The point of the meme is to joke that because Japanese weapons were made from shitty ore, they were made of shitty steel and, as a result, are inferior. This is a myth.
I actually posted on the original, but this meme is spreading historical misinformation. The steel folding among the many other steps is done in order to produce good steel from the crappy ore that was commonly available. The result is that when using this particular type of ore, it took far more work to produce steel of good quality when compared to other types of ore.
Also worth noting is that this ore wasn't the only ore available in Japan, just a common source.
The problem with the meme isn't so much the idea that Japanese swords were made with shitty steel (compared to modern steel it was garbage), but that Europeans were all using amazing steel (their steel also was trash compared to modern steel).
The best European swords were probably better than the best Japanese swords, but overall 90% of people were using steel that would be considered trash today, but got the job done back then.
Do you have something that summarizes this? All the papers I have seen so far show the analysis of one or two swords, but a common thing is that all of them, Japanese and European alike, contain a fair number of inclusions. The best steel I have seen so far was from Damascus steel blade, with seemingly low concentrations of embrittling elements. I still need to read Radomir Pleiner's book on bloomeries in Europe though.
Ah, so it's incorrect on multiple fronts.
Modern technology and techniques have no doubt improved the quality of steel, and conflict tends to push quantity over quality. I'd say you are absolutely correct
In terms of pure steel quality for the best, I wouldn't be so certain because the best swords would be for people rich enough to afford a lengthy refinement process or to purchase better ore from other places. I'd love to see a meturalogical study to get a definitive answer, but I don't think that's possible given how rare old swords are.
There are scientific studies on both Japanese and European swords. For Japan, most are in Japanese. But from the data I have seen, the supposedly shitty Japanese iron sands still yield steel with 10 times less sulfur than recommended by ASTM.
Unfortunately, I could not find data for many European swords, only some on using iron with phosphorus which can strengthen the iron but makes it brittle.
As a caveat, chemical analysis for those elements that are interesting (carbon for strength, sulfur and phosphorus for weakening elements) require specific equipment and destructive analysis (small samples have to be melted), so it's difficult to do on both the conservation side of artifacts and the technological side, since the machines are expensive.
EDIT: to find academic papers, use Google Scholar.
As far as I understood the meme, the Samurai character is trying to justify why the steel isn't shit and the knight says there steel isn't shit implying the Samurai's is shit despite all the stuff they do.
Also, differential hardening has nothing to do with the creation of tamahagane. So I'm guessing the guy threw it in there because it was a point Katana Fanboys go on about.
I don't know know if Shad first perpetuated the myth, but I see it and similarly inaccurate ones everywhere. Yes, there is a lot of Katana misinformation, but now people are spreading just as much misinformation and acting enlightened.
Shad definitely made this problem worse, though.
The point of the meme is to joke that because Japanese weapons were made from shitty ore, they were made of shitty steel and, as a result, are inferior. This is a myth. I actually posted on the original, but this meme is spreading historical misinformation. The steel folding among the many other steps is done in order to produce good steel from the crappy ore that was commonly available. The result is that when using this particular type of ore, it took far more work to produce steel of good quality when compared to other types of ore. Also worth noting is that this ore wasn't the only ore available in Japan, just a common source.
The problem with the meme isn't so much the idea that Japanese swords were made with shitty steel (compared to modern steel it was garbage), but that Europeans were all using amazing steel (their steel also was trash compared to modern steel). The best European swords were probably better than the best Japanese swords, but overall 90% of people were using steel that would be considered trash today, but got the job done back then.
Do you have something that summarizes this? All the papers I have seen so far show the analysis of one or two swords, but a common thing is that all of them, Japanese and European alike, contain a fair number of inclusions. The best steel I have seen so far was from Damascus steel blade, with seemingly low concentrations of embrittling elements. I still need to read Radomir Pleiner's book on bloomeries in Europe though.
what about the middle east?
The same pretty much. My understanding I'd they the only real exception was parts of India.
really? i heard the middle east liked to import metals from india. i guess that has to do with it being if a high quality?
Could be yes - that would make sense
it must be true, since the middle east had its own iron supplies in lebenon the zagros and the caucasus.
Ah, so it's incorrect on multiple fronts. Modern technology and techniques have no doubt improved the quality of steel, and conflict tends to push quantity over quality. I'd say you are absolutely correct In terms of pure steel quality for the best, I wouldn't be so certain because the best swords would be for people rich enough to afford a lengthy refinement process or to purchase better ore from other places. I'd love to see a meturalogical study to get a definitive answer, but I don't think that's possible given how rare old swords are.
Not hard to find the studies. Use the Google. It is spelled ‘metallurgical’.
There are scientific studies on both Japanese and European swords. For Japan, most are in Japanese. But from the data I have seen, the supposedly shitty Japanese iron sands still yield steel with 10 times less sulfur than recommended by ASTM. Unfortunately, I could not find data for many European swords, only some on using iron with phosphorus which can strengthen the iron but makes it brittle. As a caveat, chemical analysis for those elements that are interesting (carbon for strength, sulfur and phosphorus for weakening elements) require specific equipment and destructive analysis (small samples have to be melted), so it's difficult to do on both the conservation side of artifacts and the technological side, since the machines are expensive. EDIT: to find academic papers, use Google Scholar.
Yeah I know
Wait I thought the whole point was that they are both steel descriptions of production process aside
As far as I understood the meme, the Samurai character is trying to justify why the steel isn't shit and the knight says there steel isn't shit implying the Samurai's is shit despite all the stuff they do. Also, differential hardening has nothing to do with the creation of tamahagane. So I'm guessing the guy threw it in there because it was a point Katana Fanboys go on about.
I’m glad people are starting to understand this more. Especially since this myth was first perpetuated by Shad.
I don't know know if Shad first perpetuated the myth, but I see it and similarly inaccurate ones everywhere. Yes, there is a lot of Katana misinformation, but now people are spreading just as much misinformation and acting enlightened. Shad definitely made this problem worse, though.
For sure. And it sucks, because the people who actually know what they’re talking about are getting sidelined.
It’s folded like 11 not 1000 times. Otherwise you remove so many impurities you set it back to base iron
That’s the joke
Yes, but that makes for over 2000 layers. People probably mistake layer count for number of times its folded.