Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post

Oliver Pinchot · Yesterday, 04:34 PM

At the earliest, this blade could be late 17th c. Much likelier mid-late 18th century. The guard is 18th century. Where it was found doesn't impact its origins, it is Persian, plain and simple. That it was carried (and apparently lost) in Zanzibar is an interesting side note, but that is all you can say about it. On the other hand, if the blade were inscribed for example, MY NAME IS MUSTAFA, I'M OMANI AND THIS HERE IS MY SWORD, you could make a case for such an attribution.

There are excavated ivory artifacts dating back over 40,000 years which are surprisingly intact. No type of ivory I'm aware of degrades easily or quickly. Assuming the grips were ivory, which is far from certain unless there were particles attached to the tang, this sword lost its grips before it was... interred, as it were.... They were just as likely to be horn or wood.

An overall image would be helpful.

Yesterday, 04:34 PM	#44
Oliver Pinchot Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 462	At the earliest, this blade could be late 17th c. Much likelier mid-late 18th century. The guard is 18th century. Where it was found doesn't impact its origins, it is Persian, plain and simple. That it was carried (and apparently lost) in Zanzibar is an interesting side note, but that is all you can say about it. On the other hand, if the blade were inscribed for example, MY NAME IS MUSTAFA, I'M OMANI AND THIS HERE IS MY SWORD, you could make a case for such an attribution. There are excavated ivory artifacts dating back over 40,000 years which are surprisingly intact. No type of ivory I'm aware of degrades easily or quickly. Assuming the grips were ivory, which is far from certain unless there were particles attached to the tang, this sword lost its grips before it was... interred, as it were.... They were just as likely to be horn or wood. An overall image would be helpful. Last edited by Oliver Pinchot; Yesterday at 07:59 PM.