Ram's head khanjar for comment

[ariel]

Yes, Indo-Persian Khanjar.
The handle is old, with spots of rust, tarnish and pitting.
The blade, however, is pristine and the wootz pattern is very similar to modern Indian examples.
There is some black mastique oozing from the slit in the handle. Epoxy?
Where did you get it from?
Rajastan?
I am sorry for my paranoid remarks, but that's IMHO.

[Jens Nordlunde]

Ariel you came first:-), but I would also like to know, what are the flaws on the blade in the third picture?

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by ariel

Yes, Indo-Persian Khanjar.
The handle is old, with spots of rust, tarnish and pitting.
The blade, however, is pristine and the wootz pattern is very similar to modern Indian examples.
There is some black mastique oozing from the slit in the handle. Epoxy?
Where did you get it from?
Rajastan?
I am sorry for my paranoid remarks, but that's IMHO.

If anything was new I would say the handle is and the blade is old and refitted to the handle, I see no signs of wear on the edges of the handle.

[Cthulhu]

The black lines on the blade in photo 3 are easier to see in the photo than in person, but the upper one looks like a crack or surface forging flaw, and the lower one definitely looks like a crack, particularly because it has a similar line directly on the other side of the blade. I can just barely feel their presence rubbing the point of a toothpick across them.

I can't tell what the black material holding the blade in place is. Is black an unlikely color for an authentic piece?

The blade doesn't seem much more pristine than a real antique (authenticated by Bonham's) kard I have. But, on the khanjar's blade there's no rust/etc at the base of the blade where it meets the hilt (ie in the hard-to-clean places), that does point more towards newness, I guess, particularly with the hilt having pitting.

I didn't get the knife in Rajastan, no. It was in the US.

And I'm slightly confounded that now there are opposite opinions on what's old and what isn't. Maybe both are new? Or old?

And the hilt design; it seems plausible as an old piece?

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Cthulhu

And I'm slightly confounded that now there are opposite opinions on what's old and what isn't. Maybe both are new? Or old?

And the hilt design; it seems plausible as an old piece?

Nothing said here is absolute from what I can see. While rams head hits are common enough I have not seen this particular type before in either old or newly made daggers. I think the blade is old but determining the age of the hilt will be very difficult and in the end you will just have to make your own assessment.

I do not know of any newly made Indian blades that have the look of yours and as for it being fairly clean looking this can be explained in several ways. Unless someone can come up with an example of a similar looking wootz blade that is definitely newly made I would assume that the blade is old and the handle is one of two possibilities, original / old or more recent.

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by ariel

The blade, however, is pristine and the wootz pattern is very similar to modern Indian examples.
.

Ariel, I have not seen any newly made Indian daggers that have a wootz pattern that looks as good as this one, except when an older blade is attached to a new handle, do you have any examples. I look at the newly made Ebay examples from Indian and they do not look convincing to me.

[Bob A]

I feel relatively certain that it's a marriage; the blade and hilt did not originate together. I base this on the condition of the hilt, especially near the blade insertion area, relative to the seeming total lack of corrosion on the blade.

When you finally decide you can no longer live with the tension caused by this dichotomy, I'd be pleased to take it off your hands.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

....

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

It is not uncommon for broken blades from other weapons to be incorporated into daggers... I think the damage near the hilt is because of this re match.... Nice hilt and a good example of the Zoomorphic nature of these daggers.

[Sajen]

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

It is not uncommon for broken blades from other weapons to be incorporated into daggers... I think the damage near the hilt is because of this re match.... Nice hilt and a good example of the Zoomorphic nature of these daggers.

First, I know next to nothing about Indian weapons but in my opinion you have hit the nail here! Old broken blade (from this the cracks in the blade) with an IMVHO old hilt, I see the wear in the good pictures, look the last picture in #1. And also the pitting at the handle let me think it's an old one. Both old/antique and put together I think.

Regards,
Detlef

[mariusgmioc]

First, why Indo-Persian?! I am pretty sure this is a 100% Indian khanjar (AKA Mughal Dagger) that has nothing to do with Persia.

I like to believe that I am pretty familiar with current Indian production of swords & daggers.

In my opinion, both hilt and blade are old.

All recent production examples I have seen have hilts carved in stone (jade, soapstone, agate, jasper, etc.), bone, fake ivory, etc. but definitely not iron. Why?! Because Iron is very dificult to carve. Moreover, your hilt does not bear any characteristic of machining and is almost certainly chiseled and filed by hand. As far as I know, carved iron hilts of this type were quite popular in the 19th century, and that's precisely when I believe your hilt was made.

As with regards with the wootz blade, it appears to be crystalline wootz that was produced by the end of the classic wootz period, namely the first half of 19th century.

However, crystalline wootz quite similar to this is also currently produced but it is quite rare and definitely highly prized. Since yours displays very fine watering, as close as it gets to the classic wootz, I believe it is old because if it were newly produced, it would have been more expensive than classic wootz and would have definitely been mounted in a more exclusive hilt.

As with regards to the crack, it is possible the blade had an earlier mount but was damaged and then was remounted in the current hilt. However, I believe that this may have happened at least a century ago.

My conclusion is that you have an excellent classic example of a 19th century Mughal dagger.

[Bob A]

While I have no problem with the idea that the blade might have been installed in the hilt after, perhaps some time after, the hilt came into being, I suspect it may have been made for a weapon of the relatively same dimensions as it currently exists. My thinking stems from the contours of the blade itself, with the gracefully thickened point and general recurved contours. In other words, the blade seems to me to be pretty much the ideal size and shape for the role it is playing.

This is not to deny the possibility of its having been broken, presumably near the hilt, in an earlier installation. This would also help account for the flaws seen near the hilt.

I'm comfortable locating its origin to an area between the Persian Gulf and the Irrawaddy River, below the Hindu Kush. It is undoubtedly older than I am.

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

It is not uncommon for broken blades from other weapons to be incorporated into daggers... I think the damage near the hilt is because of this re match.... Nice hilt and a good example of the Zoomorphic nature of these daggers.

Ibrahiim, two of your examples are modern made.

[mariusgmioc]

Originally Posted by estcrh

Ibrahiim, two of your examples are modern made.

Without better close-up photos is hard to tell.

However, my bet is that they are both old pieces (at least the hilts) but recently decorated. The golden one appears to have a new pattern welded blade, while the silver one appears to have an original wootz blade.

It is very easy to take a dagger like the one in the original posting, replace old/damaged parts (blade, hilt or only fixtures) if necessary, clean it nicely, apply Koftgari lavishly, furbish it with a new matching scabbard and sell it for 3-5 times the price it would have raised in its original state.

This is a very, very widely spread practice in India these days as Koftgari artists are abundant and their work comes cheap.

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by mariusgmioc

Without better close-up photos is hard to tell.

However, my bet is that they are both old pieces (at least the hilts) but recently decorated. The golden one appears to have a new pattern welded blade, while the silver one appears to have an original wootz blade.

Both are completely modern. No mention of wootz on the first and I think they were being very liberal with this "first quarter of the 20th Century" The second one does not even give a date, look at the sales price / estimates, the auction house knew what these were.

Lot 170: A kardThe Great Sale of Fine & Scarce Antique Arms & Armour, Day 1by Czerny's International Auction HouseMay 25, 2013 Sarzana (SP), Italy

Realized Price: €400 Verified
Estimated Price: €400 - €600
Description: Curved, toothed, double-edged blade, ribbed at the centre, at the forte a mount decorated with silver-inlaid floral motifs; fine, iron grip with pommel shaped as a ram head, entirely silver-inlaid with effigy of peacock among racemes; wooden scabbard with green velvet covering.
provenance: India
dimensions: length 32.5 cm.
dating: first quarter of the 20th Century

A FINE INDO PERSIAN DAMASCUS GOLD NIELLO DAGGER. The slightly curved Damascus steel blade with
Jackson's Auctioneers

Lot closed:
Apr 06, 2013 9am CDT
Estimate:
150 USD - 200 USD

A FINE INDO PERSIAN DAMASCUS GOLD NIELLO DAGGER. The slightly curved Damascus steel blade with saw tooth back, the handle and rams head pommel with ornate gold niello foliage. The velvet covered scabbard with similarly decorated gold niello mounts. Overall length 16 inches (40.7 cm).

[Battara]

Originally Posted by ariel

The blade, however, is pristine and the wootz pattern is very similar to modern Indian examples.

I thought new Indian "wootz" looked different than this........

[A.alnakkas]

Originally Posted by ariel

Yes, Indo-Persian Khanjar.
The handle is old, with spots of rust, tarnish and pitting.
The blade, however, is pristine and the wootz pattern is very similar to modern Indian examples.
There is some black mastique oozing from the slit in the handle. Epoxy?
Where did you get it from?
Rajastan?
I am sorry for my paranoid remarks, but that's IMHO.

I second what Ariel have said. Owned a few of the recently made Indian wootz pieces, good projects if you are making replicas but a complete rip off if sold as antiques. Though some have really good quality and craftmanship.

The wootz is not crystalline but modern wootz tend to be similar to it. The cracks are not sign of age but sign of forging flaws which can happen to this day (unless you believe in the miracle of modern technology, which I doubt Rajastanis are using in mass)

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by ariel

Yes, Indo-Persian Khanjar.
The handle is old, with spots of rust, tarnish and pitting.
The blade, however, is pristine and the wootz pattern is very similar to modern Indian examples.
There is some black mastique oozing from the slit in the handle. Epoxy?
Where did you get it from?
Rajastan?
I am sorry for my paranoid remarks, but that's IMHO.

After seeing some clearly modern but well made swords with wootz blades and hilts being sold on Ebay I think this whole dagger may in fact be a new creation. Here is an example.

[mariusgmioc]

Originally Posted by estcrh

After seeing some clearly modern but well made swords with wootz blades and hilts being sold on Ebay I think this whole dagger may in fact be a new creation. Here is an example.

Contrary to my initial oppinion, I concede that you may be right. There are indeed quite a few very good, traditional, but newly made wootz blades on the market. And they are sold as antiques.

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by mariusgmioc

Contrary to my initial oppinion, I concede that you may be right. There are indeed quite a few very good, traditional, but newly made wootz blades on the market. And they are sold as antiques.

If what I have seen is what I think it is then this very scary. People are being fooled by a new wootz that is a step above what has previously been called "wootz". The swords I have seen have no scabbard or obviously newly made ones, and the swords show no sigh of wear / age etc but they are fooling people, some are selling for a lot of money.

Take a look at this, the cracks in the metal, the lack of wear, the wootz pattern, there is some red rust, this makes me think that the steel rams head dagger being discussed here is of the same type, a modern made replica. The rams head hilt is atypical with other similar examples and while it is pitted there is no sign of wear as you would expect to see on a 100+yr old dagger and there is a small amount of what looks like red rust on it as well. To many warning signs in my opinion.

[Cthulhu]

I'm glad we're moving towards consensus. On the other hand, it's a disappointing consensus.

Oh well; they can't all be antiques.

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Cthulhu

I'm glad we're moving towards consensus. On the other hand, it's a disappointing consensus.

Oh well; they can't all be antiques.

There is still no smoking gun but there is a lot of room for doubt. On the bright side, even if newly made it is an excellent example showing some skill and workmanship not often seen in modern made examples. Many people would not mind owning your dagger even if they knew for sure that it was newly made.

[Ian]

Cthulhu:

I don't think you should feel guilty or ashamed for buying a nice dagger believing it was perhaps older than it is. There is a strong market for these well made knives and they are produced within a culture that has been making them for centuries. It's a genuine Indian knife made in an older style, but probably produced recently and not an antique. We all live and learn.

I know a few people who would pay several hundred dollars for such a knife.

Originally Posted by Cthulhu

I'm glad we're moving towards consensus. On the other hand, it's a disappointing consensus.

Oh well; they can't all be antiques.