2nd Caucasian Kindjal for comment

[Gavin Nugent]

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

[Henk]

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.

[Gavin Nugent]

Originally Posted by Henk

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.

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

[fernando]

Originally Posted by freebooter

... 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? ...

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

[ariel]

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....

[ALEX]

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.

[CharlesS]

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.

[Lew]

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

[Gavin Nugent]

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.

[ALEX]

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.

[Gavin Nugent]

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???

[Lew]

Originally Posted by freebooter

Please point out the sloppy lines you refer to Lew?

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

[Gavin Nugent]

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

[Norman McCormick]

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.

[TVV]

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?
Regards,
Teodor

[ward]

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.

[Lew]

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

[Norman McCormick]

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.

[Tim Simmons]

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!!!!!!!!! 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 .

[David]

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.

[Norman McCormick]

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.

[David]

Originally Posted by Norman McCormick

I am an an expert of sorts, a professional photographer for forty years, anything less than 5x4 is a miniature format camera to me.

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.

[ward]

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.

[Norman McCormick]

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.

[Norman McCormick]

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.

[David]

Originally Posted by Norman McCormick

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.

[Gavin Nugent]

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???

Originally Posted by ariel

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.

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?

Originally Posted by ariel

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?

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 ...

Originally Posted by CharlesS

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.

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

Originally Posted by ALEX

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.

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

Originally Posted by LOUIEBLADES

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

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

[Gavin Nugent]

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



Gav

[Lew]

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

[Gavin Nugent]

Originally Posted by LOUIEBLADES

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

Interesting Lew,

Everyone's opinions are welcome and I am more than happy to have mine or anyones elses opinions substantiated or dismissed with absolute knowledge to help the learning process.

From all that has been presented thus far, this would mean that 9.9 out of every 10 Kindjals with silver fittings of any discription presented on this forum over the years, and all links provided by all that have made postings, are indeed, NOT the real Macoy even if some say it is...I do not understand how sloppy for one can make it real but not the other....so confused
All information that has been put forward as to what identifies both a real and a not real Kindjal really actually puts all positings in the "not a real Kindjal" column???
I can only offer up what I see first hand and describe it best I can with images 100 times larger than the item really is. I too offer up links from the same people that are presented to me and....well like you say, opinions????

Gav