Classifying shashka--a serious discussion of typology

[Mercenary]

Originally Posted by Kiziria

In aspects of warfare and weaponry Russian presence was that of a cultural intruder and surprisingly borrower of local traditions.

As well as Ottomans, all Turks, Central Asia, India, Japan, China, Caucasians - all of them borrowed local and outside traditions. Russians....

[OsobistGB]

Let me and myself get involved in the topic.The word shashka is derived from Kabardino Circassian sa`sh ho which means a long knife.For homeland is considered the Caucasus region.The most extensive studies on the subject conducted by Russian researchers.Most earliest reference to such use blades are excavations of graves from the 13th century in the Caucasus region.It is also interesting to note that such a form of long edged weapon are used at all the neighboring regions of the Caucasus (Including Georgia).During the Caucasian wars,the cossacks have find exclusive advantage of light and convenient blade used by local peoples.Begins phasing using the shashka and kinjals in Cossack troops.The command of the Russian Imperial Army began to deploy this type of weapon in the Cossack regiments.Eventually, thanks to the Russians this weapon becomes extremely popular in the world.

[ariel]

All true.

Caucasian weapons ( Shashka and kindjal) were initially individually acquired by neighboring Cossacks and later by Russian officers serving in the Caucasus, most actively during the Murid Wars.

Then both started to be manufactured in St. Petersburg and various other cities in Russia and Ukraine, using classical Caucasian forms and decorations.

Then they were modified to become regulation weapons of the Russian imperial army, having very little in common with the Caucasian originals but preserving their original names.

A similar story happened with Caucasian clothes: from occasional individual acquisition to mass fashion statement : even Russian Tsars had their official portraits painted wearing full Caucasian garb, from hats to weapons in minute detail.

I know of no other example where military victors so fully adopted external accoutrements of the vanquished.

Certainly, people all over the world adopted some details of their neighbours’
weaponry ( “ weapons do not know borders” principle), but such a massive transformation has no precedent in the “vanquished-to-victors” direction.

It is as if British high society, royalty included, would have started wearing Indian saris and Zulu loinclothes and the British military officially adopted khandas and katars.

My IMHO theory: this peculiar behavior of the Russians might be due to the absense of their own tradition. They got their weapons from Vikings or Mongols ( and later from acquiring Persian, Turkish, Polish or W. European examples, singularly or en masse), and their own clumsy boyar coats and women’s sarafans were banned by Peter I and substituted for W. European garb. A chance to dress like some unknown to the world Caucasians and wield peculiar Caucasian weapons gave them identity they so much yearned for.

[Mercenary]

[QUOTE=ariel]All true.

I know of no other example where military victors so fully adopted external accoutrements of the vanquished.[QUOTE]

Mughals in India, turks in Iran&Transoxiana, turks in India sultanates in 12-15th

[ariel]

[QUOTE=Mercenary]

Originally Posted by ariel

Mughals in India, turks in Iran&Transoxiana, turks in India sultanates in 12-15th

I fail to see any analogy: could you elaborate please?

[Mercenary]

[QUOTE=ariel]

Originally Posted by Mercenary

I fail to see any analogy: could you elaborate please?

Mughal - tulwar, jamdhar, khapwa, elephant, dress, lifestyle of rajas and sultans.
Turks-afghans in India in 12-15th - jamdhar, elephant, dress, lifestyle of rajas.
Turks in Iran - language (!), town lifestyle, ALL PERSIAN CULTURE.

In origin shashka was the Caucasian weapon. But who glorified it? That is way all we know "Russian shashka".

[ariel]

I am choosing not to participate in a discussion that will be viewed by some as personal confrontation.

There are many other people on this Forum with enough knowledge to address factual errors and inconsistencies.

I elect to pass on this occasion.

Best wishes.

[Mercenary]

Originally Posted by ariel

My IMHO theory: this peculiar behavior of the Russians might be due to the absense of their own tradition. They got their weapons from Vikings or Mongols ( and later from acquiring Persian, Turkish, Polish or W. European examples, singularly or en masse), and their own clumsy boyar coats and women’s sarafans were banned by Peter I and substituted for W. European garb. A chance to dress like some unknown to the world Caucasians and wield peculiar Caucasian weapons gave them identity they so much yearned for.

Everything is easier. Russia was not colonial empire and did not destroy local cultures - all of them still live. But I agree, russian = eclectic . When you are criticizing Russian you are criticizing 190 different nations. Please, don't do it with so many people :-)

[ariel]

I am talking about a dominant culture and governmental lmperial policies. No offense to any particular people was meant.
If you have a better alternative explanation I would love to hear it and may even agree.

[Mercenary]

Originally Posted by ariel

I am talking about a dominant culture and governmental lmperial policies. No offense to any particular people was meant.
If you have a better alternative explanation I would love to hear it and may even agree.

Mameluke swords in Europe in 19th. Didn't Europeans have their own weapons? The same Russians in Caucasus. Russian army was equiped with modern weapons as any other European army. What is "absense of their own tradition" in 19th (!!!) for army of European style? Where were British, French or Austrian own "native" weapons in 19th?
In the case of shashka or any others Caucasian things that was just a fashion the same as some British adopted tulwars. In the case of French and British it was "a cultural intruder and surprisingly borrower of local traditions" too? I am not sure. For a more developed states to borrow some of the native curious items is normal.

[Jon MB]

Originally Posted by ariel

All true.

Caucasian weapons ( Shashka and kindjal) were initially individually acquired by neighboring Cossacks and later by Russian officers serving in the Caucasus, most actively during the Murid Wars.

Then both started to be manufactured in St. Petersburg and various other cities in Russia and Ukraine, using classical Caucasian forms and decorations.

Then they were modified to become regulation weapons of the Russian imperial army, having very little in common with the Caucasian originals but preserving their original names.

A similar story happened with Caucasian clothes: from occasional individual acquisition to mass fashion statement : even Russian Tsars had their official portraits painted wearing full Caucasian garb, from hats to weapons in minute detail.

I know of no other example where military victors so fully adopted external accoutrements of the vanquished.

Certainly, people all over the world adopted some details of their neighbours’
weaponry ( “ weapons do not know borders” principle), but such a massive transformation has no precedent in the “vanquished-to-victors” direction.

It is as if British high society, royalty included, would have started wearing Indian saris and Zulu loinclothes and the British military officially adopted khandas and katars.

My IMHO theory: this peculiar behavior of the Russians might be due to the absense of their own tradition. They got their weapons from Vikings or Mongols ( and later from acquiring Persian, Turkish, Polish or W. European examples, singularly or en masse), and their own clumsy boyar coats and women’s sarafans were banned by Peter I and substituted for W. European garb. A chance to dress like some unknown to the world Caucasians and wield peculiar Caucasian weapons gave them identity they so much yearned for.

I rather agree with much of this. Although I lack literature at the moment (in storage) I am under the impression that the final destruction of the Circassians by the mid 19th C. saw the beginnings of the widespread appropriation many aspects of of the Circassian and wider Transcaucasian material culture by the Russian military and upper classes. Would love to see more discussion of this, maybe even as a new thread, although I lack the knowledge or references to start such a thread at the moment. (Apologies if such a thread already exists here). I would add that the appropriation of Caucasian stylistic elements does rather echo the 'orientalist' obsessions in their various waves in Western Europe, see for example the fashion for 'Zouave' uniforms in the mid 19th C.

[Ian]

Jon makes a good point about taking the present sociocultural discussion to a new thread. Please note the title of this thread and the original purpose for starting it. Discussion has strayed way off topic recently.

Ian

[ariel]

I agree. Adoption and migration of weapons is a very interesting topic.

. One can discuss India ( Mughal vs. Rajputs vs. South vs. Iran etc), Turkey, Arabs, SE Asia, nomads, Eastern Europe vs. Western Europe and ad infinitum.

Kirill Rivkin's book on the evolution of sabers is invaluable in this regard.

[ALEX]

Here is an unusual Central Asian/Bukharan shashka. Although the blade is of a shamshir form with slightly raised Kilij-style yelman with double edged tip, the handle with 5 rivets and crossguardless design are typical Bukharan shashka features. I do not recall seeing relatively deeply curved blades with rudimentary yelman on known Bukharan swords of 19thC. Can this be an early example, like earlier than mid-late 19thC?