Caucasian Kindjal for comment

[Gavin Nugent]

No need for apologies Jeff.

They certainly are great examples of Kindjals shown in Oriental Arms.

What would your experinece say about this piece though? Photographic comparisons are good and well, but alas, what can you tell me about this piece and of it's particular style and construction?

If it is not craftsmanship, what is it???

regards

Gav

[Jeff Pringle]

Well, it is as if they still had the workshop set up, the materials and tools at hand, and a basic knowledge of the techniques involved, but some how the desire or ability to do the work well had left the building. Note the choppy feel of the engraving, the uneven, ‘hacked-in’ look to it and the niello, miscuts and poor stops and starts everywhere; the lack of definition between the foreground and background; uneven depth of the background and lack of care in background texture – it is as if the master of the shop had died unexpectedly and a first or second year apprentice was left in charge, but he had a drinking problem and a hot date set up that evening so he was really just not paying attention…or maybe it is just the last gasp of a dying tradition, when even those who had devoted their lives to it had finally realized the ultimate futility of hand work in the machine age?

[Gavin Nugent]

Hi Jeff, thanks for the humour, sad and of no help with further identification, but funny.

In this age I find that people seem to find it so easy to criticise with out offering anything of worth, from my experience in all continents with all arms makers and embellishers of the weapons accruements there is a vast varying degree of design and execution of skill but the functionality weapons remains the same.

If you were a craftsman and I came to you and said I had $100 dollars to commission a piece, you would not invest a $1000 worth of effort would you?
I am sure there are others here who can actually offer up information about this item that are entirely factual, where we all as collectors can learn.

I await with interest further input from those in the know as I want to learn from this piece not suffer unsubstantiated negative comments, if you think this was made in 1980 and is of no value, tell me and substantiate it, other, save you fingers.

regards

Gav

[ALEX]

Gav and all, I totally agree with Jeff !!!
I understand your desire to learn the facts and see direct references. Hovewer, the general feeling about the item is very crucial factor, and it comes only with experience of handling, comparing and studying them. What Jeff has said makes lots of sense - he speaks out of experience, and it aint's humor in any way! The "old workmanship" is hard to describe in words - one has to simply "feel" it. Your kindjal lacks it indeed. The last picture, for example, shows zigzag pattern which id done by using a simple screw-driver; this "quicky" method is still used nowadays, and is sign of "low" quality production, just as the pattern being unaccurately traced throughout. I even can tell the tools being used were dull, and of low grade:-). As you said - if one invests $100 to produce it - it'll not look like $1000, and this is what it is
Also, Jeff provided an honest opinion and substantial references - and he deserves little more respect!

[Henk]

Gav,

I completely agree with Jeff and absolutely with Alex. Although this is not my field, I can see what Jeff and Alex are saying. Your reaction to Jeff is wrong.
Don't put your head in the sand and look again to the pictures of the Oriental Arms Kindjals, Jeff showed you. The differences are obvious and has nothing to do with a $100 or $1000 production.

Don't pour out your disapointment on your fellow forummembers when something is not what you hoped for.

[ward]

Gav you have to understand. I have handled thousands of pieces over the years and so have some of the other members. Half the time you can just give a quick look and tell if a piece is realitively new. Jeff gave you a well thought out very polite opinion. Your piece looks late 20th century the reasons given before seem correct. The work is sloppy and done as quickly as possible. The niello is poorly applied. You see a lot of this coming out of turkey. The piece is what it is. You have to be critical on pieces it is the only way you learn the difference between quality pieces and tourist and reproduction pieces.

[ariel]

i am coming late on it, but regretfully I have to agree with Ward and the rest.
Although this is of a much better quality than the " last week" mass produced stamped monstrosities from Georgia, one cannot even think about " old world craftsmanship". I am surprised that Christie's even took it.
This is a hand-made, one of a kind, low quality, apprentice-level job. The metalwork is poor both artistically and technically. i do not know whether an old blade was used ( they do it often), but the mounts are below par. This level of performance was not acceptable in the 19th-beg. of 20th centuries. Together with the absence of any markings, I would agree with the " end of 20th cen." dating.
This is not a judgement on you personally; this is a judgement on the kindjal.
It is perfectly adequate to defend one's sister's honor, but as as example of a Caucasian tradition it leaves much behind.
Sorry.

[RSWORD]

I have said this many times but you have to pay tuition to edge weapon collecting U. Tuition is paid in many fashions. First is through educating yourself through interaction with other collectors, reading as much reference material as you possibly can, and handling as many genuine and even fake items as possible. You don't earn a masters your first year of university. It takes time. We have all made purchases that we were disappointed with. But when you are seeking opinions from the fraternity never shoot the messenger. You gotta have thick skin when you are paying your tuition. Pay attention and you will not be disappointed as often. But when you are disappointed, learn from it. But what each of us can share with you is that it takes many years to develop an eye that just can't be explained in the books. Cheers Mate!

[Gavin Nugent]

Thanks to all thus far.

Originally Posted by ALEX

Gav and all, I totally agree with Jeff !!!
I understand your desire to learn the facts and see direct references. Hovewer, the general feeling about the item is very crucial factor, and it comes only with experience of handling, comparing and studying them. What Jeff has said makes lots of sense - he speaks out of experience, and it aint's humor in any way! The "old workmanship" is hard to describe in words - one has to simply "feel" it. Your kindjal lacks it indeed. The last picture, for example, shows zigzag pattern which id done by using a simple screw-driver; this "quicky" method is still used nowadays, and is sign of "low" quality production, just as the pattern being unaccurately traced throughout. I even can tell the tools being used were dull, and of low grade:-). As you said - if one invests $100 to produce it - it'll not look like $1000, and this is what it is
Also, Jeff provided an honest opinion and substantial references - and he deserves little more respect!

Thank you Alex,
As per the pictures supplied by Jeff and others I have searched there are vast degrees of styles and applications but I still cannot find Kindjal images anywhere amongst them, new or old that resemble this one. Why is this so? I do think calling this Kindjal "craftsmanshi(t)" as stated by Jeff does not show respect, hence the barrage.

Originally Posted by Jeff Pringle

Gav,
I’m afraid you are overly generous in calling that ‘craftsmanship,’ especially of the old world variety; have a look at the links below and see if you don’t agree that a slight change in the final consonant might be in order

There is a great deal of craftsmanship shown on this piece, I am not saying it is the holy grail of Kindjals but it does display efforts of an individual in a time past. It is aggreed that it is at the lower end of the scale when one considers gold inlay, silver filigree and ivory found on other examples but still, it is an unusual piece that no one can yet pin point to a region, style or accurate time frame and with substantiation.
With regards to the screw driver reference, I know that not to be true at all, as a metal worker myself in years past, it would appear that a scribe was used for these marking and they are the same markings that are found on the face of the piece between all the scrolling, remember that the images I have supplied are 4 times as wide as the actual piece, some of those zig zags are found 4 times within one milimetre, someone has gone to a lot of time trouble to honour this old blade, even the seam joint of the scabbard is barely visible on the inside of the scabbard and not to be seen at all on the outside. No offence to Jeff, he obviously knows what he is looking at but your statements Alex make it a whole lot clearer.

regards

Gav

Originally Posted by Henk

Gav,

I completely agree with Jeff and absolutely with Alex. Although this is not my field, I can see what Jeff and Alex are saying. Your reaction to Jeff is wrong.
Don't put your head in the sand and look again to the pictures of the Oriental Arms Kindjals, Jeff showed you. The differences are obvious and has nothing to do with a $100 or $1000 production.

Don't pour out your disapointment on your fellow forummembers when something is not what you hoped for.

Hi Henk,

I too can see and understand what Jeff was saying about construction methods and these knives are not my field either that is why I am searching out difinative answers. I don't think I am wrong in my reactions, I am happy to have points of interest pointed out, and what he has pointed out is true of the lack or technical purpose but it tells me nothing more of the knife?? I am not hoping for anything except for an explanation from those who know as to what materials where used, the region of manufature, country of original and styles etc, almost all that is said is good and well, in the immoratal words of a child "BUT WHY" is this said and why is that said. Is it a poor quality factory piece, was it made by Joe Blogs in a village after WW1? Feed me more than it is craftsmanshi"t" please.

regards

Gav

Originally Posted by ward

Gav you have to understand. I have handled thousands of pieces over the years and so have some of the other members. Half the time you can just give a quick look and tell if a piece is realitively new. Jeff gave you a well thought out very polite opinion. Your piece looks late 20th century the reasons given before seem correct. The work is sloppy and done as quickly as possible. The niello is poorly applied. You see a lot of this coming out of turkey. The piece is what it is. You have to be critical on pieces it is the only way you learn the difference between quality pieces and tourist and reproduction pieces.

Thank you ward, you offer up a good point of further review re; Turkey, criticism is fine, substantiation of the facts is best as that is the only way to truely learn.

Originally Posted by ariel

i am coming late on it, but regretfully I have to agree with Ward and the rest.
Although this is of a much better quality than the " last week" mass produced stamped monstrosities from Georgia, one cannot even think about " old world craftsmanship". I am surprised that Christie's even took it.
This is a hand-made, one of a kind, low quality, apprentice-level job. The metalwork is poor both artistically and technically. i do not know whether an old blade was used ( they do it often), but the mounts are below par. This level of performance was not acceptable in the 19th-beg. of 20th centuries. Together with the absence of any markings, I would agree with the " end of 20th cen." dating.
This is not a judgement on you personally; this is a judgement on the kindjal.
It is perfectly adequate to defend one's sister's honor, but as as example of a Caucasian tradition it leaves much behind.
Sorry.

Hi Ariel, I was hpong I would hear from you eventually. Better late than never they say in the classics.

You cover a good many points with the content I was looking for Ariel, I agree with all said thus far by all who have contibuted and have covered off above what I think needed to be said.
An old blade has been used and is of fine quality with a beaut distal taper and fine fullering and it whistles through the air when swung in the slashing motion for which they were designed. I will post more of the blade when the right winter light is available.
As far as the craftsmanship goes....I can still call it that albeiet that is wasn't made by Faberge, can you speak more about its secondry manufacture with an old blade? I think it is more likely 20/30's when people still took an interest in resurecting pieces rather than the post 50's mentality of discarding all that needs repairing, are their tell tale signs in the manufacture that I can look for that point it to the 20/30s rather than late 20th century?
I do add that someone must have loved the original knife very much and wanted to make a personal impression on it's revival with the best skills they knew how as it would have been easier if it is indeed late 20th century construction to buy a much more technically accurate reproduction Kindjal to place the blade in.

regards

Gavin