Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Mougins Pugio
#16
There is nothing wrong with making blades through stock removal. Even after forging, there is some stock removal in smoothing and shaping the blade to its final dimensions. The main advantage of forging a blade is found in the proces called "hard-packing", the iron through forging is compressed and gains in tensil strength. However, that only comes into play when you hit things with it and most re-enactors don't.

I would not really call what I do experimental archeology, as all I do is try to figure out how something was made, using the tools a Roman blacksmith would have used. But basicly, these do not differ all that much from what you use today, be it the anvil was a LOT smaller in Roman times. Even my small 35 kilo anvil is large compared to those found. For true experimental archeology, I would have to take a big step towards using only wrought iron, the smaller block and stake anvil, a bellow blown charcoal fire and getting me an assistent. I do have a Roman type smithy for demo purposes, though. So in theory I could.


Attached Files Thumbnail(s)
   
Salvete et Valete



Nil volentibus arduum





Robert P. Wimmers
www.erfgoedenzo.nl/Diensten/Creatie Big Grin
Reply
#17
Strange, my previous post only shows up when I do a reply .....
Salvete et Valete



Nil volentibus arduum





Robert P. Wimmers
www.erfgoedenzo.nl/Diensten/Creatie Big Grin
Reply
#18
Wierd, post only showed when I did another reply ...... Oh well, visible now to me as well at least.
Salvete et Valete



Nil volentibus arduum





Robert P. Wimmers
www.erfgoedenzo.nl/Diensten/Creatie Big Grin
Reply
#19
Where was the original in the museum found?
Christian K.

No reconstruendum => No reconstruction.

Ut desint vires, tamen est laudanda voluntas.
Reply
#20
Robert.
Would I be correct in thinking that your Roman anvil is set into a solid block of wood for I see that there are reinforce metal bands around the wood top and bottom.
Then also I noticed that your reply had not come in after my post it may have had a thing to do with it being a new page of the topic.
Brian Stobbs
Reply
#21
Hmm, something seems akward with this thread ... Lost another post.

What I wrote was that the block is not solid but made up of thick oak planks, the top one 2 inches thick. This saves more then 50% weight, as it supposed to be a mobile military smithy, the bands I forged around it do strengthen the construction. An added bonus is I can store the anvil and tools in the base when transporting it on the mule drawn cart in the bagagetrain.
Salvete et Valete



Nil volentibus arduum





Robert P. Wimmers
www.erfgoedenzo.nl/Diensten/Creatie Big Grin
Reply
#22
Robert.
I hope Phil will not be too angry about us going so far off topic on this fantastic dagger however I'm sure that he will be as enlightened as I have been with your very good explanations about possible construction methods and I have to say that your Roman smithing kit is very interesting indeed.
Brian Stobbs
Reply
#23
Not at all Brian....I think it is great information that you and Robert are putting forward, and I thank you both for it.

Christian I am still trying to find out more about the provenance of the original. It apparently was scientifically analysed on the late 60's early 70's in Munich and sold privately, only to re-emerge a few years ago.
Phil McKay
Illustrator
www.philmckay.com
Reply
#24
*jaw drop* Well done!!
Andy Volpe
"Build a time machine, it would make this [hobby] a lot easier."
https://www.facebook.com/LegionIIICyr/
Legion III Cyrenaica ~ New England U.S.
Higgins Armory Museum 1931-2013 (worked there 2001-2013)
(Collection moved to Worcester Art Museum)
Reply
#25
Great job guys. It is always a pleasure to see craftsmen producing works of art. You are to be commended for your attention to detail and I hope we will be able to see more of your works in the near future.
Manius Acilius Italicus
Reply
#26
Phil.
It would be nice to have some kind of provenance on this dagger however at times some of these earlier private collection pieces do tend to have a bit of mystery about them.
Brian Stobbs
Reply
#27
Quote:There is nothing wrong with making blades through stock removal. Even after forging, there is some stock removal in smoothing and shaping the blade to its final dimensions. The main advantage of forging a blade is found in the proces called "hard-packing", the iron through forging is compressed and gains in tensil strength. However, that only comes into play when you hit things with it and most re-enactors don't.

I would not really call what I do experimental archeology, as all I do is try to figure out how something was made, using the tools a Roman blacksmith would have used. But basicly, these do not differ all that much from what you use today, be it the anvil was a LOT smaller in Roman times. Even my small 35 kilo anvil is large compared to those found. For true experimental archeology, I would have to take a big step towards using only wrought iron, the smaller block and stake anvil, a bellow blown charcoal fire and getting me an assistent. I do have a Roman type smithy for demo purposes, though. So in theory I could.

Nice setup robert Smile I love the small block anvil. However I think the use of swage blocks would be very uncommon if not at all. Unless there is evidence otherwise, it is far more likely for smiths to use wooden blocks for such forming. This would mean you could also not get such detail as a rib . Not only that, you would need a top tool to hammer both sides at once. At that point it becomes more likely they used a fullering tool or fancy jig to form the rib. Pretty similar to whats been said earlier I know!

I absolutely agree with you Robert that they probably forged a rhombus shape cross section of the blade however I think they would then use the point of the rhombus to line the jig perfectly down the length of the blade! Ive done this before in forging double fullers down a migration period spatha and it worked perfectly. You don't have to carefully line the tool up because it has a place to rest. Not only that, it is much easier to displace the metal into a rib since it is already raised versus trying to force it into the groove of a jig or displace metal around it.

I am a huge proponent that there was not as much grinding on blades as we do now. My two pieces of evidence are that modern grinding equipment makes it easier to remove stock than to forge things to shape. In this case I am personally against stock removal as a historical way to reproduce artifacts. Filing and grinding with stones is a pretty long task when it is your only method. :dizzy:

The other evidence is the twisted core patterning on other pugios show that the ridges would have been forged not ground because the blade was not extensively ground. Twisted bar patterning is interesting because if you grind deep you get star patterns and if you just grind the surface you get the twisted chevron pattern! Most modern reproductions (including those from say Patrick Barta) have star patterns because he grinds his fullers.

Also not to get TOO off topic but I think the crystal compaction you are referring to Robert is almost entirely negated once a sword goes through the heat treatment process. By normalizing and annealing the metal structure loses tensile strength until the final stages of quenching and tempering. Not to sound like a smart ass I know youre well aware of this :-P Just pointing out that unless youre work hardening a steely iron blade, forging does not change the molecular structure which is why some people do stock removal blades that have just as much structural integrity.

Sorry for that long tangent!!! :o

Great pugio, love the chasing and repose! :lol:
Underhill Edge

Hand forged edged tools, blades, and functioning historical reproductions.

underhilledge.com

Jack McAuliffe
Reply
#28
Hi Jack,

That's OK, being a smart ass Big Grin . I do wonder about the whole heat treatment thing, though. I wonder how the Romans went about heat treating a blade, if at all. I personaly think they did not get past heating and quenching and perhaps some tempering, as the iron they were working with would in most cases be more similar to S37 construction steel (mild steel) then the high carbon and alloy fancy stuff we have for making blades these days. Matt told me the highest Roman carbon content he was aware of was the equivelant of C45.

When I wrote "swage block" I was indeed refering to something like a fullering tool. I have tried wooden blocks, but the end result was disappointing (though spectacular and filling the smithy with a lot of smoke). So a fullering tool would make much sense. I did use a wooden block, basicly a halved log, to bend the falx blades over with a wooden mallet. Worked fine.

I do agree that forging is the acurate way of making blades, but then, he, I'm a blacksmith ...... :woot:
Salvete et Valete



Nil volentibus arduum





Robert P. Wimmers
www.erfgoedenzo.nl/Diensten/Creatie Big Grin
Reply
#29
Thanks Jack and Robert for the info in regards to Roman forging etc, very interesting indeed.
Brian you're certainly right about the mystery behind some of these early pieces, and this particular Pugio isn't any different. I am still chasing some info from the Mougins Museum, though it appears there wasn't a lot of details recorded. The pugio was first shown in the late 60's to a leading Munich Museum and photos were taken but nothing was ever published, and at the time it belonged to a private German collection. It was then sold to a North American private collector, and finally bought by the Mougins Museum about three years ago. The original piece was most likely found in Germany.
Phil McKay
Illustrator
www.philmckay.com
Reply


Forum Jump: