Mechanical Damascus Koumya Blade
 

Hi All,

Over the years I have seen a few koumya with the sheath finial missing (photo 1). I have always passed them up as too much trouble to repair for the asking price and quality. The mechanical damascus blade on this one surprised the heck out of me. I have never before seen a koumya with anything but a mono steel blade. Given the nature of the blade, the price was very reasonable so I decided to buy it and replace the missing finial. Photos two and three show a section of the blade (both sides) after a quick clean and an etch with a 3% nital solution. There is a maker’s mark consisting of two small stamps close to the hilt (photo 4). The stamp closest to the hilt has brass inlayed in two of the four depressions. I imagine that all eight depressions had brass inlays at one time. Adjacent to the maker’s mark on the convex side, a semi-circular notch has been filed into the edge of the blade. Why this was done, I can’t begin to fathom. The blade is only one of a number of anomalies however.
On every koumya I have ever seen, the metal ferrule on the hilt flares out to fit over the sheath throat and the throat can be removed from the rest of the sheath to allow for adjustment of the two wooden blade protectors if necessary. On this koumya, the hilt ferrule (photo 5) is rebated to fit inside the sheath throat (photo 6) and the throat is soldered in place. The wooden lining inside the sheath appears to be one piece (or at least glued together) and doesn’t rattle when the blade is removed and the sheath is shaken.
There is a MOP disk inlayed in the wooden part of the pommel. I have seen inlayed metal disks but never MOP.
On every other koumya in my collection, the tang goes through the metal pommel crest and is held in place by some sort of metal piece (either ornate or simple). On this new one, the tang is blind.
On even the most simply decorated koumya in my collection, the back is more simply decorated than the front. On this new one, both sides are decorated the same (photos 1 & 7 [Photo 7 shows my repair in place]) and, although the decoration is simple, the hilt and sheath are very well constructed.
Although the lugs for the baldric rings are respectable in height and length (photos 1 & 7), caliper measurement shows that they are only 3/16” (4.78mm) thick (photo 6).
Based on the thickness of the lugs, I believe that this is a 20th century piece that was intended for special occasion dress and not everyday carry. Furthermore, based on the presence of the mechanical damascus blade and the other atypical features, I believe this koumya was made outside of Morocco for sale to Moroccans.

Sincerely,
RobT

Hello Rob,

I strongly doubt that we see here any sort of damascus! ;)

Regards,
Detlef

The decoration looks somehow not right for a koumya; too sparse and out of character for a dagger of this culture. :confused:

I think that it's a koummya for those who travel, sorry Rob!:(

Hello Rob,

I think what we see here is just the scratch from quenching. It's for sure not any damascus or pattern.

Regards,
Detlef

Plain Koumya, Not Tourist, For Sure Damascus
 

Rick,
Here are two rather unadorned koumya from my collection. Unlike the subject of the current discussion, these two koumya have all of the expected construction features (hilt ferrule over sheath throat, press fit sheath throat, two wood blade protectors inside the sheath, through tang, less decoration on the obverse). I have no doubt that they were made in Morocco for sale to Moroccans. The first koumya has an octagonal copper sheath and copper hilt furniture. The blade has a maker’s mark. The second koumya has a brass sheath and hilt furniture. The simple decoration on both koumya notwithstanding, they are well constructed of heavy copper and brass. I agree with you that the koumya now under discussion wasn’t made in Morocco. It isn’t the lack of decoration but rather the other atypical features that lead me to conclude that this item was made outside of Morocco for sale to Moroccans. Hopefully someone will recognize the anomalies as typical for some sort of jambiya made somewhere else and be able to give us a possible location.

Sajen,
I rather doubt that someone would go to the trouble of stamping a maker’s mark and then inlaying it with brass for a tourist koumya. If you look carefully at the photos (especially the close-ups), you can see that the brass on the sheath and hilt is heavy. The workmanship is very well done (especially the rivets). All the parts are well shaped and fitted together. The hilt ferrule fits tightly enough in the sheath throat so that the blade won’t fall out if the sheath is held upside down. Currently, I have 27 koumya and have seen a whole lot more. I know tourist from the real deal. This one is the real (albeit 20th century) deal. As for the damascus issue, we will have to agree to disagree. I have the piece in hand and I say that it’s for sure damascus. It isn’t damascus made to show off a pattern by any means but rather a gathering together of enough bits of steel (with varying degrees of carbon content) to be forge welded into a blade.

Sincerely,
RobT

Hello Rob,

I don't want to discuss if it is a koummya for use and wear, you have it in hand and I've learned by handling several koummyas that it can be tricky to distinguish between tourist ones and the ones which have been in use for wearing from pictures only. But I've handled tourist ones which have been of good quality.
But I am pretty sure that we don't see any sort of damascus and I am more surprised that not one of our members who are familiar with smithing haven't commented until now. Alan G. Maisey for example will be able to confirm that we don't see any sort of damascus in your pictures.
Polish the blade and re-etch it, you will see that there is no sign of damascus, I am pretty sure, sorry.
BTW, good repair of the tip of the scabbard! :)

Regards,
Detlef

Hello all ,

I don't even see any real pattern,
on the pictures you show us anyway
For be sure, you ''just have'' to sand it and etch it

Exactly what I've stated in up! ;) Thank you that you don't let me alone!:D:D

No other member here in the forum can say that we don't see any lamination on this blade?? Really?? :confused:

Sorry for my late response, in my opinion it is indeed not damascus but as you said it looks like the structure of hot steel cooled in water or oil. Try if you can bend the blade a little, does it come back straight, steel, does it stand crooked, iron.
Regards
Marc

Thank you Marc! :)
My intention is not to make Rob's koummya bad, but to make it clear that what we see here is in no way a lamination in any way. ;)

Regards,
Detlef

I believe that Detlef is most probably correct. What you see on this blade is probably caused by the quenching of the blade. Here is a railroad spike that i forged into a dagger that has a similar effect to what we see on your blade and i an 100% positive that my blade is not pattern wielded.

The bright spots on the OP's blade in linear groups remind me of nie or larger martensite crystals that may be seen in Japanese swords. David's attribution to quenching effects is probably correct.

Didn't look like lamination to me.

I didn't wish to dogpile onto a previous post.

Thank you David! Yes, what we see here is caused by quenching of the blade, exactly what I've meant in post #5. :)

Regards,
Detlef

Thanks For the Responses
 

Thanks to all who have responded,
On the first blade close-up on my initial post I do see the differential heat treatment on both edges but to me, the section between the two edges shows a different pattern and to me it appears to be mechanical damascus. In regards to the differential heat treatment, this is the only koumya blade in my collection with this feature. Does anyone out there have a koumya with this treatment that they can show us?

Sajen,
Thanks for your complement on my repair. I must however say that I have no trouble whatsoever distinguishing a koumya intended for sale only to tourists from one that a Moroccan would be willing to wear amongst his peers. If a koumya is of good quality, then it was made for sale to Moroccans and non-Moroccans alike. Tourist koumya on the other hand are identifiable by their thin metal, crudely designed and roughly finished elements, and poor construction. In short, they look cheap.The photos I have provided do not show a cheap looking item. It is undeniably of good quality. In any event, I would be willing to bet the ranch that no tourist koumya would be stamped with a maker’s mark and have a differentially heat treated blade.

It is interesting that, in this discussion to date, no comment has been made about the other anomalies that I noted (save for the mention of sparse decoration by Rick). All of these features are found on other jambiya and may point to where the item in this post was made.

Sincerely,
RobT

Dear Rob,

I think that it isn't easy like this. I've handled and seen koummyas from good and very good quality made only for tourists/collectors.
I am for my part looking more for the signs of use and handling and the wear a koummya shows. Look for example here: http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...t=koummya+bone & http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...t=koummya+bone
Also the one I've shown recently (now for sale so I don't want to show it here again) made from silver with gold accents is IMHO a 20th century piece made for sale to rich tourists.
20th century koummyas are mainly made for tourists and collectors, sometimes these are worn by Morrocans as well. I've had one recently and sold it to a member here which you would classify as a tourist one, the fittings are from brass and german silver but it shows clear signs of a long time use (see pics).
Like I said, it's not so easy like you stated.

Regards,
Detlef

Like I stated before, I am in no way an expert by koummyas but I've handled a lot and when I would have kept them all I would have a nice collection of them. So all what I write here about them I've gathered from handling them.
Attached a few I've had.

Not Tourist To Me
 

Sajen,

I think what we have here is two different definitions of tourist koumya. I wouldn’t classify any of the five pieces you show as tourist and would be quite happy to have like items in my collection (especially the last one). If a koumyia is well and traditionally made but is so expensive that the primary market is rich tourists doesn’t mean that it is a tourist piece because a Moroccan would be happy to buy and wear it as well…if he could afford it. To me, a Moroccan would be happy to wear all of the pieces you show. I think that all of them (with the very possible exception of the last one which may be 19th century) are 20th century and the first one you show is the least good one of the lot, but I don’t think any of them should be called tourist. To me, tourist means a cheaply and sloppily made pastiche of a traditional form with the only skill in its making being the ability to churn it out as quickly and with as little effort as possible. To me, tourist pieces have an almost contemptuous lack of quality. As if to say, “only a tourist would be ignorant enough to buy this piece of garbage because no person of our culture would be caught dead with it”.

Sincerely,
RobT

Rob,

I think you have hit on a subject that we all think we know about but lacks definition. What is meant by a "tourist"item? You have emphasised that these are low quality items produced in quatity. Others have used the term to mean highly decorative pieces, often with "non-functional" blades (blunt or low quality metal or roughly finished, etc.). In either case, there is a disparaging connotation which, you rightly point out, is not always justified. If a local would be happy to carry it, is it really a "tourist" piece? Good question.