Turkish Shamshir

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by ALEX

The grip (and the sword on it) that you pictured above is not saif. Saif is an Arabic word for "sword", and represents Arabian/Bedouin sword type with (usually) straight blade. The one pictured above is Indian.

I and many other people would consider it to be a saif, maybe an Indian saif but still a saif, you certainly would not call it a tulwar. As I said, it does not matter what the origin of the term is, how it is used in our times can and does differ from its original meaning. The term "saif" for many people in our times has come to describe swords from many different cultures with this distinctive hilt. As I said people can use terms whatever way they want but when I hear the word "saif" this is what I see in my mind, just like when I hear "kilij" I picture the distinctive Ottoman hilt, while the blades may differ the hilt is a very static item.

[Kubur]

Originally Posted by estcrh

I and many other people would consider it to be a saif, maybe an Indian saif but still a saif, you certainly would not call it a tulwar. As I said, it does not matter what the origin of the term is, how it is used in our times can and does differ from its original meaning. The term "saif" for many people in our times has come to describe swords from many different cultures with this distinctive hilt. As I said people can use terms whatever way they want but when I hear the word "saif" this is what I see in my mind, just like when I hear "kilij" I picture the distinctive Ottoman hilt, while the blades may differ the hilt is a very static item.

Hi Strech,

I agree for the end of what you wrote.

I think that the blade is Caucasian or Persian. But some members will tell.

Anyway it's a pure Turkish / Ottoman sword.

Best,

[ALEX]

Originally Posted by estcrh

I and many other people would consider it to be a saif, maybe an Indian saif but still a saif, you certainly would not call it a tulwar. As I said, it does not matter what the origin of the term is, how it is used in our times can and does differ from its original meaning. The term "saif" for many people in our times has come to describe swords from many different cultures with this distinctive hilt. As I said people can use terms whatever way they want but when I hear the word "saif" this is what I see in my mind, just like when I hear "kilij" I picture the distinctive Ottoman hilt, while the blades may differ the hilt is a very static item.

and many people call it wrong! Saif is an Arabic word for Arabian sword type. Calling an Indian tulwar Saif because it has non-tulwar hilt is like calling indian sword Kilij because it has yelman. The "Origin of the term" does matter! and dismissing it in favor of how it is used in "our time" is simply not correct as it defies history)

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by ALEX

The "Origin of the term" does matter! and dismissing it in favor of how it is used in "our time" is simply not correct as it defies history)

Just like "katar" and many other terms, its good to know the origins, history and the original meanings but you also have to adjust with the times, armor and weapons terms are fluid and they do change over time.

[ALEX]

Originally Posted by estcrh

Just like "katar" and many other terms, its good to know the origins, history and the original meanings but you also have to adjust with the times, armor and weapons terms are fluid and they do change over time.

..sorry, I do not understand what this means.
Katar is katar and will remain katar over time. why would any term change for the same type of weapon? Why all of the sudden some call an Indian sword Saif? the term is used inadvertently by many but it is not good reason to "adjust". Also, where did you see this handle type being associated with or called Saif?

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by ALEX

Katar is katar and will remain katar over time. why would any term change for the same type of weapon?

Are you sure, not everyone agrees with you.

The katar originated in South India where its original name was kattari before being altered to katara (romanized as "katar" by the British)

[ALEX]

Originally Posted by estcrh

Are you sure, not everyone agrees with you.

this is semantics, really. it is essentially the same term and I am not arguing about the spelling, dialect or pronunciation of the same weapon type.
But my point is: it's wrong to call Indo-Persian sword an Arabian sword, don't you disagree?

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by ALEX

this is semantics, really. it is essentially the same term and I am not arguing about the spelling. But my point is: it's wrong to call Indo-Persian sword an Arab sword, don't you disagree?

Alex, I personally do not think there is anything wrong with calling an Indian sword with a saif hilt a "saif hilted Indian sword"....if someone told me over the phone that they just purchased an Indian sword I would have no idea what it looked like, on the other hand if it was described as a "saif hilted Indian sword" I would have a good idea what the sword looked like.