The travels of a very important dagger

Mare Rosu · 16th March 2005, 01:10 PM

B.I.

I do not know just how you come up with this truly amazing story!
You must have one large and intensive library.
You sir, are making history "come alive" and enjoyable.
I for one would just like to thank you for all you efforts and inputs you have made on this dagger.
It is as you say an amazing story.
What next?
Gene

Jens Nordlunde · 16th March 2005, 02:00 PM

B.I.

The kard is still as fantastic as when you showed it the first time, and should I comment on it, I would look like a clown waiting to be coloured

.
I will however do it anyway. You wrote on the other thread: ‘also, by pure speculation from an image, without holding the piece, the persian work on the hilt just reminds me of late 18thC work, and not of the period stated.’
The story you have just told, could be the reason for, why the hilt looks like it does.

Jens

B.I · 17th March 2005, 01:54 AM

hi gene,
my library is important to me and well used, but just one way of getting information, and not always the first port of call. there is much information that has never been written and held by those not known to be academic, and yet their knowledge surpasses those that are more widely known. i have a long list of questions in my head and try and ask them at the right time and the right place

i've been out for dinner for the last 2 nights with 2 different friends (one academic and one art dealer) and on both nights learnt something new and important (to me anyway

) and both partly concerned this dagger.
jens, there isnt much i can slip past you. yes i did state doubts about the hilt and it was something i was reluctant to mention again, at least until i could offer more than just speculation. a friend has mentioned this dagger in an article and he claimed the hilt and blade were en-suite after close examination. over dinner, i expressed my doubts and in doing so instilled doubts with him. he admitted the slight possibility of it as a theory, but claimed to have not noticed it at the time (but he wasnt looking for this directly). as you say, the hilt could have been fitted after jahangirs ownership, but this can only be speculation. i still havent finished the article due to work commitments, but i got the impression a direct persian link was being reinforced, not just in this dagger, but in jahangirs taste in general. he bought many pieces from persia, importing them himself through trade routes in trade centres such as gujerat (correct me if i'm wrong as you have probably read the article) this would make sense i suppose, as the hilt is distinctly persian although it is claimed by jahangir the blade was forged in india.
my dinner tonight offered a different slant. my guest (well, actually he was paying

) has a vast knowledge of islamic history that bounds confidently across all the regions covered by the culture. he is well established as an 'expert' (but humbly refuses this role) and there are not many books written on islamic art over the last 20 years that do not thank him gratefully in their forward. he has not seen the dagger but is fully aware of it, and was comfortable with the age of the decoration. interestingly, he claimed it was indian! i argued my case, and he returned it with a history lesson which i had to accept, although my doubts will remain until i one day see the dagger myself, or hear a convincing report from someone that examined it. he claimed that jahangirs taste was always persian, as were many of the moghul courts. in this, he had persian artisans, and indian artisans that worked in a pure persian style. not only did they import pieces from persia to india, but the safavid courts imported persian pieces from india, made by indian artisans which were well known as finer craftsmen.
this statement alone will shake many, and i did argue the commercial aspect of persian art over indian, and this, i had to admit was a weak arguement. i collect indian for a reason, in that i think it is of higher quality than persian, or at least more to my taste. i always thought the commercial world disagreed, but as i was corrected, it definately does not. the persian pieces that are much sought after are the showy blades and fine late metalwork. these are meaningless, when standing next to an important piece of indian art. the reason that the world reveres persian artisans is that the good indian work doesnt exist in the sale rooms. when a piece does appear, the collecting world goes absolutely crazy. if you forget the moser pieces, which were pure decoration and go earlier, this becomes apparant. indian craftsman have always been revered, but only during this early period of which most are unaware.
interesting stuff and i hope others will give there opinion on this as i'm sure it can be taken further. my knowledge of persian art and history is slight at best.
after two dinners and many discussions, of which this dagger was just one i wasnt left with much more physical information to contribute. i still have my doubts, but now they are a little more uniform and when i one day see this piece, i will be looking at it with different eyes.

food was good though with no clowns in sight!

Andrew · 17th March 2005, 04:16 AM

Fascinating story, Brian. Thanks!

I've been tantalized by beautiful Indian and Persian weapons for some time now. Some of the pieces currently residing in the Nordlunde Collection are awesome.

One question. Your preference for Indian weapons is clear. What's your opinion on Indian wootz when compared to Persian? Some of the most breath-taking wootz blades I've ever seen are Persian.

B.I · 17th March 2005, 06:50 AM

hi andrew,
my taste has always been indian, and although i can appreciate persian watering and am in awe of the delicacies of the pattern, i have always found them a little cold when compared to the more earthy, personal feeling i get from indian. i am a huge fan of indian 'open' watering which i hold in higher esteem that the manipulated persian pattern, or the traditional indian 'tight' wootz. its all personal taste at the end of the day. the kitchener collection held many persian blades, all with a fabulous dark (almost black) persian watering that you have to accept as the finest of their kind.
also, with my last speculative offering, how do you know what you see as persian blades are actually persian? i have good indian swords with a ricassos fitted on to what i always assumed was a good persian blade. but as the complete piece was made and fitted in india, why not assume it is pure indian but made to suit the persian taste of the time.
i dont know, but there are many questions without answers and i would hope that with enough digging, answers may yield one day.

andrew, i have sent you an email.

Jens Nordlunde · 17th March 2005, 02:28 PM

Andrew, thank you for your kind words about my collection. Although I started to collect many years ago, I have not added much to my collection lately. Instead I have added considerably to my library on the subject during the last years, as the knowledge is as important as the weapons themselves.

B.I., I would suggest, if I may, that you dine out with friends at least three times a week, and give us a full report, not later than two days after the dinner. This would, if nothing else, add a lot to our knowledge.
The thread you have started is very interesting and also very important. I do realise that some collect weapon out of curiosity and to hang them on a wall, while others collect them to study and to get as much knowledge out of them as possible. Personally I have read books covering six to eight different areas, and in a way it is as if, the more you read, the less you know – I do however hope that that will change

.
The different ways wootz looks when the item is finished, can be due to different things Different ores, different ways to make the ingots, different ways of heating and cooling the item, different metals forged with the ingot, and quite a few other things I guess – but I hope Ann will be kind enough to tell us more about this, as this is an important part of this discussion.
It must be remembered that when it is said that the Indian wootz blades were more greyish and had a more floating pattern than the Persian blades, this is a truce with modifications.
The Indian smiths were masters, and could, to my opinion, make whatever pattern or colour the customer wanted. I don’t intend to start a discussion on who were the biggest artists, the Indian or the Persian smiths, only to mention that the Indian smiths were no lesser artists than the Persian.
Another thing is, that during the Mogul rule many artists were brought to India to work for the court, and everyone learned from each other, so although a blade looks as if it is Persian, an Indian smith might have made it. I doubt however, that the more greyish floating pattern was made by the Persians smiths working in India – but I don’t know.
Have a look at the two different types of pattern and tell me, that the one to the right, without any doubt was made by a Persian smith.

Ann Feuerbach · 17th March 2005, 02:54 PM

I wrote a bit about reasons for different patterns in the A worthy Kattar thread.

You do know that the blade on the left is pattern welded Damascus, not wootz.

The influence of ingot cooling and forging is, however, something I am/would like to work on further. As a side point, from what I have studied, the Persians etc (at least at Merv), had a very advanced level of craftsmenship and technical, science skills. More "advanced" than the Indians. However, I have some great meals over a campfire, compared to 4 star restarants. That is to say, sofistication does not equal "better" craftsmen.

16th March 2005, 01:10 PM	#1
Mare Rosu Deceased Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: USA, DEEP SOUTH, GEORGIA, Y'all hear? Posts: 121	Truly amazing! B.I. I do not know just how you come up with this truly amazing story! You must have one large and intensive library. You sir, are making history "come alive" and enjoyable. I for one would just like to thank you for all you efforts and inputs you have made on this dagger. It is as you say an amazing story. What next? Gene

17th March 2005, 06:50 AM	#5
B.I Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 485	hi andrew, my taste has always been indian, and although i can appreciate persian watering and am in awe of the delicacies of the pattern, i have always found them a little cold when compared to the more earthy, personal feeling i get from indian. i am a huge fan of indian 'open' watering which i hold in higher esteem that the manipulated persian pattern, or the traditional indian 'tight' wootz. its all personal taste at the end of the day. the kitchener collection held many persian blades, all with a fabulous dark (almost black) persian watering that you have to accept as the finest of their kind. also, with my last speculative offering, how do you know what you see as persian blades are actually persian? i have good indian swords with a ricassos fitted on to what i always assumed was a good persian blade. but as the complete piece was made and fitted in india, why not assume it is pure indian but made to suit the persian taste of the time. i dont know, but there are many questions without answers and i would hope that with enough digging, answers may yield one day. andrew, i have sent you an email. Last edited by B.I; 17th March 2005 at 08:18 AM.

17th March 2005, 02:28 PM	#6
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	Andrew, thank you for your kind words about my collection. Although I started to collect many years ago, I have not added much to my collection lately. Instead I have added considerably to my library on the subject during the last years, as the knowledge is as important as the weapons themselves. B.I., I would suggest, if I may, that you dine out with friends at least three times a week, and give us a full report, not later than two days after the dinner. This would, if nothing else, add a lot to our knowledge. The thread you have started is very interesting and also very important. I do realise that some collect weapon out of curiosity and to hang them on a wall, while others collect them to study and to get as much knowledge out of them as possible. Personally I have read books covering six to eight different areas, and in a way it is as if, the more you read, the less you know – I do however hope that that will change . The different ways wootz looks when the item is finished, can be due to different things Different ores, different ways to make the ingots, different ways of heating and cooling the item, different metals forged with the ingot, and quite a few other things I guess – but I hope Ann will be kind enough to tell us more about this, as this is an important part of this discussion. It must be remembered that when it is said that the Indian wootz blades were more greyish and had a more floating pattern than the Persian blades, this is a truce with modifications. The Indian smiths were masters, and could, to my opinion, make whatever pattern or colour the customer wanted. I don’t intend to start a discussion on who were the biggest artists, the Indian or the Persian smiths, only to mention that the Indian smiths were no lesser artists than the Persian. Another thing is, that during the Mogul rule many artists were brought to India to work for the court, and everyone learned from each other, so although a blade looks as if it is Persian, an Indian smith might have made it. I doubt however, that the more greyish floating pattern was made by the Persians smiths working in India – but I don’t know. Have a look at the two different types of pattern and tell me, that the one to the right, without any doubt was made by a Persian smith. Attached Images

16th March 2005, 02:00 PM	#2
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	B.I. The kard is still as fantastic as when you showed it the first time, and should I comment on it, I would look like a clown waiting to be coloured . I will however do it anyway. You wrote on the other thread: ‘also, by pure speculation from an image, without holding the piece, the persian work on the hilt just reminds me of late 18thC work, and not of the period stated.’ The story you have just told, could be the reason for, why the hilt looks like it does. Jens

17th March 2005, 01:54 AM	#3
B.I Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 485	hi gene, my library is important to me and well used, but just one way of getting information, and not always the first port of call. there is much information that has never been written and held by those not known to be academic, and yet their knowledge surpasses those that are more widely known. i have a long list of questions in my head and try and ask them at the right time and the right place i've been out for dinner for the last 2 nights with 2 different friends (one academic and one art dealer) and on both nights learnt something new and important (to me anyway ) and both partly concerned this dagger. jens, there isnt much i can slip past you. yes i did state doubts about the hilt and it was something i was reluctant to mention again, at least until i could offer more than just speculation. a friend has mentioned this dagger in an article and he claimed the hilt and blade were en-suite after close examination. over dinner, i expressed my doubts and in doing so instilled doubts with him. he admitted the slight possibility of it as a theory, but claimed to have not noticed it at the time (but he wasnt looking for this directly). as you say, the hilt could have been fitted after jahangirs ownership, but this can only be speculation. i still havent finished the article due to work commitments, but i got the impression a direct persian link was being reinforced, not just in this dagger, but in jahangirs taste in general. he bought many pieces from persia, importing them himself through trade routes in trade centres such as gujerat (correct me if i'm wrong as you have probably read the article) this would make sense i suppose, as the hilt is distinctly persian although it is claimed by jahangir the blade was forged in india. my dinner tonight offered a different slant. my guest (well, actually he was paying ) has a vast knowledge of islamic history that bounds confidently across all the regions covered by the culture. he is well established as an 'expert' (but humbly refuses this role) and there are not many books written on islamic art over the last 20 years that do not thank him gratefully in their forward. he has not seen the dagger but is fully aware of it, and was comfortable with the age of the decoration. interestingly, he claimed it was indian! i argued my case, and he returned it with a history lesson which i had to accept, although my doubts will remain until i one day see the dagger myself, or hear a convincing report from someone that examined it. he claimed that jahangirs taste was always persian, as were many of the moghul courts. in this, he had persian artisans, and indian artisans that worked in a pure persian style. not only did they import pieces from persia to india, but the safavid courts imported persian pieces from india, made by indian artisans which were well known as finer craftsmen. this statement alone will shake many, and i did argue the commercial aspect of persian art over indian, and this, i had to admit was a weak arguement. i collect indian for a reason, in that i think it is of higher quality than persian, or at least more to my taste. i always thought the commercial world disagreed, but as i was corrected, it definately does not. the persian pieces that are much sought after are the showy blades and fine late metalwork. these are meaningless, when standing next to an important piece of indian art. the reason that the world reveres persian artisans is that the good indian work doesnt exist in the sale rooms. when a piece does appear, the collecting world goes absolutely crazy. if you forget the moser pieces, which were pure decoration and go earlier, this becomes apparant. indian craftsman have always been revered, but only during this early period of which most are unaware. interesting stuff and i hope others will give there opinion on this as i'm sure it can be taken further. my knowledge of persian art and history is slight at best. after two dinners and many discussions, of which this dagger was just one i wasnt left with much more physical information to contribute. i still have my doubts, but now they are a little more uniform and when i one day see this piece, i will be looking at it with different eyes. food was good though with no clowns in sight!

17th March 2005, 04:16 AM	#4
Andrew Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: USA Posts: 1,725	Fascinating story, Brian. Thanks! I've been tantalized by beautiful Indian and Persian weapons for some time now. Some of the pieces currently residing in the Nordlunde Collection are awesome. One question. Your preference for Indian weapons is clear. What's your opinion on Indian wootz when compared to Persian? Some of the most breath-taking wootz blades I've ever seen are Persian.

17th March 2005, 02:54 PM	#7
Ann Feuerbach Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 133	I wrote a bit about reasons for different patterns in the A worthy Kattar thread. You do know that the blade on the left is pattern welded Damascus, not wootz. The influence of ingot cooling and forging is, however, something I am/would like to work on further. As a side point, from what I have studied, the Persians etc (at least at Merv), had a very advanced level of craftsmenship and technical, science skills. More "advanced" than the Indians. However, I have some great meals over a campfire, compared to 4 star restarants. That is to say, sofistication does not equal "better" craftsmen.