Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Ethnographic Weapons
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 5th March 2016, 11:27 PM   #1
arsendaday
Member
 
arsendaday's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 44
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by estcrh
I have placed red arrows showing the area I think you are talking about. You made an astute observasion. So the question is...would you still consider this to be a shashka? There are several thoughts on how this sword ended up being created, an Ottoman sword maker creating a shashka for Circassian troops but adding an Ottoman embelishment is one way I can think of. The other is that this was a kilij that was altered with the addition of a shashka hilt.
That is exactly what I meant. BTW Your second guess is more possible. The Circassians were a stubborn bunch (no offence meant, using the word as a compliment) and I don't think any one of them would agree to have "Shashka" with a guard. And the blade, despite of all it's similarities to a shashka blade is different nonetheless. Since I think that this blade was initially meant to have a crossguard (not sure about the hilt) one had to order it made this way. And for sure that ONE wasn't a Circassian. (After all only a shashka is a shashka, and everything else is not)

If this is not an experimental weapon altogether, than I think the handle/hilt is a later addition. One of the reasons it could have happened, as you said, the original (kilij type) handle broke and since the smith, who was fixing the sword (not necessarily the one that made it initially), did not have enough tang to put a kilij handle, just replaced the handle and put something that would work just as fine with a shorter tang.

P.S. The reason I think that the handle/hilt has been replaced, is quality of the crescents on it. They differ a lot from the quality of the workmanship of the cross-guard. I think the original handle had crescents on it, which were lost as well, and that the (new)owner just wanted to have them.
arsendaday is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th March 2016, 07:19 AM   #2
Jim McDougall
Arms Historian
 
Jim McDougall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,189
Default

Conversely, in this conundrum, are the number of kilij (pistol grip Ottoman style) swords which have the crossguard removed, and seem to have been worn or used in this way. I cannot offhand recall the dates, but we have discussed them here, and I think some have been seen in references.
Jim McDougall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th March 2016, 08:17 AM   #3
estcrh
Member
 
estcrh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 1,492
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim McDougall
Conversely, in this conundrum, are the number of kilij (pistol grip Ottoman style) swords which have the crossguard removed, and seem to have been worn or used in this way. I cannot offhand recall the dates, but we have discussed them here, and I think some have been seen in references.
Jim, is this what you were referring to?
Attached Images
  
estcrh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6th March 2016, 04:25 PM   #4
Jim McDougall
Arms Historian
 
Jim McDougall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,189
Default

Yes!!! ) Well done!
While some of these are the intended form as in the Indian short sword and dagger hilts, some of these seem to be Ottoman hilts sans guard, and left that way by intention.
Thank you so much.
Your skills at finding these illustrations are uncanny, and superb
Jim McDougall is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.