Did the Romans use steel weapons?

[Gladius Hispaniensis]

Ave
I know that steel was discovered circa 1100 B.C.E. Does that mean the Romans were using steel weapons since the founding of their city is supposed to be around 750 B.C.E?

[Magnus]

Their forging process seemed to produce low-carbon content steel in some cases...probably a bit less than something modern like 1020 mild steel. Which I believe is 0.2% carbon per content.

You looking to join a legion Imad? :wink:

[Gladius Hispaniensis]

You looking to join a legion Imad? Wink

Lol. Not a bad idea considering I am of Scythian descent. That would probably make me a rarity in the Roman Army.

[TITVS SABATINVS AQVILIVS]

link from old RAT

Maybe you'll find interesting the PDF article in the topic above.

Vale,

[Caratacus]

David Sim (at Reading University) has shown that the plates of lorica segmentata armour were soft iron inside and (some at least) were mild steel on the outside. This seems to have been a deliberate act, rather than an accidental conquence of the forging procedure. (See "Iron for the Eagles", by David Sim& Isabel Ridge, p.96).

The same also seems to have been true of sword blades, where they have been analysed (museums aren't too keen on people coming along and cutting up their display items to analyse, you realise). I read somewhere that it was widely believed in Roman times that swords made from iron mined in Noricum (modern Austria, roughly) were better than from other sources. When the iron ore from Austrian mines was analysed, it was found that there was a fairly high manganese content there. In other words, the Romans were making manganese steels! Of course, they didn't know this but it explains why such swords would be capable of taking a sharper edge and were harder as well.

The process of turning rought iron into steel (carburisation or cementation) has been known since ancient Greek times and was described by Aristotle.

Caratacus
(Mike Thmas)

[Endre Fodstad]

David Sim (at Reading University) has shown that the plates of lorica segmentata armour were soft iron inside and (some at least) were mild steel on the outside. This seems to have been a deliberate act, rather than an accidental conquence of the forging procedure. (See "Iron for the Eagles", by David Sim& Isabel Ridge, p.96).

It is called case hardening, and is carried out by enriching the surface iron with carbon from organic materials packed tightly around the piece which is then heated in a forge. Case hardened objects are common in iron and steel finds in germanic areas from a very early time; recently a case-hardened chisel was found in Norway from around the year 0. It is a very time-consuming process, but time was never something roman craftsmen seems to have lacked.

[Caratacus]

Yes, 'case-hardening' was used right up until the early years of the 20th century for battleship armour - it was even trademarked as 'Case-hardened Harvey nickel-steel compound armour' (whew!)

Of course, the process of forging the iron bars used charcoal in the forge and this would tend to diffuse into the iron anyway. Sim calculated that it would take around 6-8 hours for a billet of iron to be completely converted into mild steel in a furnace so, as you say, a very long process. Which is why, presumably, the armourers used a layer system when only a thin outside sheet of steel was married to a soft iron core. I would imagine that this would also make the sword less brittle and give it a certain 'spring' in use.

Caratacus
(Mike Thomas)

[Endre Fodstad]

Yes, 'case-hardening' was used right up until the early years of the 20th century for battleship armour - it was even trademarked as 'Case-hardened Harvey nickel-steel compound armour' (whew!)

Of course, the process of forging the iron bars used charcoal in the forge and this would tend to diffuse into the iron anyway. Sim calculated that it would take around 6-8 hours for a billet of iron to be completely converted into mild steel in a furnace so, as you say, a very long process. Which is why, presumably, the armourers used a layer system when only a thin outside sheet of steel was married to a soft iron core. I would imagine that this would also make the sword less brittle and give it a certain 'spring' in use.

Caratacus
(Mike Thomas)

Are you sure you're not talking about bloomery production of iron, when the iron is enriched (in the bloomery furnace) in the production process? Traditional case-hardening was done with organic materials like bone, horn, leather etc (as the primary source of carbon), plus charcoal, salt or possible ammonia or other minerals (for building up more heat and attempting to give the metal certain other properties, or just because it was custom to do so). The period it takes for enrichment varies greatly, depending on the mass and shape of the billet plus the materials used. Using just the charcoal won't do the trick especially well, compared to just using the bloomery steels or case-hardening it - the amount of carbon that diffuses into the metal during forging is difficult to control and fairly small compared to the aforementioned method.

Our knowledge of roman iron production methods is rather sparse, and even Sims work barely scratches the surface; our sources are primarily archaeological and for some reason we have found (relatively) few production sites.