Suspect Firanghi for comment

Cthulhu · 24th December 2019, 12:53 AM

Here's a firanghi I've had for some time. I'm a little suspicious of its authenticity.

The features that give me pause:

The reinforcements that fit over the blade fit perfectly, as if they're made for each other, which isn't really how the whole "foreign-bladed" thing typically goes.

There's no pin going through the reinforcement and the blade. I can't imagine a swordsmith trusting their welds so much that they want to skip the pin.

The bottom of the hilt's "cup" is perfectly rounded, and also empty inside, unlike a typical firangi.

The backspike is very round, and I don't really like its seam, though I can't say exactly why those bother me.

It's Firanghi 'A' in the photos, alongside another that I'm reasonably confident about.

What do you think? Definitely modern? Anything else that gives it away?

Cthulhu · 30th December 2019, 10:34 PM

Should I assume that I'm entirely correct that this is a fake, for exactly the reasons I mentioned?
Are there any other tell-tale signs I should be aware of in the future?

David R · 30th December 2019, 11:07 PM

Others will weigh in here, but I think you have a late period example, rather than a "fake." They were a high status item and survived as "processional" pieces long after they were "battle field" weapons.

Cthulhu · 4th January 2020, 01:41 AM

Late period would be nice, rather than a made-for-ebay special. I'm looking forward to hearing what others have to say about it.

grendolino · 1st April 2020, 07:13 PM

Well, according to Elgood (Rajput arms & armour, vol 1, p475) it could be contradictory: The plain one could be folder, as those with shorter spike and more complex crossbar are clearly marked as nineteent-century .

24th December 2019, 12:53 AM	#1
Cthulhu Member Join Date: Feb 2014 Location: Central Valley, California Posts: 46	Suspect Firanghi for comment Here's a firanghi I've had for some time. I'm a little suspicious of its authenticity. The features that give me pause: The reinforcements that fit over the blade fit perfectly, as if they're made for each other, which isn't really how the whole "foreign-bladed" thing typically goes. There's no pin going through the reinforcement and the blade. I can't imagine a swordsmith trusting their welds so much that they want to skip the pin. The bottom of the hilt's "cup" is perfectly rounded, and also empty inside, unlike a typical firangi. The backspike is very round, and I don't really like its seam, though I can't say exactly why those bother me. It's Firanghi 'A' in the photos, alongside another that I'm reasonably confident about. What do you think? Definitely modern? Anything else that gives it away? Attached Images

30th December 2019, 10:34 PM	#2
Cthulhu Member Join Date: Feb 2014 Location: Central Valley, California Posts: 46	Should I assume that I'm entirely correct that this is a fake, for exactly the reasons I mentioned? Are there any other tell-tale signs I should be aware of in the future?

30th December 2019, 11:07 PM	#3
David R Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 1,079	Others will weigh in here, but I think you have a late period example, rather than a "fake." They were a high status item and survived as "processional" pieces long after they were "battle field" weapons.

4th January 2020, 01:41 AM	#4
Cthulhu Member Join Date: Feb 2014 Location: Central Valley, California Posts: 46	Late period would be nice, rather than a made-for-ebay special. I'm looking forward to hearing what others have to say about it.

1st April 2020, 07:13 PM	#5
grendolino Member Join Date: Sep 2015 Posts: 38	Well, according to Elgood (Rajput arms & armour, vol 1, p475) it could be contradictory: The plain one could be folder, as those with shorter spike and more complex crossbar are clearly marked as nineteent-century .