The historic damascus barrels do not tend to show that stringing in the wrought, possible because of the amount that it was worked and or drawn out.
That is correct, Craig. The more wrought iron is worked, the more the silica content is dispersed and even worked out of the iron. Continually piling, welding and drawing out of wrought iron can bring it to nearly pure iron. In old gun barrels that were made of just wrought iron and scarf welded along their lengths, the silica strings are seldom visible. I believe these barrels were made of wrought iron that had been extensively worked before the iron was used to make the barrel.
I think the wrought iron used for damascus barrels was fairly high in silica content when it was first stacked into the billet. But after welding of the billet, drawing it out into small rods, twisting of the rods, welding the rods into a riband and welding of the barrel tube, a lot of the silica is removed and/or dispersed. I am certain that the high initial silica content was intentional, to aid all of the forge welding that was to ensue. But the barrel makers knew that the silica would be reduced and dispersed by the time the barrel forging was completed.
The Original Parker Process calls for an initial etch, a five minute one with battery acid.
Ken, I noticed your comment on pre-etching from another thread. You may want to proceed with caution on etching the wrought samples that I sent you. I expect that if you subject them to a five minute etch, you will wind up with a coarse stringy looking surface. Actually, I doubt that an initial etch is necessary on the wrought samples or the 1002 steel, unless it serves to open the grain to accept the rusting acid.
