Old Khyber

[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]

Originally Posted by ariel

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:

Originally Posted by mariusgmioc

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).

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

[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]

Originally Posted by 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?

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]

Originally Posted by 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

Precisely!


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]

Originally Posted by mariusgmioc

Precisely!

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