Old Khyber

[ariel]

The title was deliberately shortened; the full version would sound something like " The oldest dated Khyber I can recall"
The date is acid etched on the blade: 229H ( 1229, of course), i.e. 1813 in Gregorian.

The handle was damaged, and the bolster and tangband are made of brass.

Any criticisms or doubts?

[mahratt]

My regrets, but most of the Khyber knives, whose blades are decorated in this style, have been decorated in the last 20-30 years ... It is a known fact that Afghans did not decorate their weapons with images of people and animals (although they could use Persian or Indian weapons with such images). But on the weapons that the Afghans themselves made not images of people and animals there. In the last 20-30 years, a lot of "improved" old Afghan weapons and modern souvenirs for tourists whose blades are decorated with images of animals of different quality have appeared on the antique market.
I would believe the authenticity of the inscription, if it was similar to what I attach in the photo - short and without images of people and animals.

Although, anything can be. Once in a private collection I saw a khyber knife with a star of David roughly cut on a blade. The collector sincerely believed that this was a rare Khyber knife of an Afghan Jew;)

P.S. By the way, it seems to me, or does the saber in the hands of the rider (in the image on the blade) - have an elman (the wider part of the saber is closer to the tip of the blade)?

[Kubur]

P.S. By the way, it seems to me, or does the saber in the hands of the rider (in the image on the blade) - have an elman (the wider part of the saber is closer to the tip of the blade)?

No yelman, it's the horizontal line that creates this yelman effect or affect as you wish...
;)

Acid etching is an old technique and Persians did a lot of acid etching on their weapons and armours, including animal and humans figures... Afghans and Persians are neighbours so i don't see any problem to have a rider on the blade... What the text is saying??

[mahratt]

Acid etching is an old technique and Persians did a lot of acid etching on their weapons and armours, including animal and humans figures... Afghans and Persians are neighbours so i don't see any problem to have a rider on the blade... What the text is saying??

Persians are Shiites, and Afghans, if I am not mistaken, are Sunnis. And the Sunnits are forbidden to make images of animals and humans...

But if I am wrong, correct me please. Unfortunately, I do not know examples of images of a person or animals on the blades of an old Afghan weapon

[mariusgmioc]

Acid etching is an old technique and Persians did a lot of acid etching on their weapons and armours, including animal and humans figures... Afghans and Persians are neighbours so i don't see any problem to have a rider on the blade... What the text is saying??

Acid etching MAY be an "old" (please define what you mean by "old") technique, but Persians did NOT use it before 19th century, and even then for very specific and few items (mostly decorative, historicism - known as Qajar revival - blades decorated with religious texts).

Afghans... even less so.

In my oppinion, any acid etched Afghan blade, raises serious concerns about its autenthicity as a genuine traditional weapon and points into the direction of souvenirs market.

My two cents.
:shrug:

[mariusgmioc]

The title was deliberately shortened; the full version would sound something like " The oldest dated Khyber I can recall"
The date is acid etched on the blade: 229H ( 1229, of course), i.e. 1813 in Gregorian.

The handle was damaged, and the bolster and tangband are made of brass.

Any criticisms or doubts?

Hello Ariel,

You normally have very sensitive antennas.

Didn't they start twitching?!
;)

[RAMBA]

overall condition and etching is an issue for me.

[Kubur]

Persians are Shiites, and Afghans, if I am not mistaken, are Sunnis. And the Sunnits are forbidden to make images of animals and humans...

But if I am wrong, correct me please. Unfortunately, I do not know examples of images of a person or animals on the blades of an old Afghan weapon

You are right.

[ariel]

As per Wikipedia, somewhere between 5-20% of Afghanis are Shia.
Those are the so-called Twelvers " Farsiwan" Hazara , living in the western provinces of Herat and Farah. Other Twelvers are Bayat and Qizilbash communities. There are also Nizari Ismailis in Badakhshan and Sayeeds of Kayan. And let's not forger Sufi Afghanis.

Sunni Islam forbids images of Allah, Muhammed and/or major Prophets, but frowns upon other living imagery without explicitly banning it. Although the so-called Sword of David ( Daud) , an early Islamic sword from the collection in Topkapi Palace carries an image of a human figure with distinct facial features.
Only Wahhabis and Salafis ban images of anything else, but those are of much more modern appearance and concentrate on the far east of the country.

Afghanistan is a multi-ethnic country, and painting Afghanis as uniform community and uniformly Sunnis is superficial.

Perhaps, this could serve as an ethnographic sign of the origin of this Knyber.

[mahratt]

It would be interesting to look at the Ottoman weapons of the 19th century, on which there are images of man and animals. After all, the Ottomans are not Wahhabis, if I understand correctly? Of course, we are not talking about the use by the Ottomans of Persian blades, on which were originally images of animals.

I understand that this will not be entirely by topic, but I just want to learn more from more experienced hobby colleagues.

And it’s even more interesting to see a really old Khyber knife in good condition, on the blade of which images will be made in such a technique as on the subject that we are discussing.

Marius wrote very accurately:
Acid etching MAY be an "old" (please define what you mean by "old") technique, but Persians did NOT use it before 19th century, and even then for very specific and few items (mostly decorative, historicism - known as Qajar revival - blades decorated with religious texts).

[ariel]

Acid etching MAY be an "old" (please define what you mean by "old") technique, but Persians did NOT use it before 19th century, and even then for very specific and few items (mostly decorative, historicism - known as Qajar revival - blades decorated with religious texts).

Afghans... even less so.

In my oppinion, any acid etched Afghan blade, raises serious concerns about its autenthicity as a genuine traditional weapon and points into the direction of souvenirs market.

My two cents.
:shrug:

You are correct: my antennae were twitching :-) and this is why I posted it here.
However, I have serious doubts about dating it to the late 20th century souvenir manufacture: the handle on a " souvenir" sword sold to a Western visitor to be hung on the wall was unlikely to be so severely damaged and deep patination of the tang suggests some significant age ( compare to the tangs of WWII period Japanese swords ). The manner of profuse etching is very similar to the Qajar " revival" swords of the 19th and many " Afghani" blades were imported from Persia (and India). The overall condition does not bother me very much: we have multiple swords of the 17-18th centuries in just as good or even better shape. Spurious dating is a distinct possibility, but I see no reason why this khyber could not have been made in the 19th century, although later than 1813, coincidentally with the Persian " revival" swords, say, 1830-1880. Any objective arguments against it?

[mahratt]

You are correct: my antennae were twitching :-) and this is why I posted it here.
However, I have serious doubts about dating it to the late 20th century souvenir manufacture: the handle on a " souvenir" sword sold to a Western visitor to be hung on the wall was unlikely to be so severely damaged and deep patination of the tang suggests some significant age ( compare to the tangs of WWII period Japanese swords ). The manner of profuse etching is very similar to the Qajar " revival" swords of the 19th and many " Afghani" blades were imported from Persia (and India). The overall condition does not bother me very much: we have multiple swords of the 17-18th centuries in just as good or even better shape. Spurious dating is a distinct possibility, but I see no reason why this khyber could not have been made in the 19th century, although later than 1813. Any objective arguments against it?

1) We see the "classic" Afghan Khyber knife. By the way, no one says that he is not real. This is a authentic Khyber knife for the 19th century or early 20th century. The truth is not in very good condition. However, there are no elements that would tell us about its Persian or Indian origin (usually these elements are easy to recognize).
2) Sellers of antique weapons, souvenirs and "upgraded" old weapons in Afghanistan are not considered a problem if their goods are damaged. On the contrary, for them this is an occasion to say that this is an old item. Unfortunately, the times of Egerton, Moser and Prince Saltykov, when you could buy very good items in India and Central Asia, are long gone.
3) Using such a technique for decorating a blade for typical Afghan khyber knives is absolutely not typical. But, miracles do happen. However, I would like to see analogues from Afghanistan.

[ariel]

Glad to see that the Afghani " Sunni" argument is not used anymore and that 19 century ( rather than " last 20 or 30 years") is accepted as a possibility. Yes, it is not in a perfect shape ( that fortifies its older dating). The etching, as other people here noted, strongly suggests its Persian origin, on which everybody is in agreement. I have yet to encounter a seller who would not "improve" an easily made lost and aged bolster to justify the price to almost $6,000 asked for this one:-)
Had we had unquestionable dated Afghani analogues, this discussion would have been unnecessary.

All in all, are we in agreement that this khyber can be likely dated to the (mid-late) 19 century and sports a blade of a presumably Persian manufacture ( etching and Farsi)?

[mahratt]

Glad to see that the Afghani " Sunni" argument is not used anymore and that 19 century ( rather than " last 20 or 30 years") is accepted as a possibility. Yes, it is not in a perfect shape ( that fortifies its older dating). The etching, as other people here noted, strongly suggests its Persian origin, on which everybody is in agreement. I have yet to encounter a seller who would not "improve" an easily made lost and aged bolster to rack up the price to almost $6,000 asked for this one:-)
Had we had unquestionable dated Afghani analogues, this discussion would have been unnecessary.

All in all, are we in agreement that this khyber can be likely dated to the (mid-late) 19 century and sports a blade of a presumably Persian manufacture?

This khyber can be likely dated to the late 19 century -early 20century. Over the past 20-30 years, the blade has probably been decorated. Sorry my bad english. I probably explained very poorly. Please see message number 2:

My regrets, but most of the Khyber knives, whose blades are decorated in this style, have been decorated in the last 20-30 years ...

" Sunni" argument - remains very important. Common words about Wahhabism and Shiism did not show us a single example of images of animals or people made by Afghans in old times on old blades... But there are a lot of modern souvenir and old "improved" in recent years, Afghan blades, which modern masters put animal images.

It is a pity that experienced forum participants did not answer my question:
It would be interesting to look at the Ottoman weapons of the 19th century, on which there are images of man and animals. After all, the Ottomans are not Wahhabis, if I understand correctly? Of course, we are not talking about the use by the Ottomans of Persian blades, on which were originally images of animals.

The blade of this Khyber knife is decorated in the same way that in Persia was decorated with very late items that were used for religious holidays and as souvenirs for Europeans.
But this does not say that the blade of this highber is made in Persia :)

By the way, have you seen the blades of the Khyber knives, which can be called "made in Persia"? Their shape is very different from the shape of the "classic" Khyber knife that we are discussing.
If this is interesting, I can show such a blade;)

[mahratt]

I think when we see such a Sudanese Kaskara decorated in the same style as the Persian weapons later used for ceremonies and as souvenirs for Europeans, no one will say that "this Kaskara’s blade was made in Persia"

Well, in any case, none of the collectors of oriental weapons...

[Ren Ren]

The title was deliberately shortened; the full version would sound something like " The oldest dated Khyber I can recall"
The date is acid etched on the blade: 229H ( 1229, of course), i.e. 1813 in Gregorian.

The handle was damaged, and the bolster and tangband are made of brass.

Any criticisms or doubts?
The presented etching sample causes me great doubts about the dating of 1813. Very big doubts.

[mariusgmioc]

What is certain is that we can speculate ad nausea whether the blade was etched at the time of manufacture or much later.

Then, we can speculate if it was etched in the 19th century or 30 years ago.

We will NEVER be able to establish with 100% certainty any of the above mentioned asumptions.

But, based on the shape of the blade and amount of corosion on the tang we can presume with a reasonable degree of certainty this is a regular Afghan khyber blade from 19th to early 20th century.

The presence of the etching, however, is absolutely atypical for the Afghan khyber swords and this is also reasonably certain.

Then, the blade can be
1. with an original etching, making it an exception/curiosity;
2. with a later etching to make it more attractive.

Out of these two alternatives, I would choose the second as I consider it much more likely than the first one, since the I do not really believe in miracles (but as Mahratt said "miracles do happen"). :shrug:

PS: How much would this sword fetch if it weren't etched?!
How much could it fetch as an "exceptionally rare and dated" Khyber sword?!
The damaged hilt would enhance the impression of authenticity... :cool:

[Bob A]

Given that I have never seen a Khyber blade with etching of this nature, I too would incline steeply toward an old blade, augmented later.

I've grown suspicious of weapons that suddenly appear presenting unusual or unique features.

[Jim McDougall]

This to me is clearly a 19th c. Khyber knife (salwar) which has apparently been acid etched (as astutely noted by Bob) at a much later date, my guess would be late 19th early 20th.
While we know these swords were keenly used throughout Khyber regions, they certainly diffused into many congruent regions which were all part of the Northwest frontiers later becoming Afghanistan.

The acid etching always tempts many to classify the decoration as souvenir oriented, which of course many examples of tulwar. kukri and other Indian forms do carry in many cases.
In this case however (and most unusually) this example has decoration which resembles the kind of figure often seen on weapons of the Kalash people of the Chitral district and areas of Nuristan. These animist tribes have in many cases nominally adopted Islam, which may account for the Hegira date, and in my opinion most probably (if accurate) represents something commemorative.

It seems the character of the figures used in the decoration of these people is much like the crowned figure mounted in this motif.
The Kalash are a very much endangered (culturally) people who were known as the Kafirs (as described by Kipling) and their regions known as Kafiristan before invaded by Abdur Rahman Khan in 1890s. These areas became known as Nuristan and remain as part of the provinces of now Afghanistan.

While the Kalash are known for use of the 'jamadhar katari' , a dagger described in Egerton and often discussed here, they also use varied swords and long hafted axes resembling the Arabian jers.

While it is remarkable to see a Khyber decorated in this way, it is not surprising that one via various means of contact, found its way into this most unusual context.

Entirely speculative of course, but I find the etched figure and motif compellingly like that I have seen in the material culture of these people.
They were written on by George Scott Robertson "Kafirs of the Hindu Kush" (1896), and I have a reference from Germany by this title about 20 years ago but not on hand at the moment.

[mahratt]

Hello Jim!

I enjoyed reading your version. It is very interesting. Thank you very much!

But, tell me, please, if we do not follow the path of “speculation” (which of course is very attractive;)) do you know the weapons of Kalash (kafirs) whose blades were decorated in the same style as the Khyber knife under discussion?
Personally, such examples are unknown to me.

[Jim McDougall]

Hello Jim!

I enjoyed reading your version. It is very interesting. Thank you very much!

But, tell me, please, if we do not follow the path of “speculation” (which of course is very attractive;)) do you know the weapons of Kalash (kafirs) whose blades were decorated in the same style as the Khyber knife under discussion?
Personally, such examples are unknown to me.

Thanks very much !!! :)
Actually it does not seem 'most' examples have such decoration, or any at all, however I would need to check my book further. The thing is that there have been a number of weapons (tulwar if I recall) which have had motif very similar.
Obviously I specified my thoughts were speculative at this point as I need examples or detail to support. My hopes at this point were that others aware of this tribal group might enter.

[mahratt]

Thanks very much !!! :)
Actually it does not seem 'most' examples have such decoration, or any at all, however I would need to check my book further. The thing is that there have been a number of weapons (tulwar if I recall) which have had motif very similar.
Obviously I specified my thoughts were speculative at this point as I need examples or detail to support. My hopes at this point were that others aware of this tribal group might enter.

Thank you so much for the answer, Jim :)

[Jim McDougall]

In trying to find examples of my suggestion, I found these examples of the mother goddess of the Hoi Mata (Holy Trinity) of the folk religion of these Chitral tribes. While one rendition was on an amulet of sorts, the other was on a pesh kabz (choora type hilt) scabbard throat. It is on the 'inside' of the silvered piece.
The pesh kabz, though obviously a widely known form in these regions and into India had the calyx at the base of he hilt, as seen on most Khyber knives etc. and is considered a Central Asian affectation. The blade (not pictured) is the recurved pesh kabz form.

Despite this type of motif seen as shown in these examples, its appearance on a Khyber knife, unusual among these Kalash tribes in itself, the occurrence in acid etched design is even more baffling.

A single figure, crowned, mounted and with what 'appears' to be a Hegira date, is incongruent and I have not found distinct examples of Kalash weapons with this type etching. The pesh kabz example with the three figures is the only one found thus far.

My suggestion is intended only for consideration pending further evidence or if possible, proof of such decoration on a Khyber knife in this manner being authentically placed. Barring that proof, the possibility of this being a 'creatively' enhanced 'old Khyber' which might have been indeed intended for sale in the bazaars of Chicken Street remains in place.

[motan]

My 2 cents:
- The knife itself looks true to type and old, although sophisticated forgery of the whole knife, as well as later "decoration" can not be totally rejected. We will probably never know. The argument that this is not typical of Khyber knifes only means that and no more. A-typical weapons are found in all categories (like in Jimws example).

- The same can be said about the Sunni vs Shia argument: in general, Sunni items contain less imagery than Shiite items, but that is all.
As far as I know, in Islam, like in Judaism, imagery of human and animals is not explicitly forbidden in the source writing (Quran, Old Testament). What is forbidden is any RELIGIOUS imagery because of the fear of idolatry. The way this is interpreted varies greatly with place/culture, time and type of object. Miniatures painting with humans and animals are common in Ottoman, Persian and Mughal cultures. Rugs, weapons and ceramics from Sunni cultures have sometimes images of humans and animals in realistic, stylized or abstracted form. Further, thinking about Sunni Islam in terms of the Wahabite movement or Isis, which are true iconoclasts, is wrong and not representative.

A more productive way to approach this knife would be to try to read the texts and see in what language they are written and what they say.

[Kubur]

A more productive way to approach this knife would be to try to read the texts and see in what language they are written and what they say.

Exactly what I was saying before, of course!

There are no rules: you have Tunisian Ottoman barrels full of riders, animals and men... And they were sunni...

But we all agree that it is a bit suspicious...

Ariel you didn't post close photos of the blade next to the broken bolster. It would be interesting to see the how the etching looks like there...

http://vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=24246&highlight=powder+flask

[mahratt]

- The same can be said about the Sunni vs Shia argument: in general, Sunni items contain less imagery than Shiite items, but that is all.
As far as I know, in Islam, like in Judaism, imagery of human and animals is not explicitly forbidden in the source writing (Quran, Old Testament). What is forbidden is any RELIGIOUS imagery because of the fear of idolatry. The way this is interpreted varies greatly with place/culture, time and type of object. Miniatures painting with humans and animals are common in Ottoman, Persian and Mughal cultures. Rugs, weapons and ceramics from Sunni cultures have sometimes images of humans and animals in realistic, stylized or abstracted form. Further, thinking about Sunni Islam in terms of the Wahabite movement or Isis, which are true iconoclasts, is wrong and not representative.

A more productive way to approach this knife would be to try to read the texts and see in what language they are written and what they say.

Dear colleagues, I am surprised at your approach to the discussion...
What we have? We have one dagger, the scabbard of which is decorated with anthropomorphic figures, using the technique typical of this region. And we also have a powder flask (of unknown origin) with similar images that are made in the same technique as the images on the scabbard.
Fine! But, this is one of the only known weapons on which there are anthropomorphic images. And, by the way, the Kalash and residents of Chitral (that is, kafirs) were until recently pagans. That is, they had no restrictions on the images of humans and animals.
But even among kafirs, we cannot find several objects weapons (5-10-15) with anthropomorphic images that would allow us to talk about a tendency to decorate blades or at least details of the scabbard with anthropomorphic figures ...
Nevertheless, let's consider that I am too picky and let's assume that the dagger with anthropomorphic images on the scabbard, which Jim so kindly placed in the topic of discussion, is an important fact.

But there are still "small" problems...
1) Kafirs never used the technique of decorating blades that we see on blade Ariel’s Khyber knife. Not used, because they did not know how to decorate blades in such a technique. And they could not learn, since all the Hindu Kush nationalities lived in very isolation (by the way, therefore, they have kept paganism for so long).
2) Kafirs had no contact with Persia (this is if we decide to fantasize that the blade of the Khyber knife was decorated in Persia;)).

Therefore, the version with Kafiristan and its proud residents - you can forget.

Now back to the issue of "banning images of people by the Sunnis." Third time, I am very very I ask those who say that the Turks decorated the weapons with anthropomorphic images to place in this threadOttoman objects of the 19th century made by Turkish masters and decorated with Turkish masters, on the blades of which you can see images of a person or even animals.


The argument that this is not typical of Khyber knifes only means that and no more. A-typical weapons are found in all categories (like in Jimws example)..

Reputable motan, unfortunately, you view the past through the “prism of modernity” (that is, from the perspective of modern views). In an archaic society, which the Afghans represented in the 19th century (and even more so the Kafirs Hindu Kush ), there can be no a-typical weapons decorated in an a-typical technique for this culture. There may be trophies, but not objects typical of society, with some a-typical features.
It is incorrect to appeal to the dagger posted by Jim, since we do not know provenance of this dagger.
And most importantly, daggers, like the one Jim showed us, appeared in Afghanistan at the very end of the 19th century - early in the 20th century (This, by the way, does not make them less interesting :) ).

[Richard G]

I think, if the date 1229 was using the Jalali calendar it corresponds to 1850 Gregorian.
Regards
Richard

[Jim McDougall]

Very good point Mahratt makes on the dagger. We do not have provenance but the type of hilt (unofficially often termed choora) did not appear until about mid 19th c. The blade if I recall was the recurved pesh kabz type around much longer.

The date Richard suggests seems to correspond more to the item.

As a clarification, the Kafirs were the tribal people of the part of Afghan regions known as Kafiristan. In the 1890s these were overtaken by Abdur Rahman Khan and the regions given the name Nuristan.
The diaspora of Kafirs into Chitral regions, as I understand was considerable and these became known as the Kalash people.

The Kafirs were animists, and powerfully resisted Islam, but those who remained in these regions did apparently convert in degree.

The animist or pagan religion of these people and their very character always make me think of the Khevsurs of the Caucusus, and while I cannot make definitive comparisons nor suggest any direct link, the similarities are notable in a number of ways.

The motif on the dagger I posted was similar to the amulet I posted, which was identified as Kalash, so the comparison was drawn.

The etched figure on Ariel's Khyber is crudely applied, but the three peaked crown mindful of the figures in the example I have shown.

As discussed, I have personally never seen such etching or for that matter any type of surface decoration on the blade of a Khyber knife. Certainly as Motan has well noted...….atypical weapons are not at all unusual in themselves. This simply means a weapon has become out of its typical context in some feature(s) of its original or most commonly known character.
Since there are no specific guidelines for such deviations, all that can be done is the examine the features to determine 'their' origin, and or, period.

Old weapons are often repurposed or redecorated in traditional manner of earlier times for many reasons, whether for use as weapons as designed in some ersatz manner, or more typically as traditional or commemorative as in parade or ceremonial events (as with Qajar 'revival' items).

Amidst all of these possibilities is the ever present pallor of creative and industrious artisans supplying the souks and bazaars with old weapons which are veiled by those very possibilities. That is truly the challenge of collectors and historians of arms...finding the most plausible answers to each item based on the merits and detractions held by them.

[ariel]

My 2 cents:
- The knife itself looks true to type and old, although sophisticated forgery of the whole knife, as well as later "decoration" can not be totally rejected. We will probably never know. The argument that this is not typical of Khyber knifes only means that and no more. A-typical weapons are found in all categories (like in Jimws example).



A more productive way to approach this knife would be to try to read the texts and see in what language they are written and what they say.

The inscription is in Farsi. I saw word “Allah” and am almost sure the entire text is a part of one of the Suras.
Regretfully, I discarded all other images and cannot find them. Will try more, but 99% it will be something generic and not helpful.

Motan turned this discussion into a rational direction. And Richard G’s suggestion of a Jalali calendar is appropriate accounting for the Farsi inscription and mass production of etched blades in Persia at that time.

I would like to ask a general question: on what grounds do we discard unusual objects as some kind of “fake”?
This khyber ( and right away: I did not buy it simply because it was not very interesting to me ) is indeed unusual for several reasons. But inventing stories of “souvenir”, “last 20-30 years”, “Sunni religious beliefs” is not productive. We see tons of unusual, atypical weapons, but as Motan rightfully said, this means only that they are atypical, and no more.
Shouldn’t we rely in our assessments on physical facts?
By now everybody agrees that this khyber is genuinely old. Wouldn’t it be honest to conclude that we have no idea when its blade was etched? That “1229” may be a genuine date ( even in Jalali)?

I think that a proper way of attributing and dating old weapons should be based on hard facts and not on rash personal feelings. This is how every branch of real science works.
And if we do not have facts at our disposal, we need to humbly conclude that we just cannot date an object based on the existing information instead of dumping it into a garbage bag of seller’s shenanigans. We may conclude that we do not like it, that our antennae are twitching etc., freely admit it, and no more. And not buy it. This is a realm of emotional response, but not a scientific approach.

This Forum prides itself on striving for scientific approach. Jim is a walking encyclopedia of esoteric information, Jens forgot more about Indian weapons than we all remember, Motan seriously studies shibriyas, Battara is our Moro guru, Alan knows more about Indonesian Kris than anybody I know etc, etc. ( sorry if I did not mention other people, but I had to stop somewhere:-))
Even they admit from time to time that they do not know something and cannot pass an informed judgement. Shouldn’t we all adopt a similar attitude?

“Just the facts, Ma’am!”

[mahratt]

Let's talk about the facts.

Fact number 1. There is a Khyber knife, which is original and can may dated to the late 19th - early 20th century (well, even if the middle of the 19th century) and looks absolutely typical for Afghanistan
Fact number 2. On the blade of the khyber knife there is a strange decoration, absolutely not typical for Afghanistan
Fact number 3. In Afghanistan, souvenir "old weapons" are very actively being made and truly antique weapons are being modernized (blades and other elements). Moreover, the main "modernization" is aimed specifically at decorating blades with images.
Fact number 4. Archaic societies have a hard time accepting something new. They use their usual things. Therefore, the appearance of one "unique" subject always raises questions. Especially if it has all the other features typical of the archaic society in which it was made.
Fact number 5. There are unique blades. They can be made, for example, on the border territories between two cultures. But! Then these blades have not only one feature (for example, a decorated blade). Then they differ from the “classic” ones in the shape of the blade and the handle, etc.
Fact number 6. If an object from a traditional archaic society is decorated in a technique that is not traditional for this society, and also with non-traditional decor (anthropomorphic figures), then all fantasies about its “originality” - unfortunately, will remain fantasies, until 100% confirmation of the authenticity of the "decor" is found...

I understand that each of us wants to have extraordinary items in our collection. items in which there is something exclusive (and this is not necessarily perfect condition or gold and precious stones) ...
But, as it seems to me, we should all be very careful in our assumptions, otherwise too “exclusive” items may appear in our collection:
- Bukhara shashka, which were recently made from Afghan shashkas ...
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=21726
- "Balkan Kilij" of the Syrian work ...
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=25209
and even - "Russian Khyber Knife" with a modern fake stamp "Zlatoust" ...
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=21329

I will be very happy for the respected Ariel, if in the memoirs of English officers or in the work of some ethnographers there is a mention that they saw the blades of Afghan Khyber Knife, decorated in such a technique, and even with anthropomorphic figures. But as I understand it, while there is no such information?
In the meantime, observing the trends that have appeared on the "antique weapons fake market" in Afghanistan and Pakistan, decorated blade of this item raises at least great doubts about its authenticity.

[Kubur]

The inscription is in Farsi. I saw word “Allah” and am almost sure the entire text is a part of one of the Suras.


I won't be so sure, it might be poetry, you might have names, places...

Richard's date looks very right.


I would like to ask a general question: on what grounds do we discard unusual objects as some kind of “fake”?


Answer ignorant and arogance

A few years ago when I joined this forum, i trusted very much members opinions. I remember for some khanjar and others objects. Now i don't.
Most of the members here (including myself - sometimes) have very limited ideas and they base their opinions only on their own knowledge (unfortunately sometimes based only on Google and wikipedia).

Fake, modern, recent is an easy way.
I remember a discussion on the Greek yataghans, it was a disaster: statments without any proofs (only the ones that I provided and were turned against my own demonstration) and this by reputable and knowledgable members.


to conclude that we have no idea when its blade was etched? That “1229” may be a genuine date ( even in Jalali)?


Another point for you Ariel is why doing such complicated "fake", the script and the rider, all these decorations are very rich and i wonder if someone wanted to enhance an object to sell it to a dealer or a collector, he would have spend so much time. One inscription, one date wouldb have been more than enough. In short your sword and the etching are problably genuine and it's true that the doubts that we might have are based mainly on the uniqueness of the object.


Even they admit from time to time that they do not know something and cannot pass an informed judgement. Shouldn’t we all adopt a similar attitude?
“Just the facts, Ma’am!”

I can give you many examples such as the Berber swords from Morocco it was decided by Forum members that these swords are all Spanish colonials from the Carabean or South America. When you have many nimcha with Spanish blades and I know some of these swords were collected in Morocco...

It's not only about facts, it is also how you use the references and the facts (again look at the discussionon the Greek yataghan).

[ariel]

Atypical and unusual are not bad words.

Often they tell us about bridges between traditions and cultures. Charles presented here quite a few such examples, mainly from Indonesia. Deccan was a place where South Indian and Mughal traditions fused together.

Sometimes they are rare surviving examples of a previously well-established pattern: Shapsugh kindjals were described as having unusually wide blades. But Shapsughs were exiled from their land by the Russians ~150 years ago, settled elsewhere in the Ottoman realm and ceased to maintain their exclusive traditions. Their weapons largely vanished as a result. Currently, having encountered their old kindjal, we may dismiss it as an “ atypical” and exclude it from consideration.

We are to ignore the “unusual” to our peril: it impoverishes our understanding of history of people and their weapons. We are at our right ( and obligation?) to weed out fakes, but we need to support such a decision with damn good facts, not with superficial factoids and general statements.

Regretfully, cocky self-appointed “gurus” are the most vocal and the most aggressive popularisers of their pseudo-knowledge, and Internet as well as self-publishing book companies present them a vast arena for spreading their narcissistic balderdash.

This is why it is an obligation to remain serious, factual and “academic” in our discussions. There are quite a few people who can teach us how to do it, - LaRocca, Alexander, Elgood, Rivkin, Mohamed. They are professionals unlike us, the amateurs, but we still can learn the basics from them.

[mahratt]

Atypical and unusual are not bad words.
Often they tell us about bridges between traditions and cultures. Charles presented here quite a few such examples, mainly from Indonesia. Deccan was a place where South Indian and Mughal traditions fused together.

It would be very interesting if you would tell in more detail about the "bridges between traditions and cultures" in Afghanistan. This would increase the knowledge of all forum participants.


We are to ignore the “unusual” to our peril: it impoverishes our understanding of history of people and their weapons. We are at our right ( and obligation?) to weed out fakes, but we need to support such a decision with damn good facts, not with superficial factoids and general statements.

It may be better to confirm "unique" items "a with damn good facts, not with superficial factoids and general statements. That would be more logical.


This is why it is an obligation to remain serious, factual and “academic” in our discussions.

Personally, I look forward to when will begin “academic” in this discussions. But unfortunately, so far only assumptions have been voiced that are not based on unserious facts ...

For the fourth time, for example, I very much ask the participants who claimed that the Sunnis could depict anthropomorphic figures and animals on their blades, show Ottoman blades of the 19th century, executed and decorated by Turkish masters, with similar images in this topic ...
Is this too immodest a request?

[mahratt]

Another point for you Ariel is why doing such complicated "fake", the script and the rider, all these decorations are very rich and i wonder if someone wanted to enhance an object to sell it to a dealer or a collector, he would have spend so much time. One inscription, one date wouldb have been more than enough.

Here are absolutely grotesque examples of modern products of Afghan masters. Why didn’t they put only one inscription on the blades? Or just an image of one animal? I have no answer. But I think that no one will doubt that these are souvenirs ....

[Kubur]

Here are absolutely grotesque examples of modern products of Afghan masters. Why didn’t they put only one inscription on the blades? Or just an image of one animal? I have no answer. But I think that no one will doubt that these are souvenirs ....

Excellent examples, just decorative, I don't think they can be qualifed of fakes.
The technique is very different too, engraved or ciselled.
I think Ariel's sword is another animal.

[mahratt]

Excellent examples, just decorative, I don't think they can be qualifed of fakes.
The technique is very different too, engraved or ciselled.
I think Ariel's sword is another animal.

I say that in the case of Ariel’s Khyber’s knife, and in the case of the objects that I showed, the master was not limited to “one inscription” or “one animal”. But the technique of decorating blades is certainly different)))

[ariel]

I think Ariel's sword is another animal.

Kubur,

I apologize if I was insufficiently clear, but the Khyber I have shown is NOT mine. It was just posted on e-bay for $5,885 :-))), not sold ( naturally) and taken off the auction.
When the latter was done, I posted its pictures as required by Forum rules.

[mahratt]

I think Ariel's sword is another animal.

Kubur,
Unfortunately, fakes are of different levels. Some are grotesque, others are well made. For example, choora dagger, which was recently sold on e-bay. Very nice decoration of the blade. I even liked it. But "A Devil in the Details". . For example, if it was an old decoration of the blade, then the master would definitely decorate the T-shaped spine in the same style...

[mariusgmioc]

Kubur,
Unfortunately, fakes are of different levels. Some are grotesque, others are well made. For example, choora dagger, which was recently sold on e-bay. Very nice decoration of the blade. I even liked it. But "A Devil in the Details". . For example, if it was an old decoration of the blade, then the master would definitely decorate the T-shaped spine in the same style...

Very interesting example, but the fact that the decoration on the blade was made by a different person doesn't make it a fake!

Japanese swords are usually made by a master swordsmith and occasionaly decorated/engraved (horimono), sometimes at a much later date by another master. But that doesn't make them fakes, nor does it decrease their value.

The choora in your photos appears to have the decorations on the blade made by chiseling. This takes a big amount of time and skill and by no means can it be seen as diminishing the value of the blade.

I wouldn't consider even your earlier examples as fakes, but just poorly executed knives for the souvenirs market.

[ariel]

Very interesting example, but the fact that the decoration on the blade was made by a different person doesn't make it a fake!

Japanese swords are usually made by a master swordsmith and occasionaly decorated/engraved (horimono), sometimes at a much later date by another master. But that doesn't make them fakes, nor does it decrease their value.


Agree 100%. Nothing "fake-y" here. Everywhere from Turkey to India blades were made by bladesmiths and the rest by some other masters. Persians even had specific names for each profession, but I just forgot them. Thinking that had it been real, it would have had similar decoration on the handle is akin to asserting that had it really been da Vinci who painted Mona Lisa, he would have given her more luxurious frame.
I also agree that the previous ones, labeled as "fakes" are nothing but. An object becomes a "fake" when a newly-made one is offered for sale as a genuinely antique. Otherwise, it is either an honest working one made recently, or a souvenir.

[mahratt]

Probably, I incomprehensibly explained :) It was necessary to put the link:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/ANCIEN-COUTEAU-ETHNIQUE-MANCHE-CORNE-MARQUETERIE-VINTAGE-ETHNIC-KNIFE/193069168450?hash=item2cf3d1b742:g:0bwAAOSwx0FdZCQ w

This choora dagger, judging by the description, is declared as ancient. Beautiful floral carving on a blade is a modern work. I will explain again what I wrote a little earlier. If the old master made this carving, he would decorate the T-shaped spine this choora dagger in the same style. The photo shows that the T-shaped spine this choora dagger is decorated very roughly. Old masters did not allow such stylistic differences.
So we are dealing with a fake ... As I said before, there are fakes of a very good standard :)
I didn’t say anything about the hilt :) Perhaps my bad English is to blame. Sorry for not being able to explain right away...

For me personally, modern work (in my understanding "modern work" for an object that is 100 years old is 10-30-50 years old) on an old blade (even if it will be very good) - reduces the value of the item ... For me, such an object will be fake.

Marius, I agree with you that Japanese swords are usually made by a master swordsmith and occasionaly decorated/engraved (horimono), sometimes at a much later date by another master. That doesn't make them fakes, nor does it decrease their value.
But if I make an engraving on an old Japanese blade - what do you say about this?)) Will it be a fake? ;)

[Ian]

Mahratt:

You raise some excellent points. I think it comes down to how people present the item. Your choora example is a good one. Here the engraved floral work was clearly done recently (compared with other engravings on the blade and hilt). The item is presented as very old (ancienne) without any qualification that the engraving may be recent. This is a flawed characterization of the item. One cannot say for sure whether the misrepresentation is deliberate or not, but the item is not as old as the description suggests and it has been altered.

This example goes beyond the frequent exaggeration of age that many descriptions convey, in that the item has been altered. Was there intent to deceive? That's a matter of individual judgement IMHO. Caveat emptor!

Ian

[mahratt]

Mahratt:

You raise some excellent points. I think it comes down to how people present the item. Your choora example is a good one. Here the engraved floral work was clearly done recently (compared with other engravings on the blade and hilt). The item is presented as very old (ancienne) without any qualification that the engraving may be recent. This is a flawed characterization of the item. One cannot say for sure whether the misrepresentation is deliberate or not, but the item is not as old as the description suggests and it has been altered.

This example goes beyond the frequent exaggeration of age that many descriptions convey, in that the item has been altered. Was there intent to deceive? That's a matter of individual judgement IMHO. Caveat emptor!

Ian

Ian,
Thanks for understanding.

[ariel]

Ian,


One needs to be careful with those Frenchies:-)

There is a subtle difference between ancien (seller’s description) and ancient.
“Ancien” is translated first and foremost as old or past, previous, former.
”Ancien regime”= old rule. That’s how French called their monarchy before the 1789 Revolution.
But “ancient” is ancient or antique.
Sometimes, foreign languages are useful. N’est-ce pas?

The poor schnook never presented his choora as “antique”, just as “old”, which is true. Does not qualify for a “fake”.

[Ian]

Good point Ariel. Merci beaucoup! :)

[ariel]

De rien:-)

[mahratt]

Bravo, Ariel.

As always, you masterfully "play with words"))))

Your linguistic knowledge is fascinating, but it is not relevant. Since it is clear that the seller does not say that he is selling a modern item.

if I'm not mistaken "ANCIEN COUTEAU ETHNIQUE" - translates as "OLD ETHNIC KNIFE"
Unfortunately, the seller does not write in the description that the decoration of the blade is recent.

It always makes sense to read the entire description, and not shine with "linguistic knowledge"...

[kai]

I’m sure Ariel is not trying to be apologetic concerning this seller.

We all need to keep in mind that most salesmen will try to phrase any description in a way that entices possible buyers in reading more into it than what will be considered as legally binding - caveat emptor.

It helps to really think about what is NOT being said in sales lore...

Regards,
Kai

[Jim McDougall]

It is an interesting and contentious debate as often develops here, leaving behind the plausible explanations pertaining to the circumstances of an example set here for examination.

Momentarily returning to the example originally posted here, a Khyber knife typical of mid to latter 19th century, which has clearly undergone a dramatic acid etching of its blade, profoundly atypical for these swords.....especially in the Khyber regions where they were commonly used.

Obviously this sword has at some point left its original environs and entered a new context where the styling of the motif applied characterizes the culture and tradition of those who most likely applied it.

This does not render the sword a fake, as it clearly is not, nor does it need to suggest that the decoration was spuriously applied to garner monetary value. Such 'creations' do not need such elaborate yet crudely applied application which is far too consuming for the average innovation of souk peddlers.

The nearly unbelievable price asked in the hawking of this piece only illustrates the audacity of sellers who prey on poorly informed buyers who desperately hope to find great value in exotic and unusual items.
There is an incredible gullibility out there in the vastly expanding sales venues patrons, and sadly some are sometimes well hoodwinked.

My estimation suggesting the possibility of this item having some authenticity in its current appearance as an item perhaps ending up in the hands of the Kalash people as mentioned can only remain speculative.

The rest of the debate here becomes almost philosophical, toward what determines whether a weapon is, or has become 'fake', a term extremely relative in these matters.

The elements of arms decoration as pertains to religious doctrine or rules are typically vaguely defined or understood and it is hard to strictly define decoration in such character. Often there are nominal presences of religions in syncretic circumstances with others, so variation might move in different directions.

Similarly, there are hybridized and amalgamated weapons which result from cases of either trophy items, traditional or heirloom ones, which have incongruous components used as usually ceremonial weapons. Reciting the many examples of this here would simply belabor the discussion further.

In a note regarding the so called 'Berber sabres', these were 'presumed' to be Moroccan due to numbers of them found in Morocco. As it turned out, these were taken there by conscripted forces from Spanish colonial regions in Caribbean and Central American regions during uprisings in 1920s against Spanish rule in Moroccan regions. These were found to have indigenous proclivity in the Cuban, Mexican and Central American regions and even extended to Dominican Republic. I recall the research on these begun in the late 1990s and discussions here sharing information and evidence revealing the ultimate consensus, which became generally held rather than decided.

[motan]

Reputable motan, unfortunately, you view the past through the “prism of modernity” (that is, from the perspective of modern views). In an archaic society, which the Afghans represented in the 19th century (and even more so the Kafirs Hindu Kush ), there can be no a-typical weapons decorated in an a-typical technique for this culture. There may be trophies, but not objects typical of society, with some a-typical features.
Hello Mahratt,
While I may be suffering from post-modernism (I guess that is what you mean), others here suffer from dogmatism and rigidity of thought. I really don't know much about Kaffirs and their culture and I am not the best judge of this specific knife. However, the Kalash do not live in Papua or on the moon and trade contacts always existed. Fringes produce fringe pieces and I totally reject the view that weapons that do not conform with known and recognized types are necessarily "fake" in any way. That is all.
The last 2 pieces I have shown on the forum are almost certainly 19th c, genuine, but do not belong to any known type (http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=25170 http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=24995).
I understand why collectors dislike these odd pieces. They blur a picture that is too complex as it is. But ignoring these would be treating our hobby as any another fancy (pedigree dogs for example), where 19th c "scientific" views still prevail, meaning that opinions and reasoning are preferred above facts.
Ariel has been provocative, as usual, in order to develop discussion. Whatever this knife is, it is clearly not worth the asking price by a long shot.

[mariusgmioc]

But if I make an engraving on an old Japanese blade - what do you say about this?)) Will it be a fake? ;)

Well, if you make an engraving on a Japanese blade, it will certainly be a disaster... for the blade of course (not that I am doubting your engraving skills). ;)

However, if say you have a blade from 1700 and around 1900 the owner has it decorated with horimono by a master engraver, that would not decrease the value of the sword... but with some observations: the horimono should be TRADITIONALLY made = chiseled by hand, and with a traditional theme (hi, kanji symbols, kurikara, etc.)

So if the horimono would be made using any other method than chiseling by hand (using power tools, by etching, by punching, etc.), or if the horimono is not of traditional motifs (say you engrave your name) then it would be mutilating the blade and turning it into a fake (a contraption that is not what it is supposed to be).

In my oppinion this is precisely the case of the khyber sword in the original posting. A genuine typical Afghan khyber sword, with some decoration added on the blade at a later date, but the decoration is made by a method that is definitely NOT traditional for the Afghan khyber swords, and also has a theme that does not appear traditional as well (at least not to my eyes).

But I am not so sure about the choora in your example. The argument that a genuine Afghan engraver would have also engraved the spine in the same style is a pure speculation. Maybe the owner didn't have enough money to pay for a full engraving... :shrug:
Anyhow, at least to my eyes and just judging from the photos, the engraving on the choora appears traditionally made and with Afghan style motifs. So to me, the choora may be very genuine and original.

[mahratt]

In my oppinion this is precisely the case of the khyber sword in the original posting. A genuine typical Afghan khyber sword, with some decoration added on the blade at a later date, but the decoration is made by a method that is definitely NOT traditional for the Afghan khyber swords, and also has a theme that does not appear traditional as well (at least not to my eyes).

Of course, the authenticity of the Khyber knife, which served as the basis for later decoration, is beyond doubt


But I am not so sure about the choora in your example. The argument that a genuine Afghan engraver would have also engraved the spine in the same style is a pure speculation. Maybe the owner didn't have enough money to pay for a full engraving... :shrug:
Anyhow, at least to my eyes and just judging from the photos, the engraving on the choora appears traditionally made and with Afghan style motifs. So to me, the choora may be very genuine and original.

Marius, was there no money for a small decoration on the dagger’s spine? :) Despite the fact that on both sides the blade is richly decorated with deep carving? ;) I'm afraid it is this - pure speculation)))
Moreover, it is known that if a traditional blade was used on chur (as in the case of my example), then it is always decorated very roughly. And the appearance of such a beautiful, deep and graceful carving, but only on the sides of the blade is completely unconventional. Rather, I believe that someone ordered such a carving in the 1970s and 1980s, while not understanding how it should be in tradition. Moreover, this floral ornament is not very typical for Afghanistan. Although the master tried hard)))

[Kubur]

But I am not so sure about the choora in your example. The argument that a genuine Afghan engraver would have also engraved the spine in the same style is a pure speculation. Maybe the owner didn't have enough money to pay for a full engraving... :shrug:
Anyhow, at least to my eyes and just judging from the photos, the engraving on the choora appears traditionally made and with Afghan style motifs. So to me, the choora may be very genuine and original.

Absolutely correct, this is speculation, just look at the yataghans for example.
To me too this choora looks right.
Guys you have to stop to think that decorations are suspicious. And yes these decorations were done after the blade was forged... It is also speculation to think that it was in a later date, it could have been two days after the forge, two weeks, two months...Patina is important.

[Kubur]

In a note regarding the so called 'Berber sabres', these were 'presumed' to be Moroccan due to numbers of them found in Morocco. As it turned out, these were taken there by conscripted forces from Spanish colonial regions in Caribbean and Central American regions during uprisings in 1920s against Spanish rule in Moroccan regions. These were found to have indigenous proclivity in the Cuban, Mexican and Central American regions and even extended to Dominican Republic. I recall the research on these begun in the late 1990s and discussions here sharing information and evidence revealing the ultimate consensus, which became generally held rather than decided.

Hi Rick,
No problem with the Spanish origins, and later Cuban, Mexican and Dominican... Of Course.
But I strongly disagree that all the forum members agreed with your conclusions (at least Ariel and I we didn't), you have also Berber swords from South Morocco that I know very well. Local and tribal variations of the Spanish colonial machettes... Even these swords might have been first in Morocco and then later to the Caribbeans.
Why? Simply the Triangular trade... Think about it... I know that you like trade stories... I will post another funny example later...

[mahratt]

Absolutely correct, this is speculation, just look at the yataghans for example.
To me too this choora looks right.
Guys you have to stop to think that decorations are suspicious. And yes these decorations were done after the blade was forged... It is also speculation to think that it was in a later date, it could have been two days after the forge, two weeks, two months...Patina is important.

Well, if for someone this is not important, then let it be in 2 years, in 20 years, in 200 years))))
Seriously, it seems to me that it makes sense to look at analogies. And if there are no analogies, then it is necessary to question such "decorations" of blades. Especially if the "decoration" is made in the technique. which is a-typical for an item from a specific region.
But! This is a personal matter for everyone.

[mahratt]

Hello Mahratt,
While I may be suffering from post-modernism (I guess that is what you mean), others here suffer from dogmatism and rigidity of thought. I really don't know much about Kaffirs and their culture and I am not the best judge of this specific knife. However, the Kalash do not live in Papua or on the moon and trade contacts always existed.

Hello motan,
In recent months, I read a lot about Kalash and other kafirs of Nuristan (Kafiristan), talk with Kalash, who has a museum in Kabul dedicated to the culture of Kafiristan, look at museum collections and study archival photos from Kafiristan;) Therefore, I would not draw such hasty conclusions about the existence of "trade contacts" with Persia there. Until the end of the 19th century, these were very archaic and isolated societies.


The last 2 pieces I have shown on the forum are almost certainly 19th c, genuine, but do not belong to any known type (http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=25170 http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=24995)

I don’t know anything about Shibriyas, so I can’t say anything about the daggers that you mentioned. But I am a little versed in the weapons of Afghanistan :)

[mahratt]

Hi Rick,
No problem with the Spanish origins, and later Cuban, Mexican and Dominican... Of Course.
But I strongly disagree that all the forum members agreed with your conclusions (at least Ariel and I we didn't), you have also Berber swords from South Morocco that I know very well. Local and tribal variations of the Spanish colonial machettes... Even these swords might have been first in Morocco and then later to the Caribbeans.
Why? Simply the Triangular trade... Think about it... I know that you like trade stories... I will post another funny example later...

Thank you Kubur!
This is a very interesting geographical story :) A real journey.
But maybe we will return to Afghanistan? ;)

[ariel]

Guys,
I am not being provocative. On the contrary, I am saying that in the absence of hard facts ( aluminum on a presumably 17 century sword, plastic handle, engraving with contemporary motives etc) unusual swords and daggers should not be officially labeled as “fake”. There is such thing as presumption of innocence:-)

Unusual things challenge our current knowledge: have we missed something? We may thus engage in a search for potential gaps in our knowledge. But on top of it, swords mutated, better communications introduced exchange of forms, techniques and decorations. Trade blades were ubiquitous: European blades were sold to Sudan, Arabia and North Africa, Daghestanis sold their blades to Arabia, Indian and Persian blades were dime a dozen in Afghanistan, Oriental blades were sold in Europe. We see Philippine Barongs with Chinese hieroglyphic marks: Chinese exported them there in quantities. Trophies made “chimeric” weapons: British blade with Indian handle, Indian blade with British handle, Khanda blade with Georgian handle.

Could this Khyber blade with the etching been made in Persia in the middle of 19 century and sold in Afghanistan where a local handle was attached to it? It is a distinct possibility: why wouldn’t Persian smiths cease an opportunity to make a buck? After all, they sold quantities of sophisticated wootz Shamshir blades with engraved, chiseled and koftgari Persian inscriptions there anyway, why not make a simple Khyber blade and add a cheap etching to it?

My point is, we cannot automatically assume that strange is fake. We may not like what we see and not buy it, but in the absence of hard evidence ( Marius’ example of horimono) we may want to suspend our negative judgement.

[ariel]

Kubur,
Re. “Berber or Spanish colonial” swords I have no dog in this fight.
My only point was that there is a big old oil in Versailles showing a battle of French with Berbers. One Berber holds an identical sword. Regretfully ( stupidly, in fact) I did not photograph it or info about the artist and the date.

[mahratt]

Could this Khyber blade with the etching been made in Persia in the middle of 19 century and sold in Afghanistan where a local handle was attached to it? It is a distinct possibility: why wouldn’t Persian smiths cease an opportunity to make a buck? After all, they sold quantities of sophisticated wootz Shamshir blades with engraved, chiseled and koftgari Persian inscriptions there anyway, why not make a simple Khyber blade and add a cheap etching to it?

Unfortunately, these words are just “flight of fancy”. Shamshir is a typically Persian weapon. And their blades were highly valued and exported to other countries. There is a lot of evidence for this. The Khyber knife is the weapon of the inhabitants of Afghanistan and, to some extent, Northern India (but there the Khyber knives have their own recognizable style). I have no doubt that the Persian master could make a Khyber knife. Moreover, I know such examples. But then the Khyber knife made by the Persian master will look different than the one we are discussing. This is due to cultural traditions. There will be a different shape of the blade, another shape of the handle, another technique for decorating the blade.
By the way, for some reason everyone forgot what Marius wrote at the very beginning:

Acid etching MAY be an "old" (please define what you mean by "old") technique, but Persians did NOT use it before 19th century, and even then for very specific and few items (mostly decorative, historicism - known as Qajar revival - blades decorated with religious texts). :shrug:

I will add that such a rough Acid etching is usually found on Persian objects of the late 19th century.

[mariusgmioc]

[QUOTE=mahratt]
Marius, was there no money for a small decoration on the dagger’s spine? :) Despite the fact that on both sides the blade is richly decorated with deep carving? ;) I'm afraid it is this - pure speculation)))
Moreover, it is known that if a traditional blade was used on chur (as in the case of my example), then it is always decorated very roughly. And the appearance of such a beautiful, deep and graceful carving, but only on the sides of the blade is completely unconventional. Rather, I believe that someone ordered such a carving in the 1970s and 1980s, while not understanding how it should be in tradition. Moreover, this floral ornament is not very typical for Afghanistan. Although the master tried hard)))[/QUOTE:]

I believe I see your point!

So, if I would see a Japanese katana with a beautiful horimono with Yin and Yang or some Farsi script, I would definitely consider it a fake/contraption, and by no means a genuine ethnographic weapon characteristic for Japan.

The same will definitely be the case for the Khyber sword in the original posting. At least in my opinion.

And considering that deep engraving is NOT a technique traditionally used by Afghans, it becomes apparent that the choora in question is NOT a genuine ethnographic knife characteristic for its geographic region. It would be like a katana with horimono done by punching.
:shrug:

[Jim McDougall]

This is amazing, always learning here!! I had no idea Persians did not use acid etching before 19th century, and thought that Qajar items of the 'revival' type included the earlier Qajar period as well (from 1789).
The Mamluks of course used the process from centuries earlier in their metalwork, and the technique became well known in the Sudan by the 19th c.

It is odd that this Khyber has this type etching, which was not something used in these or most Afghan regions as far as I have known. However, it was not used on Kalash (Kafir) weapons either (again as far as I have found).
The Kalash used these type figures and styling on material culture and even on their homes in external decoration.

[ariel]

Double

[ariel]

In fact, Persians etched their blades for centuries: that was how they revealed wootz. They did not use deep etching, like on the Khyber in question, till they started producing “ revival” swords. Deep etching was a quick, cheap and dirty way to produce images and inscriptions, suitable for souvenir market, regulation sabers and trade with “penniless savages” like Afghanis:-) The quality of images varied widely, from acceptable to atrocious. In my guess, this Khyber’s imagery belongs to the low end of the Persian spectrum:-)

[ariel]

Re: post # 60

Folks, I am lost.....
Need your help to understand the logic:
Read the first sentence of my quotation, first sentence of the response and then last sentence of the response: in that order.

Am I totally confused or is it an example of a “split mind” thinking?

[mahratt]

Re: post # 60

Folks, I am lost.....
Need your help to understand the logic:
Read the first sentence of my quotation, first sentence of the response and then last sentence of the response: in that order.

Am I totally confused or is it an example of a “split mind” thinking?

Ariel, what exactly are you not clear about? I will try to explain in more understandable words, if something seemed to you not logical. It will be more correct than if the other folks try to explain my logic to you :)

I apologize for my poor English.

[mahratt]

I will try to explain to you now. But if something is not clear, please ask. Do not be shy.

1) Persia is known for exporting large quantities of shamshir blades (wootz blades and simple blades) to neighboring countries. This fact is confirmed by historical documents and a large number of undoubtedly Persian blades in India, Arabia and Central Asia.
2) Nothing is known about the fact that Persia would manufacture for export weapons not typical of Persia, but typical of another country. (if there is documentary evidence that proves that I am wrong, I will be very glad to get acquainted with them)
3) In Persia (or Persian craftsmen in Afghanistan), in exceptional cases, they made Khyber knives. These khyber knives are very elegant in the shape of a blade, have a handle that differs from the rough handles of Afghan highbers, their blades are decorated in a completely different technique.
4) The Khyber knife discussed in the subject, by all its external signs, is Afghan. There are no features in it that may indicate that it is made in Persia. In addition to "acid etching."
5) Indeed, in Persia in the 19th century actively used “acid etching” to decorate arms and armor, covering their surface with images and calligraphy. But! As Marius already wrote, the Persians began to do this in the 19th century.
6) The quality of "acid etching" in the early 19th century and at the end of the 19th century is very different. In the early 19th century - with "acid etching" you get deep and clear images. At the end of the 19th century - low-quality images (similar to images on the haber from this topic).
7) In Afghanistan, “acid etching” was not used to decorate blades.
8) How realistic is the historical combination of a typical Afghan Khyber knife and a typical Persian "acid etching"? My personal opinion is that such a combination could not exist in the 19th century. But! Even if you start to fantasize and decide that some Afghan traveled to Persia and for some reason ordered a completely non-standard jewelry on his Khyber knife, then judging by the crude "acid etching", this was done at the very end of the 19th century. That is, to call such a Khyber knife - "old khyber" or, especially, "The oldest dated Khyber I can recall" - is completely wrong.

I hope now I was able to explain what you did not understand

[mariusgmioc]

I will try to explain to you now. But if something is not clear, please ask. Do not be shy.

1) Persia is known for exporting large quantities of shamshir blades (wootz blades and simple blades) to neighboring countries. This fact is confirmed by historical documents and a large number of undoubtedly Persian blades in India, Arabia and Central Asia.
2) Nothing is known about the fact that Persia would manufacture for export weapons not typical of Persia, but typical of another country. (if there is documentary evidence that proves that I am wrong, I will be very glad to get acquainted with them)
3) In Persia (or Persian craftsmen in Afghanistan), in exceptional cases, they made Khyber knives. These khyber knives are very elegant in the shape of a blade, have a handle that differs from the rough handles of Afghan highbers, their blades are decorated in a completely different technique.
4) The Khyber knife discussed in the subject, by all its external signs, is Afghan. There are no features in it that may indicate that it is made in Persia. In addition to "acid etching."
5) Indeed, in Persia in the 19th century actively used “acid etching” to decorate arms and armor, covering their surface with images and calligraphy. But! As Marius already wrote, the Persians began to do this in the 19th century.
6) The quality of "acid etching" in the early 19th century and at the end of the 19th century is very different. In the early 19th century - with "acid etching" you get deep and clear images. At the end of the 19th century - low-quality images (similar to images on the haber from this topic).
7) In Afghanistan, “acid etching” was not used to decorate blades.
8) How realistic is the historical combination of a typical Afghan Khyber knife and a typical Persian "acid etching"? My personal opinion is that such a combination could not exist in the 19th century. But! Even if you start to fantasize and decide that some Afghan traveled to Persia and for some reason ordered a completely non-standard jewelry on his Khyber knife, then judging by the crude "acid etching", this was done at the very end of the 19th century. That is, to call such a Khyber knife - "old khyber" or, especially, "The oldest dated Khyber I can recall" - is completely wrong.

I hope now I was able to explain what you did not understand

Precisely!
:cool:

PS: But reading through this whole thread, it appears that the majority of people also lean towards this oppinion.
Anyhow, I loved the debate! :)

[mahratt]

Precisely!
:cool:


Thank you very much!
I already began to worry that my poor knowledge of English prevented me from expressing my thoughts logically ;)

[Jim McDougall]

The Khyber blade is unique, and while Persia may have begun exporting trade blades at some point about early to mid 19th c. (see the excellent article "On the Persian Shamshir and the Signature of Assad Allah" Oliver Pinchot, 'Arms Collecting' Vol. 40, #1, Feb. 2002) .......they made typical sabre type blades used often on local hilts.
They were not set on producing made to order blades or weapons for trade or as far as I am aware, commissioned or custom made weapons were not a well known Persian activity. Obviously their blades and arms were highly in demand on their own..........but never heard of a Khyber blade in Persia or from Persia.

This etching is crudely done, and far from Persian quality, and the very idea of an Afghan tribesman sending a blade or weapon to Persia for etching is on the face of it, patently not likely.

The 'date' in the motif here is certainly commemorative or with some other connection, if it is indeed a date. Therefore to presume this is a date establishing a terminus post quem for the 'Khyber knife' form is insufficient.

Still this is an intriguing example of a Khyber of the 19th c. which has found its way into an unusual context, reflected by the decorative motif which has been applied to it for whatever reason. Fascinating discussion.

[ariel]

Jim,
We will never know the precise history of this khyber. All we know that it is old and there is a Persian style deep etching on it.



Was it a special order from Persia to Afghanistan? Grossly unlikely. Or rare example of Afghani manufacture made by a Persianized Afghani master? Say, Hazara who were and still are Shia and maintain close ties with Iran? That’s more likely. There are 3 million of them in Afghanistan and half a million in Iran. More than enough to have at least several swordsmiths:-) And all over the world ethnic groups in multinational countries that are organized along tribal lines, produce their own types of weapons with their own styles of decoration.

We have a physical object with unusual feature: deep etching. But there were other contemporaneous swords with deeply etched texts all over the blade in Afghanistan.

I found the original sword in e-bay archives and gave pics to 2 of my Persian colleagues. Will see what they will read.
Meanwhile, let’s take a break.

[Jim McDougall]

Jim,
We will never know the precise history of this khyber. All we know that it is old and there is a Persian style deep etching on it.



Was it a special order from Persia to Afghanistan? Grossly unlikely. Or rare example of Afghani manufacture made by a Persianized Afghani master? Say, Hazara who were and still are Shia and maintain close ties with Iran? That’s more likely. There are 3 million of them in Afghanistan and half a million in Iran. More than enough to have at least several swordsmiths:-) And all over the world ethnic groups in multinational countries that are organized along tribal lines, produce their own types of weapons with their own styles of decoration.

We have a physical object with unusual feature: deep etching. But there were other contemporaneous swords with deeply etched texts all over the blade in Afghanistan.

I found the original sword in e-bay archives and gave pics to 2 of my Persian colleagues. Will see what they will read.
Meanwhile, let’s take a break.

It is so true that while we know the typical nature of weapons and their decoration etc. in given regions, there will always be anomalies. But that is the fascination and excitement of arms history and investigation.
It is not only conceivable but likely that Persian artisans would enter Afghan regions just as they did in many others. Their style and skills then of course would diffuse accordingly.

Of course we may never know with certainty on this intriguing Khyber, why it in such an atypical state, but honestly this discussion has been fascinating and I very much enjoy the perspective, ideas and knowledge shared here.
I hope to never stop learning, and postings like this interesting Khyber are the perfect fuel!! Thank you for so thoughtfully posting this.

[Edster]

Great discussion. Perhaps it is time to take a break, but apparently no one has considered the extensive text also etched on the blade. I suspect that there is a revealing story contained therein.

Regards,
Ed

[mahratt]

Great discussion. Perhaps it is time to take a break, but apparently no one has considered the extensive text also etched on the blade. I suspect that there is a revealing story contained therein.

Regards,
Ed

That would be great if the text could be translated But unfortunately, these late "acid etchings" are usually meaningless. Of course, we say: "Probably the surahs of the Koran are written there". But usually on Persian items of the late 19th century and Sudanese items - "inscriptions" are not readable...

[ariel]

Great discussion. Perhaps it is time to take a break, but apparently no one has considered the extensive text also etched on the blade. I suspect that there is a revealing story contained therein.

Regards,
Ed
Ed,

Many pics are with my Persian colleagues for at least partial translation. Hopefully something meaningful will come out of it. Let's keep our collective fingers crossed.

[Jim McDougall]

I look forward to hearing more from Persian speakers on possibility of actual words or perhaps phrases in this acid etched motif. While as I have stated my sense is that this is a genuine tribal Khyber which has perhaps entered the Kalash (Kafir) realm, possibly a trophy.

Since like much of Afghanistan, Uzbekistan (Bukhara) Sind and Baluchistan, who all had profound Persian influences present....this was probably quite so in the Nuristan regions. However, it should be noted that the Kalash have tried to maintain their animist religious tradition and beliefs in autonomy in the areas of Chitral where they relocated after Rahman Khans incursion in 1890s.

It is curious to see such motif and affectation applied in what appears to be regarded as in Persian style but with Kalash images coupled with supposed Persian script and dating.
Could this be some sort of syncretic anomaly?

Here I would note that with decorative calligraphy, it has often been presumed that in many cases it is in effect 'jibberish' or simply approximated lettering to achieve a provocative result in imbuement of a blade.
This was the case with the heavy lettering used on Sudanese blades in the late 19th c. known as 'thuluth'. It has been discovered however, that much of this decorative calligraphy is typically in reality select phrases or wording from Koranic Surahs in numbers of examples. This however is used in repetition and sometimes with added contemporary invocations related to the Mahdi.

In the case of Persian decoration, the well known blades of the Persian trade blades of the early 19th c. (well described in Oliver Pinchot's " On the Persian Shamshir and the Signature of Assad Allah", Arms Collecting, Vol. 40, #1. Feb.2002) he details the fact that these blades were decorated with a cartouche holding the Persian lion image to represent the famed makers name. While with scripted cartouche as well, this pictogram served as recognition visually for less than literate clientele. These were the kinds of considerations often used in decoration of these blades in these times of far broader availability of weapons.

Perhaps this 'decoration' is also in such manner, and Ed's suggestion is of course well placed. Hopefully Ariels resources will find for or against the matter.
Fingers crossed!! :)

[Kubur]

Guys

Just google Pamir petroglyphs or rock art, or just download the article below...
Is it possible that this sword is not from Afghanistan but from Pamir in Tadjikistan?
Or an Afghan sword decorated in Tadjikistan in the Wakhan Corridor??
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2013/02/wakhan-corridor/

Kubur

[mahratt]

Guys

Just google Pamir petroglyphs or rock art, or just download the article below...
Is it possible that this sword is not from Afghanistan but from Pamir in Tadjikistan?
Or an Afghan sword decorated in Tadjikistan in the Wakhan Corridor??
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2013/02/wakhan-corridor/

Kubur

Thanks Kubur!

Great version! But ... Maybe someone will show items from Tajikistan with such "acid etching" on the blade? I have not seen ... And I can’t remember that in Tajikistan or in Bukhara, "acid etching" was done on the blades. But it will be very interesting for me to see such items.

[Edster]

I agree with Kubar that the image is in a pictograph-style and Jim"s suggestion that the pictogram has a representable meaning.

How's this for an interesting if fanciful tale? Suppose a traveler during the Great Game era came across a pictogram of an ancient battle (note the curved bladed sword and rounded figures with holes in them, dead people?). Say the pictogram continued to have relevance to the locals. The traveler copied the image and had it etched into the knife along with a commemorative account of the battle in the Tadjik language which I think is a version of Farsi.

Ed

[ariel]

A bit too many "ifs" for my taste:-)
I have no idea whether the content of inscriptions might help, but no matter what, there are other unquestionably Afghani examples with similar wall-to-wall deeply etched texts along the entire blade. They might be infrequent, but this khyber is not a "unique" example.

The really interesting question would be where were they manufactured: all over the country, or limited to the Persianized ( Shia?) enclaves?

[mahratt]

A bit too many "ifs" for my taste:-)
I have no idea whether the content of inscriptions might help, but no matter what, there are other unquestionably Afghani examples with similar wall-to-wall deeply etched texts along the entire blade. They might be infrequent, but this khyber is not a "unique" example.

The really interesting question would be where were they manufactured: all over the country, of limited to the Persianized ( Shia?) enclaves?

Wow. We'll see more examples of Khyberian knives with such primitive "acid etching"? I look forward to it! I think the rest of them too.

[Jim McDougall]

While we have finally agreed that there may be some tangible message or words in the script etched onto this blade, in yet an undetermined dialect or language, it seems there is yet another factor which may be considered toward the Khyber itself.

We have agreed this Khyber is indeed of mid to third quarter 19th.c (at least I think we have) and in my opinion, these seem to have produced exclusively in Afghan regions in and around the Khyber Pass itself. It seems exclusive to the indigenous tribes of the Khyber, and as far as I have known, is not well known in the broader parts of Afghanistan or neighboring countries.

As once well expressed by Torben Flindt, ethnographic weapons have no geographic boundaries, of course an obvious axiom which sometimes seems overlooked in stringent weapon form classifications.

So I think we can agree that this Khyber was not made in Persia, or any other location beyond the sphere of the Khyber regions and its tribes.

With regard to 'if's', in my perception these are the ideas and observations that form postulations which may well become factual holdings. Just as Ed has suggested, and has recognized as perhaps 'fanciful', his idea for the possible present character of the 'old Khyber', is well ratiocinated and has compelling potential.

These Central Asian regions are some of the most traveled, invaded, and vibrantly changing in ethnic diversity in the world. The 'Great Game' is but a modern term for the dynamics that have existed there for millenia. It would be naïve to think that a weapon, even as distinctly geographically oriented as the Khyber, could not be transported into any if not many of these regions occasionally.

What is unusual, if not distinctly anomalous with this one, is not the sword itself, but the character of the motif and its acid etching application. I would join in being extremely interested in knowing of any other examples bearing this type of decoration on Khyber knives. This process is as far as I have known, as Dima has well noted, not known in the regions where Khybers are indigenous, nor for that matter contiguous areas.

While a break has been suggested, personally I find this discussion, and particularly the excellent discourse, fascinating, so I hope we can continue while hopefully finding more evidential material.

[ariel]

Jim,
I am waiting for a word from two Iranian colleagues re. inscription.
Then I shall be able to answer your questions.

Fair enough?

[ariel]

Jim,
Forgot to mention:
The so-called “ Khybers” were not limited to the Khyber Pass area. The best evidence is the variability of their handles: beak-y in the majority of cases, Karabela-like in the rest. They penetrated both East ( India) and West ( Iran), yet another suggestion of their widespread presence

They acquired the moniker you are talking about from the Brits who fought Afghanis there. And locals never called them “Khyber knives”, for them it was “ selava”.

[Jim McDougall]

Jim,
Forgot to mention:
The so-called “ Khybers” were not limited to the Khyber Pass area. The best evidence is the variability of their handles: beak-y in the majority of cases, Karabela-like in the rest. They penetrated both East ( India) and West ( Iran), yet another suggestion of their widespread presence

They acquired the moniker you are talking about from the Brits who fought Afghanis there. And locals never called them “Khyber knives”, for them it was “ selava”.


Thanks very much Ariel, I knew of course the odd moniker came from the Hobsen-Jobsen of the British forces in the Khyber regions (apparently these were known locally as salwar or selava?(sic). But I had no idea of these huge knives (swords) in India or Iran.
I knew of course the 'smaller' versions in the spectrum of pesh kabz reached into those spheres, but not the huge Khyber swords.

Any chance of seeing an example of a Khyber knife (large blade) from India or Iran? Naturally I am referring to these large 'triangular' (for lack of better geometric description) blades, almost like a butcher knife.

[ariel]

The beautiful one on the front cover of the “ Afghani edged weapons” book is Indian. Fiegels’ sale catalogue has a couple of Persian. I have one with deep old Indian chiseling ( thanks, Jens) and another potentially Indian with elephant ivory handle and sophisticated wootz blade.
But we are talking about Afghanistan proper , and most khybers in use there will be of local manufacture.
It’s like seeing more Fords than Fiats and Alfa Romeos in America. But move to Italy, and the proportions will flip. And, of course, their occurrence in neighboring countries is likely to be largely limited to ethic Afghans, such as Khyber Pakhtunhwa in contemporary Pakistan, formerly part of India.

[Jim McDougall]

The beautiful one on the front cover of the “ Afghani edged weapons” book is Indian. Fiegels’ sale catalogue has a couple of Persian. I have one with deep old Indian chiseling ( thanks, Jens) and another potentially Indian with elephant ivory handle and sophisticated wootz blade.
But we are talking about Afghanistan proper , and most khybers in use there will be of local manufacture.
It’s like seeing more Fords than Fiats and Alfa Romeos in America. But move to Italy, and the proportions will flip. And, of course, their occurrence in neighboring countries is likely to be largely limited to ethic Afghans, such as Khyber Pakhtunhwa in contemporary Pakistan, formerly part of India.

Crossed posts! I did not realize the one on the book cover was Indian (?). Would that be in that Afghanistan in the 19th c. was considered part of India?
I do not have Fiegel handy, but again did not realize there were Persian Khyber's in it. It does seem quite understandable that ethnic persons of Khyber tribes in other geographic locales might take their Khyber's along.

[mahratt]

I'd like to clarify a little bit the words of the Ariel. Indeed, there are many Khyber knives made in India or by Indian craftsmen in Afghanistan. Such Khyber knives can be seen in large quantities in museums in India. But! Khyber knives, which we could call "Persian" (made in Persia or by Persian masters in Afghanistan) are known very little...

[Jim McDougall]

Dima thank you for this information and clarification! I truly did not know of these Khyber swords being made in India, but I can understand that there must have been Indian craftsmen in Afghan regions who might make them.
As you well note, the idea of these often very large bladed Khyber swords being made in Persia seems very unlikely, just as the idea of Persian craftsmen in Afghanistan seems remote.

It seems well established of course that artisans of regions often move to other areas, and in doing so take their skills and styling character with them of course. It makes sense that obviously these styles, techniques and character would in degree become melded together in the examples they produced.

I think the objective of recognizing the possibility of this particular Khyber being one of these hybrids, or accounting for its unusual decoration is well at hand here. As far as I can see however, is that this example in the original post is of the commonly seen versions produced in the typical manner in Khyber regions, rather than one produced in these other areas noted.

We return to the very crudely applied acid etched decoration. We know that this technique was used in Persia, and by its craftsmen. It is possible that this technique, which became it seems more widely practiced in latter part of 19th c. (thinking of the Sudanese thuluth case) may have been carried into many regions by craftsmen relocating.

I think its crudely applied character of the decoration here, which has been the primary point of contention, pretty much renders the possibility of being done by a skilled craftsman unlikely, particularly Persian. The likelihood of the scenario proposed by Ed, a copied theme added by a tribal artisan representing local traditions or events is far more plausible.

[ariel]

Update:
One of the " translators" sent me a message: this is written in ancient variant of Farsi, but the quality of deep etching is very poor, the letters flow into each other.
She could translate only a small fragment:" ...the king gave advice to his son..."
She is taking it to her parents ; perhaps, they might be more successful, but I doubt more and more that translation may give us any specific information: Persians were fond of general statements of literary origin inscribed on their blades. I have a Khyber with rhino handle and 4 rivets (2-1-1); the upper 2 used to be "big" , but the washers were lost. It is inscribed in old Persian with a quote from Sa'adi's " Golestan ( 13 century). Central Asia ( Bukhara, Khiva, Samarkand)? Northern Afghanistan? Iran proper?

So, one thing is clear: the etching was made by a Farsi-speaking person. Whether he was an itinerant master from Iran or a Persianized Afghani is unclear. In any case, it may explain the human figure and ,- perhaps,- the date of 1850 in Persian calendar Jalali.

[mariusgmioc]

So, one thing is clear: the etching was made by a Farsi-speaking person. Whether he was an itinerant master from Iran or a Persianized Afghani is unclear. In any case, it may explain the human figure and ,- perhaps,- the date of 1850 in Persian calendar Jalali.

I beg to differ! Nothing is clear. The one who made the etching could have been simply copying it 1:1 from somewhere else.
:cool:

[Jim McDougall]

I think this is a strong case, again, for this weapon bearing a commemorative inscription. While the original text or example of the wording being copied was possibly (or more likely) to have been applied by someone not necessarily fluent or even familiar with the Farsi language, it does suggest the intent.
The individual applying the wording to the host weapon, by the crude character of the motif, certainly was not a master craftsman of Persia or anywhere for that matter. However, it seems a sincere attempt to portray a traditional or highly held wording of Farsi, as noted.

Inscriptions in these languages and phrases surely have been used on other Khyber's of course, but the use of acid etching is unusual as we have discussed.

[ariel]

Rephrasing my conclusion: the use of Farsi defines the etcher and/ or the owner as belonging to Persianized Afghani tribe.

Marius: is that better?

[ariel]

OK, final summary.
1. We have already established that the sword in question is an Afghani khyber.
2. It has a deep etching in Farsi, and the dating in Jalali puts it somewhere in the third quarter of 19th century.
The remaining questions were:
a). Meaning of the inscription
b). Uncertainty whether Persian technique of deep etching was used on Afghani swords.

Recent info:
Parents of my other informer ( both former professors of Persian literature and linguistics respectively) were able to read only part of the inscription due to imperfections of the etching technique. It is in ancient Farsi.
Not unexpectedly, just like in my other khyber ( inscription was done using gold wire unlay and easily readable), this is just an unrelated verse.



On the khyber in question is a quote from Sa'adi's Golestan.
"A king placed his son in a school,
Putting in his lap a silver tablet
Wrote on it in golden letters:
The hard work of a teacher is better than the love of a father."

As expected, nothing about the sword itself, just some morality verse.

As to the technique, I am attaching pics of an Afghani pseudo-shashka with deep etching on both sides along the entire length of the blade. Did not even ask to translate it: everybody is free to choose his favourite Sa'adi's verse:-)
But the bottom line, deep etching can be found on other examples of typical Afghani weapons. They might be infrequent, but they do exist.

So, my conclusion: Afghani Khyber mid-late 19th century, with deep-etching decoration in Farsi, quoting almost sacred Farsi poetry, intended for a Persianized Afghani.

[mahratt]

In the early 20th century, acid etching can see on Afghan blades made for the army. But! This acid etching is very different from what we see on the discussed Khyber knife. So a this shashka with acid etching made for the army is not a correct example.

[ariel]

Well, to re-summarize;
First, the French word "ancien (old) is incorrectly translated as " ancient". After which the seller is accused in not mentioning that the etching was done at the end of 20th century, with no objective evidence to prove the accusation. Upon realization that this interpretation was wrong, this issue slithered away.

Second, there are repeat assertions that deep etching was not used by Afghani masters. Having been presented with an unquestionable example, the tune is changed and now etching WAS actually done at the beginning of 20th century, and the presented example does not count.

That is exactly what I was talking about: Everybody is entitled to his opinions but not to his facts.
And some knowledge of foreign languages doesn't hurt either:-)

[mahratt]

I see a lot of opinions on this topic))) Starting with the fact that the Khyber knife that we are discussing is "oldest dated Khyber"))) Now, as I understand it, views have changed a bit. And according to the new version, this Khyber knife "is made in the mid-late 19th century"))) Maybe this is so. Or maybe it was made in the early 20th century. Or maybe it was decorated with acid etching 10 years ago) All this is only our thoughts :)

[ariel]

The original stated “ the oldest dated khyber that I know”: 1813 H or 1850 J , not too shabby....
Folks, can you show me a khyber reliably dated prior to those dates using the same calendar?

[mahratt]

The original stated “ the oldest dated khyber that I know”: 1813 H or 1850 J , not too shabby....
Folks, can you show me a khyber reliably dated prior to those dates using the same calendar?


I'm not home right now, so I'm posting photos from Arzi's website. I bought this Khyber knife many years ago. It dates back to 1805.
http://www.oriental-arms.com/item.php?id=2788
By the way, this Khyber knife is published in my book.