A kind of pesh kabz, opinion and translation please

[gp]

Originally Posted by Ren Ren

Three of the participants in those events today are present in this topic. We were twelve years younger, had much less knowledge and much more energy and courage!

so you were young lads "fighting" skirmishes like Georgy Konstantinovich at Khalkhin Gol ?

[ariel]

Oh no, not kindergarten "skirmishes" but full blown "special military operations" :-))))
Our arguments were, as Pushkin used to say, " senseless and pitiless". Ren Ren is right: we were just too young and full of piss and vinegar.


Saracen,
Hope you noticed remnants of some "red stuff" in the pierced areas of the Afghan/Tatar dagger.
I just do not want to go through the same heated discussions again. Too old for that.

[gp]

Originally Posted by ariel

Oh no, not kindergarten "skirmishes" but full blown "special military operations" :-))))

that's why I referred to Georgy Konstantinovich ; Георгий Константинович Жуков never was the kindergarten type ....as confirmed by Ike / Eisenhower

and "Khalkhin Gol "was far from a skirmish ☺☺☺

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by gp

that's why I referred to Georgy Konstantinovich ; Георгий Константинович Жуков never was the kindergarten type ....as confirmed by Ike / Eisenhower

and "Khalkhin Gol "was far from a skirmish ☺☺☺

You are absolutely right But it was not even "fighting" skirmishes of Khalkhin Gol. It was more like "Battle of Stalingrad"

By the way, despite our current disagreements, in that "battle" I was "in the same trench" with аriel

[ariel]

And for the life of me, I cannot even recall which side I was on:-)

Perhaps it made no difference: to steal a line from George Bernard Shaw’s pithy take on economists, if all the arms experts were laid end to end, they would not reach a conclusion.

Valid dating and attribution have to rely on the inscriptions and on physical signs of the object (patina, rust, wear, evidence of old repairs, techniques used, historiography etc.).

Gut feelings may be deceiving: there are too many instances of parallel development and/or mutual origin. That’s why G.C. Stone misread Minasbad for Parang Nabur and Tirri claimed N.African origin of Laz Bicagi etc. I have shown here Khyber knife and Bauernwehr with identical blades.

Only physical facts can serve as valid evidence of dating and origin. The rest of argumentation can force us to take a wrong turn.

In retrospect, does the dagger with pierced details belong to Afghanistan or Crimea is still uncertain to me. Sorry. We were laid end to end ……

[mahratt]

I agree 200% with these words:

Originally Posted by ariel

Valid dating and attribution have to rely on the inscriptions and on physical signs of the object (patina, rust, wear, evidence of old repairs, techniques used, historiography etc.).

But! Paying attention to the inscriptions, you should always remember the "Assad Allah Syndrome". We can find the name of this master on blades made from the 16th century to the end of the 19th century. And if you trust the name on the blade, you can make a mistake and date the item incorrectly.

[Ren Ren]

Originally Posted by mahratt

Paying attention to the inscriptions, you should always remember the "Assad Allah Syndrome". We can find the name of this master on blades made from the 16th century to the end of the 19th century. And if you trust the name on the blade, you can make a mistake and date the item incorrectly.

Quite right! That is why extremely prestigious blade attribution contests are held in Japan, the author's signatures on which are closed.