Hi,new member and a question please
 

Hello,This is my first post,I thought this forum might be a good place to get some help.
I only have two blades,one is a katana in world war two livery in which the blade is dated 1576 though is in poor condition due to use.
The one I would like help in id’ing is a recent gift from an elderly gent who worked in the middle east in his early career,he told me he was given the knife by a local tribal head some 45 years ago whilst in Oman.The closest I can find is actually a sudanese dagger and was wondering if any of you guys have any idea what it might be.
I have no interest in its value I would just like to know something about it if possible.
Many thanks and all the best.
Kevin

Armdagger from Sudan, 20 th century.

Regards
Marc

That was quick,Thanks very much Mark,yep I thought Sudanese,in view of the condition I am going to polish the blade as there is a small engraving and underneath the rust the metal is actually quite smooth and I think it will come up very nicely.
Maybe gently rub down the handle and clean the leather too.
Thanks again

Just a suggestion....do not over polish/clean it as you will likely remove any age patina. It maybe 20th century but that was LAST century.
Stu

Thanks Khanjar,Would you mind giving me your opinion on the “age,patina”I have come across this a number of times.It comes up in old weapons,banjos ,guns etc .Does the accumulation of ,can I bluntly call it “crud”have any influence on the values of these things.I can understand it on much more valuable older relics but on a knife like this which I am guessing has little or no real value (which as I have said isn’t of interest to me.) really matter ?.
A friend of mine plays banjo and he has a couple of very nice instruments,one modern one much older and he refuses to clean the old one ,I wouldn’t touch it if he let me ,it just looks filthy to me,he insists it is to be kept original.
Would cleaning this old knife up and polishing the blade be considered “not the thing to do”
many thanks again
all the best
Kevin

As Stu has noted, the worst thing that can be done with a vintage weapon is to over clean it, to a garish gleam. While these were made following old traditional forms, they were still the pride of modern (then) tribesmen. The best respect that can be shown an 'old warrior' is to leave as much patination intact as possible, it has been well earned through time. Nice example, and the marking is likely more of a talismanic symbol than any sort of makers mark.
These were placed on blades as a kind of imbuement following tribal folk religions and superstitions, rather a kind of 'magic'.
Using a leather conditioner will best stabilize the scabbard and hilt and keep them from drying out and cracking etc.
On the blade simply WD40 is likely best, very lightly with rag or very fine steel wool if rust spots are deep.

Thank you very much Gents,I very much appreciate you all taking the time to get back to me .I will do as you suggest.Wire wool ,wd40 check.
Kevin

Active 'red' rust should be cleaned off gently and stabilized with a good preventative oil or wax. Search the forum here for 'rust' for more info.Opinions differ :rolleyes:



The blue/black oxide form of iron oxide is 'patina' and should not be touched if possible. Brass or silver 'furniture' with oxide/patination is best just gently cleaned and oiled. Some like to polish silver, I don't unless it is my tableware. Some silver is just plated and polishing will eventually expose the copper/brass the silver used to be attached to.

Not to derail this thread into a conservation vs restoration-type argument, but I have to contend with this overzealous glorification of patina. All patinas are the result of oxidation. All oxidation (in ferrous metals) is rust. From personal experience, most patinas I have encountered either cover up or are interwoven with dangerous, active rust to one extent or another, and said rust cannot be removed without removing the patina.

It is true that past a certain point rust becomes mostly inactive, however this is not the result of the rust "dying", but rather it covering itself up to the point it limits its own effectiveness. A patina is nothing more than the surface of a base metal casually, evenly oxidizing, such that it all turns the same color. This does not equate to any kind of anti-rust armor, rather, patinas themselves are thin layers of rust!

Think of it like digging a hole (which is what rust most often does; bore a hole into metal, resulting in pitting). At the start, progress is easy as there is plenty of room to maneuver oneself. After a few feet, the hole limits movement and prevents one from shoveling out great heaps of dirt in an easy swing. Even when dirt can be shoveled out, there is often a big pile of dirt surrounding the hole, meaning new dirt has to be placed carefully in order to prevent more dirt from falling back in to the hole, which often times happens anyways, further limiting new progress. To decipher the analogy: "we" are the chemical reaction of rust, "digging" a hole into metal. The loose dirt being excavated is metal freshly removed from (in this case) a blade, which has now been turned into ferrous oxide, i.e. more rust. This new rust limits progress as, like loose dirt on the side of a hole, it can fall back into (cover up) the hole, and prevent us from further digging (oxidizing/reacting with the base metal being rusted). This does not mean progress (further digging/oxidizing) is impossible, just that it's much slower. Given enough time and exposure, rust will oxidize enough that the new rust will "push" older layers of rust away, which is what causes rust to flake away and/or turn to powder. While most antiques, because of how they are treated, will not get to this point for 500 years or so, removing oxidation (patina/rust) still resets this clock, instead of passively removing only the most active layer and leaving the rest to further fester and rot. This all gets especially aided by water or humidity, which in our hole-digging-analogy is basically like a bulldozer that removes old dirt & can even be used to create wider, deeper holes.

Basically, what I'm saying is feel free to only remove red/orange rust as you see convenient, but after doing so you better keep that item oiled/waxed or else it very much can and will still rust. Patina does not make an item hydrophobic, immune to the effects of time generally, or "oxygen-phobic" specifically, insofar as it is does not make rust "dead" and possess no further risk.

In terms of what is respectful, I, quite frankly, could not imagine something more disrespectful than handing a warrior a blade with clear signs of neglect! Across cultures, blades invariably were kept as sharp and as clean as possible. This doesn't mean they were all kept to a mirror polish (although there is plenty of evidence that this was preferred too), but at the very least they were not allowed to develop a dirt-black patina! This isn't rocket science: a blade that is neglected and dirty is one that is covered in rust, gunk, and yes, is patina'd.

To throw one more controversial punch: if you need a patina (rust) to tell you that your item is old, and you find it to be so valuable and necessary in dating that you equate removing said patina (rust) to "destroying" the value of an item - you probably don't actually know all that much about your item. Rust **can** be significant in the dating of an item, but all too often it is subject to so many circumstantial variables that it is impossible to rely on it solely as a means of dating something. Form should, principally, be the determiner of age. It is highly uncommon for anything being consistently produced to retain the exact same form or shape over hundreds of years. This applies to reproductions ("fakes") made of older forms too: most often, only with rare exception, the reproduction will not have the same form as the original. I'll end my spiel with some anecdotal experience: I have handled plenty of 19th century items that are many times more oxidized than 18 or 17th century ones. Rust is not a determiner of age, it is the result of negligence.

Hi Kevin,
I see others have replied so you should have some guidance as to what is best for you to do to your Arm Dagger.... (nice piece by the way). What I mean by "age patina" is best shown by the pic attached of some brass Middle Eastern coffee pots I have. All have "age patina" and we are all aware of what brass looks like when polished. IMHO, these would not "look right" if highly polished. Hope this is of help.
Stu

Thank you all very much,this is far more response than I had hoped for and I will treat the knife with the respect it deserves.
It is always good to find a forum where people are so happy to help ,some are not so good.
I will post pictures of my katana for your interest.I have found out quite a lot about it and although it has been subjected to a hard life and is a shadow of its former self I like it.Both the katana and the Armdagger were gifts and for that reason alone they mean much to me.
Thank you all again
kevin

Oh yes and thank you Jim ,I was wondering about the engraving on the blade.

My pleasure Bontee, and glad to have you here! Your dagger is a good example of a tribal dagger and I know I have seen that geometric pattern before, it seems mostly on dagger blades of these regions.

I would venture Darfur, ('home of the Fur people'), Western Sudan, as the origin.
Best wishes
Richard

I have always advocated cleaning as little as possible, preserving patina as an evidence of age: kisses of time, so to speak. But nothing is absolute: sometimes we get an obviously old item that is covered with gunk, crud and rust to the point of such a terminal ugliness that no old soldier would touch it with a barge pole. And “gentle cleaning” of the red rust just uncovers deeper and deeper defects that will progress unabated with time but meanwhile mutilate the item to the point of disgust.
I have an admission to make: on couple of occasions I had to clean things aggressively. The deep “ french kisses of time” were lost , but just a quick glance of the entire item was sufficient to establish its true age. Nihl had a very valid argument in favor of that approach. I have a Khazar saber that was pitted, rusty and covered in lime deposits. A bath of vinegar with subsequent mechanical cleaning eliminated rust, lime and some superficial scales of rusty metal originally held together by lime just fell off, and “Renaissance Wax” will hopefully preserve the entire relic for another couple of centuries. The saber remained totally unusable on the battlefield, but has retained its historical value.

Hamlet’s “ I must be cruel only to be kind” still holds true on occasion.
Human medicine is essentially based on this principle, with chemotherapies, radiations, surgeries, amputations and innumerable side effects of virtually all drugs.

Very well said Ariel, and what I was trying to say but clearly fell short when I used the term 'old warrior' wistfully toward my own swords which are pretty 'aged' (like me) but still very proud :)

Very much agree Richard, note the apparent favor of the geometric 'lozenge' or diamond pattern in Darfur motif (Reed, 1987, attached plate). The symbolism or reason for favor of this shape is unclear but seems well established.
This hilt style is deemed 'of Ali Dinar period' loosely for the 'last Sultan of Darfur'(d.1916).
The figure in the photo is Austrian Rudolf Slatin, who was governor of Darfur and captured by the Mahdi in his campaigns in 1880s. It shows the manner in which these daggers were worn.

Interesting photo Jim. I note he is leaning on a Martini Henry rifle...captured from the Brits??
Stu

Thanks Stu,
Actually he was working diplomatically with Gordon and the British, so he had access to British arms. Interesting story by him in his "Fire and Sword in the Sudan".

thanks again this is really interesting

Thanks for the clarification Jim