The term Damascus swords or Damascus steel has become synonymous with blades or iron/steel objects that have any surface pattern. Historically there are many different names for blades that have specific patterns or shapes, sometimes reflecting different workshops, geographic areas, craftsmen, quality or surface appearances. Replication experiments have shed light on the mechanisms that determine the microstructure and cause the pattern to appear. By comparing microstructure and the mechanisms that caused the microstructure, together with the name of the surface pattern, a preliminary classification system for possible types of crucible steel, some of which have patterns, can be proposed. 

The first classification of swords was performed during the 9^th century AD by al-Kindi.  Anosov produced the first modern classification of the various Damascus steel patterns during the mid 19^th century (Bogachev, 1952, 39-40).  Piaskowski (1976, 239) further divided Anosov’s classification. Other classifications have been presented, such as the discussion found in the exhibition catalogue Weapons of the Islamic World (1991). The most useful recent discussion is found in Sachse (1994, 72-73) who discusses the different patterns and also illustrates them. These classification studies, along with the mechanisms that cause the pattern and the different varieties, shed additional light on the types of patterns that may have been available in the past, in addition to their possible appearance and quality.

Anosov listed five patterns (Piaskowski, 1976, 238). The different types were illustrated by Sachse (1994, 73).

                               Pattern and Names                   

The first two groups of patterns, stripy and water Damask, are made of hypoeutectoid steel. The pattern in formed by ferrite-pearlite banding.  Swords with the stripy Damask are known as Sham, named after Syria.  In the Weapons of the Islamic World exhibition catalogue (1991, 17) these “soft Damask” blades fall under the Damascene style of decoration and they are described as smooth rust resistant blades with soft, stippled surfaces and generally a light grey colour.

Verhoeven does not consider these hypoeutectoid steel blades to be exhibiting a true Damascus pattern, however, this is misleading because the blade would have been made of crucible steel and exhibited a pattern. While the mechanisms that cause the pattern in hypoeutectic and hypereutectic blades are significantly different, the method, which would have been used to produce the ingot, would have been the same in antiquity; particularly as only a few grams less of carbonaceous material could have made the difference between producing an ingot with more or less carbon. Blades made of hypoeutectic crucible steel and exhibiting a pattern are a distinct type of crucible steel.

The other three groups, wavy, chequered, and ladder Damask, are made of hypereutectoid steel and the pattern is caused by the alignment of cementite (see above). When the blade is etched the cementite appears as the light coloured threads whereas the background is usually dark. The ladder pattern is in effect a sub-category of the hypereutectoid steel. Creating groves or holes in the surface and then forging or hammering creates the decorative patterns such as the Ladder and Rose. This decorative method has been discussed by a number of scholars (e.g. Sachse, 1994, 75; Figiel, 1991, 74). The first description of these grove patterns comes from al-Kindi who wrote that the Khorasani swords were made from Khurasani iron called muharrar, which were covered with knots made by a chisel, and had a black watering (Allan and Gilmore, 2000, 192). Muharrar appears to be the name of the deliberate pattern such as used to produce the Rose or Mohammad’s Ladder pattern. Allan and Gilmour (2000, 203) also noted this interpretation.