Turkish Kilij-translation requested

[A.alnakkas]

Originally Posted by ALEX

Dave, you are right about sham - it generally "runs the length of the blade". But it is also characterized by low contrast and low activity! The pattern on your blade is quite bold and active, and certainly of quite good quality. I'd not call it anywhere close to the "lowest on the list of desirable wootz patterns"
It's a nice blade! I also agree with A.alnakkas that the cross and coftgari inscription are recent (meaning post 19th Century ) and likely of Syrian origin, as could be the blade itself. I agree the blade is at least 19th Century.

I wouldnt argue with you, Alex, as you are far more experienced than me when it comes to wootz patterns. But isnt the pattern too bold to count as sham?

[ALEX]

Originally Posted by A.alnakkas

... But isnt the pattern too bold to count as sham?

Yes, I agree. In some areas it looks like so-called "wavy damask", i.e. non-sham wootz.
One of sham patterns is shown HERE , second from the top. There are many other sham patterns that can be quite bold and active. I'll show one of them soon.
These patterns are relatively easy to call sham, but the pattern on Dave's sword is quite complex in my opinion to be called sham with certainty. Would be interesting what others think.

[A.alnakkas]

Originally Posted by ALEX

Yes, I agree. In some areas it looks like so-called "wavy damask", i.e. non-sham wootz.
One of sham patterns is shown HERE , second from the top. There are many other sham patterns that can be quite bold and active. I'll show one of them soon.
These patterns are relatively easy to call sham, but the pattern on Dave's sword is quite complex in my opinion to be called sham with certainty. Would be interesting what others think.

Yes! I am interested as well as I have two blades with such pattern and never saw them as sham.

Interesting thing about those Syrian made mounts is often the quillons are old ones with added silver koftgari. Some are supposedly wootz too. Though I think the quillons on Dave's sword is Syrian made and recent while the rhino hilt is probably older with an obvious but skilfully made repair.

[DaveS]

Originally Posted by ALEX

Yes, I agree. In some areas it looks like so-called "wavy damask", i.e. non-sham wootz.
One of sham patterns is shown HERE , second from the top. There are many other sham patterns that can be quite bold and active. I'll show one of them soon.
These patterns are relatively easy to call sham, but the pattern on Dave's sword is quite complex in my opinion to be called sham with certainty. Would be interesting what others think.

In your opinion then which of the wootz types would this be called? I realize that there could be possibly many variations, as there are many types and variations of Indonesian pamor, so much so that even they can't always agree on just what this one or that one is...........Dave.

[ALEX]

Originally Posted by DaveS

In your opinion then which of the wootz types would this be called? I realize that there could be possibly many variations, as there are many types and variations of Indonesian pamor, so much so that even they can't always agree on just what this one or that one is...........Dave.

Dave, you're right. There are many variations of wootz. I like Anossov's classification (in Manfred Sachse "Damascus Steel" book p.72). He set 5 categories:
1. Stripy/Simple damask (sham) - predominantly straight lines
2. Water damask - shorter straight lines mixed with curved lines
3. Wavy damask - more complex curved lines mixed with dots
4. Checkered mottle (network) damask - shorter lines with random web-like bands
5. Ladder damask (aka Kirk-Narduban).

I think yours falls under #2 - Water damask.

Attached are some pictures for comparison (not related to above system).
# 3 is sham on Persian shamshir, and #4 - sham on Ottoman kilij blade. Your pattern is more complex (in some/most sections of the blade!). it resembles #1, with lines going in random directions with some dots.

[DaveS]

Originally Posted by ALEX

Dave, you're right. There are many variations of wootz. I like Anossov's classification (in Manfred Sachse "Damascus Steel" book p.72). He set 5 categories:
1. Stripy/Simple damask (sham) - predominantly straight lines
2. Water damask - shorter straight lines mixed with curved lines
3. Wavy damask - more complex curved lines mixed with dots
4. Checkered mottle (network) damask - shorter lines with random web-like bands
5. Ladder damask (aka Kirk-Narduban).

I think yours falls under #2 - Water damask.

Attached are some pictures for comparison (not related to above system).
# 3 is sham on Persian shamshir, and #4 - sham on Ottoman kilij blade. Your pattern is more complex (in some/most sections of the blade!). it resembles #1, with lines going in random directions with some dots.

Alex: I think this kilij might be a combination of #1 and 2. It seems to have predominately straight lines along with the shorter straight and curved lines. Thanks for these pictures also. I'll have to see if I can find a copy of this book "Damascus Steel". Is it still in print?.........Dave.

[ALEX]

Dave, the book is readily available. Make sure to get English version. It covers mainly modern mechanical damask, and has a chapter on wootz. it's a nice book overall and you can get it quite cheap now (PM sent).

[archer burak]

This one is not original Türk kılıç it seems made in afganistan , in these days we can see lots of them coming to istanbul too , there is no Türkish words on barrel , all seems arabic