Anglo-Indian Knives

mariusgmioc · 25th January 2018, 10:43 AM

I disagree with the idea that the knife at #6 is better than the others.

While the knives at #1 are quite touristy and probably made for the souvenirs market (see the fairly crude etchings on their blades), the knives at #3 (second one) and #12 are of very good workmanship that I find much better than that of #6.

Both knives at #3 (second one) and #12 have very carefully chiseled blades, with T-shaped spine and reinforced edge, as opposed to the blade of #6, that is only grooved.

Moreover, the knives at #3 (second one) and #12 have much more elaborate hilts, with pommels and front bolsters of hard stone and mid portions with intricately made mother-of-pearl geometric paterns, as opposed to the knife of #6 that has very basic hilt made of two slabs of hard stone.

So in my oppinion, the knives at #3 (second one) and #6 are of significantly better workmanship/quality than the knife at #6.

25th January 2018, 10:43 AM	#16
mariusgmioc Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Location: Austria Posts: 1,906	I disagree with the idea that the knife at #6 is better than the others. While the knives at #1 are quite touristy and probably made for the souvenirs market (see the fairly crude etchings on their blades), the knives at #3 (second one) and #12 are of very good workmanship that I find much better than that of #6. Both knives at #3 (second one) and #12 have very carefully chiseled blades, with T-shaped spine and reinforced edge, as opposed to the blade of #6, that is only grooved. Moreover, the knives at #3 (second one) and #12 have much more elaborate hilts, with pommels and front bolsters of hard stone and mid portions with intricately made mother-of-pearl geometric paterns, as opposed to the knife of #6 that has very basic hilt made of two slabs of hard stone. So in my oppinion, the knives at #3 (second one) and #6 are of significantly better workmanship/quality than the knife at #6.