This makes some serious assumptions regarding what exactly "close to identical" means.
"Similar in design" or even "identical in design" definitely do not equate to "close to identical" in execution in all cases, despite the provided anecdote. If we're talking about something that qualifies as the same type of tool or weapon, OK. If we're talking about something with extremely similar metallurgical qualities, size, design, age, etc., then it's likely a little more than just "well, it's an x made of y found at z, they're all the same."
> This makes some serious assumptions regarding what exactly "close to identical" means.
Let me spell that out for you: so close to each other that if you exchanged two of those items and you wouldn't be intimately familiar with it (scratches, dents) that you wouldn't be able to tell them apart.
> "Similar in design" or even "identical in design" definitely do not equate to "close to identical" in execution in all cases, despite the provided anecdote.
Not in all cases, but in quite a few of them. Examples:
- wheels bands and hubs (the rest was usually wood)
- weapons
- utensils
- tools
- hardware (like nails, which were insanely valuable)
Almost all of those would be copied very accurately from template designs over a wide region. Decorations (handles and such) would be the first to vary, then dimensions, then materials then the actual design of the business bit and finally the process.
> If we're talking about something that qualifies as the same type of tool or weapon, OK.
Exactly.
> If we're talking about something with extremely similar metallurgical qualities, size, design, age, etc., then it's likely a little more than just "well, it's an x made of y found at z, they're all the same."
No, that's what you'd expect. If they would be made in the same region and time then that's more or less the default since that puts serious constraints on the metallurgical knowledge of the time and on the designs that were permitted and/or in fashion.
We still have this even today, walk into any toolstore and pick tools from roughly the same quality level and you'll find that at that level they're pretty much identical.
Rare exceptions like Estwing hammers do happen but for handtools they're not the norm.
When 'mass production' wasn't possible yet there was greater variability than there is today but that was not because variability was a goal, it was rather an unfortunate side effect of making things by hand. The whole idea of being a good tradesman was to deliver constant quality and to get that variability under control as much as possible.
Having your sword break in battle because it has a nice new pattern on it isn't going to give you many happy customers so better stick to knowing what works.
"Similar in design" or even "identical in design" definitely do not equate to "close to identical" in execution in all cases, despite the provided anecdote. If we're talking about something that qualifies as the same type of tool or weapon, OK. If we're talking about something with extremely similar metallurgical qualities, size, design, age, etc., then it's likely a little more than just "well, it's an x made of y found at z, they're all the same."