Old Khyber

[mahratt]

Hello Jim!

I enjoyed reading your version. It is very interesting. Thank you very much!

But, tell me, please, if we do not follow the path of “speculation” (which of course is very attractive) do you know the weapons of Kalash (kafirs) whose blades were decorated in the same style as the Khyber knife under discussion?
Personally, such examples are unknown to me.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by mahratt

Hello Jim!

I enjoyed reading your version. It is very interesting. Thank you very much!

But, tell me, please, if we do not follow the path of “speculation” (which of course is very attractive) do you know the weapons of Kalash (kafirs) whose blades were decorated in the same style as the Khyber knife under discussion?
Personally, such examples are unknown to me.

Thanks very much !!!
Actually it does not seem 'most' examples have such decoration, or any at all, however I would need to check my book further. The thing is that there have been a number of weapons (tulwar if I recall) which have had motif very similar.
Obviously I specified my thoughts were speculative at this point as I need examples or detail to support. My hopes at this point were that others aware of this tribal group might enter.

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Thanks very much !!!
Actually it does not seem 'most' examples have such decoration, or any at all, however I would need to check my book further. The thing is that there have been a number of weapons (tulwar if I recall) which have had motif very similar.
Obviously I specified my thoughts were speculative at this point as I need examples or detail to support. My hopes at this point were that others aware of this tribal group might enter.

Thank you so much for the answer, Jim

[Jim McDougall]

In trying to find examples of my suggestion, I found these examples of the mother goddess of the Hoi Mata (Holy Trinity) of the folk religion of these Chitral tribes. While one rendition was on an amulet of sorts, the other was on a pesh kabz (choora type hilt) scabbard throat. It is on the 'inside' of the silvered piece.
The pesh kabz, though obviously a widely known form in these regions and into India had the calyx at the base of he hilt, as seen on most Khyber knives etc. and is considered a Central Asian affectation. The blade (not pictured) is the recurved pesh kabz form.

Despite this type of motif seen as shown in these examples, its appearance on a Khyber knife, unusual among these Kalash tribes in itself, the occurrence in acid etched design is even more baffling.

A single figure, crowned, mounted and with what 'appears' to be a Hegira date, is incongruent and I have not found distinct examples of Kalash weapons with this type etching. The pesh kabz example with the three figures is the only one found thus far.

My suggestion is intended only for consideration pending further evidence or if possible, proof of such decoration on a Khyber knife in this manner being authentically placed. Barring that proof, the possibility of this being a 'creatively' enhanced 'old Khyber' which might have been indeed intended for sale in the bazaars of Chicken Street remains in place.

[motan]

My 2 cents:
- The knife itself looks true to type and old, although sophisticated forgery of the whole knife, as well as later "decoration" can not be totally rejected. We will probably never know. The argument that this is not typical of Khyber knifes only means that and no more. A-typical weapons are found in all categories (like in Jimws example).

- The same can be said about the Sunni vs Shia argument: in general, Sunni items contain less imagery than Shiite items, but that is all.
As far as I know, in Islam, like in Judaism, imagery of human and animals is not explicitly forbidden in the source writing (Quran, Old Testament). What is forbidden is any RELIGIOUS imagery because of the fear of idolatry. The way this is interpreted varies greatly with place/culture, time and type of object. Miniatures painting with humans and animals are common in Ottoman, Persian and Mughal cultures. Rugs, weapons and ceramics from Sunni cultures have sometimes images of humans and animals in realistic, stylized or abstracted form. Further, thinking about Sunni Islam in terms of the Wahabite movement or Isis, which are true iconoclasts, is wrong and not representative.

A more productive way to approach this knife would be to try to read the texts and see in what language they are written and what they say.

[Kubur]

Originally Posted by motan

A more productive way to approach this knife would be to try to read the texts and see in what language they are written and what they say.

Exactly what I was saying before, of course!

There are no rules: you have Tunisian Ottoman barrels full of riders, animals and men... And they were sunni...

But we all agree that it is a bit suspicious...

Ariel you didn't post close photos of the blade next to the broken bolster. It would be interesting to see the how the etching looks like there...

http://vikingsword.com/vb/showthread...t=powder+flask

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by motan

- The same can be said about the Sunni vs Shia argument: in general, Sunni items contain less imagery than Shiite items, but that is all.
As far as I know, in Islam, like in Judaism, imagery of human and animals is not explicitly forbidden in the source writing (Quran, Old Testament). What is forbidden is any RELIGIOUS imagery because of the fear of idolatry. The way this is interpreted varies greatly with place/culture, time and type of object. Miniatures painting with humans and animals are common in Ottoman, Persian and Mughal cultures. Rugs, weapons and ceramics from Sunni cultures have sometimes images of humans and animals in realistic, stylized or abstracted form. Further, thinking about Sunni Islam in terms of the Wahabite movement or Isis, which are true iconoclasts, is wrong and not representative.

A more productive way to approach this knife would be to try to read the texts and see in what language they are written and what they say.

Dear colleagues, I am surprised at your approach to the discussion...
What we have? We have one dagger, the scabbard of which is decorated with anthropomorphic figures, using the technique typical of this region. And we also have a powder flask (of unknown origin) with similar images that are made in the same technique as the images on the scabbard.
Fine! But, this is one of the only known weapons on which there are anthropomorphic images. And, by the way, the Kalash and residents of Chitral (that is, kafirs) were until recently pagans. That is, they had no restrictions on the images of humans and animals.
But even among kafirs, we cannot find several objects weapons (5-10-15) with anthropomorphic images that would allow us to talk about a tendency to decorate blades or at least details of the scabbard with anthropomorphic figures ...
Nevertheless, let's consider that I am too picky and let's assume that the dagger with anthropomorphic images on the scabbard, which Jim so kindly placed in the topic of discussion, is an important fact.

But there are still "small" problems...
1) Kafirs never used the technique of decorating blades that we see on blade Ariel’s Khyber knife. Not used, because they did not know how to decorate blades in such a technique. And they could not learn, since all the Hindu Kush nationalities lived in very isolation (by the way, therefore, they have kept paganism for so long).
2) Kafirs had no contact with Persia (this is if we decide to fantasize that the blade of the Khyber knife was decorated in Persia).

Therefore, the version with Kafiristan and its proud residents - you can forget.

Now back to the issue of "banning images of people by the Sunnis." Third time, I am very very I ask those who say that the Turks decorated the weapons with anthropomorphic images to place in this threadOttoman objects of the 19th century made by Turkish masters and decorated with Turkish masters, on the blades of which you can see images of a person or even animals.

Originally Posted by motan

The argument that this is not typical of Khyber knifes only means that and no more. A-typical weapons are found in all categories (like in Jimws example)..

Reputable motan, unfortunately, you view the past through the “prism of modernity” (that is, from the perspective of modern views). In an archaic society, which the Afghans represented in the 19th century (and even more so the Kafirs Hindu Kush ), there can be no a-typical weapons decorated in an a-typical technique for this culture. There may be trophies, but not objects typical of society, with some a-typical features.
It is incorrect to appeal to the dagger posted by Jim, since we do not know provenance of this dagger.
And most importantly, daggers, like the one Jim showed us, appeared in Afghanistan at the very end of the 19th century - early in the 20th century (This, by the way, does not make them less interesting ).

[Richard G]

I think, if the date 1229 was using the Jalali calendar it corresponds to 1850 Gregorian.
Regards
Richard

[ariel]

Originally Posted by motan

My 2 cents:
- The knife itself looks true to type and old, although sophisticated forgery of the whole knife, as well as later "decoration" can not be totally rejected. We will probably never know. The argument that this is not typical of Khyber knifes only means that and no more. A-typical weapons are found in all categories (like in Jimws example).



A more productive way to approach this knife would be to try to read the texts and see in what language they are written and what they say.

The inscription is in Farsi. I saw word “Allah” and am almost sure the entire text is a part of one of the Suras.
Regretfully, I discarded all other images and cannot find them. Will try more, but 99% it will be something generic and not helpful.

Motan turned this discussion into a rational direction. And Richard G’s suggestion of a Jalali calendar is appropriate accounting for the Farsi inscription and mass production of etched blades in Persia at that time.

I would like to ask a general question: on what grounds do we discard unusual objects as some kind of “fake”?
This khyber ( and right away: I did not buy it simply because it was not very interesting to me ) is indeed unusual for several reasons. But inventing stories of “souvenir”, “last 20-30 years”, “Sunni religious beliefs” is not productive. We see tons of unusual, atypical weapons, but as Motan rightfully said, this means only that they are atypical, and no more.
Shouldn’t we rely in our assessments on physical facts?
By now everybody agrees that this khyber is genuinely old. Wouldn’t it be honest to conclude that we have no idea when its blade was etched? That “1229” may be a genuine date ( even in Jalali)?

I think that a proper way of attributing and dating old weapons should be based on hard facts and not on rash personal feelings. This is how every branch of real science works.
And if we do not have facts at our disposal, we need to humbly conclude that we just cannot date an object based on the existing information instead of dumping it into a garbage bag of seller’s shenanigans. We may conclude that we do not like it, that our antennae are twitching etc., freely admit it, and no more. And not buy it. This is a realm of emotional response, but not a scientific approach.

This Forum prides itself on striving for scientific approach. Jim is a walking encyclopedia of esoteric information, Jens forgot more about Indian weapons than we all remember, Motan seriously studies shibriyas, Battara is our Moro guru, Alan knows more about Indonesian Kris than anybody I know etc, etc. ( sorry if I did not mention other people, but I had to stop somewhere:-))
Even they admit from time to time that they do not know something and cannot pass an informed judgement. Shouldn’t we all adopt a similar attitude?

“Just the facts, Ma’am!”

[mahratt]

Let's talk about the facts.

Fact number 1. There is a Khyber knife, which is original and can may dated to the late 19th - early 20th century (well, even if the middle of the 19th century) and looks absolutely typical for Afghanistan
Fact number 2. On the blade of the khyber knife there is a strange decoration, absolutely not typical for Afghanistan
Fact number 3. In Afghanistan, souvenir "old weapons" are very actively being made and truly antique weapons are being modernized (blades and other elements). Moreover, the main "modernization" is aimed specifically at decorating blades with images.
Fact number 4. Archaic societies have a hard time accepting something new. They use their usual things. Therefore, the appearance of one "unique" subject always raises questions. Especially if it has all the other features typical of the archaic society in which it was made.
Fact number 5. There are unique blades. They can be made, for example, on the border territories between two cultures. But! Then these blades have not only one feature (for example, a decorated blade). Then they differ from the “classic” ones in the shape of the blade and the handle, etc.
Fact number 6. If an object from a traditional archaic society is decorated in a technique that is not traditional for this society, and also with non-traditional decor (anthropomorphic figures), then all fantasies about its “originality” - unfortunately, will remain fantasies, until 100% confirmation of the authenticity of the "decor" is found...

I understand that each of us wants to have extraordinary items in our collection. items in which there is something exclusive (and this is not necessarily perfect condition or gold and precious stones) ...
But, as it seems to me, we should all be very careful in our assumptions, otherwise too “exclusive” items may appear in our collection:
- Bukhara shashka, which were recently made from Afghan shashkas ...
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=21726
- "Balkan Kilij" of the Syrian work ...
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=25209
and even - "Russian Khyber Knife" with a modern fake stamp "Zlatoust" ...
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=21329

I will be very happy for the respected Ariel, if in the memoirs of English officers or in the work of some ethnographers there is a mention that they saw the blades of Afghan Khyber Knife, decorated in such a technique, and even with anthropomorphic figures. But as I understand it, while there is no such information?
In the meantime, observing the trends that have appeared on the "antique weapons fake market" in Afghanistan and Pakistan, decorated blade of this item raises at least great doubts about its authenticity.

[Kubur]

Originally Posted by ariel

The inscription is in Farsi. I saw word “Allah” and am almost sure the entire text is a part of one of the Suras.

I won't be so sure, it might be poetry, you might have names, places...

Richard's date looks very right.

Originally Posted by ariel

I would like to ask a general question: on what grounds do we discard unusual objects as some kind of “fake”?

Answer ignorant and arogance

A few years ago when I joined this forum, i trusted very much members opinions. I remember for some khanjar and others objects. Now i don't.
Most of the members here (including myself - sometimes) have very limited ideas and they base their opinions only on their own knowledge (unfortunately sometimes based only on Google and wikipedia).

Fake, modern, recent is an easy way.
I remember a discussion on the Greek yataghans, it was a disaster: statments without any proofs (only the ones that I provided and were turned against my own demonstration) and this by reputable and knowledgable members.

Originally Posted by ariel

to conclude that we have no idea when its blade was etched? That “1229” may be a genuine date ( even in Jalali)?

Another point for you Ariel is why doing such complicated "fake", the script and the rider, all these decorations are very rich and i wonder if someone wanted to enhance an object to sell it to a dealer or a collector, he would have spend so much time. One inscription, one date wouldb have been more than enough. In short your sword and the etching are problably genuine and it's true that the doubts that we might have are based mainly on the uniqueness of the object.

Originally Posted by ariel

Even they admit from time to time that they do not know something and cannot pass an informed judgement. Shouldn’t we all adopt a similar attitude?
“Just the facts, Ma’am!”

I can give you many examples such as the Berber swords from Morocco it was decided by Forum members that these swords are all Spanish colonials from the Carabean or South America. When you have many nimcha with Spanish blades and I know some of these swords were collected in Morocco...

It's not only about facts, it is also how you use the references and the facts (again look at the discussionon the Greek yataghan).