![]() |
|
|
|
|
#1 |
|
Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,818
|
The silence is deafening guys, I was hoping for a little more objective speculation Gav |
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
(deceased)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 3,191
|
Gav
I think we have gone as far as we can with this thread and it's time to put it to rest. Gav this will be my last response on this thread. The sloppy lines I referring to are in these two areas below. Unevenly scribed on the acorn shaped tip that extend past the area that is bordered by that scribed oval which are themselves very poorly applied. Also within the panel above the tip the checkered work is unevenly done with some of the lines being crooked. This is not the work of a master engraver. The theory that an apprentice did this work does not make sense do to the fact that the master would not have let this leave his shop looking like this because it would a some what of a negative effect on his reputation. Hey if you like the kindjal and think it's old and original than that's fine but I am entitled to my opinion as are the other forumites and I think we have made up our minds on it already. I am basing this on my experience and observations over the last 25 years that I have collecting edged weapons. Regards Lew Last edited by LOUIEBLADES; 31st May 2008 at 12:17 PM. |
|
|
|
|
#3 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,818
|
Quote:
Everyone's opinions are welcome and I am more than happy to have mine or anyones elses opinions substantiated or dismissed with absolute knowledge to help the learning process. From all that has been presented thus far, this would mean that 9.9 out of every 10 Kindjals with silver fittings of any discription presented on this forum over the years, and all links provided by all that have made postings, are indeed, NOT the real Macoy even if some say it is...I do not understand how sloppy for one can make it real but not the other....so confused All information that has been put forward as to what identifies both a real and a not real Kindjal really actually puts all positings in the "not a real Kindjal" column??? I can only offer up what I see first hand and describe it best I can with images 100 times larger than the item really is. I too offer up links from the same people that are presented to me and....well like you say, opinions???? Gav Last edited by freebooter; 14th June 2008 at 02:01 PM. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
(deceased)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 3,191
|
[QUOTE=freebooter]Interesting Lew,
Everyone's opinions are welcome and I am more than happy to have mine or anyones elses opinions substantiated or dismissed with absolute knowledge to help the learning process. From all that has been presented thus far, this would mean that 9.9 out of every 10 Kindjals with silver fittings of any discription presented on this forum over the years, and all links provided by all that have made postings, are indeed, NOT the real Macoy even if some say it is...I do not understand how sloppy for one can make it real but not the other....so confused All information that has been put forward as to what identifies both a real and a not real Kindjal really actually puts all positings in the "not a real Kindjal" column??? Gav Your logic is flawed to say the least you asked the specialists on this forum to give you there thoughts on your kindjal and they did. Regards Lew Last edited by LOUIEBLADES; 14th June 2008 at 09:20 PM. |
|
|
|
|
#5 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,818
|
Quote:
Hi Lew, flawed logic........ with regards to silver fitted kindjals... Without circling all visual references supplied in this forum over the years, I do wish to know from yourself and these specialists and any others who have knowledge in this forum on these weapons. Take these following comments on board with out taking any visual references of my Kindjal into perspective, just leave it out of any thought process. Why does lets say, unfinished rivets, sloppy lines for starters make one kindjal a true piece and another not?? Does this flaw in accuracy point to the differences between a collector and a researcher. I don't claim to be a professional researcher but I think these valid visual references do point to something that needs to be researched for the betterment of all concerned in learning the truth behind these weapons, after all this is a resource/research site is it not, not just a show and tell??? regards Gav |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
(deceased)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: East Coast USA
Posts: 3,191
|
Gav
It's a real kindjal but collectively we do not feel that it's from the 19th century. Just like in my jambiya thread the newer piece is a real jamibiya that an adult male Yemenite would wear it's just not from the 19th century as I have shown in my photos what to look out for when one is looking for an older piece the quality of the older pieces speak for themselves Maybe one day you can join us at our annual show at Timonium and you can bring your kindjal so you can compare it in person with some others that our advanced collectors have and then we will see. Until then this thread should be put on hold.Regards Lew |
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 119
|
this is a little off topic but what exactly are the "spiky protrusions" on the hilt for? i have a kindjal from daghestan that unfortunatly turned out to be a dull wallhanger and those spiky things make the knife harder to handle.
|
|
|
|
|
#8 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,818
|
Quote:
Gav |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 | |
|
(deceased)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal
Posts: 9,694
|
Quote:
![]() . Last edited by fernando; 14th June 2008 at 07:50 PM. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|