An indian shamshir with a persian blade

[Drabant1701]

I got this Indian shamshir not to long a ago. Its heavy (over 900grams) and 93cm long. I would guess it is ca 1800 and that the fittings are the original ones.

The blade appears to be persian and is made of good high contrast wootz. It is has a magic square and is signed assadullah isifani i think, I would rather it was signed something else since its the most used and least informative signare there can be on a blade.

Grip is leather on wood with gold applied over it, the end piece is missing on both sides so either it had a metal end piece or the wood extended all the way and has come lose. This seem to be a less common type of grip in India and I would not say it was an Indian sword based just on the grip.

But the crossguard is clearly made in India, it is gold over copper with flowers punched into the material. Almost all the gold is gone, I imagine the gold layer was very thin so that the flower would still show through. I would think its made in north India, Kutch has a lot of gold on copper with flowers attributed to it.

Its to bad that the condition is not so good and that the grip is damage and the scabbard is missing. I would have love to see it in its pride.

Any additional informations and or/and corrections of my assumptions would be greatly appreciated.

[ariel]

Leather cover of handles was a trademark of Central Asian, especially Turkmen, shamshirs.

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by ariel

Leather cover of handles was a trademark of Central Asian, especially Turkmen, shamshirs.

This is somewhat of a misconception. Leather cover of handles was found in Afghanistan, and in the khanates of Central Asia, and even on the outskirts of Persia.
It is important to note that none of these regions used embossed leather decorated with gold on the handle. So, in my humble opinion, the Indian origin of this shamshir is beyond doubt.

By the way, Drabant1701, congratulations on the acquisition of a wonderful shamshir.

[Battara]

I love this. The wootz is amazing and the gold koftgari work is nice.

[ariel]

Originally Posted by mahratt

This is somewhat of a misconception. Leather cover of handles was found in Afghanistan, and in the khanates of Central Asia, and even on the outskirts of Persia.
It is important to note that none of these regions used embossed leather decorated with gold on the handle. So, in my humble opinion, the Indian origin of this shamshir is beyond doubt.

By the way, Drabant1701, congratulations on the acquisition of a wonderful shamshir.

Regretfully, I failed to find examples of Persian shamshirs with leather-covered handles in the Khorasani’s book, in the Polish collections , in the Hales’ book or in any other source. Similarly, such covers were not described in the D. Miloserdov’s ( Mahratt’s) Russian article on the materials used for shamshir handles and in his book on Afghani weapons.

I would not be surprised to see Turkmen swords on the “ outskirts of Persia”, since it has a large border with Turkmenistan and large Turkmen minority population, or Tajik/Uzbek swords in Afghanistan with similarly extensive borders and large populations of Tajiks and Uzbeks ( there are ~4 times more Tajiks in Afghanistan than in Tajikistan) who resisted Russian occupation of their lands ( See Basmachi) and escaped to Afghanistan in the 192O-30s carrying their weapons.

Leather covers of shamshir handles were typical Central Asian features, not inherently Persian or Afghani. In the latter locations they are largely family heirlooms, last remnants of their national liberation movement.

Simillarly, I am unaware of any Indian shamshirs with leather handle covers .

Thus, I doubt we can define a shamshir with Persian blade and typical Central Asian leather cover of the handle as Indian.


Drabant, you got yourself an incredibly rare sword in excellent condition! Congratulations!

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by ariel

Regretfully, I failed to find examples of Persian shamshirs with leather-covered handles in the Khorasani’s book, in the Polish collections , in the Hales’ book or in any other source. Similarly, such covers were not described in the D. Miloserdov’s ( Mahratt’s) Russian article on the materials used for shamshir handles and in his book on Afghani weapons.

I would not be surprised to see Turkmen swords on the “ outskirts of Persia”, since it has a large border with Turkmenistan and large Turkmen minority population, or Tajik/Uzbek swords in Afghanistan with similarly extensive borders and large populations of Tajiks and Uzbeks ( there are ~4 times more Tajiks in Afghanistan than in Tajikistan) who resisted Russian occupation of their lands ( See Basmachi) and escaped to Afghanistan in the 192O-30s carrying their weapons.

Leather covers of shamshir handles were typical Central Asian features, not inherently Persian or Afghani. In the latter locations they are largely family heirlooms, last remnants of their national liberation movement.

Simillarly, I am unaware of any Indian shamshirs with leather handle covers .

Thus, I doubt we can define a shamshir with Persian blade and typical Central Asian leather cover of the handle as Indian.

"Just because we don't know something exists doesn't mean it doesn't exist" ©

I am very pleased that you follow my publications so carefully. But you probably forgot that the article "Typology of Shamshir handles" was written by me almost 10 years ago. Since then, I have had the opportunity to get acquainted with a large number of sabers from Afghanistan and Central Asia and their neighboring states.
I recommend at your leisure to leaf through my book "Edged Weapons of Afghanistan" to refresh your memory of what is published in it.
On page 123 (if my memory serves me right) you will find an example of a shamshir from Afghanistan with a leather-covered handle (I am posting a good photo of it in the topic).



Similar samples of shamshirs from Khorasan are also known (by the way, these sabers came from there in significant quantities to the Turkmen tribes).

In the khanates of Central Asia (Kokand, Khiva and Bukhara), the hilt was not covered with leather, as on the shamshir that I show and the magnificent shamshir that Drabant shows. In this region, a special cover made of soft leather (suede) was sometimes put on top of an ordinary bone or horn handle.
You are confusing the leather cover on the handle of the shamshir, which was really used in Central Asia, with the handle, on the surface of which the skin is glued.

I am very interesting, in connection with which are trying in almost any topic that affects Russia, are you trying to write information that 1) is not directly related to the topic under discussion, 2) distorts historical facts?
Either you do not know the history of the country from which you left many years ago, or for some reason you deliberately distort historical facts. In either case, it doesn't add a friendly feel to forum threads.
What I mean:
1) It is at least strange to write that "the Basmachi resisted the Russian occupation", speaking of the 1920-1930s. After all, since the end of the 19th century, the entire territory of Central Asia actually became part of the Russian Empire. You cannot "occupy" what is already yours. And, what is most curious, After the territories of the Turkmen tribes were conquered, there was no "resistance to Russian occupation" in the region. Moreover, those same Turkmens voluntarily served in the army of the Russian Empire.
Perhaps you simply did not know that the appearance of Basmachi in the region is associated with illiterate, and sometimes illegal and even criminal actions of soldiers and commanders of the Red Army, who in 1919-1920 forcibly tried to involve thenative people Central Asia in the World Revolution. At the same time, neither religious nor traditional features of the native people were taken into account.
2) It is difficult to call the Basmachi participants in the national liberation struggle (although in Uzbekistan the authorities are now trying to do this, trying to rally the population with the ideas of nationalism). It is impossible to talk about the national liberation struggle if society is divided into three parts: those who supported the Basmachi, opponents of the Basmachi (those who supported the Soviet government) and neutral people (they were in the majority).
3) Those Basmachi who fled to Afghanistan in the 1930s and remained there were overwhelmingly armed with modern (at that time) firearms (rapid-firing rifles), which they were supplied by emmisars from Great Britain, who actively supported the Basmachi. Undoubtedly, these Basmachi also had edged weapons (sabers and daggers). But by 1930, it no longer played a significant role.


In conclusion, I would like to ask you to post in the topic a few photos of shamshirs from Central Asia with "leather" handles. I think a good example in the topic will not be superfluous.

[ariel]

I know full well that the Forum has very negative attitude to political discussions.
But we are discussing historical weapons here and history includes politics.

We cannot discuss Indian weapons without mentioning the roles and actions of British government or of EIC, the "Mutiny", Afghani weapons without mentioning the causes and aftermaths of British-Afghani wars , Philippine weapons without mentioning Spain and the USA, French in Indochina and North Africa, Britain in Arabia, Portuguese in India and Arabia, Mughals in South India etc, etc, etc.

By the same token, the consequences of different Russian governmental actions in the Caucasus and Central Asia need to be discussed to understand histories and weapons of those regions.

We obviously have very different views and you are entitled to yours. However, I would suggest you read the book by Paul Bergne " The birth of Tajikistan" and Richard Frye's " The heritage of Central Asia". Perhaps, they will add something to what you were taught at school.

Just one comment: unilaterally pronouncing that some other country taken by force becomes your permanent and inviolable property and then asserting that any anti-occupation (liberation) movement is illegal because " You cannot " occupy" what is already yours" is a non sequitur. We can see it even today in daily news.

On a lighter note, Monty Python had a skit in which pupils were forced to pray for the memories of soldiers who "died to keep China British":-)))