UNIDENTIFIED INDO PERSIAN OR ARAB SWORD FOR COMMENT

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by spiral

Years ago when I had a couple of these to hand, I discussed them with Robert Wilkinson -Latham because the steel & grinding was unlike anything Ive seen on any other Afghan weapon.

He & the German experts he then consulted were of the opinion they were clearly Solingen made.

The Afghan temple marks on some blades are just ownership or inspection marks As there are also many English made Lee Enfield bayonets that carry the same hot stamp...{As well as the Afghan made ones..}

These marks were used by the regime, and primarily applied at the Mashin Khana, as described in the article on this establishment in Man at Arms (2009). This factory was in operation producing many of the Enfield rifles and accompanying bayonets in the 1880s in their assembly, with some components brought in under British supervision Mr. Wikinson-Latham would of course be well versed in these circumstances, and it seems he indicated to me at one point that many of the bayonets had been produced en masse in Solingen for makers in England to meet voluminous quotas.

[ariel]

There was an article by Mahratt here on on this Forum postulating existence of an evolution of the Afghani khybers toward the "regulation" pattern illustrated by Jim.
I was always uneasy with the term "evolution", since the same or a very similar pattern was worn by an Afghani representative at the Treaty of Gandamak, well before the appearance of its alleged "evolutionary predecessors" marked with the Mashin Khana " Mazar-I- Sharif" stamp.

But be it as it may, the conclusions of the current topic strongly veer toward the existence of an unstructured hodge-pudge of Afghani weapons at the time of massive penetration of the Afghani military tradition by the Western influences: handles, D-guards , blades.

I fully agree with Tatiana: in that part of the world one finds contemporarily existing weirdest combinations of native Afghani tradition, British examples of various ages and patterns, German imports and Russian "regulation" pattern were thrown together without any centralized overarching idea. The same is happening even today, with the Khyber knife and AK-47 happily coexisting side by side. No evolution here: Afghanistan is an island that time forgot......

[spiral]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

These marks were used by the regime, and primarily applied at the Mashin Khana, as described in the article on this establishment in Man at Arms (2009). This factory was in operation producing many of the Enfield rifles and accompanying bayonets in the 1880s in their assembly, with some components brought in under British supervision Mr. Wikinson-Latham would of course be well versed in these circumstances, and it seems he indicated to me at one point that many of the bayonets had been produced en masse in Solingen for makers in England to meet voluminous quotas.

Thank you Jim, that's fascinating!

spiral

[Jim McDougall]

Regarding the Afghan sword which has often been deemed a 'regulation' pattern for their army in the 1890s (these were often present even as late as the '3rd Afghan War' in 1919) this is perhaps a misnomer in the true sense of the term regulation.

I recall when I first acquired one of these in the 1990s, and at that time they were not well known among most collectors. Many of them were somewhat fancifully identified in many cases, however the one I acquired was properly described as 'Afghan'. The deep stamp in the blade was then regarded as from the 'arsenal at Mazir I Sharif' . This was of course incorrect as I found in later years, and while the representation was of the Masjid at Mazir I Sharif, the stamp was used as a dynastic state symbol and applied at Mashin Khana.

I recall research on my sword and the excitement of seeing the photo (attached) by John Burke (in "Northwest Frontier" by Arthur Swinson, 1967)of officials at the signing of the 'Treaty of Gandamak, May 26,1879 .
In this photo, second from the right is General Daoud Shah, Commander in Chief of the Afghan Army . .....and he is indeed wearing a sword whose hilt is remarkably like these later 'regulation' swords.

This set forth a long search to find more on the significance of this apparent forerunner of the 'regulation' form we now know as the Mashin Khana products of the 1890s (mine is dated 1896). The objective of research on this type of hilt was to determine when and where they might have originated.

Much as in the use of the term 'regulation' for the Mashin Khana swords is a misnomer in degree, the terms development or evolution are perhaps in similar category with regard to classifying these weapons in categoric sense. As has been noted, these regions have been the center of geopolitical strife into ancient times, and even more intensely in recent centuries. In this volatile context and with so many influences present, I would say that we are examining a spectrum of variations in these weapons rather than trying to establish a distinct line of evolution or development.

In my opinion the study of these weapons is primarily using key historic data, provenance examples when available, and analysis of associated clues including art and cultural materials to assess examples on their own merits.
With this we can establish a reasonable image of the details pertaining to these, and where consistancies are found, these may be considered in degree a 'development'.

[mahratt]

Dear Ariel. I used the term "evolution" is applicable to a specific group of items produced in a relatively short period in Kabul Mashin Khan. And my assumption confirms the stamp. I recommend you read the article again. Perhaps in the version in Russian, it will be more accessible for you.

[spiral]

They earliest known & properly dated piece is not always the earliest that existed....

\for the earliest mk.1 kukri Ive ever seen was dated 1903, most prolific collectors have never seen one dated before 1904. most kukri collectors have seen ones dated 1915...

But there may be ones unseen by us that's dates to 1901 or an unmarked by identical pioneer from 1805...

Without a paper trail from the time its hard to be certain... :

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by spiral

They earliest known & properly dated piece is not always the earliest that existed....

\for the earliest mk.1 kukri Ive ever seen was dated 1903, most prolific collectors have never seen one dated before 1904. most kukri collectors have seen ones dated 1915...

But there may be ones unseen by us that's dates to 1901 or an unmarked by identical pioneer from 1805...

Without a paper trail from the time its hard to be certain... :

Exactly, and that's why most prudent authors always regard their work as pretty much 'open ended', and encourage further research and investigation. One well said statement once heard was '..the thing I like best about history, is that it's always changing!'.

While much of the discussion in threads here may often be centered toward new acquisitions and sharing these examples between collectors and dealers, we very much encourage discussion and fact finding. We never know, and on some occasions one of these might yield key clues we have been seeking to reveal exactly these kind of 'Kodak moments.

The knowledge base here, as well as the constant exposure to examples and widespread experience in observing them makes our pages the perfect 'field labratory' for such studies.

[spiral]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Exactly, and that's why most prudent authors always regard their work as pretty much 'open ended', and encourage further research and investigation. .

Exactly indeed Jim..

I try to learn everyday.. I am a student...