Persian Shamshir

[Roland_M]

Hello,


Received just a few days ago, I proudly present this Persian Shamshir.
With 970 gram it’s a pretty heavy sword, 79cm from point to point, ~84cm along the cutting edge, ~9cm deep curvature, 92 cm with the hilt. Typical dimensions and weight for an early Persian Shamshir.
I'm pretty sure, that the current hilt was later added.

I have no better pictures right now, sorry.

The blade saw some heavy battle action, not too much notches but it was brutally bended. It took hours to straighten the blade out.

The blade is not made from wootz, it is pattern welded steel of an unknown type. Looks like small straps of fine steel, parallel to the cutting edge with some unexplainable points. I just started to restore the blade, it will take some weeks from now on. After the work is finished, I can show better pictures.

I hope, someone can translate the cartouche. I think there is probably a date “111” which means 1111 or Gregorian calendar 1699. Is that right or a wrong guess? If the blade was made during the Abbas-period or shortly after, it’s a first prize.

Now I hope for some benevolent comments.



Best wishes and a nice weekend,
Roland

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Roland_M

Hello,


Received just a few days ago, I proudly present this Persian Shamshir.
With 970 gram it’s a pretty heavy sword, 79cm from point to point, ~84cm along the cutting edge, ~9cm deep curvature, 92 cm with the hilt. Typical dimensions and weight for an early Persian Shamshir.
I'm pretty sure, that the current hilt was later added.


Now I hope for some benevolent comments.



Best wishes and a nice weekend,
Roland

I would like to see some more images when you have some, for obvious reasons.

[Roland_M]

Originally Posted by estcrh

I would like to see some more images when you have some, for obvious reasons.

Yes I will make more and better pictures for you. My very first guess was Afghan Pulwar but it has no sharp back edge (Yelman).

[mariusgmioc]

Originally Posted by estcrh

I would like to see some more images when you have some, for obvious reasons.

Hello,

I remember discussing quite extensively your Pulowar recently (the discussion we had about the fullers at the thread regarding the blade of my Pulowar), so you know my opinion.

Now, I find very strange that the base metal in the cartouches shows nothing of the "wear" the rest of the blade shows. If the blade was corroded then cleaned, shouldn't the cartouches be equally corroded and cleaned? What protected the cartouches from the corrosion that presumably affected the rest of the blade? What protected the cartouches and the cartouches alone with such minute precision?

And just as a hunch, I believe both swords come from the same workshop, but of course more detailed photos would help a lot (I am particularly curious about the fullers, more exactly about the beginings/ends of the fullers).

[ariel]

Eric,
Egg-zactly my feeling!

I do not think pics are good enough to be certain it is not wootz, but Roland is likely be correct: some kind of mechanical damascus.


It is dated 1197 (1782-1783). At that time Persian shamshirs were routinely made of wootz. I am not saying that we can reliably exclude Persian origin because of that point, but the likelihood of it goes down.

The blade is also not exactly Persian: configuration of grooves and the Tamerlan's "three dot" tamga push me eastward of Isphagan:-)

I think this one is Afghani.


Marius,

You have a suspicious mind, my friend:-))) I have encountered the only other similar degree of mistrust on several Russian sites, but I cannot blame them: they have an industrial level of forgery, re-assembly, new inscriptions, the whole nine yards. Understandably, their paranoia is in the fifth gear. I do not have any doubts in the authenticity of Roland's shamshir. Of course, the bladesmith could have shaved off some years in the dating cartouche, but... well... who did not:-) However, my worst case scenario would be 19 century.
And, as to the same workshop... Blades were mass-produced in hundreds and thousands of workshops existing across the humongous area over 100 + years. One needs to have similarities of orders of magnitude higher than that to claim same masters.

Roland, good find! Congratulations and enjoy the new puppy!

[mariusgmioc]

Originally Posted by ariel

Marius,

You have a suspicious mind, my friend:-)))

At least we can agree on something!

[ariel]

Originally Posted by mariusgmioc

At least we can agree on something!

Oh no! We agree on MANY things, just your antennae twitch 10 times more frequently than mine. I bet you correctly identify fakes more often than I do.

[A.alnakkas]

Originally Posted by mariusgmioc

Hello,

I remember discussing quite extensively your Pulowar recently (the discussion we had about the fullers at the thread regarding the blade of my Pulowar), so you know my opinion.

Now, I find very strange that the base metal in the cartouches shows nothing of the "wear" the rest of the blade shows. If the blade was corroded then cleaned, shouldn't the cartouches be equally corroded and cleaned? What protected the cartouches from the corrosion that presumably affected the rest of the blade? What protected the cartouches and the cartouches alone with such minute precision?

And just as a hunch, I believe both swords come from the same workshop, but of course more detailed photos would help a lot (I am particularly curious about the fullers, more exactly about the beginings/ends of the fullers).

I've seen this very same sword prior to its etching. It was aggressively and inconsistently etched. Who ever polished decided not to touch the cartouches and tried hard to get a pattern out of the steel thus giving it the inconsistent look.

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by A.alnakkas

I've seen this very same sword prior to its etching. It was aggressively and inconsistently etched. Who ever polished decided not to touch the cartouches and tried hard to get a pattern out of the steel thus giving it the inconsistent look.

Which one are you referring to?

[A.alnakkas]

Originally Posted by estcrh

Which one are you referring to?

One with the Afghan hilt.

[mariusgmioc]

Originally Posted by A.alnakkas

I've seen this very same sword prior to its etching. It was aggressively and inconsistently etched. Who ever polished decided not to touch the cartouches and tried hard to get a pattern out of the steel thus giving it the inconsistent look.

Interesting. A possible explanation.

Thank you!

[estcrh]

Another similar example.

[Roland_M]

Better pictures under daylight conditions.

In one or two days I can make some pictures of the pattern.

I have already polished a window in the surface, to try out the best etching method. This should be done before the complete restoration.

[mariusgmioc]

Thank you for the additional photos!

Definitely different from the Pulowar above. The fullers are quite clearly hand chiseled and the cartouche displays the same wear like the rest of the blade.

Also the pattern welding appears to be significantly better since there is no visible de-lamination.

Regards,

Marius

PS: The fact you struggled to straighten the blade, shows that it is a good steel blade, the real thing. Almost invariably all display/tourist/fake blades are very easily bent/straightened as they are made of low carbon steel or plain iron as that is much easier to machine.