![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 | |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 685
|
![]() Quote:
Cheers Chris |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Greensboro, NC
Posts: 1,087
|
![]()
Actually, Jose, I made that request several years ago.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
(deceased)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal
Posts: 9,694
|
![]()
Sorry to interfere.
It is indeed fascinating that this spanish navaja ended up in SouthAfrica. Forton assures that national production was so short, comparing to local demans that, in fact, during 1850-1869 ( there are no prior registration records ) Spain has imported an average ( imagine ) one million navajas per year ... no razor specimens included ( the name navaja actually comes from a type of razor blade ). Instead, their exports were minimum and practically directed to Portugal. So hardly this is a trade piece ? I have resided in Durban for a couple years, working with Afrikaaner coleagues. Their language is fascinating, both sound and construction wise. But it appears that afrikaans started to be written in Latin alphabet long after the Boer war, like around 1850... as it was written in Arabic before, for circumstancial reasons. Could it be that the inscription is from an iliterate ( like the majority at the time ? ) doing "verbal" writting ?. Couldn't an "official" text be close to VAN A BOER (IN) WAAR ?. But then, if this specimen is "from a true Boer", doesn't this mean this is a presentation navaja, from a Boer to somebody, probably another Boer? Such an interesting piece. Sorry again to have interfered. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
EAAF Staff
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 7,280
|
![]()
Oh no interference at all Fernando. In fact, you hit the nail on the head. I agree that the inscription was done by someone who could very well be illiterate and presented to another Boer.
Afrikaans in Arabic script - who knew? ![]() "Several years ago" - good point Rick. ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
(deceased)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal
Posts: 9,694
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
EAAF Staff
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 7,280
|
![]()
Nice link Fernando, thank you.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 | |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 685
|
![]() Quote:
Thanks for that link and your comments. One learns something new every day; And I always thought that Afrikaans was written and read in the Roman alphabet - Goes to show how wrong one can be. You are most right in your reading of Forton. What fascinates me is the number of navajas, pre 1850, that were made in France. Of course, we'll never know, but it is an interesting speculation. Perhaps the whole 19th century, at least after the Napoleonic wars and as far as the navaja is concerned, belongs to France and not to Spain. Cheers Chris |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
(deceased)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal
Posts: 9,694
|
![]()
Olá Chris
Have you the Forton book translated, or can you comprehend Spanish writing ? In the satistical part about imports, he reminds that three quarters of those millions of navajas brought in, were indeed French. He also admits that by mid end 19th century, several countries had their cuttlers making navajas, but visibly giving a Spanish approach to their shape. In another part of the book he considers that, before this period and, as far these devices evoluted from razors in the 16-17th century, the specific Navaja, with all its contents and meanning ( as to differentiate it from the common utensile pocket knife ... ) is original and tipically Spanish. More or less that, right ? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|