Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post

ariel · 26th December 2007, 11:38 PM

It's Armenian.
There are not very many kindjals with Armenian inscriptions: thus, it is quite rare.
The best armourers of the 19th cen. Caucasus were ethnic Armenians ( Papov, Purunsuzov, Mamikonov, Khachatur), but they all were high class and made very tasteful and luxurious swords and daggers. Necessarily, their works followed the accepted level of decoration, ie. it was Caucasian, rather than Armenian.
The "in your face" Armenian work was likely done by the second-string masters or by those who worked in isolation ( Karabagh, Persian or Turkish Armenian diasporas etc.) Their works are cruder, with overdone ornamentation, not much free space. The marks on this kindjal are not truly Persian: they, too, were made by the same Armenian master in a Persian pattern.

26th December 2007, 11:38 PM	#3
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	It's Armenian. There are not very many kindjals with Armenian inscriptions: thus, it is quite rare. The best armourers of the 19th cen. Caucasus were ethnic Armenians ( Papov, Purunsuzov, Mamikonov, Khachatur), but they all were high class and made very tasteful and luxurious swords and daggers. Necessarily, their works followed the accepted level of decoration, ie. it was Caucasian, rather than Armenian. The "in your face" Armenian work was likely done by the second-string masters or by those who worked in isolation ( Karabagh, Persian or Turkish Armenian diasporas etc.) Their works are cruder, with overdone ornamentation, not much free space. The marks on this kindjal are not truly Persian: they, too, were made by the same Armenian master in a Persian pattern. Last edited by ariel; 26th December 2007 at 11:51 PM.