Great Qama

ariel · 26th June 2020, 07:06 PM

Re. Armenian armorers.
The majority of them worked as jewelers, Papov being the ultimate example. Blades were mainly produced by Daghestani and Tiflis masters and sold to workshops.
There are some clearly Armenian blades with Armenian inscriptions, but they are often over-embellished with almost kitschy inlays and koft decorations and personally I do not like them. Pure IMHO.
Exceptions: we do not know for certain whether Eliarov was Georgian or Armenian or whether Purunsuzov or Master Khachatur made their own blades. They worked relatively early in the 19 century, and most of the splendid kindjals and shashkas available to us date much later, when the entire field was captured by large and medium sized workshops mass producing generic products with rather faceless appearance . The role of bladed weapons in warfare plummeted at that time and they became part of a wardrobe, status symbols and souvenirs.

ariel · 26th June 2020, 07:28 PM

By the way, Rivkin mentioned the similarity of the “Tiflis zigzag” with some Indian mechanical damascus patterns and noted the presence of Indian merchants and armorers in Tiflis.
Surprisingly, one can find Indian blades on Caucasian swords. Trade connections may be the reason, but Georgian mercenaries ( often of the highest rank!) served in Persian armies since Shah Abbas I times and went to Afghanistan and India. Globalization was not invented yesterday:-)

kai · 27th June 2020, 02:49 AM

Welcome to the forum!

With Ariel's examples, the fullers clearly exhibit twistcore. I doubt that there is any difference in basic construction between Tiflis zigzag, Turkish ribbon, stars, what-have-you: made from twisted bars and differences in appearance result from obvious forging details as well as how much material is removed from the surface of the twisted rod. A rose is still a rose...

BTW, twistcore is a widespread technique known pretty much all over the place; no need to invoke any specific connection with India.

I'm less convinced that the fullers of the blade in the first post show twistcore - to me it looks more like pattern-welding with some surface manipulation from the limited pics. We need close-ups for getting a better grasp on its construction!

Regards,
Kai

ariel · 27th June 2020, 05:39 AM

Kai,
You hit the nail on the head: every variety of mechanical Damascus is a product of mixing/ twisting chunks of steel with different carbon content. Suffice it to take a book by Manfred Sachse and look at the endless combinations and perturbations of “ hard” and “soft” iron to realize that they all, without exception, are in fact “ twistcore”. But devil is in the details: different masters in different cultures had their favorite schemes of twisting to produce their favorite final pattern. Not for nothing contemporary Indian artisans manufacture blades with the “ bird eye” pattern: simple , quick and flashy. Turks twisted their rods creating “ Turkish ribbon”, old Vikings braided them, but Tibetans just bent their rods on themselves for their unsophisticated “ hairpin “ pattern.
It’s like music: every composer from Bach to ABBA had same do-re-mis, but arranged them differently.
This is why we can look at the Damascus pattern and guess where it came from, and why pattern A and pattern N have a lot in common implying a connection between the traditions.

Interested Party · 27th June 2020, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ariel

Kai,
You hit the nail on the head: every variety of mechanical Damascus is a product of mixing/ twisting chunks of steel with different carbon content. Suffice it to take a book by Manfred Sachse and look at the endless combinations and perturbations of “ hard” and “soft” iron to realize that they all, without exception, are in fact “ twistcore”. But devil is in the details: different masters in different cultures had their favorite schemes of twisting to produce their favorite final pattern. Not for nothing contemporary Indian artisans manufacture blades with the “ bird eye” pattern: simple , quick and flashy. Turks twisted their rods creating “ Turkish ribbon”, old Vikings braided them, but Tibetans just bent their rods on themselves for their unsophisticated “ hairpin “ pattern.
It’s like music: every composer from Bach to ABBA had same do-re-mis, but arranged them differently.
This is why we can look at the Damascus pattern and guess where it came from, and why pattern A and pattern N have a lot in common implying a connection between the traditions.

Not an easy book to find in English. Cheap in German though.

ariel · 27th June 2020, 06:01 PM

OsobistGB:

“but the Persian influence is obvious!”

———————————-

Can you elaborate what particular features you view as specifically and obviously Persian?
Thanks.

mariusgmioc · 27th June 2020, 06:51 PM

Interesting that the moment I saw it, I also thought that is Persian.

Why?

Simply because it looked so much alike others I saw in Persian museums.

The size, the shape of the hilt and also the chiseled decoration on the blade looked very Persian to me.

PS: Yet, the fullers do not look very Persian...

Gavin Nugent · 27th June 2020, 09:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ariel

OsobistGB:

“but the Persian influence is obvious!”

———————————-

Can you elaborate what particular features you view as specifically and obviously Persian?
Thanks.

Ariel,

Standing on the outside looking in, perhaps the gazelle

Gavin

27th June 2020, 06:51 PM	#7
mariusgmioc Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Location: Austria Posts: 1,906	Interesting that the moment I saw it, I also thought that is Persian. Why? Simply because it looked so much alike others I saw in Persian museums. The size, the shape of the hilt and also the chiseled decoration on the blade looked very Persian to me. PS: Yet, the fullers do not look very Persian... Last edited by mariusgmioc; 28th June 2020 at 12:19 AM.

26th June 2020, 07:06 PM	#1
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Re. Armenian armorers. The majority of them worked as jewelers, Papov being the ultimate example. Blades were mainly produced by Daghestani and Tiflis masters and sold to workshops. There are some clearly Armenian blades with Armenian inscriptions, but they are often over-embellished with almost kitschy inlays and koft decorations and personally I do not like them. Pure IMHO. Exceptions: we do not know for certain whether Eliarov was Georgian or Armenian or whether Purunsuzov or Master Khachatur made their own blades. They worked relatively early in the 19 century, and most of the splendid kindjals and shashkas available to us date much later, when the entire field was captured by large and medium sized workshops mass producing generic products with rather faceless appearance . The role of bladed weapons in warfare plummeted at that time and they became part of a wardrobe, status symbols and souvenirs.

26th June 2020, 07:28 PM	#2
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	By the way, Rivkin mentioned the similarity of the “Tiflis zigzag” with some Indian mechanical damascus patterns and noted the presence of Indian merchants and armorers in Tiflis. Surprisingly, one can find Indian blades on Caucasian swords. Trade connections may be the reason, but Georgian mercenaries ( often of the highest rank!) served in Persian armies since Shah Abbas I times and went to Afghanistan and India. Globalization was not invented yesterday:-)

27th June 2020, 02:49 AM	#3
kai Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 3,255	Welcome to the forum! With Ariel's examples, the fullers clearly exhibit twistcore. I doubt that there is any difference in basic construction between Tiflis zigzag, Turkish ribbon, stars, what-have-you: made from twisted bars and differences in appearance result from obvious forging details as well as how much material is removed from the surface of the twisted rod. A rose is still a rose... BTW, twistcore is a widespread technique known pretty much all over the place; no need to invoke any specific connection with India. I'm less convinced that the fullers of the blade in the first post show twistcore - to me it looks more like pattern-welding with some surface manipulation from the limited pics. We need close-ups for getting a better grasp on its construction! Regards, Kai

27th June 2020, 05:39 AM	#4
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Kai, You hit the nail on the head: every variety of mechanical Damascus is a product of mixing/ twisting chunks of steel with different carbon content. Suffice it to take a book by Manfred Sachse and look at the endless combinations and perturbations of “ hard” and “soft” iron to realize that they all, without exception, are in fact “ twistcore”. But devil is in the details: different masters in different cultures had their favorite schemes of twisting to produce their favorite final pattern. Not for nothing contemporary Indian artisans manufacture blades with the “ bird eye” pattern: simple , quick and flashy. Turks twisted their rods creating “ Turkish ribbon”, old Vikings braided them, but Tibetans just bent their rods on themselves for their unsophisticated “ hairpin “ pattern. It’s like music: every composer from Bach to ABBA had same do-re-mis, but arranged them differently. This is why we can look at the Damascus pattern and guess where it came from, and why pattern A and pattern N have a lot in common implying a connection between the traditions.

27th June 2020, 06:01 PM	#6
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	OsobistGB: “but the Persian influence is obvious!” ———————————- Can you elaborate what particular features you view as specifically and obviously Persian? Thanks.