2nd Caucasian Kindjal for comment
 

Found some time today to photograph the other Kindjal I have here.

Ex Butterfield and Butterfield

I welcome any comments including Jeff's if he is not gun shy now.

There is a collectors sticker on the rear of the piece stating it to be from Tiflis or Erevan, with a silver hilt and scabbard with bold Niello decoration, reverse of hilt and scabbard with neillo florals and faint remains of a signature, circa 1860.

I don't consider the craftsmanship...there's that word again..of the blade to be as good as the previous Kindjal but the rest of the piece does show superior craftsmanship. In a martial application though, this piece is not as quick from the scabbard or through the air or as comfortable in the hand? Is there a reason for this, is it purely a status/display piece?

There is an issue I wish to fix too, there is a collectors sicker that is over 10 years old and is stuck pretty good on the reverse. If I remove it, it will come away in pieces and I will need to use chemicals to clean the remainder off, will this effect the Neillo application?


regards

Gav

Gav,

Did you try a hairdryer?Let the hot air blow on the sticker for a while and it will come off very easily. No damage and no chemicals.

Well Gav,
It could be that, decoration and embelishment seldom imply efectiveness. It appears that operational weapons for field action often offer a plain look, whereas decorated items are for showing off ... be them luxury pieces used by rulers and other big shots in cerimonies or the like, or low profile stuff for souvenirs, either for tourists or for the boys to bring back home.
Fernando

Butterfield or not, I have an uneasy feeling about it.
The niello looks very fresh and remarkably intact: not a scratch, not a missing segment. Repousse has a feel of being stamped.
The wooden inserts ( handle) are light in colour. The incised lines at the tip of the scabbard are shiny and the edges look sharp. The blade has strange proportions and is too clean. The "buttons" on the back of the hilt are poorly flattened, very crude. Are there any markings?
I understand, of course, that photographs are not an ideal way to evaluate antique items, but..... It looks to me as if it hails from the same " workshop" as the first one.
Sorry, I am not enjoying bringing bad news....

As always - very good observations Ariel. I completely agree.
Gav, I have a comment about the term "craftsmanship". It'd be deceiving to think of it in isolated manner, i.e. without detailed comparison of quality, technique, design, etc. To produce anything requires work, skills and effort. But as Ward said - one has to be critical of any item. Just because it looks like someone "worked" on it, does not mean much. Even if it looks good and wonderful... unless you know exactly what to look for... is irrelevant in terms of collectors value!!! One will be able to see the difference only by studying, handling and comparing as many pieces as possible.

I'm with Alex and Ariel on this one. Have bad feeling about it. The blade most especially looks to much like the new ones. The quality of the niello and silver work is suspect. Some more pics of the blade may answer the age question.

Hope I am wrong for freebooter's sake.

I'm with Ariel.

Looks more recent to me and the incised lines are pretty sloppy not something you would see on an older piece. Everything looks too fresh and new to me. Artzi has a number of older examples in his sold section here is one for comparison.

http://www.oriental-arms.com/item.php?id=2601

Lew

Oh dear gents haha
 

Oh dear gents, glasses please, no offense taken or ment on my behalf.

I will have to go back to my old camera and with bad lighting and show all the losses of niello that there is much on the reverse, this in turn will also show the honest age patina that covers the silver and neillo and the chiseled releif. If I could get a good image of the cartouche to the rear that I have cleaned, there is a forgein script within it covering 4 lines that is now so rubbed, even if I knew the lingo, I do not think I would be able to read it, but it looks to be in the style of a presentation.
Same work shop Ariel, I will have to take a photo of them side by side for you too compare....ouch :)
The blade it is true has suffered a very bad clean I must say, that will be fixed, I know not of any wood that you mention either, what I see is only a coloured woven material that show genuine period age.
The scabbard, oh I wish you were sitting at my desk... I can see every chisel and incise very clearly, and there is not a single sharp edge to the acorn at the base, it a shame how the 3 dimensions that you have when holding a piece cannot be presented correctly in 2 dimensions.

Absolutely Alex, I agree about comparrison and work verses craftsman ship, funny thing, I showed these to a Elderly Romanian gentleman today and not that it is any indication for you to go by but he was in awe of the kindjal posted in this thread.

Heres hoping you can see more detail in the photos coming up.

Nice, and something that I would consider a lovely piece to have in my collection, especially the blade but not the best for comparision for "craftmanship" but like anything it is an opinion, although it is hallmarked I could point out a couple of faults with it that would ring true from previous words from others here about these pieces.
Please point out the sloppy lines you refer to Lew?

Further photos
 

Photos in natural light rather than having the piece backlit.

Photo 1, Shows the real age to the neillo on the backside of the scabbard which in reality does wear more than the front of any scabbard. One can clearly see the losses of the neillo, these losses are the base of 8 borders that surround the floral neillo on the reverse, only 4 remain perfect as does the floral arrangements, but this is all bar a little bit that remains of the other 4 borders.

Photo 2, One hundred times larger than it really is, one can plainly see that there are no sharp edges and that all the pattern has been chiseled.

In photo 3, if you look close you can see at the tip there is a small amount of pitting and delamination, the rest of the blade shows to be rubbed over with what I could only think to be "sandpaper". Over all it shows a warmer older feel in natural light.

Photo 4, Comparrison, do you really think they were made in the same place or time? If so, do tell more...

Photo 5,6 & 7, Showthe wonderful chiseled and cut releif that is found in the silver scabbard and hilt.

Gav, to be critical of an item also means to be aware of methods and techniques used by "artists" to deliberately age their products, i.e. to make them look old. I observed scabbards being "worked" with metal chains and hammers to create an "old look". the acids and mechanical tears are very common to "age" the metal. Even stamps and punch marks can be "new". This is true not only for weapons, but for ANY antiquity!!! Also, it takes just weeks for patina to appear on silver, not even months:-) I have a solution which will "patina-age" the silver in 20 seconds!!! I am not just saying the kindjal is "brand new fake". It could be 5, 10, 20 years old. I am critical of it because I see some reasons to be.
I'd also suggest taking it to the experienced antique jeweler/dealer, and asking to look at it via magnifying glass. They usually can tell the age.

Interesting Idea
 

Interesting Idea Alex, I know of a very good Hungarian jeweler who I will be travelling past tomorrow when I go to have a new tire put on the scooter, for now have a look at these 2 photos through a 10X jewelers loop I had handy.

There have been a couple of links to Oriental-arms for comparrisons, blades aside, I welcome those who have these in their collections to offer a few up for comparrision to point out what they think the exact differences are that seperate this piece from theirs???

Down at the tip on the finale and just above that is an area that has crosshatching. The lines are crudely applied and seem uneven to me. I'm no expert in kindjals but I do have an excellent eye for detail and this caught my attention. The blade itself shows very little sign of age or use which also raises some flags to me. Gav I am not trying to put your kindjal down it is still a nicely made example for what it is. It takes years of research and handling older examples of any type of weapon to get a real feel for what is truly old and authentic and I have been burned a few times but you need to take it in stride and learn from the experience. As far as buying weapons from Butterfields or any other auction houses beware some of there appraisers have no clue what they are talking about I have seen them screw up big time.

Lew

A genuine work of art.
 

It has been confirmed as authentic late 19th century piece most definitely and most very possibly earlier, 1860/70s.

The well known antique jeweller and watch maker was too amazed at the craftsmanship and precise handcut relief of this piece. He spent a good deal of time going over the entire piece and stated it to be of outstanding craftsmanship of the highest quality that would have taken a very very long time to complete.

It was also confirmed by another elderly French gentleman whom he referred me and who owns a high end art gallery here in Brisbane. He has an amazing knowledge of antique arms and is also a collector of fine 14th century to very early 19th century European and Japanese arms of which he is giving me the privilege to view for a few hours next Tuesday before his gallery doors open. Quite a joy for me as I will be able to talk to him about other parts of my personal collection other than weaponry. His personal choice does not include weapons post 1820 as his view is that the era past this point was vastly machine made weapons with notable exceptions.

It has been suggested too by this collector that I invest in a UV light. I have not heard of this ever mentioned in this forum anywhere but he seems to think with a good UV light and some time I should be able to see the rubbed script in the cartouche to the rear of the scabbard. It will reveal in more detail, the threads in the scabbard throat and in the hilt which was mistaken for wood too.... and I thought UV was reserved for stamp collectors. A rubbing too will be done of this to see what it reveals.

I will also be returning to the Jeweller that afternoon to have the quality of silver tested for records sake, in the mean time I will soak the collectors sticker off the back as it does so detract further from the beauty.

All the best chaps, feel free to continue with your thoughts and postings on this piece I am intrigued.

regards

Gav

Congratuations Gav. I am glad that you finally got the "expert" assessment that you have been wanting on this piece. Funny thing about "experts"....if we look long enough we will always be able to find one that will tell us what we want to hear. I am not trying to say that you latest "expert" is not absolutely correct. He may well be. Personally i know nothing about these knives and to me it looks quite nice. But as someone who has spent a lot of time collecting and learning about keris i have discovered that things are not always what they appear to be and sometimes people deliberately create things to deceive. Not necessarily the case here, but always a possibility.
Many of the people on this forum who have taken the time to try to answer your questions about this piece have a great deal of combined knowledge about these knives. Some have made it their specialty. Doesn't mean they are right about your kindjal either, but they didn't have to respond to your post, they have done so with good will in the spirit of collecting and sharing knowledge. You might do youself well not to alienate an entire community of knowledgeable collectors just because you found an expert who told you what you wanted to hear. :shrug:

So true, David :cool:

"The well known antique jeweller and watch maker" :confused:

Tell me Gav did you ask this expert how many kindjal has he handled in his career? I have an old gentleman down the street from where I work who is also an expert jeweler and watch maker since 1940 but I don't think he knows much about kindjals? I would not ask a dentist to give me his opinion on my cardiogram I would seek out a cardiologist. :shrug:

Lew

When you don't have a dog, you hunt with a cat :shrug: . On the other hand, a certain person may be able to grade a determined silver work, from simply stamped to thouroughly chased, whereas not necessarily knowing how to grade a kinzhal per se ;) .
... Just my humble opinnion, Lew.
Fernando

Fernando

I am sure there are modern silversmiths who do masterful work but you need to look at the object as a whole and not through a jewelers lupe.

Lew

Hello,
My initial reaction to the 'Kindjal' posts was not to get involved in something I was not familiar with nor to get involved in the subsequent "toing and froing". I do feel, although this may alienate me from some of the Forum, that the entire tone of this debate was set at the very beginning of the first post with a less than necessary remark with regard to the skill level of the Kindjal maker. It seems to me only polite and courteous to give your opinion in a gracious and friendly manner in the knowledge that the recipient has spent good money and may be in some occasions without the necessary knowledge to fully understand what they have purchased good or not so good, after all that is why they have posted in the first place, to accrue the knowledge to facilitate their collecting bug. I am always disappointed when short one sentence answers are given, usually negative, without the courtesy of a Dear so and so, Hi so and so etc., and are finished without a Regards so and so etc. Having said all this I am grateful for the knowledge base present in this Forum I just wish those with a greater degree of this knowledge would be a bit more tolerant of folks with more run of the mill aspirations with regard to their collections, after all most of us have fiscal constraints that preclude us from purchasing bits with the 'wow factor' although we may turn up with one occasionally with luck and a bit of that 'Knowledge'. This reply is aimed at no one in particular and everyone in general. Please remember most of us do this for pleasure and not for gain and our communication with each other should be pleasurable also, even if the opinion given is not what the recipient would prefer to hear but an honest answer given honestly but always with courtesy.
Regards,
Norman.

For myself, I have always thought that every time I post an item for discussion in this forum and ask for opinion from the other members here, I have to be willing to accept or at least consider their comments, even if said comments may not be what I have hoped to read for the item in question. If I am unwilling to consider any opinion different from my own, why even bother posting here and asking, unless I am merely looking for a pat on the back? :shrug:
Regards,
Teodor

I am sorry Norman that my messages seem kurt. I answer a lot of emails and questions a day. I am not trying to be impolite it is just my nature. I would rather see a collector buy simpler honest old pieces than fancy reproduction or tourist pieces. I see no reason to suger coat a response and give false hope to someone. The piece stands on its own or does not.

Norman

Some of our fellow formites are advanced collectors in there respected areas such as in Eastern European,South East Asian,Indo Persian and African weapons so when I post something that I am not sure of I am looking for their honest unbiased opinion. So if I bought something that later turns out to be not what I originally hope for than I take it with a grain of salt and move on. I feel if several individuals with one hundred plus years of combined collecting expertise in a given area tell me something I should listen. Yes I agree sometimes they can be a bit blunt but there is a saying "If it looks like a duck walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it must be a duck". I generally stay away from Chinese and Eastern European items due to the fact that they have become a cottage industry in some the mother countries and the replicas though traditionally made are becoming harder to differentiate from the old ones.

Regards,

Lew

Hi Teodor,
I am in absolute agreement that the very act of posting an item is to invite constructive criticism and that if you do not want to hear or acknowledge that your item may or may not be what you had hoped then don't post. On the other hand comments and opinions can be proffered with tact and understanding and need not be in any way derisory or demeaning to get over a point.
Regards,
Norman.

Hi Ward,
Having mentioned no names you are obviously aware that your responses are short and to the point, I wouldn't say curt. First may I say that I am grateful that you have taken the time and effort to respond and give your opinion on some of my pieces, you are obviously knowledgeable and I do appreciate the imparting of said knowledge. I wouldn't expect you to give false hope and to be fair I never suggested anywhere that you or anyone else should tell anybody anything other than your honest opinion. I am probably behind the times with regard to the beginning and ending of replies, my daughter tells me I'm a dinosaur and that this is for letter writing and not the net, I am retired and have time for the niceties and so will stick with them. The most important thing is the common interest we all share the posters and repliers for without them there would be no Forum.
Regards,
Norman.

To fight your corner here, you really have to be sure or know your interest, and do the research. The mysterious "rightness" in one item is completely different in another. All collectors have struggled with this sort of work at one time or another.
The items in question are indeed better than many "right" stuff I have seen that I am sure are not apprentice work due to location and time frame. All adding to the difficulties, just that these do not appear to be truly old.
Auction houses some better than others, are only expert in selling!!!!!!!!! :eek: Most often thier knowledge is only based on the price an object made at the last same category of sales whether they knew anything about it or not. They are salespeople only, lets drink there mini bar :shrug: .

Norman, i certainly agree that it is important that we all respond to one another in a civil and understanding manner. That said, having followed these 2 kindjal threads, i do not see anywhere that any member was uncivil with Gavin.
As for remarks made about the skill level of the creator of any piece, unless i made it myself, or my father, uncle or grandfather was the craftsman, i see no reason whatsoever to take offense. We should be able to separate ourselves from the things we collect and i should hope that criticism of my knife is not criticism of me.

Hi Lew,
Agreed, there is a vast resource of knowledge here and it is a pleasure and a privilege to be able to tap that resource at will. As to experts, along with their expertise comes a certain blase approach to lesser specimens of the genre, weapons I mean not people, this is to be understood, I am an an expert of sorts, a professional photographer for forty years, anything less than 5x4 is a miniature format camera to me. Usually when someone finds out my ex profession out come the holiday photographs or the tired old S.L.R. from the cupboard but I have to say I have never been unnecessarily blunt or short but neither have I given them false hope that "Yes you could be the next, insert name of famous photographer of your choice, honest you really could!" Everyone of you are correct in that honesty and candour should never be sacrificed but neither should sensitivity and understanding.
Regards,
Norman.
P.S. Yes, I think you have to be particularly sharp, pardon the pun, to enter the Chinese antique market.

That's funny Norm, i've been a pro shooter for more than 30 years now and have always considered anything larger than 2 1/4 as those unnecessarily large format cameras. ;) :D

getting back to the original post. Either you see the differece between this piece in workmanship style and form and a 19th century piece or you do not. If you are happy with the piece fine otherwise move on. I personally feel the piece was made somewhere between 1950-1990.

Hi Tim,
I have seen many things described incorrectly at auction houses and agreed just because they say it is so does not make it necessarily so, see the disclaimer. As to the "rightness" factor I believe this can only be determined absolutely, if there is any doubt, by handling the object in question indeed the only times I have bought a pup, several in fact, was over the net with only photographs to guide me. Kindjals are not my area of interest or knowledge, although I would not pass up the opportunity to acquire a nice one given the chance, therefore I am not defending Gav's notions of the "rightness" of his acquisitions I was only concerned that some responses were a bit insensitive.
We are all different and perhaps what one person finds insensitive others do not, each to their own I guess is the only answer.
Regards,
Norman.

Hi David,
As I said in the previous post, each to their own. You'll be telling me next that glass plates are a thing of the past.
Regards,
Norman.

:D

Lots going on while I was away.
 

Hi David,

Thank you for your posting, I whole heartedly agree about things never appearing what they seems to be and that a lot of items are being created to fool the unwarey, we all at one time or another have been bitten by these deceivers, I too have knowingly passed on goods of very questionable backgrounds that I known not to be the real deal to experts who had to have the item, heck I know, I made the damn thing and they even went to to the trouble of telling me the whole history of the type of item in question but, this is not a reflection of who I am or what I do. How does one talk an expert out of what he wants so dearly.
I know I have been collecting since a boy and weapons for the last 12 years or so. Although I don't have millions to spend on such toys that I desire but like so many here I know a good deal more than most and I too have handled vast amounts of all styles of edged weapons in some very fine collections and at every arms far for much longer than the 12 years, not that this should be taken in an arogant manner either, these weapons are a passion of mine, not something that I want a pat on the back for as mentioned elsewhere.
It is disturbing for me that those who are considered both by myself, others here and themselves as experts, should be able to offer up a little more than links to others webpages and shrug off this piece as a fake, although there have been others with very good points and posting made with reasons stated, which is most important to everyone concerned viewing these threads as it is the only way for everyone, including themselves to learn further.
The straight out calling this piece a fake or poor quality is of little concern to me, if it is, it is, that is fine and cannot be changed....but what you say about possibly alienating myself from these people because I heard what I wanted to hear from another, should not put others offside, as humans we all continue to learn and if we think we know it all the learning has stopped. I have offered up images from myself and opinions of others who are very successful in their fields and it is their livelyhood too. By placing these things back on the table so to speak in this forum I would hope others here will continue to offer up images and real facts and reference points to enhance the learning process by all and debunk what more I have offered up...
Thanks again for your interest in this thread.

Hi Lew, it was not the Kindjal that I took it there for, it was from the advise of Alex that I did so and I took it to a European born family of jewellers for further interest. These guys like your jeweller Lew, do certainly known about quality workmanship, age and styles through all mediums I would think, if not they have just lucked their way through life.

Thanks for the proverb Fernando, so true, I should have looked below before replying but am doing so in order of postings, thanks.

Thanks Lew, it was as a whole it was studied, and studied closely.

Extremely well spoken Norman with great courtesy. I can appreciate not everyone can or will communicate in the manner that many are acustomed, that is fine, I still have trouble though, listening to those who make debunking comments without offering up a "well see that there Gav, in year blah blah the standard for that was this and that feature there was not found until date so and so and so on and so forth, links provided are not as clear in many cases as the images I have provided and at no where near the light or magnification so i think some elements of those presented have been lost but I am not a photographer, but I do take photographs so I can comment at some level.
I still ask to see comparrisions in collections of those who have passed comment either good or bad to point and out the where fors and why fors as to why this piece in question is what some think it is from the images, but I think the alienation excuse may be quietly reserved for not doing so.

All comments are accepted and noted, the problem lays with no reply to the debunking images and questions that I have posted, it seems the learning stops dead because of that. Are we all expected to hear "that's no good" and that's the end of it? All comments are considered, processed and replied to with a wishing to know more about their reasons why rather than a I know so or I feel. Sure feeling has a lot to do with anything we do in this world but facts support or debunk facts and without facts there is no knowledge of anything.

Thank you everyone for your interest in this posting, unfortunately I am out of time for now and will address each and every other response tomorrow night. Please in the mean time if so inclined cover off a few of the other questions I have offered up like the UV light and the further images in relation to the comments made, it is the only was to learn and move foward. If after all possible knowldege has been exhausted and it turns out to be a late made piece i will as always be happy to acknowledge the fact, I do hope those who dismiss it with out fulling viewing all that is offered up would in turn acknowledge that they too have learnt something from the postings, if and when it is varified as authentic again further down the track.

very best regards

Gav

Gavin, i think you have not quite grasped what i was trying to say. Probably my fault for not being clear enough. It is not the facts of these threads which i personally found alienating. Perhaps i read too much between your lines, the the post which prompted me to write what i did came off to me as "I found some some real experts, they told me all you guys are wrong and i was right....so there!" Followed, of course, by a very large raspberry. :)
Now, this may not have been you intention, but it is certainly the way it came off to me and i would guess probably some others. Norman (and yourself) make some good points about knowledgable members sometimes being too hard on certain items that get posted and of course if someone knocks a knife you own you want to hear solid facts as to why, especially if you thought it was something greater than what people are making it out to be. The difference i see here is that while some members have knocked your kindjal (an object), you seem to me knocking the the members (actual people). This is what i found to be possibly alienating, not the mere fact that you have found your own experts who disagree with the members here. Most of our membership is pretty good about admitting they were wrong when presented with facts that show they were.
BTW, you seem you want very specific evidence from the forum members as to why they believe your kindjals are not quite kosher. What evidence (other than their say so) did your experts give you that they are indeed authentic antiques?
Keep in mind Gavin that i've got no horse in this race. I know nothing about kindjals though i do like to think i know something about quality. I could clearly see the points of forumites who remarked negatively on your first kindjal. I am on the fence about the second. The silverwork and neillo look quite beautiful to my eye. I don't know enough about the blades to know whether or not the style is period. It's a nice knife regardless of it's age or origins.
What i suggest is that everyone just take a step back and take a deep breathe. I don't think any member here intended to disrespect you with their comments about your kindjals. Their comments were on the knife itself. I also think that they are trying their best to communicate with you just what it is about these knives that don't sit right with them and if you gave it some time more might come out. And they may well be wrong about this last one. I am just afraid that rubbing your expert's opinions in their faces, especially ones that are equally unsubstantiated, is not likely to get you positive responses. :shrug:

I also feel the Forum had been swayed to the direction of mixing personal feelings, guesses and comments from others with unsufficient experience in a particular field. Everyone had been professional and courteous, but I believe it'd be better to stick with the basics, i.e. sharing opinions based solely on specific experience and knowledge! At this point many experienced members voiced their solid opinions and reasoning behind them. The best advice was to handle as many pieces as possible, which is the only way to tell the difference. There is no science behind telling an authentic antique kindjal (or painting, sculpture or anything else) from repro. Experience is what counts. Congratulations to those who were able to learn.
It's time to move on.
OUT

Finally found the time.
 

Thats alright Ward,
When at work I operate with, short clear direct responses without the sit around and have a chat attitude as sometimes seconds are precious and when wasted the day can have a snowball effect. I will touch on the fancier "reproduction and tourist pieces" shortly. False hope, real hope and items standing on their own only do so with consistant facts across the board, I have filed through so many postings here on kindjals and find no consistancy with points of interest raised and the same when taking these notes on board when viewing with great details Kindjals in very reputable dealer's webpages. :shrug: I will follow this up soon with further postings.

Very good point Lew, the combined experience here is a great sum of knowledge, what I am trying to sift through here(is for the betterment of all to understand these items), is the consistancy of comments made with conviction by different individuals that contradict other individuals here, the relationship of what is said and how it doesn't colate to images offered up. I am not trying to discredit anyone, I am sure there must be very good reason for these differences, it is just not explained clearly if at all.
I just want to see and hear what these reasons for different standards are, not just have it accepted without an explanation.

The ducks quacking and I don't see no emus...




Nicely said Norman, are you sure you haven't spent time in the diplomatic corp? I too agree there are some very knowledgeable people here and I too wish to hear all that is said good or bad about anything posted, though delivery of anything is always important.

Hi Tim, that sounds like me struggling to get a hold of the elusive standard for sure....I think I need a double of what ever you are pouring....make that a tripple on the rocks...

You are quite right David, there has been no personal attack on me, only on what can be seen in the images, I take no offense persay, I am disappointed as expressed clearly in past posting of the lack of whys and wherefores, that is very disappointing coming from who people here consider experts and the jumping on the band wagon by others with the same experinece again with out so much as a small consistant comparison, I have read many of the Keris forum postings, mostly things are put into perspective clearly and concisely with good factual backup....I still have many question unanswered and will sum them all up shortly in an other reply.

You guys will have plenty to talk about when that minibar is opened, maybe you can click of a few too for the forum gathering postings..... :p :D

Hi Ward, please come in and share with me your reasons why, the only to learn for myself and others. Thanks in advance.

I too have, any many here have found these misrepresented items, sometimes refered to as sleepers. Handling an object along with knowledge is paramount I feel also Norman, as Scratch here has said about many things in my collection both weapons and non weapons, the images provided do not do them justice...mybe a few photgraphy tips can bring the real essence of this piece to light?

A shame you are opting out of this Alex, you have provided the most substantiated comments in my eyes and good points of reference to follow up on. I will be offering up more questions(and further images of this and others) that have arisen from these specific and knowlegdable comments for further discussion shortly.

Thank you everyone who has taken an interest thus far and thank you for all comments good or bad, it is the only way forward.

regards

Gav

Further Opinions
 

Hi David, thanks again for coming in.

Maybe a little was lost in both our translations. No one at this stage has said anyone is wrong, I am however tenacious in understanding the differing points of comparisons and comments and consistancy of statements and will vigorously follow these up when time does permit as I plainly cannot understand these somewhat obvious points, more to follow in up coming postings with these and other unanswered questions, maybe my questions are beyond the realm of probable questioning without the item in their hands???
With regards to what other dealers and collectors/enthusiasts have said about this piece, I will add too that this piece was shown around a few more dealers on Saturday at the Brisbane arms and Militaria fair with good reception but no further concrete evidence other than what is below. About half a dozen people including the Jeweller and previous enthusiast have passed comment with some interesting points, I also rang the previous owner today an asked if he had any more information in his weapons register.
Some of the points that have been mentioned are First and formost the superb quality workmanship has been mentioned and that it is distinctly Georgian and is a very lovely piece without a doubt made by a master craftsman for someone of wealth or importance, it too was offered up that the rubbed inscription panel will most likely hold the key to understanding it's history and who it was for. It was also mentioned that the blade has a good deal of age to it and does show despite what some fool at some stage has done with it and that is run the blade over a belt sander at some stage of it's life, "they should have been drawn and quartered" was the remark of one dealer about what it has suffered. I have had good points bought to my attention on the best way to fix it and out of the cupboard comes my ole faithful Lanskey honing stones or varying degrees and the long task of oiling and rubbing with the stones starts. It has also been advised that the acorn final and the acorn patterns that I hadn't previously noticed in the neillo design and in the chiseling may also real more about the time period if research can be done on these points. Also said that it carries a good deal of honest wear to the reverse side and has beeen well cared for and other than the state of the blade, well respected.
It too has been stated in relation to other Kindjals that have been through the hands of these dealers, that an unsightly seam is often seen in the manufacture of the scabbard, someone has gone to great trouble to join this scabbard in an very unobvious spot and short of pulling the old timber from the scabbard it remains undetectable to the naked eye. When probed about hallmarks it was said that it is not uncommon at all to find Silver unhallmarked. The design of the rivet heads was noted too as it gives a very positive feel about where the hilt is in the hand in all range of movements. the shape too may reveal more about it's origins.
That's about all I can recall for tonight David, a long day is now at an end for me. Lots more food for thought has been offered up by others, I'll spend a bit of time digesting it all and write again soon.

regards

Gav

Sticker removed
 

Thanks Henk, no lady in the house, I did soak it with a sponge and with a little elbow greese and some eucalyptus oil and it came off quite easy.

thanks

Gav

Some interesting info and comparrisons
 

A wonderful few hours were passed away this morning with the French gentleman I spoke of previously, some may question his authority of such items, antique edge weapons is his love and does reflect in the quality and rarity of some weapons I have never had the privilege of handling before.

His knowledge on this subject matter is incredible when heard first hand.

His credentials stand high, curator in France until 1979, is director and founder and curator of well known and respected art galleries and foundations whose artists are represented at the Queensland State art gallery, is an approved valuer of Cultural Heritage to the Commonwealth Government for Australian Artists, both Aboriginal and contempory, also French sculpture, prints, paintings, decorative arts & furniture from 1600-1950.

A number of these weapons I have seen today have been and are documented in his family history from the 1860's.

Again in length many of my questions were answered in full detail today, the acorns shaped icons I mentioned yesterday are actually a symbol of good luck, they are the "hand of Fatima"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamsa

His historical knowledge was expressed in great detail, kind of wished I had a tape recorder. He also touched on coral found on Kinjals and that it is the red coral that was most prized as it too is a symbol of good luck.

Many points about Niello and it's very early origins were also covered off today from medieval time up until today, his chemistry major was shining through on many other subjects too.

Upon further viewing today, what can be viewed of the script remaining in the central panel to the rear of the scabbard, I have been told that it is most likely a verse from the Koran asking for protection or similar, not a presentation as thought by myself and a couple of others, I am still trying to get it read or rubbed for future posting.

Again this piece was put at approx 1870-1900 and from all explanations, it is of the highest gallery quality...This differs from a link below but at this stage I am happy to go with either until further research has been done.

Throughout this steep learning curve in Kinjals, I am hoping some off the original forumites who made earlier postings will further comment on some comparisons found in the Oriental Arms website that has been offered up to me a few times.
I am not looking to discredit anyone, maybe I have now offered up enough imagery that was not available at the initial postings and initial fears and loathing have been overcome? Maybe it will be continue to be said after all comparisons below that it is still not antique? I am just looking to understand why what's is stated as being right for one is not for another even though it shows all the signs of being correct and of period as seen my many first hand, maybe we can all learn from this???

I understand this as the initial photos certainly showed off the best and most unworn parts of the piece, what are your views Ariel on the images of the worn Niello?

As this wood has been noted as a very old fabric, does this denote anything in particular. Do the photos of the tip referred to,(at 100X magnification) make the rounded edges any clearer. Do the lack of refinement on the rivets not make it an authentic piece, it has been my understanding that the rivets would rarely be paid a lot of attention, as they, throughout their life may be replaced when and if ever a blade needed to be replaced?

http://www.oriental-arms.com/photos.php?id=966
http://www.oriental-arms.com/photos.php?id=2766
http://www.oriental-arms.com/photos.php?id=1062
http://www.oriental-arms.com/photos.php?id=2885

I haven't looked any further for bad riveting on silver Kindjals..these should do

I understand, of course, that photographs are not an ideal way to evaluate antique items, but..... It looks to me as if it hails from the same " workshop" as the first one.
Sorry, I am not enjoying bringing bad news....[/QUOTE]

Maybe I need a photography course in bringing real essence out of objects??

Here is a link to it's almost twin brother...again from Oriental arms...

Actually this link may convince others of it's authenticity???

http://www.oriental-arms.com/photos.php?id=2181

And for argument sake within the forum I'll even run with 1920 ...

Hi Charles, it may be a while before I post blade images, I will be working slowly at polishing out the linishing marks, know that the description given in Oriental arms is exactly the same right down to the size.

regards

Gav


Hi Alex, with further images, notes, declarations and links provided, is there anything else or other points of interest you can point out?

Hi again Lew, the lines, to my eyes are clearly made by or at least in the same guild/family as the last link on Oriental Arms. What is your views and points of interest with my comparrison?

The dreaded Kindjal postings continues, still striving for facts...

regards

Gav

deafening
 

:shrug: The silence is deafening guys, I was hoping for a little more objective speculation :shrug:

:rolleyes:

Gav

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