|
14th December 2005, 09:48 PM | #1 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 692
|
albanian jambiya
Hi to everyone!
I'm a new member and that is my first post here. I'm from Zagreb, Croatia. I've found that forum recently and look what a great community! Compliments! I'm also a novice collector. I was bidding on that the previous day on ebay. Item number 6586228816 . I think that it is an albanian jambiya... Is that true? |
14th December 2005, 10:08 PM | #2 |
(deceased)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 3,191
|
Hi Valjhun
Welcome to the forum! Were you the one who won the auction on this dagger? I had put in a few bids on it but for some reason the hilt didn't look that old? The blade is wootz but I think the hilt was replaced more recently it just does not have the right patina on it. Still it is a nice piece with a wonderful blade. Lew |
14th December 2005, 11:06 PM | #3 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
|
I do not think it is Wootz (crystalline damascus); it is mechanical damascus and, I think, of Shams variety.
The finial looks Ottoman, and the use of niello points more towards Asia Minor proper rather than the Balkans. I just got Yu. Miller's book on Caucasian Arms in the Hermitage collection; it has an example of a dagger with a handle traditionally attributed to Albania (deep diagonal cuts on the handle) but in fact of Georgian origin. This one is not Caucasian at all: wire-stitched scabbard, different niello ornaments, different location of hanging rings (look almost Syrian or Moroccan to me!) , wrong finial. I vote for the Levant origin (Turkey, Western Middle East). |
15th December 2005, 12:41 AM | #4 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 1,625
|
Ariel's post brings up a great question: sometimes wootz (pulad) and very fine mechanical damascus are difficult to differentiate, as they look similar. I think Risk had a khyber knife that was controversial in this aspect, and I have a qama blade that I initially thought was wootz but now I believe is simply fine mechanical damascus (sorry for the enormour picture and its poor quality, the problem if partially in the camera and partially in the photographer )
Is there any way to tell the difference without a complex analysis causing harm to the blade? |
15th December 2005, 01:13 AM | #5 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Greensboro, NC
Posts: 1,084
|
In the first piece posted, the blade is wootz. Sham is a pattern style of wootz. The carving in the middle of the handle reminds me of "Marsh Arab" Jambiya although the handle form is not quite the same. I would vote for Iraqi/Kurdish origin for this piece. The picture is not too good in the Qama to be able to tell for sure but it does look more like pattern welding versus wootz. I don't think there is a definitive way to tell other than through experience in viewing various watered steels and gaining an understanding of what to look for to recognize each. Two decent books on the subject are Sasche's "Damascus Steel" where he has lots of good images and technical descriptions on the different types of "watered" steel. The other book is "On Damascus Steel" by Figiel. Less technical but lots of great images of wootz and pattern welded blades.
|
15th December 2005, 03:53 AM | #6 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
|
RSWORD, I am surprised by your assertion that Shams is a pattern of wootz.
Wootz is a crystalline Damascus, a natural one, whereas Shams is a pattern of mechanical Damascus and is formed by repeat folding, twisting etc. of different steel/iron pieces. Am I wrong? What do other Forumites think? |
|
|