An unusual Shaska

[TVV]

I believe the seller was correct. The guard was taken from a late 19th century Ottoman military pattern, and the crescent on the pommel is certainly consistent with an Ottoman use as well. There seems to have been a lot of variation and leeway in 19th century military patterns in the Empire and it is a topic I am not familiar with at all. There is a book on Ottoman military sword patterns by Branko Bogdanovic, but it is in Russian and not easily available from major online book retailers.

Teodor

[Jim McDougall]

Wow! Harry, good call!!
While of course this is not a 'shashka' per se', It certainly is an anomaly which is likely in the spectrum of variants as Ottoman forces were being 'westernized' as well as the possibility of this being aligned with the Caucasian and Balkan forces of the Ottomans.

The clefted pommel with the characteristic shashka profile as well as the blade, which seems compellingly like East European (often Hungarian) forms which also were often seen on shashkas, suggest possible association in Janissary units (?) or those using Caucasian forces.

As Teodor well notes, the guard, though incongruent, looks like an Ottoman military type.

There have been numbers of these unusual hybrids coming from Ottoman ranks, and one other type I think of is the sabre which for all intents and purposes like a kilij or pala with a stirrup type knuckleguard, and these were 19th century as well.

Excellent example !!!

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Wow! Harry, good call!!
While of course this is not a 'shashka' per se', It certainly is an anomaly which is likely in the spectrum of variants as Ottoman forces were being 'westernized' as well as the possibility of this being aligned with the Caucasian and Balkan forces of the Ottomans.

Jim, I see no reason why this would (not) be a shashka, the Circassians used shashka and were heavily involved with the Ottoman forces and later the New Turkish governmant forces following their exile from Russia, they are mentioned quite frequently along with a few other ethnic groups including the Zeybek as irregular forces used in military campaigns during the 1800s and into the 1900s. This sword could have been an attempt to display alignment/allegiance with the Ottoman/Turkish forces by a Circassian.

On the other hand....it could have also been a war trophy captured during one of the militry conflicts between the Ottomans/Turkish forces and the Russians that was later Ottomanized a bit by its new Ottoman/Turkish owner with the addition of a guard and cresent.

There are some examples of Ottoman mounted shashkas that I have seen, it would have been helpful if Harrys new sword had come with a scabbard as well.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by estcrh

Jim, I see no reason why this would be a shashka, the Circassians used shashka and were heavily involved with the Ottoman forces and later the New Turkish governmant forces following their exile from Russia, they are mentioned quite frequently along with a few other ethnic groups including the Zeybek as irregular forces used in military campaigns during the 1800s and into the 1900s. This sword could have been an attempt to display alignment/allegiance with the Ottoman/Turkish forces by a Circassian.

On the other hand....it could have also been a war trophy captured during one of the militry conflicts between the Ottomans/Turkish forces and the Russians that was latter Ottomanized a bit by its new Ottoman/Turkish owner with the addition of a guard and cresent.

There are some examples of Ottoman mounted shashkas that I have seen, it would have been helpful if Harrys new sword had come with a scabbard as well.

Estcrh, thanks for the great insight and for the agreement with my observation about the Caucasians (Circassians) in Ottoman service.
As I had noted, "it is not a shashka per se'" thus NOT actually a shashka but a weapon composite using the general form plus crossguard.
Agree, a scabbard always is helpful when evaluating these kinds of composite items...but this one still very intriguing.

[ariel]

There is a long ( and often pretty vicious) argument about the origins of shashka. The blade is relatively simple: early Circassian blades were mostly European, very light, but later Daghestani ones could be quite heavy.
But the origin of the eared guard-less handle is still a mystery.
My guess is that it stems from the Turkish yataghan ( pure IMHO)

If so, re-fitting Caucasian shashka with an Ottoman crossguard might not have been such an unnatural idea for the owner and exiled Circassians ( muhadjirs) seem to be a natural group for the mix of an old and the new traditions.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by ariel

There is a long ( and often pretty vicious) argument about the origins of shashka. The blade is relatively simple: early Circassian blades were mostly European, very light, but later Daghestani ones could be quite heavy.
But the origin of the eared guard-less handle is still a mystery.
My guess is that it stems from the Turkish yataghan ( pure IMHO)

If so, re-fitting Caucasian shashka with an Ottoman crossguard might not have been such an unnatural idea for the owner and exiled Circassians ( muhadjirs) seem to be a natural group for the mix of an old and the new traditions.

Thank you Ariel, that is most interesting perspective regarding the application of the crossguard on this example, and might explain this 'hybrid' case.
The idea of cleft pommel swords with heavy yataghan type blades were known as well in European units of the late 18th into 19th c which were attuned to the 'pandour' unit concept.
That of course simply notes the instance as an analogy concerning cleft pommel swords, which are indeed not always shashkas.

As you well note here, while unusual, this example could be a melding of old and new traditions and this may have been a shashka after all.

[arsendaday]

Harry, I was bidding on this one myself, but it got too expensive for me. I was really curious about this one as well and its good that a member of this forum got it so we can discuss it here. For all it's similarities to a Caucasian shashka it was never one. I am basing my opinion on the outer side of the handle: as it can bee seen it has a little bump just before the cross-guard and no shashka Caucasian or Russian has that. This bump is not added, because the blade tang has the same form. In most Caucasian and early Russian shashkas the outer edge of the handle is flat and continues almost seamlessly into the blade. Some of them have a handle that is slightly larger than the blade, but still there are no bumps or protrusions on them. The later Russian and Soviet shashka handles have three parts and put together they are a bit larger than the blade but still follow the same outline. IMHO this sword was thought and made this way and not modified. I think this was an experiment to incorporate a crossguard to a shashka type sword for the protection, as the Russians did with their Dragoon shashkas. Below are the photos of a
1. Caucasian shashka handle (Silver)
2. Russian shashka handle
3. Russian Dragoon shashka handle (with a guard)

[harrywagner]

Originally Posted by ariel

There is a long ( and often pretty vicious) argument about the origins of shashka. The blade is relatively simple: early Circassian blades were mostly European, very light, but later Daghestani ones could be quite heavy.

One of the first things I noticed when I unpacked it was how light it is. It must have been a formidable weapon; strong and firm but light as a feather. Between a bathroom scale and a food scale I can probably determine its weight, if that would help. Let me know, and thanks to all for the help.

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Estcrh, thanks for the great insight and for the agreement with my observation about the Caucasians (Circassians) in Ottoman service.
As I had noted, "it is not a shashka per se'" thus NOT actually a shashka but a weapon composite using the general form plus crossguard.
Agree, a scabbard always is helpful when evaluating these kinds of composite items...but this one still very intriguing.

Jim, my mistake in not checking what I wrote before posting, it should have read "I see no reason why this would NOT be a shashka". This sword comes at a good time as I have been searching for shashka with Ottoman scabbards and Harry comes up with an Ottoman fitted shashka sword. While thousands of Circassians ended up in the Ottoman empire and kept using shashka,I have not found many examples of shashka scabbards with an Ottoman influence and Harrys shashka is the first sword I have seen with an Ottoman influence.

Here is an example of a shashka with Ottoman type mounts.

[Jim McDougall]

Thank you Estcrh, I was pretty sure we were on the same page
Outstanding illustrations (as always) and incredible details.
With these Ottoman scabbards it seems I once knew the terms describing them (the distinct little 'springs' in the gap) but darned if I can find the notes.
It really is interesting to see the kinds of variations in weaponry the diversity of ethnicity in Ottoman forces brought.

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

With these Ottoman scabbards it seems I once knew the terms describing them (the distinct little 'springs' in the gap) but darned if I can find the notes.

Jim, I seem to remember a particular term as well, but "with characteristic Ottoman metal spiral stitched scabbard" works. This shashka appears to be another example.

[arsendaday]

Originally Posted by estcrh

Jim, my mistake in not checking what I wrote before posting, it should have read "I see no reason why this would NOT be a shashka". This sword comes at a good time as I have been searching for shashka with Ottoman scabbards and Harry comes up with an Ottoman fitted shashka sword. While thousands of Circassians ended up in the Ottoman empire and kept using shashka,I have not found many examples of shashka scabbards with an Ottoman influence and Harrys shashka is the first sword I have seen with an Ottoman influence.

Here is an example of a shashka with Ottoman type mounts.

Nice photos Estcrh! While they may not be a lot of Ottoman Shashkas surviving today, they were actually being made in Ottoman Turkey at some point. And considering the fame and usefullnes of shashkas it is no surprise that Ottomans were considering them for their own use. (As Russians did, and eventually ended up replacing all their bladed weapons with modified shashkas) So I think your examples and this sword also are the result of those experiments. But for some reason or another (the main one being the German military influence) the Ottoman army started using the Western European sword types instead.

[Kubur]

Originally Posted by estcrh

On the other hand....it could have also been a war trophy captured during one of the militry conflicts between the Ottomans/Turkish forces and the Russians that was later Ottomanized a bit by its new Ottoman/Turkish owner with the addition of a guard and cresent.

There are some examples of Ottoman mounted shashkas that I have seen, it would have been helpful if Harrys new sword had come with a scabbard as well.

I totally agree with Estrech, it's a shashka converted to Ottoman military with a guard. The Turkish guy was lazy, normaly they keept the blade and change the whole thing...
Harry, the mark is a number v., 70 could be anything, regiment number or inventory number...
Best,
Kubur

[harrywagner]

Harry, the mark is a number v., 70 could be anything, regiment number or inventory number...
Best,
Kubur

Hi Kubur. Thanks! I was hoping someone here would know what that was. I would have never associated the mark with a number. What language is that? Thanks to you and others for the help!