plan to forge one from some of the wrought iron I'm smelting.
So I would say there are "correctly styled" and quite usable but one could aspire to one in the correct style made of the correct material---or even from one of those to an original and perhaps from an original to one provanenced to your place and time of interest.
This very discussion has probably opened people to the fact that there was a radical change in iron/steel making that occured in the mid 1800's and that medieval and renaissance iron/steel *was* different---I'm all for education!
Thomas
-
Destichado
- Archive Member
- Posts: 5623
- Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2000 1:01 am
The only differences between what was made then and what was made even at the begining of this century is in purity and homogenity. We don't use wrought iron any more. That's. About. It.
Especialy when it comes to steels, we can produce (and thus, buy) reasonable equivalents of nearly anything the medievals made. If you took and analyzed steel samples from a dozen antique steels from a given period and settled on an "average" composition, I would bet a good deal of money that there's a commercialy avalable steel that has, or closely aproaches, those properties.
The problem we run into with experemental archaeology is that the people who's tasks we're reenacting, almost without a doubt, performed those tasks with much greater proficiency than we do. 10 will get you 20 that, even allowing for the exact same equipment, a medieval smelter would consistantly produce a higher quality ore (likely of greater purity and homogenity) than any reenactor or experemental archaeologist today.
I've said so to archaeologists and I'll say so here -at a certain point, the premise of absolute authenticity is self-defeating. The accumulation of un-authentic techniques and unwitting mistakes that a period craftsman would not have made will result in a measurable margin of difference in performance or composition; and that margin can be aproached or even decreased by the judicial use of modern materiels, tools, and techniques.
Especialy when it comes to steels, we can produce (and thus, buy) reasonable equivalents of nearly anything the medievals made. If you took and analyzed steel samples from a dozen antique steels from a given period and settled on an "average" composition, I would bet a good deal of money that there's a commercialy avalable steel that has, or closely aproaches, those properties.
The problem we run into with experemental archaeology is that the people who's tasks we're reenacting, almost without a doubt, performed those tasks with much greater proficiency than we do. 10 will get you 20 that, even allowing for the exact same equipment, a medieval smelter would consistantly produce a higher quality ore (likely of greater purity and homogenity) than any reenactor or experemental archaeologist today.
I've said so to archaeologists and I'll say so here -at a certain point, the premise of absolute authenticity is self-defeating. The accumulation of un-authentic techniques and unwitting mistakes that a period craftsman would not have made will result in a measurable margin of difference in performance or composition; and that margin can be aproached or even decreased by the judicial use of modern materiels, tools, and techniques.
-
Thomas Powers
- Archive Member
- Posts: 13112
- Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2000 1:01 am
- Location: Socorro, New Mexico
Wrought iron and wrought iron derrived steels- like the "natural" steels (formed during the smelting or refining processes) and blister steels are *COMPOSITE* materials. Therefor a modern alloy having the same composition would be about as accurate as a piece of glass and a puddle of resin would be for fiberglass.
Wrought iron forges differently, welds differently, corrodes differently due to the pressence of the ferrous silicate stringers in it. Saying they are the same based on content just ain't so!
The more highly refined WI is the more it does approach a low carbon steel ; but the micrographs I have seen indicate that a lot of the armour was *not* made from super refined WI.
Modern steels are fundamentally different from medieval steels save for the rare occurance in Nothern Europe of crucible steels from the east.
When I internalized that trying to make guess as to how stuff worked back then using metal that is *different* was a bit specious I bought 3 tons of real wrought iron plate to experiment with.
I hope to move at leat 1-2 tons of it 1600 miles to my new home; but if anyone will be near central Ohio next week I'd be happy to share a piece with them, (or near Socorro NM anyting in the next couple of years).
Typical smithing joke is to take a person who's never worked with WI and watch they try to forge something out of it, very amusing!
Thomas
Wrought iron forges differently, welds differently, corrodes differently due to the pressence of the ferrous silicate stringers in it. Saying they are the same based on content just ain't so!
The more highly refined WI is the more it does approach a low carbon steel ; but the micrographs I have seen indicate that a lot of the armour was *not* made from super refined WI.
Modern steels are fundamentally different from medieval steels save for the rare occurance in Nothern Europe of crucible steels from the east.
When I internalized that trying to make guess as to how stuff worked back then using metal that is *different* was a bit specious I bought 3 tons of real wrought iron plate to experiment with.
I hope to move at leat 1-2 tons of it 1600 miles to my new home; but if anyone will be near central Ohio next week I'd be happy to share a piece with them, (or near Socorro NM anyting in the next couple of years).
Typical smithing joke is to take a person who's never worked with WI and watch they try to forge something out of it, very amusing!
Thomas