Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Ethnographic Weapons
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 22nd January 2006, 05:23 PM   #9
ariel
Member
 
ariel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
Default

I think it is a hodge-podge of unrelated parts, including the kitchen sink. The Brits would call it "dog's breakfast".The blade is very primitive, almost African in it's design and execution. I also think that the "pattern" is just a consequence of overeager sand-blasting of a deeply rusted and pockmarked blade, to the point that that even the contour of the blade got melted away. The handle is new and careless: some of the blade(sharpened part!) protrudes outside the lower part. One would cut himself more with this weapon than any opponent.
As to Kazakh.... Kazakhs are Turkic people of Central Asia ; they never wore kindjals. This is a classic mistake of homophone names: Kazak (spelled Cossack in English) and Kazakh. And, of course, Rivkin is correct: Kuban has no relation to Kazakhstan.
In short, I am sorry to say it, but this piece does not inspire much confidence. Perhaps, this was the reason nobody wanted to be the bearer of bad news. On the other hand, the whole purpose of this Forum is to be honest and to separate real weapons from the chaff.
ariel is offline   Reply With Quote
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:07 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.