Indian Daggers?

ariel · 29th December 2015, 09:03 PM

I have an uneasy feeling that all of them are either fully modern or assembled from new and somewhat older parts.
BTW, isn't the handle on #2 put backward? The pommel should be on the blade's convex side.
Am I wrong?

ALEX · 29th December 2015, 09:08 PM

Ariel, you're right. No 2 has handle other way, but it is Qajar nevertheless, could be for some reason or design it is that way, it looks matching as an item.

ariel · 30th December 2015, 02:33 AM

Well, real Qajar knife makers were less likely to make such silly mistake: they saw khanjars daily, didn't they?
Shall we call it a la Qajar? :-)

ALEX · 30th December 2015, 02:38 PM

According to workmanship and material it is Qajar, could be slightly after 1925 but the work and style is typical late Qajar, and late Qajar is still Qajar) I'd not discard it because the handle orientation.

ariel · 30th December 2015, 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALEX

According to workmanship and material it is Qajar, could be slightly after 1925 but the work and style is typical late Qajar, and late Qajar is still Qajar) I'd not discard it because the handle orientation.

Since Qajar dynasty did not exist after 1925 anymore, I have no objections.

How about Pahlavi, a la Qajar? :-)

ALEX · 30th December 2015, 05:28 PM

not changing my mind, Ariel

there is no evidence it was done after 1925

this kind of work is almost exclusively associated with Qajar, so the term sticks

what I meant is that if it was done in 1926 by a master who continued making them a year prior... but that is subjective of course. the motif is certainly Qajar and I do not believe it is much later.
---------------------------------
By the way, does anyone have similarly styled jambiya of Pahlavi era for comparison?

ariel · 31st December 2015, 12:18 PM

Well, no bickering about that on my end.

Happy New Year!

estcrh · 30th December 2015, 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ariel

Well, real Qajar knife makers were less likely to make such silly mistake: they saw khanjars daily, didn't they?
Shall we call it a la Qajar? :-)

These look like versions of jambiya, khanjar would have a double curved blade I believe.

I am not a big fan of most late Persian Qajar weapons, this particular one has some interesting differences. While that handle orientation is not common at all it is not unknown.

Miguel · 31st December 2015, 07:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by estcrh

These look like versions of jambiya, khanjar would have a double curved blade I believe.

I am not a big fan of most late Persian Qajar weapons, this particular one has some interesting differences. While that handle orientation is not common at all it is not unknown.

Hi Estcrh,
Thank you very much for you comments and improved photos. I would agree with you regarding the name of the items, I would call them Jambiyas not Khanjars for the same reason single curve not double. Thanks for the photo which should settle the way the pommel faces query.
Wishing you a Happy New Year
Regards
Miguel

29th December 2015, 09:03 PM	#1
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	I have an uneasy feeling that all of them are either fully modern or assembled from new and somewhat older parts. BTW, isn't the handle on #2 put backward? The pommel should be on the blade's convex side. Am I wrong?

29th December 2015, 09:08 PM	#2
ALEX Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 936	Ariel, you're right. No 2 has handle other way, but it is Qajar nevertheless, could be for some reason or design it is that way, it looks matching as an item.

30th December 2015, 02:33 AM	#3
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Well, real Qajar knife makers were less likely to make such silly mistake: they saw khanjars daily, didn't they? Shall we call it a la Qajar? :-)

30th December 2015, 02:38 PM	#4
ALEX Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 936	According to workmanship and material it is Qajar, could be slightly after 1925 but the work and style is typical late Qajar, and late Qajar is still Qajar) I'd not discard it because the handle orientation.

30th December 2015, 05:28 PM	#6
ALEX Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 936	not changing my mind, Ariel there is no evidence it was done after 1925 this kind of work is almost exclusively associated with Qajar, so the term sticks what I meant is that if it was done in 1926 by a master who continued making them a year prior... but that is subjective of course. the motif is certainly Qajar and I do not believe it is much later. --------------------------------- By the way, does anyone have similarly styled jambiya of Pahlavi era for comparison?

31st December 2015, 12:18 PM	#7
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Well, no bickering about that on my end. Happy New Year!