Ram's head khanjar for comment

Sajen · 23rd August 2016, 07:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

It is not uncommon for broken blades from other weapons to be incorporated into daggers... I think the damage near the hilt is because of this re match.... Nice hilt and a good example of the Zoomorphic nature of these daggers.

First, I know next to nothing about Indian weapons but in my opinion you have hit the nail here! Old broken blade (from this the cracks in the blade) with an IMVHO old hilt, I see the wear in the good pictures, look the last picture in #1. And also the pitting at the handle let me think it's an old one. Both old/antique and put together I think.

Regards,
Detlef

mariusgmioc · 23rd August 2016, 09:21 PM

First, why Indo-Persian?! I am pretty sure this is a 100% Indian khanjar (AKA Mughal Dagger) that has nothing to do with Persia.

I like to believe that I am pretty familiar with current Indian production of swords & daggers.

In my opinion, both hilt and blade are old.

All recent production examples I have seen have hilts carved in stone (jade, soapstone, agate, jasper, etc.), bone, fake ivory, etc. but definitely not iron. Why?! Because Iron is very dificult to carve. Moreover, your hilt does not bear any characteristic of machining and is almost certainly chiseled and filed by hand. As far as I know, carved iron hilts of this type were quite popular in the 19th century, and that's precisely when I believe your hilt was made.

As with regards with the wootz blade, it appears to be crystalline wootz that was produced by the end of the classic wootz period, namely the first half of 19th century.

However, crystalline wootz quite similar to this is also currently produced but it is quite rare and definitely highly prized. Since yours displays very fine watering, as close as it gets to the classic wootz, I believe it is old because if it were newly produced, it would have been more expensive than classic wootz and would have definitely been mounted in a more exclusive hilt.

As with regards to the crack, it is possible the blade had an earlier mount but was damaged and then was remounted in the current hilt. However, I believe that this may have happened at least a century ago.

My conclusion is that you have an excellent classic example of a 19th century Mughal dagger.

Bob A · 23rd August 2016, 09:51 PM

While I have no problem with the idea that the blade might have been installed in the hilt after, perhaps some time after, the hilt came into being, I suspect it may have been made for a weapon of the relatively same dimensions as it currently exists. My thinking stems from the contours of the blade itself, with the gracefully thickened point and general recurved contours. In other words, the blade seems to me to be pretty much the ideal size and shape for the role it is playing.

This is not to deny the possibility of its having been broken, presumably near the hilt, in an earlier installation. This would also help account for the flaws seen near the hilt.

I'm comfortable locating its origin to an area between the Persian Gulf and the Irrawaddy River, below the Hindu Kush. It is undoubtedly older than I am.

Cthulhu · 24th August 2016, 02:01 AM

Thanks for the opinions and discussion; it's really interesting to learn a little of the thought process that goes into these evaluations.

Thanks also to Ibrahiim for the photos of other ram's head daggers. Aside from being nice pieces, they help me feel more confident that the protruding horns on my knife aren't ridiculously over-decorative.

I looked at some photos of wootz reproductions and billets on ebay, and I really can't tell the difference between them and my knife. But I also can't tell the difference between them and photos of period wootz, so I think I'm the real point of failure there. Is there somewhere (site/book/forum thread) with an explanation (and better yet side-by-side comparison photos) of what to look for? Or is it more a matter of experience and "feel"?

23rd August 2016, 09:21 PM	#2
mariusgmioc Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Location: Austria Posts: 1,911	First, why Indo-Persian?! I am pretty sure this is a 100% Indian khanjar (AKA Mughal Dagger) that has nothing to do with Persia. I like to believe that I am pretty familiar with current Indian production of swords & daggers. In my opinion, both hilt and blade are old. All recent production examples I have seen have hilts carved in stone (jade, soapstone, agate, jasper, etc.), bone, fake ivory, etc. but definitely not iron. Why?! Because Iron is very dificult to carve. Moreover, your hilt does not bear any characteristic of machining and is almost certainly chiseled and filed by hand. As far as I know, carved iron hilts of this type were quite popular in the 19th century, and that's precisely when I believe your hilt was made. As with regards with the wootz blade, it appears to be crystalline wootz that was produced by the end of the classic wootz period, namely the first half of 19th century. However, crystalline wootz quite similar to this is also currently produced but it is quite rare and definitely highly prized. Since yours displays very fine watering, as close as it gets to the classic wootz, I believe it is old because if it were newly produced, it would have been more expensive than classic wootz and would have definitely been mounted in a more exclusive hilt. As with regards to the crack, it is possible the blade had an earlier mount but was damaged and then was remounted in the current hilt. However, I believe that this may have happened at least a century ago. My conclusion is that you have an excellent classic example of a 19th century Mughal dagger. Last edited by mariusgmioc; 24th August 2016 at 10:43 AM.

23rd August 2016, 09:51 PM	#3
Bob A Member Join Date: Feb 2014 Posts: 443	While I have no problem with the idea that the blade might have been installed in the hilt after, perhaps some time after, the hilt came into being, I suspect it may have been made for a weapon of the relatively same dimensions as it currently exists. My thinking stems from the contours of the blade itself, with the gracefully thickened point and general recurved contours. In other words, the blade seems to me to be pretty much the ideal size and shape for the role it is playing. This is not to deny the possibility of its having been broken, presumably near the hilt, in an earlier installation. This would also help account for the flaws seen near the hilt. I'm comfortable locating its origin to an area between the Persian Gulf and the Irrawaddy River, below the Hindu Kush. It is undoubtedly older than I am.

24th August 2016, 02:01 AM	#4
Cthulhu Member Join Date: Feb 2014 Location: Central Valley, California Posts: 46	Thanks for the opinions and discussion; it's really interesting to learn a little of the thought process that goes into these evaluations. Thanks also to Ibrahiim for the photos of other ram's head daggers. Aside from being nice pieces, they help me feel more confident that the protruding horns on my knife aren't ridiculously over-decorative. I looked at some photos of wootz reproductions and billets on ebay, and I really can't tell the difference between them and my knife. But I also can't tell the difference between them and photos of period wootz, so I think I'm the real point of failure there. Is there somewhere (site/book/forum thread) with an explanation (and better yet side-by-side comparison photos) of what to look for? Or is it more a matter of experience and "feel"?