Wootz afghan knife for komments

mahratt · 9th August 2018, 04:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rumpel9

Hi everyine.
One week ago I got the wootz knife, I believe of Afghan Origin.This is not a pesh kabz or karud. I wonder if this knife has its own name.

Dear rumpel9 .

I think it does not matter how this knife was called in Afghanistan. In different parts of the country, wazir, afridi or gilzai could call such a knife differently. The main thing is that now it will not be a mistake if we say that this is Pesh Kabz.

ariel · 9th August 2018, 06:33 AM

...or Zirah Bouk.
See Artzi's examples ## 5886 and 7961.
Also, see one from the Met: https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/31537 ( Stone's bequest).
Although Artzi, G.C. Stone and curators at Met are just the beginners, they are not so bad

The clue to identifying what was called Zirah Bouk is not in the T-spine, or blade form ( straight, recurved), but in massively swollen reinforced tip, just like in your first example. Its very function gives rise to its name: Zirah Bouk is Farsi " mail piercer". You can see Stone's book or Elgood's Glossary in his " Rajput arms and armour" and read how these "beginners" define it.

mahratt · 9th August 2018, 07:25 AM

Dear Marius.

Correct me, please, if I'm wrong (I know English badly). But, it seems to me that it is very difficult to confuse the words "Pesh Kabz" and "Zirach Bouk" ... And I see that the respected Artzi, at objects numbers 5886 and 6971 wrote: "Pesh Kabz". Maybe I have problems with vision ???? I worry....

Ian · 9th August 2018, 07:36 AM

Gents,

We are again getting into the frustrating game (for observers) of "what's in a name." If you want to know Artzi Yarom's opinion, ask him. As best I can tell, Artzi numbers his items sequentially as they enter his inventory. Thus, lower numbered items seem to have been acquired earlier than higher numbered items. He uses the term pesh kabz for the earlier items and zirah bouk for the later ones. It appears he changed his mind over time about what to call them, and more recently favors zirah bouk. That's an assumption on my part, but ask him.

Ariel makes a cogent argument for zirah bouk, based on the Persian term for "mail piercer." That seems pretty convincing to me.

Ian.

mahratt · 9th August 2018, 07:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ian

Gents,

We are again getting into the frustrating game (for observers) of "what's in a name." If you want to know Artzi Yarom's opinion, ask him. As best I can tell, Artzi numbers his items sequentially as they enter his inventory. Thus, lower numbered items seem to have been acquired earlier than higher numbered items. He uses the term pesh kabz for the earlier items and zirah bouk for the later ones. It appears he changed his mind over time about what to call them, and more recently favors zirah bouk. That's an assumption on my part, but ask him.

Ariel makes a cogent argument for zirah bouk, based on the Persian term for "mail piercer." That seems pretty convincing to me.

Ian.

Dear Ian.

Here is what Artzi writes, in the description of objects 5887 and 7961, calling them Pesh Kabz:
"The last 2 ½ inches are swollen to a heavy diamond cross-section tip in a typical Zirah-Bouk (Mail Piercer)". By the way, the term "mail piercer" is written on the website of Artzi

That is, it's Pesh Kabz with a point like Zirah Bouk.

But, of course, it is ideal to ask the opinion of the highly respected Artzi.

Look, please, here are these items:

http://oriental-arms.com/item.php?id=4441
http://oriental-arms.com/item.php?id=2199
http://oriental-arms.com/item.php?id=2942
http://oriental-arms.com/item.php?id=896
http://oriental-arms.com/item.php?id=5642
http://oriental-arms.com/item.php?id=1907
http://oriental-arms.com/item.php?id=1491

Probably, following the opinion of the respected Ariel, all these daggers should also be called Zirach Boke? They all have - massively swollen reinforced tip (larger or smaller):

mariusgmioc · 9th August 2018, 09:47 AM

Hello guys,

Now this is a very interesting discussion.

My oppinion is quite simple: it is not the shape of the tip that defines the knife!

From all I know, "zirah bouk" means "armour piercer." This term has become associated with some typically Indian knives characterised by their massively strengthened tips. However, that does not mean that every knife that has a strengthened tip is a Zirah Bouk.

There can be Kards (see the first photos attached), Khanjars, Jambiyas and Pesh-kabz with strengthened tip, but they still remain Kards, Khanjars, Jambiyas or Pesh-kabz.

Using the example below, I believe that it will be at least confusing if not incorrect to call the knife in the photo "Zirah Bouk" only because it has a strengthened tip. However, we can call it a "Kard" with zirak bouk (or armour piercing) tip.

The same goes with the Pesh-kabz.

So I believe Mahratt's/Artzi's point is correct.

PS: Please note that the first knife in the original posting DOES NOT HAVE A STRENGTHENED TIP, but a clipped tip. Thus, I believe it will be an error to even mention the term "zirah bouk" in its name.

ariel · 9th August 2018, 11:39 AM

Marius,
Please read my post carefully: “ massive reinforced tip”.
Your example has a tiny pimple, no more. It is most likely a tourist version, totally unsuitable for the job of armor/ mail piercing. Just like some examples shown by Mahratt.

Unless my eyes deceive me the original example shown by Rumpel9 has “ massive reinforced tip”. So it qualifies according to the definition of Stone, Elgood and Artzi. Perhaps the owner, Rumpel9, can tell us whether I am wrong about this feature. If the blade is not significantly reinforced in its terminal half/third but flat and plain throughout, I would admit my error.

The blade is just recurved, so I am also puzzled by your use of “ clipped”. You may use this term if you wish, but again it does not make a difference: see my post again, where I mentioned the irrelevance of the blade geometry ( straight, recurved), a feature not even mentioned by Stone and Elgood. In Artzi’s collection # # 1405 and 12604 are almost straight, and he still calls them ZB.

So, what is the purpose of this discussion/argument? To reach a correct conclusion or to inflate egos? If the latter, I am out. I am too old to need proving myself.

mahratt · 9th August 2018, 12:29 PM

It is interesting, what armor in the 19th century could be pierced in Afghanistan?

I think hardly anyone will disagree that the dagger in question is dated to the middle (and this is at best) or the late 19th century ... It is enough to examine the old photographs and engravings to make sure that at this time mail armor in Afghanistan was a rarity.

Ordinary Pesh Kabz with a faceted point. Like this:

mariusgmioc · 9th August 2018, 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ariel

Marius,
Please read my post carefully: “ massive reinforced tip”.
Your example has a tiny pimple, no more. It is most likely a tourist version, totally unsuitable for the job of armor/ mail piercing. Just like some examples shown by Mahratt.

Unless my eyes deceive me the original example shown by Rumpel9 has “ massive reinforced tip”. So it qualifies according to the definition of Stone, Elgood and Artzi. Perhaps the owner, Rumpel9, can tell us whether I am wrong about this feature. If the blade is not significantly reinforced in its terminal half/third but flat and plain throughout, I would admit my error.

The blade is just recurved, so I am also puzzled by your use of “ clipped”. You may use this term if you wish, but again it does not make a difference: see my post again, where I mentioned the irrelevance of the blade geometry ( straight, recurved), a feature not even mentioned by Stone and Elgood. In Artzi’s collection # # 1405 and 12604 are almost straight, and he still calls them ZB.

So, what is the purpose of this discussion/argument? To reach a correct conclusion or to inflate egos? If the latter, I am out. I am too old to need proving myself.

Hello Ariel,

I am saying that the knife in the original posting is by no means a Zirah Bouk because it does not have a reinforced/strengthened tip, but a tip shaped into a false edge/clipped. Besides that I consider it a Pesh-kabz.

And by the way, I am by no means the holder of the truth. Just that I am of the oppinion the shape of the knife does have importance, and it is the shape of the whole knife that defines the knife not just the tip alone.

Best regards,

Marius

mahratt · 9th August 2018, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mariusgmioc

Using the example below, I believe that it will be at least confusing if not incorrect to call the knife in the photo "Zirah Bouk" only because it has a strengthened tip. However, we can call it a "Kard" with zirak bouk (or armour piercing) tip.

The same goes with the Pesh-kabz.

Marius, I think you're absolutely right. Here's another Kard.... or Zirah Bouk?

http://armsandantiques.com/19th-c-wo...-dagger-id1134

Ian · 9th August 2018, 01:07 PM

Gentlemen:

This is deteriorating into another "it is/it's not" argument about names. These discussions are tedious and unattractive. I will close the thread and issue suspensions without further notice if you persist.

Ian.

mahratt · 9th August 2018, 07:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ariel

Also, see one from the Met: https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/31537 ( Stone's bequest).

Thank you for a good example. This - Zirah Bouk. But not Pesh Kabz. I think now everyone can see the difference

9th August 2018, 07:25 AM	#3
mahratt Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Russia Posts: 1,042	Dear Marius. Correct me, please, if I'm wrong (I know English badly). But, it seems to me that it is very difficult to confuse the words "Pesh Kabz" and "Zirach Bouk" ... And I see that the respected Artzi, at objects numbers 5886 and 6971 wrote: "Pesh Kabz". Maybe I have problems with vision ???? I worry.... Attached Images

9th August 2018, 09:47 AM	#6
mariusgmioc Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Location: Austria Posts: 1,906	Hello guys, Now this is a very interesting discussion. My oppinion is quite simple: it is not the shape of the tip that defines the knife! From all I know, "zirah bouk" means "armour piercer." This term has become associated with some typically Indian knives characterised by their massively strengthened tips. However, that does not mean that every knife that has a strengthened tip is a Zirah Bouk. There can be Kards (see the first photos attached), Khanjars, Jambiyas and Pesh-kabz with strengthened tip, but they still remain Kards, Khanjars, Jambiyas or Pesh-kabz. Using the example below, I believe that it will be at least confusing if not incorrect to call the knife in the photo "Zirah Bouk" only because it has a strengthened tip. However, we can call it a "Kard" with zirak bouk (or armour piercing) tip. The same goes with the Pesh-kabz. So I believe Mahratt's/Artzi's point is correct. PS: Please note that the first knife in the original posting DOES NOT HAVE A STRENGTHENED TIP, but a clipped tip. Thus, I believe it will be an error to even mention the term "zirah bouk" in its name. Attached Images Last edited by mariusgmioc; 9th August 2018 at 10:10 AM.

9th August 2018, 11:39 AM	#7
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Marius, Please read my post carefully: “ massive reinforced tip”. Your example has a tiny pimple, no more. It is most likely a tourist version, totally unsuitable for the job of armor/ mail piercing. Just like some examples shown by Mahratt. Unless my eyes deceive me the original example shown by Rumpel9 has “ massive reinforced tip”. So it qualifies according to the definition of Stone, Elgood and Artzi. Perhaps the owner, Rumpel9, can tell us whether I am wrong about this feature. If the blade is not significantly reinforced in its terminal half/third but flat and plain throughout, I would admit my error. The blade is just recurved, so I am also puzzled by your use of “ clipped”. You may use this term if you wish, but again it does not make a difference: see my post again, where I mentioned the irrelevance of the blade geometry ( straight, recurved), a feature not even mentioned by Stone and Elgood. In Artzi’s collection # # 1405 and 12604 are almost straight, and he still calls them ZB. So, what is the purpose of this discussion/argument? To reach a correct conclusion or to inflate egos? If the latter, I am out. I am too old to need proving myself. Last edited by ariel; 9th August 2018 at 12:24 PM.

9th August 2018, 12:29 PM	#8
mahratt Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Russia Posts: 1,042	It is interesting, what armor in the 19th century could be pierced in Afghanistan? I think hardly anyone will disagree that the dagger in question is dated to the middle (and this is at best) or the late 19th century ... It is enough to examine the old photographs and engravings to make sure that at this time mail armor in Afghanistan was a rarity. Ordinary Pesh Kabz with a faceted point. Like this: Attached Images

9th August 2018, 01:07 PM	#11
Ian Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Aussie Bush Posts: 4,363	Moderator's warning! Gentlemen: This is deteriorating into another "it is/it's not" argument about names. These discussions are tedious and unattractive. I will close the thread and issue suspensions without further notice if you persist. Ian.

9th August 2018, 06:33 AM	#2
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	...or Zirah Bouk. See Artzi's examples ## 5886 and 7961. Also, see one from the Met: https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/31537 ( Stone's bequest). Although Artzi, G.C. Stone and curators at Met are just the beginners, they are not so bad The clue to identifying what was called Zirah Bouk is not in the T-spine, or blade form ( straight, recurved), but in massively swollen reinforced tip, just like in your first example. Its very function gives rise to its name: Zirah Bouk is Farsi " mail piercer". You can see Stone's book or Elgood's Glossary in his " Rajput arms and armour" and read how these "beginners" define it.

9th August 2018, 07:36 AM	#4
Ian Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Aussie Bush Posts: 4,363	Gents, We are again getting into the frustrating game (for observers) of "what's in a name." If you want to know Artzi Yarom's opinion, ask him. As best I can tell, Artzi numbers his items sequentially as they enter his inventory. Thus, lower numbered items seem to have been acquired earlier than higher numbered items. He uses the term pesh kabz for the earlier items and zirah bouk for the later ones. It appears he changed his mind over time about what to call them, and more recently favors zirah bouk. That's an assumption on my part, but ask him. Ariel makes a cogent argument for zirah bouk, based on the Persian term for "mail piercer." That seems pretty convincing to me. Ian.