Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Ethnographic Weapons
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 22nd May 2005, 03:21 AM   #1
Rivkin
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 655
Default

Sorry for the grammar in the previous letter - it gets really bad when I'm in a hurry.

In short I would not trust a single word said by a seller you don't know on "this kindjal is a great example of ... craftsmanship". They've tried to sell me a "chechen kindjal by great Mudunov" (Mudunov owned a second class osethian company), "khevsurian satevari" that for unknown reasons was signed in arabic and had very characteristic atagi motiff (and the seller is actually a very honest and reliable guy, he just does not know better).

They are not crooks, they just really don't know, and to be honest - in most cases with "generic" kindjals it can be really hard to make a call Georgia/Armenia or sometimes even Dagestan/Georgia, Chechnya/Georgia can be even worse.

There are some agreements, that since Tiflis was the biggest kindjal making place in Southern Caucasus, the Transcaucasian blades are georgian by default, just like circassian blades are dagestani unless definitely proven circassian .
Rivkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd May 2005, 03:52 AM   #2
derek
Member
 
derek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 215
Default

Hi Rivkin,

Thanks. The 2nd and 3rd you seem to have some level of confidence in saying they are this or that, but not the first one. Why? What is your initial impression as to its actual origin?
-d
derek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd May 2005, 05:05 AM   #3
Rivkin
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 655
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by derek
Hi Rivkin,

Thanks. The 2nd and 3rd you seem to have some level of confidence in saying they are this or that, but not the first one. Why? What is your initial impression as to its actual origin?
-d
The first is strange. It seems to be very short - too short (boy's kindjal ?), but the hilt is disproportionally large. This is the first problem - what is this kindjal ? A weird product of prohibition against wearing large kindjals, adopted in a few cities ? The second problem is copper as a material for parts of the scabbard - not the most usual choise. Especially for small kindjals like this one. I had a somewhat similar georgian scabbard, but the engravings look weird to me. I've seen a similar turkish scabbard for a shashka (another weirdo).

So overall this guy is a weirdo.
Rivkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd May 2005, 03:31 PM   #4
derek
Member
 
derek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 215
Default

So it is, thanks for explaining. What do you make of those four cicular depressions on the top coppoer fitting? They look deliberate, but for what?

-d
derek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22nd May 2005, 03:55 PM   #5
Rivkin
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 655
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by derek
So it is, thanks for explaining. What do you make of those four cicular depressions on the top coppoer fitting? They look deliberate, but for what?

-d
I think it's just an ornament.
Rivkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:35 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.