Turkish or Persian?

[ariel]

I took as an example a wonderful sword just sold by Oriental-Arms.
http://www.oriental-arms.com/item.php?id=3785

The blade is of a Persian shamshir, but the handle is of typical Ottoman " bulbous" form, and the crossguard has long Ottoman quillons.
The scabbard is also of Persian pattern ( no wire stitching) as well as the suspension rings ( oval and integral with the fitting, rather than free rings, customary to the Ottoman pattern).

So, the question: is it Ottoman or Persian?
Turks used shamshir blades on their swords and called them " Adjemi Kilic".
But this one has such a saturated mix of Turkish and Persian elements, that I just do not know how to attribute it.
This is not the first one I see, and the question pops up every time.

[Oriental-Arms]

Persian in my humble opinion. The grip is a later additon (as mentioned in the description) and made (wrongly) in a Turkish style. There is no grip strap and no holes in the pommel as one would expect to find on a Turkish shamshir. The cross guard is very Persian. Turkish shamshirs will mostly go with brass and/or silver cross guard and steel cross guards is rarely seen on Them. Also the gold decoration (which is en suite with the carrying rings) is made in a Persian style. I really think that whoever added the horn handle was replacing a damaged grips but did not really know what he was doing and mixed up styles he has seen on various swords.

When I first received this sword I was quite tempted to put the right Persian style handle, but the (wrong) handle addition is quite old and the sword was probably used by its owner after this addition, so out of "respect to its age" I decided to leave it as is.

[ariel]

Originally Posted by Oriental-Arms

Persian in my humble opinion. The grip is a later additon (as mentioned in the description) and made (wrongly) in a Turkish style. There is no grip strap and no holes in the pommel as one would expect to find on a Turkish shamshir. The cross guard is very Persian. Turkish shamshirs will mostly go with brass and/or silver cross guard and steel cross guards is rarely seen on Them. Also the gold decoration (which is en suite with the carrying rings) is made in a Persian style. I really think that whoever added the horn handle was replacing a damaged grips but did not really know what he was doing and mixed up styles he has seen on various swords.

When I first received this sword I was quite tempted to put the right Persian style handle, but the (wrong) handle addition is quite old and the sword was probably used by its owner after this addition, so out of "respect to its age" I decided to leave it as is.

Dear Artzi,
First, Gmar Hatima Tova!
I agree with everything you said, and you have mentioned yet additional "pro-Persian" features.
But my question is a more general one: we see the hybrid "Otto-Persian" swords now and then, and the preponderance of elements from one culture is often not as pronounced as here. They are truly a melange of styles, which would be not unexpected since the two countries were in close contact both in peace and war, and the swordmakers moved from one to another. Also, some adjacent areas ( Caucasus, for example) were under the influence of both cultures and manufactured weapons of a multitude of styles and sold them both to Turkey and Iran.
When ( if ever) did the pure styles started to mix? The existence of the so-called Adjemi Kilic-es and Atesh-Kilic-es ( wavy shamshir blades) in Turkey testifies to the widespread infusion of non-Turkish elements into the Ottoman Empire, and, likely, the reverse was also true ( Pala blades with Persian decorations and high contrast wootz, for example).

How do we attribute these melange weapons?