Go on...show us your Choora!!

[Gavin Nugent]

Here is a snap of a high end Khyber with a wootz blade and fittings.

Gavin

[ariel]

Here is my Choora: handle is horn with multiple small nails, all decorative parts are brass. The interesting thing is the thin line of turquoises below the bolster, on both sides.
The scabbard is made of ass hide ( not THAT ass! The one that is a donkey, and has long ears!:-))

When and where would you put it?

[Rick]

"When and where would you put it?"

Between the ribs; preferably on a dark night ??






couldn't resist

[ariel]

I fully expected it :-)

[ariel]

Well, after a long interruption, I want to show 2 more chooras.
The is a long friendly argument between myself and another member about the age of a choora as a pattern.
In his opinion choora appeared only in the 20 th century as a modification of Karud.

Here are two chooras bought originally at an auction in Scotland. Their scabbards are in a sorry shape, but both carry paper labels dated 1854 and 1840. The daggers and their scabbards fit each other perfectly: no doubt original.Since the daggers themselves are not dated, as usual for the Afghani stuff, I did the next best thing: contacted Dr. Cathleen Baker from the Department of Restoration and Preservation of the University of Michigan Library. She is a world-renown expert on all things printed: paper, ink, techniques, bindings etc, former President and member of the Board of Directors of professional societies in her field, and the author of books and articles on the history of printing materials and techniques.
She examined the chooras ( magnifying equipment, UV and infrared lights, some chemical analysis), and in her professional opinion the physical condition of the labels and their materials ( papers, inks) are compatible with the mid-19th century or earlier, and incompatible with 20th century.

Together with the dates, this seems to clinch the issue: chooras existed in the pattern known till today even in the middle of the 19th century.

Gentlemen, I give you 2 oldest dated chooras known to man and beast :-)

And of the beasts: please look at the pics of the handle of the bigger choora: rhino?

[mahratt]

Dear Ariel.

No one is arguing that the very old papers. But no one can say when the papers were glued (50 years ago or 100 years ago). And most importantly, why ...

In addition, you're kind of writing in Russian forum that besides numbers (not necessarily the date) on pieces of paper are many other words that you no one could translate into English

So do not be in such a hurry, saying that these chooras 19th century.

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by ariel

And of the beasts: please look at the pics of the handle of the bigger choora: rhino?

Just horn (no rhino horn). This is a similar pattern in the Kurdish dagger.

Take a picture please, so that could be seen a cross-section fibers horns.

[ariel]

Mahratt, you have your opinion about dating chooras, I have mine, and we have discussed it many times.


Why wouldn't we put our differences aside and let the Forumites decide for themselves whether they view expert opinion sufficiently convincing. OK?

As to the origin of the handle, I am making arrangements to take it to our Museum of Natural History and have the real experts look at it.

Meanwhile, the Forumites are free to express their opinions.

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by ariel

Mahratt, you have your opinion about dating chooras, I have mine, and we have discussed it many times.


Why wouldn't we put our differences aside and let the Forumites decide for themselves whether they view expert opinion sufficiently convincing. OK?

As to the origin of the handle, I am making arrangements to take it to our Museum of Natural History and have the real experts look at it.

Meanwhile, the Forumites are free to express their opinions.

You have expressed your opinion, and I expressed my opinion. We both participants of the forum What are the arguments? Only opinions.

And why do you need an expert to determine the horn? Suffice it to another photo of a certain angle.

[ariel]

Why wouldn't we both remain quiet and let the Forumites speak?

[David]

Just my 2 cents...
Clearly these papers have been attached to these sheaths for a very long time. If this was an attempt to deceive about the age of these sheaths it would be a very good forgery indeed. Better, sharper photographs would beg helpful though, Ariel.
But if we do assume that the papers were in place for a very long time i don't see that someone even 50 years ago would bother to try to deceive anyone with dates just 100 years previous. What would be the point? Ariel took the time and effort to have these papers scientifically analyzed. I see no reason, therefore, to doubt the dating of these sheaths give the age of the paper. Even if the numbers themselves do not represent dates, the paper and ink has been proven to be 19th century, so i find little to doubt with this finding.
I also don't see why expert examination to determine whether or not the handle is rhino is a bad thing. Photographs can be deceptive, and if you are not too offended by this professional photographer's opinion Ariel, your photographs are just not clear enough to really determine anything for sure. So personally i would welcome your expert's testimony from the Museum of Natural History.
Why would anyone not welcome such evidence?

[ariel]

I freely admit my poor photographic abilities. No offence taken. Do I blush? Yes.... :-(((
Photographing a different view of the pommel, as suggested, is impossible: it is so polished by the years of hand contact that nothing can be discerned. Personal handling by a professional is the only way.

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by David

Just my 2 cents...
Clearly these papers have been attached to these sheaths for a very long time. If this was an attempt to deceive about the age of these sheaths it would be a very good forgery indeed. Better, sharper photographs would beg helpful though, Ariel.
But if we do assume that the papers were in place for a very long time i don't see that someone even 50 years ago would bother to try to deceive anyone with dates just 100 years previous. What would be the point? Ariel took the time and effort to have these papers scientifically analyzed. I see no reason, therefore, to doubt the dating of these sheaths give the age of the paper. Even if the numbers themselves do not represent dates, the paper and ink has been proven to be 19th century, so i find little to doubt with this finding.
I also don't see why expert examination to determine whether or not the handle is rhino is a bad thing. Photographs can be deceptive, and if you are not too offended by this professional photographer's opinion Ariel, your photographs are just not clear enough to really determine anything for sure. So personally i would welcome your expert's testimony from the Museum of Natural History.
Why would anyone not welcome such evidence?

David, no one disputes that the paper is very old and that the paper glued for a long time (50 years is a long time, too). There is no question about the fact that it is a fake. But! 1) Ariel no has translated all the text and stopped at the numbers, which he considers dates. It is not quite correct. Maybe it's a record of the number of sheep 2) No one person does not determine exactly when the old paper was glued (50 years ago, 100 years ago or 150 years ago). And in Afghanistan, a very old paper used for household needs 40-50 more years ago. 3) It is known that the scabbard choor often papered with paper, so they came to the sword belt tight (see photo).

And another. Let's look a hypothetical situation. I have an old edition of the newspaper in 1927. And I have a knife that did in 1970. If I glue a piece of old newspaper on the knife that did in 1970, this knife will be stabbed in 1927? )

And on account of rhino horn - is online now enough people who can simply determine what kind of horn in question, if the photos will be presented in a certain foreshortening.

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by ariel

Photographing a different view of the pommel, as suggested, is impossible: it is so polished by the years of hand contact that nothing can be discerned. Personal handling by a professional is the only way.

Very strange ... The longitudinal fibers are seen well, although exactly there more hand contact. Their cross, where hand contact less-section is polished so that nothing is visible?

In the Horn of rhinoceros we always clearly visible longitudinal section of a special "drawing".

[ward]

I think mahratt is correct to a point. You have not translated what else it says so have no context that this is a date. It could easily mean that it was the 1854 piece they made, maybe it was remembering his grandfather's death. It seems strange that it in western characters and dating while the rest is not. If it says this was made under the ruler whomever, or if it was collected by lord so and so at that date you would have a lot stronger case. As to the paper being added the afghans are notorious for mixing old and new items together. The piece might be that old but Ariel you are far from proving it. I think this debate is one of the more interesting ones I have read.

[ariel]

Mahratt,
Why are you so nervous?
On what grounds do you call these labels a fake?

You might be right, and the handle may not be a rhino one. This is exactly why I am making arrangements to show it to an expert. But this is an aside and bears no influence on the main question.

The important thing is the age.

David has already agreed with the idea of the "19th century". Please stop adding more and more unrelated verbiage and images and let other Forumites express their opinions.

Thanks.

[ariel]

Ward, thank you.
These labels were examined by a person fluent in both Urdu and Pashto.
This is Pashto. However, he was unable to make sense of any other textual snippets with the exception of a very tentative "Mohammed" on the better preserved one. Also, these labels were examined by the Curator of the Islamic Manuscripts collection in the Dept. of Restoration. She pointed out to some numbers in the right upper corners of both labels. According to her, they represent typical archival entries ( accounting entries, collection entries, documents rosters etc, etc.) on old Indian/Afghani documents , including 19th century.

Dr. Baker examined not only the composition of papers and inks, but also assessed the potential age of paper, leather and wood. This is something she was trained to do, deals regularly with, presented multiple lectures all over the world and published papers about. In a way, this is identical to how the conservators and restorers examine and assess book bindings.

As a professional book/binding restorer, she dated the paper/wood/leather complexes as compatible with mid 19th century or earlier and definitely older than 20th century. She maintained this conclusion even without taking the numbers 1854 and 1840 into account. Simply by the state of the materials. And she had the advantage of actually handling these objects and doing her traditional tests on them.

Should we accept the testimony of an expert witness or dismiss it?

The labels had to be attached to the scabbards after the manufacture of these chooras and aged in parallel with them from there on. The estimates of their age as mid-19th century, therefore, give the absolutely latest date of their manufacture, and this is the reason why they may be even older.

You are correct: this is the most unexpected and fascinating discussion we have had in a very long time. We are dealing here with dating an old weapon using a completely novel and hitherto never used approach. Fifty years ago the idea of using DNA samples as a method of finding an accused guilty or innocent would have been viewed as totally crazy:-)

[ward]

That is a much more reasoned assessment. I would conclude that 19th century is very reasonable. I have come across a handful of these over the years with the paper attached and various writing on them.

[ariel]

Thanks, Ward.

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by ariel

Mahratt,
Why are you so nervous?
On what grounds do you call these labels a fake?

You might be right, and the handle may not be a rhino one. This is exactly why I am making arrangements to show it to an expert. But this is an aside and bears no influence on the main question.

The important thing is the age.

David has already agreed with the idea of the "19th century". Please stop adding more and more unrelated verbiage and images and let other Forumites express their opinions.

Thanks.

Ariel, my friend, and who of us nervous? I just express my assumption. Please quote, where I said that your "labels" - a fake?

I am delighted that David has agreed with you. That is his right. And my right to express my opinion on your version of the "19th century". The pictures are just pertain to the topic of discussion. It is strange that you do not want to see. And let's not plugging each other's mouth. You express your opinion in the forum of items, and I express my opinion.

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by ward

That is a much more reasoned assessment. I would conclude that 19th century is very reasonable. I have come across a handful of these over the years with the paper attached and various writing on them.

Dear Ward. Ariel refers to the opinion of an expert. It's pretty cool. But! One thing is when the expert concludes about the age books (hardcover leather), which was stored (because the books are always stored in special conditions. And those that do not keep do not get to the experts). Another thing - a knife, which is constantly used. Its details (especially wood and leather scabbard) wear out quickly. And it is hardly an expert on the books (with all due respect) can accurately determine the age of leather and wood scabbard.
I have to say Ariel in Russian forum that his version is very interesting. But this is only version. And the evidence is not sufficient. To say that choor were in the 19th century can only when we find choor in the museum, and in this museum is to be recorded from the 19th century, Kotra said choora was the exhibit is the collection of the 19th century. K Unfortunately everything else is just speculation. On the existence of Bigfoot and the Loch Ness Monster is also a lot of debating. Someone believes in them, some do not. It is everyone's right. But no serious evidence of their existence...

[Kurt]

Hi ,

What is your opinion about this Choora ??

Kurt

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by Kurt

Hi ,

What is your opinion about this Choora ??

Kurt

Hi Kurt!

Lovely choora! My opinion is. Some Waziri took the blade from the Pesh-Kabz did handle to choora (usual for myself). When this was done - no one knows ... I saw choor with wootz blades Pes-Kabz, Kard and even Jambiya.

[Kurt]

Originally Posted by mahratt

Hi Kurt!

Lovely choora! My opinion is. Some Waziri took the blade from the Pesh-Kabz did handle to choora (usual for myself). When this was done - no one knows ... I saw choor with wootz blades Pes-Kabz, Kard and even Jambiya.

Hi Mahratt ,
Is also my opinion !
Kurt

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by Kurt

Hi Mahratt ,
Is also my opinion !
Kurt

Thank you my friend! I am delighted that our views coincide.

[Jens Nordlunde]

Interesting discussion, and I must say that Ariel has done his home work well :-).
I am no specialist on chooras, but if I was asked I would have guessed 19th century.
To skipp the discussion on the paper, ink and handwriting I would have suggested that the wood should be checked, but I see that this has been done, and the result was 19th century.
So not only does the chooras seem to be 19th century, the scabbards as well, which is nice to know - especially for Ariel :-).
Jens

[ariel]

Jens, many thanks for expressing your opinion.

[Ian]

Mahratt and ariel:

I don't have a dog in this fight, but I would like to venture some observations based on ariel's pictures to date (acknowledging that they are incomplete and not very clear).

First, like Jens, I think the scabbards and wood show age and are consistent with items I have handled from the middle of the 19th C--and that observation is confirmed by ariel's historical consultant.

Second, the papers glued to the scabbards appear to have been there for a long time. They show defects adjacent to old deterioration of the leather covering the wooden scabbards. These defects in the leather show wear and rubbing, suggesting they are not recent, and the paper matches that damage well.

Third, I believe at least one of the inscriptions is a date because I think I can read "JANUARY 1 /, 1854." The first three letters of JAN seem clear and the rest of the month is indistinct. The following number (below the name of the month) could be a "1" or "3," then a slash, comma and 1854. All of this is in English and consistent with the Scottish auction provenance that ariel provided. As ariel's consultant has already determined, the handwriting is consistent with an early 19th C English style (possibly older), but we don't know the age of the person who wrote it. It seems reasonable to conclude, however, that the handwriting is consistent with having been written by an adult in the mid-19th C, and therefore consistent with the date on at least one of these choora scabbards.

Fourth, the remaining text on these papers is not written in English or a language that I recognize. What the language of this writing may be seems an important clue to the puzzle. Much of the inscriptions are faded or missing, which will make translation difficult even if we can find someone who can read it. There are photographic techniques and other methods used by professionals specializing in antique documents that will enhance faded writing, and these might be useful here. Perhaps forumites reading this thread will be able to suggest resources who could help with that.

Lastly, if I had been shown just these knives and their scabbards (without any attached documents), my estimated age would have been second half of the 19th C. That would have been my best guess. If they turn out to be older than that, then it would not surprise me very much. If they are actually of early 20th C manufacture, then I would be more surprised.

Let's hear what the professional experts have to say about the inscriptions and the likely age of these two knives.

Great topic!

Regards,

Ian.

[ward]

there is a evolution to weapons. I doubt that every one in 1901 said I must make a choora today. If you were preparing a research paper on this I would expect more than the opinion of one expert. I would like to see possible paintings and museum acquisitions checked. I am always a little leary about some museums claims. They do not always know what they are doing. I would probably also look for early examples of what the knife evolved from. I agree the experts field is slightly off from what is being studied and the ageing of the items may vary from books. However I can not think of a similar expert it could be brought to that could do better. Also what was said was that the scabbard was studied by the expert and their opinion given of it. I guess that you could take a sample of the horn taken and tested for age. I am not sure how accurate or expensive that would be. I think that mahratt would be better served if he showed documented pieces of why his dating is correct and show the widespread use of the knife that this replaced. I do not say that ariel is absolutely right, but using Occam's razor it leads to him being more correct.

[ariel]

Ian, thank you!
As I have mentioned earlier, the text was attempted to be read by a native ( my postdoctoral fellow from Pakistan, who is fluent in Urdu and Pashto and his wife, who is a native Pashto) neither of them managed to get any useful clues. When these labels were examined in the Dept. Of Restoration, they were viewed under mighty magnification , and in different lights. This was also unproductive and the Curator of the Islamic Manuscript collection couldn't make any heads or tales either.
In short, this is a dead end. Drats! :-)


Ward,

Mahratt based his entire hypothesis on the fact that, having scoured the Internet, he was unable to find any photographs or drawings of Afghani natives carrying chooras. One could counter it by noting that very few British photographers, artists or journalists dared to venture to Waziristan and its "suburbs" in the 19 century:-) but I do trust Mahratt that his search was fruitless. He is very good in searching the Net.

I know of no examples of very old Choora in British museums. I found catalogues of provincial amateur exhibitions of ~ 1870 introducing Waziri or just Afghani knives, but there were no pics. Their whereabouts are unknown to me. Perhaps, they are the very ones I am showing here:-)

Egerton shows a Choora in his book ( #624, Plate XIV) and gives Bannu as its origin: current Edwardsville, Pakhtunkhwa, The Pakistani part of the Khyber Pass) . Regretfully, Mahratt refuses to see a Choora in it :-)

Radiocarbon analysis is unlikely to be productive: the items are not old enough and the spread will undoubtedly push the date somewhere between 17 and 20 centuries. Even worse, assuming that the analysis establishes the age as 19 century, one would be able to invoke a not unreasonable counter argument that the churras were made in , say, 1940, but the master used bits and pieces of wood, leather and horn that he inherited from his great-great-grandfather and that were stored in the darkest corner of his workshop:-)