Classifying shashka--a serious discussion of typology

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by ariel

Eric,
I think you are operating with wrong definitions of Cossack and Russian shashkas.

Cossack shashka is a misnomer: they were not CREATED by the Cossacks: they merely BELONGED to them. Their origin was North Caucasus, Circassians and related ethnic groups. Cossacks bought or captured them from the locals. These shashkas are purely Caucasian. Importantly Don, Terek and the rest of Cossach Hosts had no industry at all: at the most they might have had a village smith to shoe a horse or fix a broken axe. All "professionals" were Russian peasants who spent limited time in Cossack settlements and went back home. Engaging in any trade was considered a disgrace for a Cossack and the violators were beaten up and thrown out. Even in the Ukraine , the seat of the most developed Host, Ukrainian Zaporogian one, great majority of weapons were either imported or captured and the rare examples of locally-manufactured weapons were crude imitations of Persian and Turkish examples. See book by Denis Toichkin "The Cossack saber", the most detailed account of virtually all Ukrainian museum collections, lists of professions in Ukrainian towns, data on importation of steel etc, etc. An indispensable book. Elgood might have been proud of it.

The Russian shashka is a different kettle of fish: there were single examples made in St. Petersburg faithfully imitating Caucasian example. Jewelry creation, not a weapon. However, when we talk about "Russian shashka" we are talking about mass-produced regulation designs, borrowing guardless handle, eared pommel and slightly curved blade. This is what they got, with minor variations in the amount of brass, scabbard material etc.
A true "pseudoshashka":-)))

Very good information Ariel, unfortunately when you look online, there are Caucasian / Circassian shashka being described as Cossack, Georgian, Russian etc. Most with a few exceptions as you noted have simply been improperly described but just like the so called "Bukharan shashka" the descriptions are already out there so I have grouped these together in one category (for now). As you also noted, the mass produced Russian shashka should probably be in its own category, much like the Afghan shashka. In the English speaking world there are a lot of misconceptions about shashka which are slowly being revealed.

As for the term "pseudo", I use it for shashka like sabres that are not actually shashka based weapons and since it appears that the Russian and Afghan shashka have a common relation to actual shashka I do not see them as being "pseudo" based on my understanding of the word, but not everyone has the same understanding of the word. We will have to agree to disagree

[Kiziria]

Originally Posted by estcrh

Very good information Ariel, unfortunately when you look online, there are Caucasian / Circassian shashka being described as Cossack, Georgian, Russian etc. Most with a few exceptions as you noted have simply been improperly described

Allow me to point out that though there are plenty of incorrectly attributed Circassian shashkas online, there are distinct type of Georgian shashka (noteworthy it was not called shashka in Georgian ) and other Georgian types of swords, which shared fundamental features of guardless sabers.

Circassian shashka in my opinion is brilliant weapon, a crowning specimen of special type of swords that emerged and underwent development in Caucasus region. There is a definite genealogical line of these kind of weapons. Shahska does not stand totally apart.

[ariel]

Vakhtang,
Glad to finally see you here.
This forum definitely needs people of your expertise.