Huge sword - Persia or Caucasus

Rivkin · 20th December 2005, 06:18 PM

Here is another monster that was sold by Artzi (43 inches). He identifies it as persian, and the engravings are quite typical persian work (I would guess ?).

I think it is somewhat similar to your sword.

P.S. It would be really great to see the letters on your sword.

wolviex · 20th December 2005, 06:23 PM

Thank you Ariel and Rivkin.

Indeed, the handle and the fuller of Artzi's piece are the same. I'll try to take a picture of these "letters" in a few days, but can't promise.

It's good to hear you're tending to call it Persian. In one of the catalogues it was called "shamshir" - but I'm not convinced it's a proper name for such "monster"

Regards!

Oriental-Arms · 20th December 2005, 08:16 PM

Hi all

An interesting sword indeed. In all our career we have examined three such swords, all of huge dimensions (we call it Qama to end all Qamas). 42-45 inches total length, 4-5 inches wide. One of these is posted above by Rivkin. The other one is shown below:

For more details on this sword see:Huge Qama

Another similar sword is shown in Tirri’s book, page 206, Fig 143, shown next to a normal size kindjal and defined as Quadarra.

In our opinion, these are Persian, Qajar period, second half of the 19C. In spite of the well forged steel, good sharp edges and good workmanship altogether these are ceremonial swords and not a fighting weapons. They are too big and cumbersome for battle use. We have heard several suggestions as execution swords, swords used in the Ashura celebrations of the Shiites etc.

One more word on our sword posted by Rivkin: It was originally purchased in Jerusalem in 1918, wandered to the USA and returned to Israel. This gives a latest possible date for it.

ariel · 21st December 2005, 12:57 AM

Here it is, and it is, of course, from the Bible of Caucasian swords: Astvatsaturyan. It is a Khevsur Palasche. The handles on those were covered with brass, just like the regular Khevsur swords (on top). I guess, the swords under discussion in this thread are, indeed, Persian. The Khevsur ones were not ceremonial: these people were too poor to manufacture ceremonial weapons. The price of a sword labeled "David Ferrara " was 25 cows, the simple straight "pranguli" cost 10-12 cows and the simplest one, "rusuli", 2-3 cows. At prices like that nobody could afford a "toy" weapon.

Rivkin · 21st December 2005, 05:59 AM

There is such thing as a georgian mega-kindjal, called satevari ("attack"). I have seen examples with total length of 27+ inches, and heard of XVIIIth century ones that were up to 35+ inches. I have never heard of anything larger than 40 inches.

At the same time these mega-kamas remind me of japanese "swords of gods", humongous, up to 10 feet long, but very high quality and quite functional swords, attributed to great heroes and gods of the past.
Concerning the ritual connection to ashura: I have seen lots of spires, knives and whips being used, but I can not imagine anything repeatable about someone taking this 7 pounds monster and trying to inflict some pain with it.

However, in my very humble opinion, Qajar period is known for not very functional but very symbolic and may be even slightly apprehensive for a muslim weapons - like Gorz-mace. While the shia sect is a complete darkness to me, it is Shahnameh, not Quran, Hadith or anything of a traditional islam that fueled these "revival" forms.

ariel · 21st December 2005, 11:05 PM

I agree with Rivkin.
There may be some psychological undertone: Persians were losing one war after another and were much better swordmakers than swordwielders. Perhaps, as a compensation, they tended to exaggerate their past military glories, exploits of their national heroes and the grandiosity of their weapons.
I have a strong suspicion that these giant Qamas were just an equivalent of "mine is bigger than yours". I also do not think these things were used for self-mutilation at Ashura festivals. The scalp wounds were in a large measure for show: bleed a lot but heal fast. With the giant Qama one could inadverently inflict some real damage.....

Rivkin · 22nd December 2005, 05:30 AM

and I concur with Ariel

.

The problem I always had with understanding Qajars is that on one side Qajars are from Azerbajan and they are turkoman. After 1820 they started to follow extremely pro-modern and somewhat anti-religious route, which included modernization of the army and later, imitation of russian military (which ended up with iranian "cossack" regiments). Azerbajan historical museum has an impressive collection of locally made gorz-maces, "revival" helmets and shields.

The problem with me (and it's probably that I don't know iranian history that well) that pre-islamic pan-persian nationalism a-la Pahlavi have always been anti-azeri in nature (they were declared to be turkish-speaking northern persians), at the same time there is nothing panturanistic or even turkophilic about Qajar period weapons (even those made in Azerbajan). Was turkish nationalism so dead there that people considered persian culture their only choise for nationalistic expression ? Or was it symbol of a reunited countries, after almost a century of internal strife ?

20th December 2005, 06:18 PM	#1
Rivkin Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 655	Here is another monster that was sold by Artzi (43 inches). He identifies it as persian, and the engravings are quite typical persian work (I would guess ?). I think it is somewhat similar to your sword. P.S. It would be really great to see the letters on your sword. Attached Images

20th December 2005, 08:16 PM	#3
Oriental-Arms Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Haifa, Israel Posts: 183	Huge Qama Hi all An interesting sword indeed. In all our career we have examined three such swords, all of huge dimensions (we call it Qama to end all Qamas). 42-45 inches total length, 4-5 inches wide. One of these is posted above by Rivkin. The other one is shown below: For more details on this sword see:Huge Qama Another similar sword is shown in Tirri’s book, page 206, Fig 143, shown next to a normal size kindjal and defined as Quadarra. In our opinion, these are Persian, Qajar period, second half of the 19C. In spite of the well forged steel, good sharp edges and good workmanship altogether these are ceremonial swords and not a fighting weapons. They are too big and cumbersome for battle use. We have heard several suggestions as execution swords, swords used in the Ashura celebrations of the Shiites etc. One more word on our sword posted by Rivkin: It was originally purchased in Jerusalem in 1918, wandered to the USA and returned to Israel. This gives a latest possible date for it.

21st December 2005, 12:57 AM	#4
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Here it is, and it is, of course, from the Bible of Caucasian swords: Astvatsaturyan. It is a Khevsur Palasche. The handles on those were covered with brass, just like the regular Khevsur swords (on top). I guess, the swords under discussion in this thread are, indeed, Persian. The Khevsur ones were not ceremonial: these people were too poor to manufacture ceremonial weapons. The price of a sword labeled "David Ferrara " was 25 cows, the simple straight "pranguli" cost 10-12 cows and the simplest one, "rusuli", 2-3 cows. At prices like that nobody could afford a "toy" weapon. Attached Images

20th December 2005, 06:23 PM	#2
wolviex Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Poland, Krakow Posts: 418	Thank you Ariel and Rivkin. Indeed, the handle and the fuller of Artzi's piece are the same. I'll try to take a picture of these "letters" in a few days, but can't promise. It's good to hear you're tending to call it Persian. In one of the catalogues it was called "shamshir" - but I'm not convinced it's a proper name for such "monster" Regards!

21st December 2005, 05:59 AM	#5
Rivkin Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 655	There is such thing as a georgian mega-kindjal, called satevari ("attack"). I have seen examples with total length of 27+ inches, and heard of XVIIIth century ones that were up to 35+ inches. I have never heard of anything larger than 40 inches. At the same time these mega-kamas remind me of japanese "swords of gods", humongous, up to 10 feet long, but very high quality and quite functional swords, attributed to great heroes and gods of the past. Concerning the ritual connection to ashura: I have seen lots of spires, knives and whips being used, but I can not imagine anything repeatable about someone taking this 7 pounds monster and trying to inflict some pain with it. However, in my very humble opinion, Qajar period is known for not very functional but very symbolic and may be even slightly apprehensive for a muslim weapons - like Gorz-mace. While the shia sect is a complete darkness to me, it is Shahnameh, not Quran, Hadith or anything of a traditional islam that fueled these "revival" forms.

21st December 2005, 11:05 PM	#6
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	I agree with Rivkin. There may be some psychological undertone: Persians were losing one war after another and were much better swordmakers than swordwielders. Perhaps, as a compensation, they tended to exaggerate their past military glories, exploits of their national heroes and the grandiosity of their weapons. I have a strong suspicion that these giant Qamas were just an equivalent of "mine is bigger than yours". I also do not think these things were used for self-mutilation at Ashura festivals. The scalp wounds were in a large measure for show: bleed a lot but heal fast. With the giant Qama one could inadverently inflict some real damage.....

22nd December 2005, 05:30 AM	#7
Rivkin Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 655	and I concur with Ariel . The problem I always had with understanding Qajars is that on one side Qajars are from Azerbajan and they are turkoman. After 1820 they started to follow extremely pro-modern and somewhat anti-religious route, which included modernization of the army and later, imitation of russian military (which ended up with iranian "cossack" regiments). Azerbajan historical museum has an impressive collection of locally made gorz-maces, "revival" helmets and shields. The problem with me (and it's probably that I don't know iranian history that well) that pre-islamic pan-persian nationalism a-la Pahlavi have always been anti-azeri in nature (they were declared to be turkish-speaking northern persians), at the same time there is nothing panturanistic or even turkophilic about Qajar period weapons (even those made in Azerbajan). Was turkish nationalism so dead there that people considered persian culture their only choise for nationalistic expression ? Or was it symbol of a reunited countries, after almost a century of internal strife ?