Huge sword - Persia or Caucasus

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 ?

wolviex · 22nd December 2005, 07:48 AM

Thank you for discussion Gentlemen. For answers on your questions you'll have to wait for someone else Rivkin, becasue in Persian history I'm definitely less educated than anyone of you.
Stupid but obvious question passed through my head yesterday. We're agree all this is Persian, and if it's Persian than it can be only 19th century. But this weapon, it's shape, sheath are characteristic for another country (or maybe only I think they are) - so do we have any historical resources this is Persian not, i.e. Caucasian - literature, drawings, etc.? Or maybe the size of this thing per se means Persian. On my piece there are symbols on the blade - ok, we can probably say they're Persian for sure, but what about other pieces, and conviction about their origin?

21st December 2005, 11:05 PM	#1
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	#2
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 ?

22nd December 2005, 07:48 AM	#3
wolviex Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Poland, Krakow Posts: 418	Thank you for discussion Gentlemen. For answers on your questions you'll have to wait for someone else Rivkin, becasue in Persian history I'm definitely less educated than anyone of you. Stupid but obvious question passed through my head yesterday. We're agree all this is Persian, and if it's Persian than it can be only 19th century. But this weapon, it's shape, sheath are characteristic for another country (or maybe only I think they are) - so do we have any historical resources this is Persian not, i.e. Caucasian - literature, drawings, etc.? Or maybe the size of this thing per se means Persian. On my piece there are symbols on the blade - ok, we can probably say they're Persian for sure, but what about other pieces, and conviction about their origin?