An Ottoman Shamshir for Comment

tom hyle · 22nd February 2005, 09:42 AM

To call it a dress sword doesn't neccessarily mean it lacks any of the capabilities of a simpler piece (there is, as I've said before, no readable or consistant inclination either way on this issue of falsely equating fance with either quality or its lack). Is the blade sharp? I think it's original width, and I don't think that placing either the struck or etched marks where resharpenings would potentially eface them is all that unusual. In addition to the no untoward uneveness in the edge issue, the general lack of wear, and the handle matching the blade width, there is the front groove at the forte, whose placement seems original.

Conogre · 22nd February 2005, 11:25 PM

I'm struck by the red necklace-type bead in the center of the hilt, which seems very uncharacteristic for a sword of this type, more inclined to be found in a Moroccan or N African sword than in an Ottoman sword.
Mike

Yannis · 23rd February 2005, 07:07 AM

Conogre
Sharp eye! I watched it as close as I could. My idea is that the “eye” is a replacement. I think it used to be another ornament there. Possibly a small silver plaque of a “tear” design. The color around this small hole is little different than the rest of the hilt. Also I am more pro of a rhino horn hilt.

Philip · 23rd February 2005, 07:08 AM

Based upon the position of the eyelash markings at present, and comparison of its general proportions (including fuller width and spacing vis-a-vis the spine and edge) to other blades of its ilk which I have personally examined and/or seen in photos over many years, I still believe that the blade of this one has been ground down, most likely PRIOR to being mounted in its present hilt.

It is very likely that the narrowing of the blade (skilfully executed, to harmonize with the spine) was done at the same time the calligraphy was etched into the surface.

Kilij and shamshir blades have relatively diminutive tangs (generally no more than 3 1/2 in. long and about 2/3 the width of the blade) which are rivetted to an iron plate which has the contours of the hilt itself. A peripheral band or strap is brazed or soldered around the plate, and the gripscales rest upon the band, being held in place by rivets running through matching holes in the iron plate. The plate is invariably wider than the blade tang, and thus a tang can be attached a bit "off center", or even filed down on one side, to compensate for the loss of some width at the edge and thus end up being centered on the finished hilt.

There are also cases which I have seen in which the tang itself has been replaced; the old one (originally forged as an extension of the blade billet) replaced with a separate unit, whose forward end is cleft to accept the blade and perhaps just a nub of the original tang, to provide enough contact surface for a good forge-weld. In this way, the new tang can be made to be centered on whatever width the altered blade may happen to be.

The small short groove in the area corresponding to the ricasso may well have been cut after the blade was narrowed. On blades which I have studied which have this feature and all/most of their original width, this groove tends to be somewhat wider and deeper.

tom hyle · 24th February 2005, 01:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Philip

ground down, most likely PRIOR to being mounted in its present hilt.

It is very likely that the narrowing of the blade (skilfully executed, to harmonize with the spine) was done at the same time the calligraphy was etched into the surface.

Possible, but almost certainly that would mean the small groove at the forte was also made at such time. That is possible, but is it likely? and it seems to match the small rear groove well?

Kilij and shamshir blades have relatively diminutive tangs (generally no more than 3 1/2 in. long and about 2/3 the width of the blade) which are rivetted to an iron plate which has the contours of the hilt itself. A peripheral band or strap is brazed or soldered around the plate, and the gripscales rest upon the band, being held in place by rivets running through matching holes in the iron plate. The plate is invariably wider than the blade tang, and thus a tang can be attached a bit "off center", or even filed down on one side, to compensate for the loss of some width at the edge and thus end up being centered on the finished hilt.

Thanks for the description. I don't see inside a lot of these, or even yatagans, but I've seen them have more after the nature of a half length (full width) tang rivetted to an extension (plate) for length.

There are also cases which I have seen in which the tang itself has been replaced; the old one (originally forged as an extension of the blade billet) replaced with a separate unit, whose forward end is cleft to accept the blade and perhaps just a nub of the original tang, to provide enough contact surface for a good forge-weld. In this way, the new tang can be made to be centered on whatever width the altered blade may happen to .....w

I believe you are misinterpretting what you have seen; the pinched and scarfed blade bases are more likely part of the original construction.

tom hyle · 24th February 2005, 02:01 AM

Hmmmm....I got my comments mixed in with the quote....I'd fix it, but my computer's acting up a little and also my cat is going to eat me if'n I don't play with her.

Jim McDougall · 24th February 2005, 04:23 AM

Outstanding observations on this Ottoman kilic everybody!!
In looking at this beautiful parabolic shamshir type blade, with pronounced yelman which as Philip has noted more categorizes this in the 'kilic' group, I am with Mike in thinking of North Africa.
As has also been noted by Philip, the triple X marking derives from European trade blades, particularly German. It seems that this symbolism had certain parallels in early occult/cabalistic devices and that three crosses were in apothecary connotation cautionary for deadly substances. Whether or not this application is relevant, it seems interesting to note. As often occurs on trade or native blades, multiplication of symbols presumably were thought to increase potency.

Also, this kilic blade seems much more a horsemans blade than the much shorter and clearly heavier and less parabolic blade of the Turkish kilic most commonly seen. This brings to mind the Mamluk sabres of the end of the 18th c. which of course were from Egypt. It is interesting that the etching on the blade resembles 'thuluth' which was commonly applied to edged weapons in Sudanese regions in the last quarter of the 19th century. Since these regions closest to Egypt were under Ottoman suzerainty at that time, it would seem plausible that a Mamluk type blade could have been remounted or joined with this hilt. The 'thuluth' motif might have then been applied, including the 'dukari' or opposed crescent moons marking that although commonly associated with the Saharan 'takouba', is also known to occur of Sudanese kaskaras with the thuluth application.
The fact that this marking is applied close to the cutting edge, as well as the application of 'thuluth' motif would suggest that this was done as addition to an existing blade and around the fullering. The central location of the 'moons' also concurs with location on thuluth covered kaskaras attributed in Briggs article to the Hausa's.

These suppositions are presuming that this etched decorative motif is in fact 'thuluth' as described, and not other similar motif. Since it is noted this has no inclinations toward Persian revival type pieces, it would seem unlikely that the calligraphy would be 'naskh' , a Persian form of this motif .

Best regards,
Jim

Philip · 24th February 2005, 09:03 AM

Some years ago, I had a discussion with swordmaker Vincent Evans about these tangs which were cleft and forge welded to the blade. I showed him a couple of shamshir blades with this treatment, and also a Chinese saber blade that was similarly joined, albeit a fraction of an inch behind the blade shoulders. Vince, having forged many a blade in his time, could not see any logical reason why a smith would do a joint like that as part of original manufacture. If anything, it's more time consuming than it would be to hammer the tang out as an integral extension of the blade billet. Also, this type of joint creates a potential stress point since the contact area is relatively small.

I had thought about the desire to economize on materials as a rationale, to avoid "wasting" wootz or pattern weld on a part of the blade that would be hidden from view. Over time, I acquired and obtained for study several Ottoman kilij of the late 18th and early 19th cent, and did a polish and etch on the blades to bring out their structure. Two were wootz. Lo and behold, there was a lap weld at the forte, about 3 inches ahead of the shoulders, where the wootz was joined to a plain carbon steel "root" which also formed the tang. When the blade was new and pristine, the ornate gold koftgari decoration (a good deal of which still remained on these pieces) covered up the joint. Vince said that the contact area of this type of lap joint was larger than on the cleft-and-welded tangs, and thus the joint would be stronger.

On two multi-row twistcore pattern weld kilij blades, the tang and the steel at the very base of the forte was a simple linear laminate joined to the pattern weld via a diagonal scarf joint, likewise very strong. On these, the joint was skilfully laid out so that the linear blended with the twisted cores in an aesthetically attractive and structurally sound manner, and there seemed to be no attempt to hide it with koftgari onlay. The deliberateness of the assembly led Vince and me to conclude that these joints were purpose-made at time of manufacture and not a later repair.

Battara · 3rd April 2007, 01:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Conogre

I'm struck by the red necklace-type bead in the center of the hilt, which seems very uncharacteristic for a sword of this type, more inclined to be found in a Moroccan or N African sword than in an Ottoman sword.
Mike

Although a little unusual, it looks like this bead is made of cornelian (better closeups can show more) and this semi-precious stone is not unheard of in Ottoman jewelry or other pieces (archer's rings for example made of cornelian). I'm with Phillip with Ottoman origins.

Aqtai · 5th April 2007, 04:48 PM

Its a beautiful weapon. the combination of slender blade and yelman does remind me of Mamluk sabres, however the Mamluk sabres I've seen also tend to be much less curved, i.e. straighter.

23rd February 2005, 07:08 AM	#4
Philip Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: California Posts: 1,036	alteration to edge Based upon the position of the eyelash markings at present, and comparison of its general proportions (including fuller width and spacing vis-a-vis the spine and edge) to other blades of its ilk which I have personally examined and/or seen in photos over many years, I still believe that the blade of this one has been ground down, most likely PRIOR to being mounted in its present hilt. It is very likely that the narrowing of the blade (skilfully executed, to harmonize with the spine) was done at the same time the calligraphy was etched into the surface. Kilij and shamshir blades have relatively diminutive tangs (generally no more than 3 1/2 in. long and about 2/3 the width of the blade) which are rivetted to an iron plate which has the contours of the hilt itself. A peripheral band or strap is brazed or soldered around the plate, and the gripscales rest upon the band, being held in place by rivets running through matching holes in the iron plate. The plate is invariably wider than the blade tang, and thus a tang can be attached a bit "off center", or even filed down on one side, to compensate for the loss of some width at the edge and thus end up being centered on the finished hilt. There are also cases which I have seen in which the tang itself has been replaced; the old one (originally forged as an extension of the blade billet) replaced with a separate unit, whose forward end is cleft to accept the blade and perhaps just a nub of the original tang, to provide enough contact surface for a good forge-weld. In this way, the new tang can be made to be centered on whatever width the altered blade may happen to be. The small short groove in the area corresponding to the ricasso may well have been cut after the blade was narrowed. On blades which I have studied which have this feature and all/most of their original width, this groove tends to be somewhat wider and deeper.

24th February 2005, 09:03 AM	#8
Philip Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: California Posts: 1,036	more observations on blade tangs Some years ago, I had a discussion with swordmaker Vincent Evans about these tangs which were cleft and forge welded to the blade. I showed him a couple of shamshir blades with this treatment, and also a Chinese saber blade that was similarly joined, albeit a fraction of an inch behind the blade shoulders. Vince, having forged many a blade in his time, could not see any logical reason why a smith would do a joint like that as part of original manufacture. If anything, it's more time consuming than it would be to hammer the tang out as an integral extension of the blade billet. Also, this type of joint creates a potential stress point since the contact area is relatively small. I had thought about the desire to economize on materials as a rationale, to avoid "wasting" wootz or pattern weld on a part of the blade that would be hidden from view. Over time, I acquired and obtained for study several Ottoman kilij of the late 18th and early 19th cent, and did a polish and etch on the blades to bring out their structure. Two were wootz. Lo and behold, there was a lap weld at the forte, about 3 inches ahead of the shoulders, where the wootz was joined to a plain carbon steel "root" which also formed the tang. When the blade was new and pristine, the ornate gold koftgari decoration (a good deal of which still remained on these pieces) covered up the joint. Vince said that the contact area of this type of lap joint was larger than on the cleft-and-welded tangs, and thus the joint would be stronger. On two multi-row twistcore pattern weld kilij blades, the tang and the steel at the very base of the forte was a simple linear laminate joined to the pattern weld via a diagonal scarf joint, likewise very strong. On these, the joint was skilfully laid out so that the linear blended with the twisted cores in an aesthetically attractive and structurally sound manner, and there seemed to be no attempt to hide it with koftgari onlay. The deliberateness of the assembly led Vince and me to conclude that these joints were purpose-made at time of manufacture and not a later repair.

22nd February 2005, 09:42 AM	#1
tom hyle Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 1,254	To call it a dress sword doesn't neccessarily mean it lacks any of the capabilities of a simpler piece (there is, as I've said before, no readable or consistant inclination either way on this issue of falsely equating fance with either quality or its lack). Is the blade sharp? I think it's original width, and I don't think that placing either the struck or etched marks where resharpenings would potentially eface them is all that unusual. In addition to the no untoward uneveness in the edge issue, the general lack of wear, and the handle matching the blade width, there is the front groove at the forte, whose placement seems original.

22nd February 2005, 11:25 PM	#2
Conogre Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Clearwater, Florida Posts: 371	I'm struck by the red necklace-type bead in the center of the hilt, which seems very uncharacteristic for a sword of this type, more inclined to be found in a Moroccan or N African sword than in an Ottoman sword. Mike

23rd February 2005, 07:07 AM	#3
Yannis Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Athens Greece Posts: 479	Conogre Sharp eye! I watched it as close as I could. My idea is that the “eye” is a replacement. I think it used to be another ornament there. Possibly a small silver plaque of a “tear” design. The color around this small hole is little different than the rest of the hilt. Also I am more pro of a rhino horn hilt.

24th February 2005, 02:01 AM	#6
tom hyle Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 1,254	Hmmmm....I got my comments mixed in with the quote....I'd fix it, but my computer's acting up a little and also my cat is going to eat me if'n I don't play with her.

24th February 2005, 04:23 AM	#7
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,190	Outstanding observations on this Ottoman kilic everybody!! In looking at this beautiful parabolic shamshir type blade, with pronounced yelman which as Philip has noted more categorizes this in the 'kilic' group, I am with Mike in thinking of North Africa. As has also been noted by Philip, the triple X marking derives from European trade blades, particularly German. It seems that this symbolism had certain parallels in early occult/cabalistic devices and that three crosses were in apothecary connotation cautionary for deadly substances. Whether or not this application is relevant, it seems interesting to note. As often occurs on trade or native blades, multiplication of symbols presumably were thought to increase potency. Also, this kilic blade seems much more a horsemans blade than the much shorter and clearly heavier and less parabolic blade of the Turkish kilic most commonly seen. This brings to mind the Mamluk sabres of the end of the 18th c. which of course were from Egypt. It is interesting that the etching on the blade resembles 'thuluth' which was commonly applied to edged weapons in Sudanese regions in the last quarter of the 19th century. Since these regions closest to Egypt were under Ottoman suzerainty at that time, it would seem plausible that a Mamluk type blade could have been remounted or joined with this hilt. The 'thuluth' motif might have then been applied, including the 'dukari' or opposed crescent moons marking that although commonly associated with the Saharan 'takouba', is also known to occur of Sudanese kaskaras with the thuluth application. The fact that this marking is applied close to the cutting edge, as well as the application of 'thuluth' motif would suggest that this was done as addition to an existing blade and around the fullering. The central location of the 'moons' also concurs with location on thuluth covered kaskaras attributed in Briggs article to the Hausa's. These suppositions are presuming that this etched decorative motif is in fact 'thuluth' as described, and not other similar motif. Since it is noted this has no inclinations toward Persian revival type pieces, it would seem unlikely that the calligraphy would be 'naskh' , a Persian form of this motif . Best regards, Jim

5th April 2007, 04:48 PM	#10
Aqtai Member Join Date: May 2005 Location: Merseyside, UK Posts: 222	Its a beautiful weapon. the combination of slender blade and yelman does remind me of Mamluk sabres, however the Mamluk sabres I've seen also tend to be much less curved, i.e. straighter.