Help translating inscription on shamshir
 

Hello I'm posting this for a friend, and I was wondering if anyone could help us with the translation on this shamshir. We are more into Japanese arms and armour and this kind of weaponry is not really our area of knowledge. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance.
Austin

bump

Hi Austin
your "shamshir" present some unusual particularisms (at least for me)
- the reading of the date, give what seems a none sense
- the juxtapostion of "Damascus" and "Al Sham", normally, it's either one or the other, because both are the same place

the translation of the cartouche gave;
- sana hegira 875 - in English "Hegirian year 875"
either 1470 Gregorian calendar :eek: honestly I doubt about the veracity of that date, didn't match with the sword, even the blade,
but may be, m'I wrong ? :o

the long sentence running along the blade it's for 4/5 a poem, following by those words;
"amal Damascus Al Sham" - in English "made at Damascus Damascus"

the poem is too difficult to be translated, at least for my translator :shrug: due to, some old forms of writting and syntax

à +

Dom

Also, I do not think we can call it a "shamshir". The pistol handle and long quillons suggest Ottoman origin. They did use a "shamshir"-type blades, but those were properly called Kilic Ajjemi: foreign sword. That may also explain the Al-Shams/Damascus point: it belonged to the Ottomans.
And, indeed, Dom is correct about the date of 875H. Perhaps, there might be a "1" before the "8"? !875 in Gregorian written with Arabic numerals? I am really going on a limb...

Ariel
you have to take in consideration, the mention in Arabic: "sana Hegeri" (Hegeri year)
that mention cancel all doubt of confusion :shrug:
and the writting, it's clear

à +

Dom

This is very interesting. I can read some of the Arabic dates, but I thought I had to be wrong when it came out to 1470, because of the shape of the blade, but thanks to Dom independently confirming the date there is know little doubt in my mind, that the date is 875 or 1470. I just recently got to see this sword again and it is definitely made out off Damascus steel as well as the hand guard, and if I was judging the patina on the hand guard like a tsuba I would say it is at least 500 years old. While there still is a possibility off this being a later fake, I wonder if this could be one of the blades captured by the Ottomans from the Mamluk's around 1516? Does anybody know of any swords from around this time period that state that they were made in Damascus or any sword at all that states it was made in Damascus? Once again Dom I just want to thank you very much for the translation, you have been extremely helpful.

I know, I know...
I was just desperately trying to reconcile the nonreconcilable...:-(
I also doubt that the blade is old mameluke. Would be nice, of course, but I have read too many descriptions of swordmakers putting earlier dates on their blades to increase their value. Mind you, I do not think for a moment it is a modern fake, but a possibility of a 19th cen blade being presented as the 15th one needs to be considered.

I completely agree with Ariel. The earlier-dated cartouches are too common on later blades, and this blade suggests it as such. It is very doubtful a 15th Century blade. The heavily patinated crossguard like this is not necessarily an indication of 500 y.o. age, it's shape also suggests 18/19 Cent.
But, Ariel, I'd call it a Shamshir. Should a Kilic have yelman?