Classifying shashka--a serious discussion of typology

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by Ian

Mahratt, that is an excellent start to defining a shashka! Thank you for the prompt reply.

Thank you for the nice words

[Jim McDougall]

Allow me to second that Mahratt!! Nicely on point.

[mahratt]

I think no one doubts that the "Bukhara" shashka developed independently, regardless of the Caucasus.

Russian (Cossack) shashka is derived from the Caucasian shashkas (or vice versa). There are serious studies (they have not yet completed) and we do not know who came before. But it is not important. It is important that they have their own identity (in the decor, for example)

Afghan shashka is not a copy of the Russian shashkas. If someone borrows something - then items will be very similar. For example, the installation of the handle of the Caucasian and Russian shashkas - the same. Afghan shashka - individual. So we can not say that it copies a Russian shashka.

[ariel]

Gentlemen,
Enjoy shashkas from the Indonesian archipelago:

[mariusgmioc]

Originally Posted by ariel

Gentlemen,
Enjoy shashkas from the Indonesian archipelago:

If those are Shashkas, then my Japanese Katana is also a shashka!

[Kubur]

Originally Posted by mariusgmioc

If those are Shashkas, then my Japanese Katana is also a shashka!

yes i agree and some kattara too up to West African mandingo swords...
Should have chronological and geographical frames

[mariusgmioc]

Can somebody please post some photos of Afghan and Bukahara Shashkas?!

[ariel]

Originally Posted by Kubur

Should have chronological and geographical frames

Exactly true!
Otherwise we may start discussing Scottish Sgian Dubh bringing Caucasian Kindjals, Moroccan Genoui and some Congo daggers as examples. The blades are straight, so what more do we need?:-)

[ariel]

That is what happens when a definition is taken out of context: the cardinal word missing in the above comment is "Caucasian". All the rest of guardless sabers from all over the world are not Shashkas by definition.

Just like there is only one true Katana: the Japanese one. We all know Indonesian and Filippine WW2 imitations, but would not dare call them true katanas: pseudo-katanas at the most.

Rivkin, Astvatsaturyan and Stone were very well familiar with other guardless sabers. They just thought about the topic bit more carefully:-)

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by ariel

That is what happens when a definition is taken out of context: the cardinal word missing in the above comment is "Caucasian". All the rest of guardless sabers from all over the world are not Shashkas by definition.

Just like there is only one true Katana: the Japanese one. We all know Indonesian and Filippine WW2 imitations, but would not dare call them true katanas: pseudo-katanas at the most.

Rivkin, Astvatsaturyan and Stone were very well familiar with other guardless sabers. They just thought about the topic bit more carefully:-)

Rivkin and Astvatsaturyan wrote a book about the Caucasus weapons. Stone did not know the Afghan shashkas. Yes, and "Bukhara"shashkas Stone is not written. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Try to think big. Beyond the clichés.

Originally Posted by ariel

Gentlemen,
Enjoy shashkas from the Indonesian archipelago:

Reread again signs of checkers from my post.

[ariel]

Originally Posted by mahratt

g.

Try to think big. Beyond the clichés.

There is a difference between "thinking big" and "thinking mile wide and inch deep."

I try to do my best not to belong to the latter group.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by mahratt

Rivkin and Astvatsaturyan wrote a book about the Caucasus weapons. Stone did not know the Afghan shashkas. Yes, and "Bukhara"shashkas Stone is not written. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Try to think big. Beyond the clichés.



Reread again signs of checkers from my post.

Jim, that's what I call - overdo to the point of absurdity.

Indeed it is but good to have some levity, these intense 'discussions' can sometimes be trying. The point is well taken though, sometimes the fact of a sabre without a guard as a key factor does not qualify it immediately as being a 'shashka'.
So then, do we turn to the notable cleft in the pommel?
As seen with the Turkish sabre with yataghan hilt, the blade is clearly a sabre, not recurved or deep bellied as with the true yataghan blade form.
The hilt does not have the same cleft character, it is more eared. But we see the point made.

It is interesting to see the number of other guardless sabres in the world, and of course obviously NOT in the shashka realm.

It seems clearly that we are off to a good start, and everyone thinking quite largely!!! as would be expected here.

I think personally that one of the biggest obstacles in weapons classification is the incessant need to categorize into arbitrary groupings, without some sort of accurate qualification. As we have seen, the term 'psuedo' fails as a prefix, where in the case of Afghan or Uzbek sabres, the term(s) of Caucasian shashka form might serve better.

Since these were in proximity or somewhat in the geographical context of areas of Caucasian influence, then that description seems reasonable.
It is well established that the Russian and via them, Caucasian influences might have filtered into these regions with their presence there.

In the cases of other guardless sabres such as katanas et al, obviously in far reaching areas without notable contact with indigenous areas or ethnicities of the shashka, that term or dominator clearly fails.
In many cases though, other prefixes noting similarities or key features similar to other swords in their proximities, such as the dhas of SE Asia, Chinese dao and others might work as required.

[mariusgmioc]

Originally Posted by mahratt

Afghan shashka is not a copy of the Russian shashkas. If someone borrows something - then items will be very similar. For example, the installation of the handle of the Caucasian and Russian shashkas - the same. Afghan shashka - individual. So we can not say that it copies a Russian shashka.

OK, it is not a copy of the Caucasian Shashka, but wasn't inspired by it?!

Or did it appear absolutely independent from the Caucasian Shashka?!

How do Afghan people call it?!

[kronckew]

ariel, your submissions do NOT have the "wedge-shaped cutout on top of the pommel - forked head"*. turkish ones propbably count as turkey once ruled over parts of the caucasian areas.

*-as in my pommel:

[AJ1356]

Originally Posted by mariusgmioc

OK, it is not a copy of the Caucasian Shashka, but wasn't inspired by it?!

Or did it appear absolutely independent from the Caucasian Shashka?!

How do Afghan people call it?!

I just started reading this post and have not read completely through yet. But, to answer your question, the current people of Afghanistan would refer to it as shamshir (shamshir meaning sword) now I am not sure about people in the north. However, in the home I was raised in there was a shashka and my grandmother, whose parents were from Samarqand would call it a shashqa. I remember it had an all steel hilt with no gaurd and was said to have been brought down from Samarqand when they migrated to Afghanistan.

[mahratt]

Visual comparison: