Rare Mughal Dagger
 

now when I got your attention:-) there's a growing trend hitting the market, and particularly eBay, of mughal kundan imitations. Not to discredit a particular seller (as there's no mentioning of word "kundan"), but to educate those who may not realize this is not kundan, as it looks like some do not know, based on prices and feedbacks. So look at the below closeups: the real kundan requires stones to be placed (pushed) into carved patterns into melted gold. What we see here is a clever surface application with twisted wire and stones being glued on top. The work is actually quite sloppy, there's even some glue residue left and I'd feel sorry for anyone during Mughal times who'd dare to produce such "quality" - that person would be expelled from the workshop and loose an arm. Nowadays, this is what buyers do:-). One can write a few pages of what's "not right" with those daggers, but pictures worth a few pages more...

WOW! Ugly stuff. And you can't tell very well from ebay pictures. Good to have this thread, thank you.

Hi Alex,
Thank you for bringing this up. I agree with you that not all know what kundan is, or how it was made, so your warning is well placed.
Jens

Any chance fo seeing pictures of similar but confirmed mughal period weapons for comparison?

Hi Alex, you're absolutely right :D
and ... if it's was "only" concerning Mughal kundan ... :rolleyes:
I will add some criteria, about edged weapons, or part of armour
- when the pic's exposure, is done, darken voluntarily
- when there is no mention about a date or even a century, like that, no risk to be accused of false description
- last point, but sometime I may be wrong, when the price is far away of the market average price
the list it's not restrictive, we may complete it :p

à +

Dom

Here are few examples of kundan technique...

And here's 18th century nephrite jade handle with all jewels and gold removed, so you can see the original carvings before they were filled with all that bling:-)

also, 19th C mughal handle with some kundan applied much later, likely in 20th C.

Excellent thread Alex.. Valuable information.

Mughal handle comparison
 

since we're on a mughal subject - here are few handles in most common mughal horse forms. Just like with new kundan - one thing is when you're looking superficially or on blury pictures, but when you start comparing with authentic mughal, the difference becomes much clearer.

Yes seeing examples of quality differences is invaluable.

Kundan is a very interesting subject, but few collectors know much about what it is. Some of the reasons could be, that good kundan work is rare, and so very expensive. Another reason could be, that on many of the hilts with gold and gems all of value have been removed and sold seperately.

I recently found somethingg interesting about kundan.
In Treasurers of the World. Jewelled Arts of India in the Age of the Mughals. The Al-Sabah Collection, Kuwait National Museum, the authors Manuel Keene and Salam Kaoukji on page 18 writes about the varieties in stone settings.
It says that kundan was invented, '...Probably in the centuries immediately preceding the birth of Christ...'
I never knew that the technique was that old – did you?


'Kundan, or hyper-purified gold, is beaten into narrow strips of foil and refined to the point at which it becomes ‘tacky’ to room temperature. At this degree of purity, it can actually form a molecular bond when pressure is applied to it by means of steel tools, which are first used to press the foil down around the stones, then to cut, shape and burnish it into any form that the artist may wish.... It can even be used on ivory and wood... There is no evidence that this technique was ever practised anywhere except in India.'
It is most interesting to read that the gold can form a molecular bond with several materials, as no glue would be needed to keep the gold in place, and the soft gold could easily be hammered down around the gem.
Alex, the hilt to the right in post 10 is not a horse, althought it could look like the head of a horse, it is a nilgai - notice the small horns.

Jens I read that too in that catalogue, but don't now anything more about kundan technique.

If I have to be honest - I dont have a clue either. Strange how many people know what the technique means, but very few know how it is done.

Have a look here.
http://www.gemologyonline.com/Forum/...pic.php?t=1754

I just saw this.
http://blog.mirraw.com/2012/09/18/wh...undan-jewelry/

So there seem to be different oppinions of how it was done.

After reading both, I lean towards the first one. Makes more sense, although I have a rough time believing that some amount of heat is not needed.

Yes, I too believe more in the first version.
My mothers sisters could, like my mother, do anything they wanted with their hands, as they were all very gifted. One painted porcelain, and I remember at one time, that I saw her guild the edge of a plate. She took a piece of very fine gold foil, 'blowing in the wind so to say', cut it to the right size, put it on the edge and burnished it with an agate stone – and is was as if it had been nailed to the plate – well nailed and nailed, but I think you know what I mean. It became part of the porcelain, and she said that it would not go away unless it was worn off.
As an afterthought, I have been wondering why I did not think of this before, but it was maybe sixty years or more ago. Menory is sometimes a funny thing.

Jens, these are not horns, these are true inward-turned ears: a specific feature of the so-called Marwari horse.

The Met has been known to be wrong from time to time when describing items in their collection, this one seems to be described correctly, besides the ears you can see a pair of horns.

http://www.metmuseum.org/collection/...&tabname=label

Dagger with Hilt in the Form of a Blue Bull (Nilgai)

Object Name: Dagger
Date: ca. 1640
Geography: India
Culture: Islamic
Medium: Hilt: Nephrite Blade: Watered steel
Dimensions: H. 15 in. (38.1 cm)
Classification: Stone
Credit Line: Gift of Alice Heeramaneck, in memory of Nasli Heeramaneck, 1985
Accession Number: 1985.58a, b

On view in Gallery 463

High resolution image.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com...4ab58015ac.jpg

Here are a few examples from the Met Museum.

Ariel, I still think the one to the right in post no 10 is a nilgai, just like the one shown in post 18. See the text here.
http://www.metmuseum.org/collection/...&tabname=label
Jens

The Blue Bull or the Nilgai (Boselaphus tragocamelus)

An antelope found only in India, the Blue Bull or the Nilgai is unlike antelope in its build. It has a body of horse, face of a cow with high withers and low rump.

Nilgai is found only in India from the foothills of Himalayas to the forest of Karnataka and from the dry forest of Rajasthan to the forest of West Bengal and Assam.

There's a lot of supposition re: this technique. One of the offsite posts got it right, though.

I think part of the problem is the use of translating software or not being fluent in the technical aspects of either or both languages.

Gold will NOT form a molecular bond with stone. And, for the purposes of this discussion, gold, if hammered onto another piece of gold of a similar karat, will not form a molecular bond between the two pieces. Any attachment would be purely mechanical. Think of two pieces of aluminum foil. Crumble them up together in a random, haphazard manner as when you're not thinking about it when you throw it away. The two pieces are pretty securely held together if squished together tightly. However if you very methodically, for whatever reason, decide you need to separate the two pieces, this can be done. Try it.

This is a mechanical bond. If a eutectic bond formed, there would be no separating the two.

A design is engraved into the hard stone object. The walls of the design are next undercut slightly.

The stones to be set must also have slightly sloping sides as all stones that are set have to have.

Gold, now cannot be "hyper purified". Period. Pure gold is 24 karat. There is no 24.5 or 25 karat.

Strips of 24 karat gold are drawn that have a rectangular cross section, the minor dimension should fill tightly the space between the precious stone and the matrix. The major dimension should stand proud approximately twice to three times the thickness of the minor dimension, leaving as small a gap where the two ends meet as possible. It is critical for these strips be annealed well. During the process used in the following paragraph the strips will become slightly springy due to work-hardening. The trick is to get everything in place as efficiently as possible and not to over work.

A steel chasing tool, which is similar to a small chisel but with a blunt rounded edge, is pressed to the gold and driven down with gentle blows of a light hammer. OR a tool known as a burnisher, which is a smooth, polished shape made from steel, agate, or haematite mounted securely in a wooden handle, is pressed forcibly downward causing the gold strip to deform and be forced to fill any undercuts and voids between the precious stone being inlaid and the design carved into the grip. The slight extra amount of gold that was left standing proud originally should roughly be figured to be slightly greater than the volume of the void. If during the process this is miscalculated, unless there's enough of an undercut, more gold cannot be just hammered on top of the gold in place to build it up. There has to be some undercuts to mechanically lock everything together.

One respondent mentions a eutectic bond forming without heat.

Nonsense.

Period.

Any bonding forming during this process is purely mechanical and can be easily undone with a pair of pliers, tweezers, or needles to remove the set stones.

With a bit of prep time and a clear schedule, this could be demonstrated.

Shakethetrees,
Thank you very much for the explanation, which I find very interesting.
If I understand you correctly, you are saying, that the jade or whatever, is 'scratched' like in 'koftgari', and that is what is holding the gold/stone in place. Is that correct?
If it is, then it is a bit like when the enamelleded. I have a very good example of this somewhere.
Jens

Jens, thank you for your comment.

The decoration is not just "scratched" into the jade or other hard stone, but it to depth needed to allow the stone, once set, to be at the proper relative height to the hard stone matrix.

Once the linear aspects of the design and the larger cuts intended to support the set stones are finished, the edges are undercut slightly.

Once the 24K annealed gold is forced down, filling the undercuts, it's locked in by burnishing or chasing lightly.

Enameling is a different process, where powdered glass is fused by heat to a metal or glass surface.

When heated, the ground, powdered, colored glass liquified and flows down onto the surface. One technical term it that it fluxes to the surface, and a close, intimate bond is developed, similar to a good glue.

I realize this is simplified, but, follow me here, please.

When dissimilar materials with different coefficients of expansion and sensitivity to heat and humidity are glued together, the weak link between everything is the glue. Over time and exposure to conditions relevant to the inherent weaknesses of each material losses can occur when the glue fails.

If two materials have a true molecular bond, these issues, (sensitivity to temperature, humidity, coefficients of expansion) do not come into play as the different materials are close enough to each other in these sensitivities so as not to be affected.

Examples of true molecular bonds include welds of layers of steel in blades (not crucible Damascus), and diffusion bonding of dissimilar metals as used by the Japanese in Mokume-Gane, or wood grain metal. In either case, no extra filler material or solder is added. Molecules of each layer are exchanged by high heat and an intimate contact, sometime assisted by the hammer or pressing under pressure while at temperature.

Shakethetrees,

Thank you very much for your explanation, which I find most interesting, although I think I am missing a few points.
It is however, quite late here, so I will write to morrow and show you a few photos of a 'looted' jade hilt that I have.

Thank you again

Jens

That is why I mentioned that I have a hard time believing that heat was not used at all.

Thus I agree with Shakethetrees on everything he said. Notice too that in the jade example pictured where all the pieces and gold was stripped, there are small holes in the grooves. These are for the pounded gold to fill and grip the gold, holding it better in place as well as the undercut grooves.

This is not too unlike what is done to inlay steel. I under cut the inlay grooves in the steel so that they may "catch" the softer metal and hold it in place (like what Shakethetrees mentioned).

Thank you Jens and Jose for your comments.

The holes drilled appear to be positioned beneath the settings. These are no more than pilot holes for larger holes to remove stock for the settings. Another smaller tool was used to shape it to accommodate the setting fully.

I don't know if the bottoms were overlaid with thin sheet gold, possibly, but the only thing holding the stones were the undercuts in the carving of the matrix.

Gold, well annealed, is extremely soft, softer by orders of magnitude than even fine silver, so it theoritically is like putty, smeared down and forced into and under the undercuts, cold.

If heat enough to affect the softness of the gold, (roughly 1000 degrees F.), the stone or ivory would be ruined.

This has piqued my interest. If I can find some time I will attempt to do a small demonstration piece and report back.

A few more excellent examples.

Shakethetrees, you bring up some points I haven't thought of. And I forgot about the heat effecting the stones. In fact it would change the color of the stones at the very least. Also not aware of the holes being drill holes to take out the stones and inlay.

If you could experiment and show the results that would be great. I still am a little hazy about the the process.