Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Ethnographic Weapons
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 10th June 2012, 09:38 AM   #1
David R
Member
 
David R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,120
Default

Hiya guys, this conversation and particulary Doms contribution has piqued my interest, so I have a question. I saw these 2 and dismissed them as 20thC tourist pieces, but now I wonder? They are not in an auction so I think they are ok to post.
Attached Images
      
David R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th June 2012, 07:20 AM   #2
kronckew
Member
 
kronckew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Room 101, Glos. UK
Posts: 4,224
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David R
Hiya guys, this conversation and particulary Doms contribution has piqued my interest, so I have a question. I saw these 2 and dismissed them as 20thC tourist pieces, but now I wonder? They are not in an auction so I think they are ok to post.
how thick are the blades? that seems to be the main difference. the tourist 'wedding nimcha' ones, which apparently started late 19th c. tend to have thin flat blades (2mm-ish) and are more sharply curved than earlier ones with 4mm distal tapered blades (like mine above) and the engraving/inlays/scabbard carvings are not in traditional kabyle patterns. (see earlier post by emmanuel)
kronckew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th June 2012, 08:35 AM   #3
Emanuel
Member
 
Emanuel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1,242
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David R
Hiya guys, this conversation and particulary Doms contribution has piqued my interest, so I have a question. I saw these 2 and dismissed them as 20thC tourist pieces, but now I wonder? They are not in an auction so I think they are ok to post.
Hi David,

I owned an identical "wedding nimcha" a few years ago. Like Kroncke says, the blades are uniformly flat, cut from ~2mm sheet, not forged, and the scabbard wire inlay is poor compared to the old carving. I had therefore also assumed they were early 20th century pieces. I'm happy to accept evidence that they're earlier. How they came about and who made them I don't know. Since they are all of a near-identical type I assume a common provenance.

Emanuel
Emanuel is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


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 12:26 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.