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.
|