Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Ethnographic Weapons
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 29th May 2005, 07:43 AM   #1
ariel
Member
 
ariel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
Default Polish???? Karabela

What do you think about it?
I think it is Persian/Turkish, and not Polish (which determined an outrageous price that was disproportionate to the quality and the condition of the sword)
The handguard is not Polish at all. Beyond that... who can tell? The sword is in such sorry shape...
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...MEWA%3AIT&rd=1
ariel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th May 2005, 09:45 PM   #2
erlikhan
Member
 
erlikhan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Istanbul
Posts: 452
Default

Ariel, Polish karabelas must be more expensive than Turkish and Persian ones? Why?Are they very rare? The cross guard tip form looks more like Persian than Turkish to me but the blade can be European, the inscription is in Latin alphabet, not?

Last edited by erlikhan; 30th May 2005 at 01:47 AM.
erlikhan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th May 2005, 11:40 PM   #3
Ian
Vikingsword Staff
 
Ian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: The Aussie Bush
Posts: 4,200
Default

I watched that one soar out of my range and also wondered what someone thought they saw in it. Could be Persian but the blade does seem to be European. Perhaps someone here will shed light on why it went for as much as it did.

Ian.
Ian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th May 2005, 07:13 PM   #4
wolviex
Member
 
wolviex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Poland, Krakow
Posts: 418
Arrow resources

Gentlemen!

I don't why it was sold for so much money, maybe "Polish" in the name of the object is some kind magical . Instead, I think it is a time to shed a light on karabelas, based on some resources. I know the only one monograph, and it is article of prof. Zdzislaw Zygulski, who has took a try of classification the karabelas sabres in 1978. For me it's the only known article on this sabres at all. Because it was a try, I think there are some exceptions, which weren't include by the Author. Anyway I hope this excerpts and quotes will bring something new for you:

Professor Zygulski has made a classification and has divided karabelas on two basic groups: Turkish as a first group and Polish as a second. These two groups are divided further:
(only excerpts, I'm sorry for any grammar mistakes during translation and overall shortcut. Images below)
Zdzislaw Zygulski, Karabela i szabla orla (The Karabela and the Eagle Sabre), Studia do dziejów dawnego uzbrojenia i ubioru wojskowego (Studies in history of old arms and uniforms), T. VII, Krakow, 1978

1.
group A:
war-karabelas (17th c.) The characteristic, Turkish, 17th century war-karabela, has handle made of black buffalo horn, becoming a little narrow towards the pommel, decorated with engraved lines, with four big, brass rivets, steel quillons similar to Persian one, blade used to be European (from Styria) (…). As a trophy, karabelas from this group were used also in Poland. It is possible they were made or remade in Poland as well, anyway some of the scholars used to link this sabres as Polish.

group B:
decorated karabelas with war features. Handle made of different kinds of semiprecious stones or buffalo black horn, wood, ivory, with three rivets, decorated with curved lines, narrowing towards the quillon. Straight quillons ended with bulb knobs. Blade made of Damascus steel (more often). Made in Turkey, used also in Poland. Many of them are preserved in The Wallace Collection, among the others with Polish coat-of-arms.

Group c:
Armenian-Turkish karabelas (with quillons curved towards the blade)

2. Karabela in Poland:

Poland is the land where karabela has survived in fairly large quantities. Normally (and wrongly) almost every specimen is said to be of Polish make. In fact there were used in Poland real Turkish pieces, acquired by trade or taken in war, there were sabres made partly of imported elements, and, finally, there were sabres totally manufactured of local materials. The correct distinction of the Polish made karabela is not an easy task but we have several clues which help in this: formal and stylistic features, marks, inscriptions, and heraldic symbols etc. Here is also given an attempt at classification:

group I:
(end of the 17th cent. – early 18th cent.) – hilts of ivory or semiprecious stones, with three rivets (as is usual in Polish karabelas), decoration in gilded silver, repousee etc.

group II:
(about 1715-1730) – hilts preferably of semiprecious stones, set with golden wire, the quillons straight with small knobs at the ends, the blades of Damascus steel, often iscribed with Latin or Polish mottoes.

and groups III-V, which are from period not considered here (mid 18th-late 19th c.)

Polish classification was started from the 18th century, but we can add here all the karabelas mentioned in group A and B, most of them were Turkish, accepted in Poland, but there were many of them copied or altered in Poland. What is worth of mention - here we have only Turkish and Polish karabelas without Persian and other. So there is still much to do!

As we can see our Ebay karabela is similiar to the description of group A and B. It could be Turkish because it was made ca. middle of 17th century, it has European blade, persian-like quillons (as in group A), but there is problem with rivets - I can see only two instead of four or three at least. Maybe it is one exception which wasn't include by the Author? Anyway grip is IMO similar to those from group B. Of course this classification won't set in order all the mess with karabelas but it can be the first step, while it is not the first time we are discussing about those sabres.

Here are the images - illustrations for mentioned groups. As the last photo, karabela from my museum - let's make more mess - described as Polish from 17th century (isn't it similar to this one from ebay anyway? )
Attached Images
      
wolviex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th May 2005, 09:33 PM   #5
tom hyle
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Houston, TX, USA
Posts: 1,254
Default

wow! Thanks!
tom hyle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30th May 2005, 10:31 PM   #6
erlikhan
Member
 
erlikhan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Istanbul
Posts: 452
Default

Thanks for the info. Well, "Karabela" means "black curse" in Turkish language. So there is nothing Persian karabela, but just Persian type quilloned Turkish karabela right? Most of the Polish karabelas are also partially or completely Turkish made too. That can explain why they are often found in Turkey, but certainly more in very close past and were sold for any ordinary sword prices. Especially in western Black Sea region, as far as I heard. I'd like to understand what makes them so expensive abroad? Just because their hilt form proves they were produced latest early 1700s or before?

Last edited by erlikhan; 30th May 2005 at 10:58 PM.
erlikhan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th June 2005, 04:21 AM   #7
ariel
Member
 
ariel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
Default

Yet another one!
It is astonishing how the words "karabela" and "Polish" attract buyers!
IMHO, this is a South Arabian, most likely Yemeni, Saif.
Interesting, what kind of price the same sword would command had the description been correct?
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...MEWA%3AIT&rd=1
ariel is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:26 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.