Decoration on Indian blades

Jens Nordlunde · 26th January 2005, 10:40 PM

Decoration on blades have during time been very different, sometimes the decoration was ‘only’ the watering, sometimes it was inlays or maybe koftgari, but now and again it was something quite different – animals cut out of the steel, and inlaid in gold or other precious metals, and the artists were good - very good, they were masters.
Have a look at this.

tom hyle · 27th January 2005, 02:54 AM

wow! That's a tulwar?

Andrew · 27th January 2005, 05:18 AM

Oh, my. Those animals are carved into the blade.

Jens, will you post photos of the full sword, please? I'm eager to see more.

Thanks for sharing.

tom hyle · 27th January 2005, 01:14 PM

Interesting that both animals being attacked art domestic animals, bringing the hand or representation of man into the struggle. I don't think a leopard will really attack an elephant; it may be "same as a lion" (my favourite name, I think, for an animal; "what's that animal?" "It's equal to a lion." 'nuff said about it.) but I don't think a lion will do that either; I have heard that a tiger will upon ocassion, or lions in a gang....nice carving though, and there seems to be some evocation of the purpose/excuse for an heroic/armigerous class in the attack of domestic animals by wild ones.

Jens Nordlunde · 27th January 2005, 03:34 PM

I like the Indian blade with carvings, the animals are not made stiff, they are moving, and you can see it – true artists make carvings like this.
Most blades showing animals fighting or walking in procession are hunting swords, which of course does not mean, that they could not be used for other purposes. On both sides of the blade is an inscription, one in Farsi and the other one in an Indian dialect.
A strange thing is, that the hand guard can be screwed off, but it is clear that the screw thread is handmade. In Leo S.Figiel’ On Damascus Steel, pages 104-5, you can see a hilt very much alike, but whether this hand guard can be screwed off is not known, as he does not mention anything about it.

Jens Nordlunde · 27th January 2005, 03:41 PM

Here is the whole sword. The blade type is a Kirach. Total length 86 cm.

Jim McDougall · 28th January 2005, 02:58 AM

Jens,
Another absolutely beautiful weapon!
The type of blade, the kirach, is especially interesting, especially in ths type hilt. I am inclined to think this is a Rajput weapon and the hilt form corresponds to similar khanjars from Rajasthan.

The decorative motif depicting various animals on the blade is termed 'shikargaha' in India, and seems to derive from Persian craftsmanship in such motif. It is generally presumed that these decorative blades are typically found on blades of 'hunting' swords, as the figures of animals in varying action situations suggest. There are examples with wider range of figures including one with a tiger attacking a mahout (elephant driver), a tiger attacking a horseman, some even with a horseman pursuing a foot soldier.

It was a very common practice in India, at 'durbar', to present gifts of ceremonial weapons to achieved individuals and persons of high status, many which certainly included so called hunting weapons, or as it seems, possibly weapons carrying depictions of events.

Possibly there were certain allegorical themes or totemic symbolisms used in metaphor in many of these wonderfully crafted blades, aside from seemingly random depictions of various animals and figures. Weapons have long been vehicles to carry important iconographic and traditional symbolism in most cultures, regardless of how subtily these messages are carried.

Best regards,
Jim

tom hyle · 28th January 2005, 04:53 AM

I don't understand where the screw is?

Jens Nordlunde · 28th January 2005, 05:31 PM

Here you can see how it was screwed onto the hilt.
I think I forgot to tell that the blade is wootz - sorry.

Jens Nordlunde · 28th January 2005, 10:45 PM

Just one more thing. Not all of the hand guards were made together with the hilts. Sometimes the hand guards were made seperate and fitted to the hilt.

Jens

tom hyle · 29th January 2005, 12:11 AM

Interesting. Thanks.

Andrew · 29th January 2005, 03:02 AM

Another outstanding sword, Jens. Thank you for sharing this with us.

Jim's comments above remind me of a katar you posted on the old forum with similar scenes. For some reason, I was unable to find it. Could you post photos of it for comparison? That is, if my memory is accurate.

Can you estimate an age on this sword? How common is this handle form? It is certainly seen, as Jim notes, on khanjars, but I've really not seen it on older swords. Many contemporary weapons feature it, however.

Thanks again!

Jens Nordlunde · 29th January 2005, 10:23 AM

Hi Andrew,

I think it is this one you are thinking of.

Jens Nordlunde · 29th January 2005, 10:24 AM

Here is a detail.

Alam Shah · 29th January 2005, 12:58 PM

Excellent pieces. Both of them. (Museum quality).

Jeff D · 29th January 2005, 08:20 PM

Nice pieces Jen thanks for sharing them with us. Could the hand guard be a later add on? The one in Figiel's book seems to attach in two places so it is unlikely it screws on.
I wonder if your hilt was made with out the guard and was added later as fashion or need dictated.

Thanks again for bringing these pieces up.
Jeff

Jens Nordlunde · 29th January 2005, 10:45 PM

Jeff,

I don't really know, but if the hand guard on mine was not bend so much, or the angle it was photographed in, was different it would also look as you describe. That Figiel has not commentet on it does not mean that the hand guars on his former sword, ccan not be screwed off, he might not have found it interesting, or maybe he did not even notice. It took me some time before I found out that it was loose.

Jens

Jeff D · 30th January 2005, 01:52 AM

Hi Jen,

I have seen older hilts that have been modified by placing a guard on. The photo below is one, however the guard was subsequently lost. I make this comment only to illustrate that even if the screw is relatively modern the hilt still may be quite old.

Jeff

Jens Nordlunde · 30th January 2005, 05:24 PM

Hi Jeff,

It is difficult to guess, but I will try anyway. To me it looks as if the guard has been cut off, this could mean that it has been broken – not reparable, or that the (new) owner did not like a guard.
I have another hilt where the guard is missing, but here it is clear, that the guard must have been loose from the start, and must have fallen off. Loose guards can’t have been so seldom as many believe, although I do believe that most guards were forged to the hilt.
Interesting hilt you show, are the eyes mountain crystal?

Jens

Jeff D · 30th January 2005, 06:09 PM

Hi Jens,

I am glad you asked about the eyes as I would like your opinion. I bought this one a couple years ago, and had the blade repolished. It has a nice pattern weld damascus. The eyes have a gummy substance that I think held in gems but they are long gone. I would like to have them replaced, and was thinking of rubies, but would like to be correct. What kind of gems do you think were original.
I have a scan of a very similar hilt from Z. Zygulski's Polish collection book but I can't make out the eyes (I don't have the original book).

Thanks
Jeff

Photo 1, My hilt
Photo 2, Zygulski's hilt

Jens Nordlunde · 30th January 2005, 08:26 PM

Hi Jeff,

Yes, you are right, the eyes are 'dead' meaning thet the stone is dead, which I doubt, somthing else it the matter.
Got the book. This is most interesting. I will try to find out more, and come back, but it looks like onyx in the book, could also be something else.
I will also show you how the Indians dealt with having a nice grip, although some did not have the money to pay for such a 'grip' - when new, it would have look exactly like the real thing:-)- later.

Jens

Andrew · 30th January 2005, 08:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jens Nordlunde

Hi Andrew,

I think it is this one you are thinking of.

Yes. Thanks for posting it again.

B.I · 30th January 2005, 10:10 PM

hi,
jens sword has all the remnants of a mid to late 19thC piece. the style of the hilt and the decoration seem to confirm this. during this period, the decorative arts of india progressed into an 'exhibition' standard. the great exhibition of 1851 kick started this, to be followed on by the parisian exhibition and the many durbars back in india. it was during this time, that the artists were brought forward and their art was recognised. they left their marks like the more traditional artist, even signing their work (in rare circumstance). its strange as before this period, it was the bladesmith that took all the glory.
i wonder if it was the british that could take the credit for this, recognising the pure artistry of the time. most tend to think of the british as the raj, and forget the legacy they left in people like hendley, watt and going back to william jones and the asiatic society. these outstanding individuals all became heavily involved in the local arts, and in many cases became patrons and promoted them amongst the locals, as well as their fellow countrymen back home.
the dehli exhibition of 1903 (catalogued by watt) is a good example of this, as it gave these artists from all over india a chance to come forth and take a bow.
i believe jens sword to be of this period, and one where the artist is showing off his art to a captive public.
only jens can decide whether the knuckle guard is en suite. the scroll design (where the quillions should be) seems complete and you would think that one side would 'reach out' to incorporate a knuckle guard. however, i would be inclined to assume it was of the same period and not later. if the colour of gold and style of decoration match, i would think it right. i wouldnt be detered by the screw thread. this did exist, expecially in pieces of this period. i have seen pommels unsrew and in one case, hold a maker signature under the pommel disc (hidden from view). other exampes of screw thread appear commonly on axes and on sword canes, crutches, combination weapons etc.
jeffs missing knuckle guard could be for different reasons, all speculative. i do know one thing, that the knuckle guard itself, being a 'thin' protrusion is prone to 'metal fatigue' when it has been bent, then straightened a few times. this seems to the most obvious reason for its disappearance, although intentional removal can also be an option.
also, i hope the desription of a similar hilt in the polish book doesnt lead any people astray. the book itself is notoriously mis-described and i done believe this to be persian for a second. i suppose, for once, the term 'indo-persian' can be justified as it is indeed indian with a persian influence.

Jeff D · 30th January 2005, 10:33 PM

Thanks B.I. for the reply. I think Dr. Zygulski may have been thrown off by the Assadulla cartouche and the shamshir style blade. My sword is more obviously a Indian tulwar with a riccasso even though mine has the Assadulla cartouche as well.
BTW what do you think the eyes were made of?

Jeff

Jens Nordlunde · 30th January 2005, 11:06 PM

B.I. very well described – thank you. Are you looking into the ‘eyes’, or should I do it?
I think you did a very fine, and interesting research, which all of us can learn from.
On this forum, it should not be so much guessing, as research and knowning.

Jens

B.I · 30th January 2005, 11:22 PM

hi jens/jeff,
i'm afraid the eyes are up to you guys

i've never had much interest in stones, prescious or otherwise. as my collective taste go early, rather than decorative, i rarely need to unearth any real information on this. i did have a deccani dagger with a stone hilt which was a nightmare to research. it seems that everyone is an expert and everyone disagrees. i think the closest i got was jasper, but i still wasnt convinced. i know the stone predated the 17thC (or sat comfortably within it)but the islamic 'experts' all had opinions that i could tear apart which but a few simple questions. its funny how people tend to fall apart when you hit them with a totally unreasonable and completely unexpected 'why?'
so i bow out gracefully. give me a piece of indian metal and i'll ramble on way past desertion (i am by own best audience) but jewellery is out of my sphere.

Jens Nordlunde · 31st January 2005, 11:22 AM

Well Jeff, I think B.I. has taken a step back, and left the scene to the experts – the two of us (lol).
I have mailed to a friend in Poland, to ask what kind of stones the eyes, on the sword shown in Persian Arms and Armour are made of. When I have an answer I will let you know.
Should I start guessing I would say, that you most probable can use any colour of stone, as stones on a hilt are likely to fall out, and would be replaced with what ever stone was at hand – I think.
Before I forget it, remember that the colours have a symbolic value and meaning - so maybe 'any colour' is not correct.

If you have a look at the picture, you will notice something strange about the ‘stones’. Some of them are ‘dead’ and some have a nice colour. These are not stones; these are glass/crystal, with coloured metal foil behind, which gives the colour. The fittings are lead with rests of gold foil. When the dagger was new, it must have looked very nice. Even when they used gemstones, they often used metal foil behind the stones to make the light reflect better if the hilt was Jade. Was the hilt gold or silver they made sure that the surface behind the stone was scratched, to get the same effect.

Jens Nordlunde · 31st January 2005, 02:11 PM

Come to think of it, I remember to have seen red (ruby), green (emerald), white (diamond) and black (onyx?) eyes, but I don’t remember to have seen yellow, or pink eyes for that matter.
The symbolic meaning is important, just like with any form of decoration used on the Indian weapons.

Jens

Jeff D · 31st January 2005, 05:09 PM

Thank you Jens, for all your effort. I really do appreciate it!

Jeff

Battara · 1st February 2005, 12:36 AM

Jens, I thought that kundun technique was the only one used on such high end pieces. This uses 24K gold, not lead. The stones look second rate at best (if not glass) and so I wonder if the lead, foil, and poorer stones was a later attempt at repairing what was lost on this khanjar.

26th January 2005, 10:40 PM	#1
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	Decoration on Indian blades Decoration on blades have during time been very different, sometimes the decoration was ‘only’ the watering, sometimes it was inlays or maybe koftgari, but now and again it was something quite different – animals cut out of the steel, and inlaid in gold or other precious metals, and the artists were good - very good, they were masters. Have a look at this. Attached Images

27th January 2005, 03:34 PM	#5
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	I like the Indian blade with carvings, the animals are not made stiff, they are moving, and you can see it – true artists make carvings like this. Most blades showing animals fighting or walking in procession are hunting swords, which of course does not mean, that they could not be used for other purposes. On both sides of the blade is an inscription, one in Farsi and the other one in an Indian dialect. A strange thing is, that the hand guard can be screwed off, but it is clear that the screw thread is handmade. In Leo S.Figiel’ On Damascus Steel, pages 104-5, you can see a hilt very much alike, but whether this hand guard can be screwed off is not known, as he does not mention anything about it. Attached Images

27th January 2005, 03:41 PM	#6
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	Here is the whole sword. The blade type is a Kirach. Total length 86 cm. Attached Images

28th January 2005, 02:58 AM	#7
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 9,952	Jens, Another absolutely beautiful weapon! The type of blade, the kirach, is especially interesting, especially in ths type hilt. I am inclined to think this is a Rajput weapon and the hilt form corresponds to similar khanjars from Rajasthan. The decorative motif depicting various animals on the blade is termed 'shikargaha' in India, and seems to derive from Persian craftsmanship in such motif. It is generally presumed that these decorative blades are typically found on blades of 'hunting' swords, as the figures of animals in varying action situations suggest. There are examples with wider range of figures including one with a tiger attacking a mahout (elephant driver), a tiger attacking a horseman, some even with a horseman pursuing a foot soldier. It was a very common practice in India, at 'durbar', to present gifts of ceremonial weapons to achieved individuals and persons of high status, many which certainly included so called hunting weapons, or as it seems, possibly weapons carrying depictions of events. Possibly there were certain allegorical themes or totemic symbolisms used in metaphor in many of these wonderfully crafted blades, aside from seemingly random depictions of various animals and figures. Weapons have long been vehicles to carry important iconographic and traditional symbolism in most cultures, regardless of how subtily these messages are carried. Best regards, Jim Last edited by Jim McDougall; 28th January 2005 at 03:51 AM.

28th January 2005, 05:31 PM	#9
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	Here you can see how it was screwed onto the hilt. I think I forgot to tell that the blade is wootz - sorry. Attached Images Last edited by Jens Nordlunde; 28th January 2005 at 08:20 PM.

27th January 2005, 02:54 AM	#2
tom hyle Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 1,254	wow! That's a tulwar?

27th January 2005, 05:18 AM	#3
Andrew Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: USA Posts: 1,725	Oh, my. Those animals are carved into the blade. Jens, will you post photos of the full sword, please? I'm eager to see more. Thanks for sharing.

27th January 2005, 01:14 PM	#4
tom hyle Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 1,254	Interesting that both animals being attacked art domestic animals, bringing the hand or representation of man into the struggle. I don't think a leopard will really attack an elephant; it may be "same as a lion" (my favourite name, I think, for an animal; "what's that animal?" "It's equal to a lion." 'nuff said about it.) but I don't think a lion will do that either; I have heard that a tiger will upon ocassion, or lions in a gang....nice carving though, and there seems to be some evocation of the purpose/excuse for an heroic/armigerous class in the attack of domestic animals by wild ones.

28th January 2005, 04:53 AM	#8
tom hyle Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 1,254	I don't understand where the screw is?

28th January 2005, 10:45 PM	#10
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	Just one more thing. Not all of the hand guards were made together with the hilts. Sometimes the hand guards were made seperate and fitted to the hilt. Jens

29th January 2005, 12:11 AM	#11
tom hyle Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 1,254	Interesting. Thanks.

29th January 2005, 03:02 AM	#12
Andrew Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: USA Posts: 1,725	Another outstanding sword, Jens. Thank you for sharing this with us. Jim's comments above remind me of a katar you posted on the old forum with similar scenes. For some reason, I was unable to find it. Could you post photos of it for comparison? That is, if my memory is accurate. Can you estimate an age on this sword? How common is this handle form? It is certainly seen, as Jim notes, on khanjars, but I've really not seen it on older swords. Many contemporary weapons feature it, however. Thanks again!

29th January 2005, 10:23 AM	#13
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	Hi Andrew, I think it is this one you are thinking of. Attached Images

29th January 2005, 10:24 AM	#14
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	Here is a detail. Attached Images

29th January 2005, 12:58 PM	#15
Alam Shah Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Singapore Posts: 1,248	Excellent pieces. Both of them. (Museum quality).

29th January 2005, 08:20 PM	#16
Jeff D Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: B.C. Canada Posts: 473	Nice pieces Jen thanks for sharing them with us. Could the hand guard be a later add on? The one in Figiel's book seems to attach in two places so it is unlikely it screws on. I wonder if your hilt was made with out the guard and was added later as fashion or need dictated. Thanks again for bringing these pieces up. Jeff

29th January 2005, 10:45 PM	#17
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	Jeff, I don't really know, but if the hand guard on mine was not bend so much, or the angle it was photographed in, was different it would also look as you describe. That Figiel has not commentet on it does not mean that the hand guars on his former sword, ccan not be screwed off, he might not have found it interesting, or maybe he did not even notice. It took me some time before I found out that it was loose. Jens

30th January 2005, 01:52 AM	#18
Jeff D Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: B.C. Canada Posts: 473	Hi Jen, I have seen older hilts that have been modified by placing a guard on. The photo below is one, however the guard was subsequently lost. I make this comment only to illustrate that even if the screw is relatively modern the hilt still may be quite old. Jeff Attached Images

30th January 2005, 05:24 PM	#19
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	Hi Jeff, It is difficult to guess, but I will try anyway. To me it looks as if the guard has been cut off, this could mean that it has been broken – not reparable, or that the (new) owner did not like a guard. I have another hilt where the guard is missing, but here it is clear, that the guard must have been loose from the start, and must have fallen off. Loose guards can’t have been so seldom as many believe, although I do believe that most guards were forged to the hilt. Interesting hilt you show, are the eyes mountain crystal? Jens

30th January 2005, 06:09 PM	#20
Jeff D Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: B.C. Canada Posts: 473	Hi Jens, I am glad you asked about the eyes as I would like your opinion. I bought this one a couple years ago, and had the blade repolished. It has a nice pattern weld damascus. The eyes have a gummy substance that I think held in gems but they are long gone. I would like to have them replaced, and was thinking of rubies, but would like to be correct. What kind of gems do you think were original. I have a scan of a very similar hilt from Z. Zygulski's Polish collection book but I can't make out the eyes (I don't have the original book). Thanks Jeff Photo 1, My hilt Photo 2, Zygulski's hilt Attached Images

30th January 2005, 08:26 PM	#21
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	Hi Jeff, Yes, you are right, the eyes are 'dead' meaning thet the stone is dead, which I doubt, somthing else it the matter. Got the book. This is most interesting. I will try to find out more, and come back, but it looks like onyx in the book, could also be something else. I will also show you how the Indians dealt with having a nice grip, although some did not have the money to pay for such a 'grip' - when new, it would have look exactly like the real thing:-)- later. Jens

30th January 2005, 10:10 PM	#23
B.I Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 485	hi, jens sword has all the remnants of a mid to late 19thC piece. the style of the hilt and the decoration seem to confirm this. during this period, the decorative arts of india progressed into an 'exhibition' standard. the great exhibition of 1851 kick started this, to be followed on by the parisian exhibition and the many durbars back in india. it was during this time, that the artists were brought forward and their art was recognised. they left their marks like the more traditional artist, even signing their work (in rare circumstance). its strange as before this period, it was the bladesmith that took all the glory. i wonder if it was the british that could take the credit for this, recognising the pure artistry of the time. most tend to think of the british as the raj, and forget the legacy they left in people like hendley, watt and going back to william jones and the asiatic society. these outstanding individuals all became heavily involved in the local arts, and in many cases became patrons and promoted them amongst the locals, as well as their fellow countrymen back home. the dehli exhibition of 1903 (catalogued by watt) is a good example of this, as it gave these artists from all over india a chance to come forth and take a bow. i believe jens sword to be of this period, and one where the artist is showing off his art to a captive public. only jens can decide whether the knuckle guard is en suite. the scroll design (where the quillions should be) seems complete and you would think that one side would 'reach out' to incorporate a knuckle guard. however, i would be inclined to assume it was of the same period and not later. if the colour of gold and style of decoration match, i would think it right. i wouldnt be detered by the screw thread. this did exist, expecially in pieces of this period. i have seen pommels unsrew and in one case, hold a maker signature under the pommel disc (hidden from view). other exampes of screw thread appear commonly on axes and on sword canes, crutches, combination weapons etc. jeffs missing knuckle guard could be for different reasons, all speculative. i do know one thing, that the knuckle guard itself, being a 'thin' protrusion is prone to 'metal fatigue' when it has been bent, then straightened a few times. this seems to the most obvious reason for its disappearance, although intentional removal can also be an option. also, i hope the desription of a similar hilt in the polish book doesnt lead any people astray. the book itself is notoriously mis-described and i done believe this to be persian for a second. i suppose, for once, the term 'indo-persian' can be justified as it is indeed indian with a persian influence.

30th January 2005, 10:33 PM	#24
Jeff D Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: B.C. Canada Posts: 473	Thanks B.I. for the reply. I think Dr. Zygulski may have been thrown off by the Assadulla cartouche and the shamshir style blade. My sword is more obviously a Indian tulwar with a riccasso even though mine has the Assadulla cartouche as well. BTW what do you think the eyes were made of? Jeff

30th January 2005, 11:06 PM	#25
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	B.I. very well described – thank you. Are you looking into the ‘eyes’, or should I do it? I think you did a very fine, and interesting research, which all of us can learn from. On this forum, it should not be so much guessing, as research and knowning. Jens

30th January 2005, 11:22 PM	#26
B.I Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 485	hi jens/jeff, i'm afraid the eyes are up to you guys i've never had much interest in stones, prescious or otherwise. as my collective taste go early, rather than decorative, i rarely need to unearth any real information on this. i did have a deccani dagger with a stone hilt which was a nightmare to research. it seems that everyone is an expert and everyone disagrees. i think the closest i got was jasper, but i still wasnt convinced. i know the stone predated the 17thC (or sat comfortably within it)but the islamic 'experts' all had opinions that i could tear apart which but a few simple questions. its funny how people tend to fall apart when you hit them with a totally unreasonable and completely unexpected 'why?' so i bow out gracefully. give me a piece of indian metal and i'll ramble on way past desertion (i am by own best audience) but jewellery is out of my sphere.

31st January 2005, 11:22 AM	#27
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	Well Jeff, I think B.I. has taken a step back, and left the scene to the experts – the two of us (lol). I have mailed to a friend in Poland, to ask what kind of stones the eyes, on the sword shown in Persian Arms and Armour are made of. When I have an answer I will let you know. Should I start guessing I would say, that you most probable can use any colour of stone, as stones on a hilt are likely to fall out, and would be replaced with what ever stone was at hand – I think. Before I forget it, remember that the colours have a symbolic value and meaning - so maybe 'any colour' is not correct. If you have a look at the picture, you will notice something strange about the ‘stones’. Some of them are ‘dead’ and some have a nice colour. These are not stones; these are glass/crystal, with coloured metal foil behind, which gives the colour. The fittings are lead with rests of gold foil. When the dagger was new, it must have looked very nice. Even when they used gemstones, they often used metal foil behind the stones to make the light reflect better if the hilt was Jade. Was the hilt gold or silver they made sure that the surface behind the stone was scratched, to get the same effect. Attached Images Last edited by Jens Nordlunde; 31st January 2005 at 11:52 AM.

31st January 2005, 02:11 PM	#28
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	Come to think of it, I remember to have seen red (ruby), green (emerald), white (diamond) and black (onyx?) eyes, but I don’t remember to have seen yellow, or pink eyes for that matter. The symbolic meaning is important, just like with any form of decoration used on the Indian weapons. Jens

31st January 2005, 05:09 PM	#29
Jeff D Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: B.C. Canada Posts: 473	Thank you Jens, for all your effort. I really do appreciate it! Jeff

1st February 2005, 12:36 AM	#30
Battara EAAF Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 7,226	Jens, I thought that kundun technique was the only one used on such high end pieces. This uses 24K gold, not lead. The stones look second rate at best (if not glass) and so I wonder if the lead, foil, and poorer stones was a later attempt at repairing what was lost on this khanjar.