Karud dagger with unusual chased scabbard

[BBking]

Really interesting find !

This one, not the same but a nepalese ivory dagger
from the MET, with a ''pesh-kabz... shape''
contrary to the usual nepalese knives or kukhris.

Really old , Dated 1650-1700...

[ariel]

The blades are different.

[francantolin]

Thank you for the picture of the nepalese '' pesh-kabz'' and link ( an amazing Garuda carved on the hilt ! )

For me the silver work on mounts is sino-tibetan
So I come back to the wakhan- eastern Afghanistan origin...
Two pictures: a tibetan kangling and a mongolian trousse set.
I don't think the scabbard was made in Tibet or in far
Mongolia but they illustrate the clear chinese, sino-influence.

[ariel]

I agree with you wholeheartedly.
Daggers and scabbards were usually done by different workshops. Moreover, scabbards were exposed to the destructive forces both from the outside and the inside and their lifespan was limited. Any old Oriental bladed weapon likely came to us in its second or third scabbard. Thus, attribution of any weapon is based on its handle and blade, but not on its replaceable scabbard.

What we see here is a classical Islamic Central Asian pesh kabz ( NB: Afghanistan is also historically a Central Asian (CA) country) with a scabbard adorned with “Buddhist” elements. Was it done by an itinerant master, by a Buddhist master somewhere in the Buddhist country or by one native CA Buddhist is not possible. Currenly, Buddhists constitute <1% of general population of any ~CA country, but how many of them were there in the 18-19 centuries is also unknown.

The same is true for the abovementioned example from the Chinese museum.

Thus, calling it a “Nepalese” or any other “Buddhist/Chinese” example is a mistake, IMHO. It might be Afghani/Tajik/ Indian, but that is the closest I can do.

We see it all the time: weapons travel and some of them acquire foreign elements.

CharlesS on this Forum is an undisputed champion: he is specifically fascinated by these mixed examples and often shows things that none of us ever suspected to exist.

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by francantolin

Thank you for the picture of the nepalese '' pesh-kabz'' and link ( an amazing Garuda carved on the hilt ! )

For me the silver work on mounts is sino-tibetan
So I come back to the wakhan- eastern Afghanistan origin...
Two pictures: a tibetan kangling and a mongolian trousse set.
I don't think the scabbard was made in Tibet or in far
Mongolia but they illustrate the clear chinese, sino-influence.

It is very important to determine the "place of use" of arms. The dagger or saber itself could be made in one place, and then made a "journey" and used in a region far from the place of production.
For example, the vast majority of sabers and daggers in the khanates of Central Asia were made in Persia. And in the khanates, native craftsmen made handles and scabbard details in their traditional style. But looking at the resulting objects, we define them as "Central Asian" and not as "Persian". Although, of course, we can say that these are "Central Asian items with Persian blades." So it is with your dagger, francantolin. He certainly lived in a region with strong Chinese or Nepalese influence. Where exactly, of course, is difficult to say. At the same time, the blade and hilt of this karud could have been made in Afghanistan. But given the special details of the scabbard, to say that he is "Afghan" or "Central Asian", in my opinion, is categorically not true.

[ariel]

British 1796 saber served for a very long time in India. It did not make it Indian.

Then, when it was old and outmoded, Brits gave it to the Indians who threw away its steel scabbard and replaced it with a wooden/leather one. It still remained British 1796 pattern light cavalry saber.

Just as a man dressed as a woman is still a man.

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by ariel

British 1796 saber served for a very long time in India. It did not make it Indian.

Then, when it was old and outmoded, Brits gave it to the Indians who threw away its steel scabbard and replaced it with a wooden/leather one. It still remained British 1796 pattern light cavalry saber.

Just as a man dressed as a woman is still a man.

Is are we talking about typical army arms, the place of production of which a priori cannot raise questions? Like we are talking about ethnographic items?
Are you ready to "o risk one's neck", claiming that this karud was made in Afghanistan?
By the way, if we change the hilt of a British saber to a tulvar hilt, we, of course, will know that the donor is a British saber, but at least we will clearly understand exactly where it was used.
Here's another example. The Khyber knife is undoubtedly an Afghan arms. But I think that any of the forum participants, looking at the Khyber in this photo, will say that this is an Indian arms:

[Ian]

Guys,

I think we are headed down a familiar path. As ariel notes, CharlesS (and others) have shown a large number of mixed-cultural edged weapons that have been discussed previously in this Forum. We usually have no clear information about the various items' provenances, and attempts to describe where these were made and used are often speculative. When attempting to place such items geographically, we often end up in the realm of guess work, otherwise known as "professional judgement" or "expert opinion."

It's interesting to debate these topics but, in terms of informing the reader here, it is perhaps most helpful to define the blade (e.g., karud, pesh kabz of Afghan type) and dress (e.g., indo-Persian), with a likely geographic attribution (e.g., Central Asian).

What readers here are mainly looking for is guidance that is fairly clear, but also expresses the uncertainty of its characterization.