Old Khyber

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by Kubur

I think Ariel's sword is another animal.

Kubur,
Unfortunately, fakes are of different levels. Some are grotesque, others are well made. For example, choora dagger, which was recently sold on e-bay. Very nice decoration of the blade. I even liked it. But "A Devil in the Details". . For example, if it was an old decoration of the blade, then the master would definitely decorate the T-shaped spine in the same style...

[mariusgmioc]

Originally Posted by mahratt

Kubur,
Unfortunately, fakes are of different levels. Some are grotesque, others are well made. For example, choora dagger, which was recently sold on e-bay. Very nice decoration of the blade. I even liked it. But "A Devil in the Details". . For example, if it was an old decoration of the blade, then the master would definitely decorate the T-shaped spine in the same style...

Very interesting example, but the fact that the decoration on the blade was made by a different person doesn't make it a fake!

Japanese swords are usually made by a master swordsmith and occasionaly decorated/engraved (horimono), sometimes at a much later date by another master. But that doesn't make them fakes, nor does it decrease their value.

The choora in your photos appears to have the decorations on the blade made by chiseling. This takes a big amount of time and skill and by no means can it be seen as diminishing the value of the blade.

I wouldn't consider even your earlier examples as fakes, but just poorly executed knives for the souvenirs market.

[ariel]

Originally Posted by mariusgmioc

Very interesting example, but the fact that the decoration on the blade was made by a different person doesn't make it a fake!

Japanese swords are usually made by a master swordsmith and occasionaly decorated/engraved (horimono), sometimes at a much later date by another master. But that doesn't make them fakes, nor does it decrease their value.

Agree 100%. Nothing "fake-y" here. Everywhere from Turkey to India blades were made by bladesmiths and the rest by some other masters. Persians even had specific names for each profession, but I just forgot them. Thinking that had it been real, it would have had similar decoration on the handle is akin to asserting that had it really been da Vinci who painted Mona Lisa, he would have given her more luxurious frame.
I also agree that the previous ones, labeled as "fakes" are nothing but. An object becomes a "fake" when a newly-made one is offered for sale as a genuinely antique. Otherwise, it is either an honest working one made recently, or a souvenir.

[mahratt]

Probably, I incomprehensibly explained It was necessary to put the link:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/ANCIEN-COUT...wAAOSwx0FdZCQw

This choora dagger, judging by the description, is declared as ancient. Beautiful floral carving on a blade is a modern work. I will explain again what I wrote a little earlier. If the old master made this carving, he would decorate the T-shaped spine this choora dagger in the same style. The photo shows that the T-shaped spine this choora dagger is decorated very roughly. Old masters did not allow such stylistic differences.
So we are dealing with a fake ... As I said before, there are fakes of a very good standard
I didn’t say anything about the hilt Perhaps my bad English is to blame. Sorry for not being able to explain right away...

For me personally, modern work (in my understanding "modern work" for an object that is 100 years old is 10-30-50 years old) on an old blade (even if it will be very good) - reduces the value of the item ... For me, such an object will be fake.

Marius, I agree with you that Japanese swords are usually made by a master swordsmith and occasionaly decorated/engraved (horimono), sometimes at a much later date by another master. That doesn't make them fakes, nor does it decrease their value.
But if I make an engraving on an old Japanese blade - what do you say about this?)) Will it be a fake?

[Ian]

Mahratt:

You raise some excellent points. I think it comes down to how people present the item. Your choora example is a good one. Here the engraved floral work was clearly done recently (compared with other engravings on the blade and hilt). The item is presented as very old (ancienne) without any qualification that the engraving may be recent. This is a flawed characterization of the item. One cannot say for sure whether the misrepresentation is deliberate or not, but the item is not as old as the description suggests and it has been altered.

This example goes beyond the frequent exaggeration of age that many descriptions convey, in that the item has been altered. Was there intent to deceive? That's a matter of individual judgement IMHO. Caveat emptor!

Ian

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by Ian

Mahratt:

You raise some excellent points. I think it comes down to how people present the item. Your choora example is a good one. Here the engraved floral work was clearly done recently (compared with other engravings on the blade and hilt). The item is presented as very old (ancienne) without any qualification that the engraving may be recent. This is a flawed characterization of the item. One cannot say for sure whether the misrepresentation is deliberate or not, but the item is not as old as the description suggests and it has been altered.

This example goes beyond the frequent exaggeration of age that many descriptions convey, in that the item has been altered. Was there intent to deceive? That's a matter of individual judgement IMHO. Caveat emptor!

Ian

Ian,
Thanks for understanding.

[ariel]

Ian,


One needs to be careful with those Frenchies:-)

There is a subtle difference between ancien (seller’s description) and ancient.
“Ancien” is translated first and foremost as old or past, previous, former.
”Ancien regime”= old rule. That’s how French called their monarchy before the 1789 Revolution.
But “ancient” is ancient or antique.
Sometimes, foreign languages are useful. N’est-ce pas?

The poor schnook never presented his choora as “antique”, just as “old”, which is true. Does not qualify for a “fake”.

[Ian]

Good point Ariel. Merci beaucoup!

[ariel]

De rien:-)

[mariusgmioc]

Originally Posted by mahratt

But if I make an engraving on an old Japanese blade - what do you say about this?)) Will it be a fake?

Well, if you make an engraving on a Japanese blade, it will certainly be a disaster... for the blade of course (not that I am doubting your engraving skills).

However, if say you have a blade from 1700 and around 1900 the owner has it decorated with horimono by a master engraver, that would not decrease the value of the sword... but with some observations: the horimono should be TRADITIONALLY made = chiseled by hand, and with a traditional theme (hi, kanji symbols, kurikara, etc.)

So if the horimono would be made using any other method than chiseling by hand (using power tools, by etching, by punching, etc.), or if the horimono is not of traditional motifs (say you engrave your name) then it would be mutilating the blade and turning it into a fake (a contraption that is not what it is supposed to be).

In my oppinion this is precisely the case of the khyber sword in the original posting. A genuine typical Afghan khyber sword, with some decoration added on the blade at a later date, but the decoration is made by a method that is definitely NOT traditional for the Afghan khyber swords, and also has a theme that does not appear traditional as well (at least not to my eyes).

But I am not so sure about the choora in your example. The argument that a genuine Afghan engraver would have also engraved the spine in the same style is a pure speculation. Maybe the owner didn't have enough money to pay for a full engraving...
Anyhow, at least to my eyes and just judging from the photos, the engraving on the choora appears traditionally made and with Afghan style motifs. So to me, the choora may be very genuine and original.

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by mariusgmioc

In my oppinion this is precisely the case of the khyber sword in the original posting. A genuine typical Afghan khyber sword, with some decoration added on the blade at a later date, but the decoration is made by a method that is definitely NOT traditional for the Afghan khyber swords, and also has a theme that does not appear traditional as well (at least not to my eyes).

Of course, the authenticity of the Khyber knife, which served as the basis for later decoration, is beyond doubt

Originally Posted by mariusgmioc

But I am not so sure about the choora in your example. The argument that a genuine Afghan engraver would have also engraved the spine in the same style is a pure speculation. Maybe the owner didn't have enough money to pay for a full engraving...
Anyhow, at least to my eyes and just judging from the photos, the engraving on the choora appears traditionally made and with Afghan style motifs. So to me, the choora may be very genuine and original.

Marius, was there no money for a small decoration on the dagger’s spine? Despite the fact that on both sides the blade is richly decorated with deep carving? I'm afraid it is this - pure speculation)))
Moreover, it is known that if a traditional blade was used on chur (as in the case of my example), then it is always decorated very roughly. And the appearance of such a beautiful, deep and graceful carving, but only on the sides of the blade is completely unconventional. Rather, I believe that someone ordered such a carving in the 1970s and 1980s, while not understanding how it should be in tradition. Moreover, this floral ornament is not very typical for Afghanistan. Although the master tried hard)))

[mariusgmioc]

[QUOTE=mahratt]
Marius, was there no money for a small decoration on the dagger’s spine? Despite the fact that on both sides the blade is richly decorated with deep carving? I'm afraid it is this - pure speculation)))
Moreover, it is known that if a traditional blade was used on chur (as in the case of my example), then it is always decorated very roughly. And the appearance of such a beautiful, deep and graceful carving, but only on the sides of the blade is completely unconventional. Rather, I believe that someone ordered such a carving in the 1970s and 1980s, while not understanding how it should be in tradition. Moreover, this floral ornament is not very typical for Afghanistan. Although the master tried hard)))[/QUOTE:]

I believe I see your point!

So, if I would see a Japanese katana with a beautiful horimono with Yin and Yang or some Farsi script, I would definitely consider it a fake/contraption, and by no means a genuine ethnographic weapon characteristic for Japan.

The same will definitely be the case for the Khyber sword in the original posting. At least in my opinion.

And considering that deep engraving is NOT a technique traditionally used by Afghans, it becomes apparent that the choora in question is NOT a genuine ethnographic knife characteristic for its geographic region. It would be like a katana with horimono done by punching.

[Kubur]

Originally Posted by mariusgmioc

But I am not so sure about the choora in your example. The argument that a genuine Afghan engraver would have also engraved the spine in the same style is a pure speculation. Maybe the owner didn't have enough money to pay for a full engraving...
Anyhow, at least to my eyes and just judging from the photos, the engraving on the choora appears traditionally made and with Afghan style motifs. So to me, the choora may be very genuine and original.

Absolutely correct, this is speculation, just look at the yataghans for example.
To me too this choora looks right.
Guys you have to stop to think that decorations are suspicious. And yes these decorations were done after the blade was forged... It is also speculation to think that it was in a later date, it could have been two days after the forge, two weeks, two months...Patina is important.

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by Kubur

Absolutely correct, this is speculation, just look at the yataghans for example.
To me too this choora looks right.
Guys you have to stop to think that decorations are suspicious. And yes these decorations were done after the blade was forged... It is also speculation to think that it was in a later date, it could have been two days after the forge, two weeks, two months...Patina is important.

Well, if for someone this is not important, then let it be in 2 years, in 20 years, in 200 years))))
Seriously, it seems to me that it makes sense to look at analogies. And if there are no analogies, then it is necessary to question such "decorations" of blades. Especially if the "decoration" is made in the technique. which is a-typical for an item from a specific region.
But! This is a personal matter for everyone.

[ariel]

Guys,
I am not being provocative. On the contrary, I am saying that in the absence of hard facts ( aluminum on a presumably 17 century sword, plastic handle, engraving with contemporary motives etc) unusual swords and daggers should not be officially labeled as “fake”. There is such thing as presumption of innocence:-)

Unusual things challenge our current knowledge: have we missed something? We may thus engage in a search for potential gaps in our knowledge. But on top of it, swords mutated, better communications introduced exchange of forms, techniques and decorations. Trade blades were ubiquitous: European blades were sold to Sudan, Arabia and North Africa, Daghestanis sold their blades to Arabia, Indian and Persian blades were dime a dozen in Afghanistan, Oriental blades were sold in Europe. We see Philippine Barongs with Chinese hieroglyphic marks: Chinese exported them there in quantities. Trophies made “chimeric” weapons: British blade with Indian handle, Indian blade with British handle, Khanda blade with Georgian handle.

Could this Khyber blade with the etching been made in Persia in the middle of 19 century and sold in Afghanistan where a local handle was attached to it? It is a distinct possibility: why wouldn’t Persian smiths cease an opportunity to make a buck? After all, they sold quantities of sophisticated wootz Shamshir blades with engraved, chiseled and koftgari Persian inscriptions there anyway, why not make a simple Khyber blade and add a cheap etching to it?

My point is, we cannot automatically assume that strange is fake. We may not like what we see and not buy it, but in the absence of hard evidence ( Marius’ example of horimono) we may want to suspend our negative judgement.

[ariel]

Kubur,
Re. “Berber or Spanish colonial” swords I have no dog in this fight.
My only point was that there is a big old oil in Versailles showing a battle of French with Berbers. One Berber holds an identical sword. Regretfully ( stupidly, in fact) I did not photograph it or info about the artist and the date.

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by ariel

Could this Khyber blade with the etching been made in Persia in the middle of 19 century and sold in Afghanistan where a local handle was attached to it? It is a distinct possibility: why wouldn’t Persian smiths cease an opportunity to make a buck? After all, they sold quantities of sophisticated wootz Shamshir blades with engraved, chiseled and koftgari Persian inscriptions there anyway, why not make a simple Khyber blade and add a cheap etching to it?

Unfortunately, these words are just “flight of fancy”. Shamshir is a typically Persian weapon. And their blades were highly valued and exported to other countries. There is a lot of evidence for this. The Khyber knife is the weapon of the inhabitants of Afghanistan and, to some extent, Northern India (but there the Khyber knives have their own recognizable style). I have no doubt that the Persian master could make a Khyber knife. Moreover, I know such examples. But then the Khyber knife made by the Persian master will look different than the one we are discussing. This is due to cultural traditions. There will be a different shape of the blade, another shape of the handle, another technique for decorating the blade.
By the way, for some reason everyone forgot what Marius wrote at the very beginning:

Originally Posted by mariusgmioc

Acid etching MAY be an "old" (please define what you mean by "old") technique, but Persians did NOT use it before 19th century, and even then for very specific and few items (mostly decorative, historicism - known as Qajar revival - blades decorated with religious texts).

I will add that such a rough Acid etching is usually found on Persian objects of the late 19th century.