![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 363
|
![]()
I have one close to identical to the two you posted. I am in the middle of a big move and will post as soon as find it.
I have always felt it is culturally related to a flyssa- the blade shape and workmanship are too close to coincidental. But, I have been mistaken before, so.... |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 456
|
![]()
I'd love to see yours if you find it.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 456
|
![]()
This "Chinese sword" auction finished recently (I didn't win it), and the grip looks remarkably similar to that of these Maghreb daggers. I suppose it's just coincidence...
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 460
|
![]()
Anthropologists who study material cultures term this parallel development. Two or more cultures with similar requirements and levels of technological skill will occasionally develop a very similar object (in this case a dagger or sword grip) for the same purpose. So, in cultures where particular organic materials are readily available (wood, bone, antler, horn or ivory, for example) and stone or metal tools which can rapidly remove softer materials (files, for example) have either been invented by that culture or introduced from another through trade or war, grips with crosshatched surfaces are likely to develop independently. Thus, although the grips look alike, other factors must be considered in order to place them in the same culture. Bladeform is probably the most important distinction here.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|