Mughal? or Indian dagger?.

[donsamadhi]

Originally Posted by Roland_M

A touristic souvenir with a jade hilt, are you sure? The hilt seems handmade without machine driven tools and the corrosion on the blade looks old.

But I'm just a collector, not an expert and for my eyes the pictures are not good enough for a proper statement.

Some macro-pictures would be useful.


Best wishes,
Roland

And of course you Roland

Best regards.

[mariusgmioc]

Thank you for the additional photos!

Certainly very poorly machine milled. No doubts about that.

Also pretty sure it is Onyx, very abundant in central Turkey.

Sorry!

[mariusgmioc]

You may want o have a look at my posting regarding Jade/Onyx in the Ethnographic Miscellania section of this forum.

[donsamadhi]

Hello,

I respect your opinion Marius ,the expert of minerals was thinking about the jade and bovenit. Finally he said that this is jade. The signs points to the use of simple tools, but there are some doubts. I see that nobody else wanted to comment that
Everyone can be wrong only by looking at photos. I always rely on the opinions of the other people. Thank you.

Best Regards,
Alex

[ALEX]

Some experts call any green stone a jade, including green quartz, jadeite, etc. It depends what definition they use. "Real" jade is referred to as Nephrite, and can contain some quartz. You may see
THIS LINK

[mariusgmioc]

1. Why am I pretty sure it is not Jade (Nephrite or Jadeite)?!
1.1 Jade was and is in big demand and commands rather high prices. Therefore, it is used on valuable pieces of certain artistic value and not wasted on "tourist" items.
2. Why am I pretty sure it is Onyx?!
1.1 Onyx of precisely this coulour is found in abundance in central Anatolia and comes very cheap.
1.2 Onyx is charaterised in that it has a layered structure with parallel layers (see the photo of the horse) which can be easily identified also in the hilt (see the first three photos). Albeit I have seen pieces of up to 3 centimetres thick without any discernable layer.
3. Why am I pretty sure it was machined with a rotary tool?!
1.1 The grooves have circular cross-section and display transverse parallel traces of the rotating tool (see photos 5 and 6).
1.2 The entry/exit point of the tool is round (see last photo).
But I am definitely not an expert.

[Battara]

I must also add that the motifs and style of carvings on the hilt are not typically Mughal. Closest I have seen are more related to Persian, but the quality of the carving again is not like that found in Persian ivory hilts (albeit a softer material).

I must also agree with the possibility of dremel tool work looking at the micro-pictures.

[kai]

I'm also with Marius et al. - clear signs of modern tools (and low quality work, sorry).

Regards,
Kai

[mariusgmioc]

Originally Posted by Battara

I must also add that the motifs and style of carvings on the hilt are not typically Mughal. Closest I have seen are more related to Persian, but the quality of the carving again is not like that found in Persian ivory hilts (albeit a softer material).

I must also agree with the possibility of dremel tool work looking at the micro-pictures.

As Oliver pointed out, the blade looks rather typical Turkish made and the decorations on the hilt look Persian style, yet, they are quite different from the genuine Persian works.

The blade also looks rather thin and flat like cut from sheet/band stock steel and not forged.

So I would bet on Turkish origin, attempting to immitate Persian style.