Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Ethnographic Weapons

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 11th December 2004, 04:51 PM   #1
Rivkin
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 655
Default

Well, I have dozen or so kindjals with a real damascus pattern - turkish star night, burly pattern etc. Scabbards are very inexpensive, but the blades are the real beauty, through I strongly suspect 25% of them can be etchings, but others - it's physically impossible to etch starry damascus.

Getting them was tough, and involved in most cases personal contacts. I hope to post some pictures soon.
Rivkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th December 2004, 05:21 PM   #2
Lee
EAAF Staff
 
Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Upstate New York, USA
Posts: 932
Question Pattern-Welded Qama or Kindjal?

Does anyone know where would this be from?



Lee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th December 2004, 05:45 PM   #3
Rivkin
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 655
Default

Damn it. Here we are posing as experience collectors, and Mr.Jones comes with his dagger that is surely a better one.

It's from Dagestan, made most likely by Lak master, can be that master worked outside of Dagestan, but it's unlikely. The date I would guess 1860 and may be a little bit up.

P.S. Sorry for the direct question, but where did you get it ? It seems to be a VERY good piece.
Rivkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th December 2004, 05:46 PM   #4
Rivkin
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 655
Default

Yet again, as in my experience - the hilt and scabbard are usually simplistic.
Rivkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th December 2004, 07:19 PM   #5
Jeff D
Member
 
Jeff D's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: B.C. Canada
Posts: 473
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rivkin
Yet again, as in my experience - the hilt and scabbard are usually simplistic.

Can someone refresh my memory? I thought I read that the weapons with plain wood hilts were considered tools and not taxed or taken by the Russians / Ottoman, while the ornate hilts where considered weapons instead of tools and were. I can't for the life of me remember where (or even if i read this).

Thanks
Jeff
Jeff D is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th December 2004, 07:48 PM   #6
Rivkin
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 655
Default

It's true in some sence, however there is a different reason for the fact that most damascus blades have simple hilts - they were made prior to 1860, prior to the point when Kubachi hilts and scabbards became "must have" in order to sell it.
Rivkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th December 2004, 08:01 PM   #7
Yannis
Member
 
Yannis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Athens Greece
Posts: 479
Default

Ariel

You have right that late 19th century kindjal became more asthetic than useful objects. But they still could kill someone in close combat or tavern fight. It is the same that happened to yataghans, cretan knifes etc.

We know from history books that some greek guerillas till the end of WWII had swords and big knifes and they USED them in battles.

Dr Jones

Thank you for the picture. It is amazing. Any other damascus kindjal?
Yannis is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:40 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.