Help needed with a Mamluk kilij

[Roland_M]

Dear forum members,

Back with an new computer and here is one of my last acquisitions.

It is a Mamluk sword of nice quality, I think it was made between the 16th and 18th century.
The steel is high quality, it is very sharp wootz but not soft and also not brittle. I have an Indian wootz-tulwar, which is much softer than this blade.
The kilij is differential hardened, with a weak hamon. The tip seems to be separately hardened.
The steel is very tough, it took more than 80 hours to polish the blade up to a grit of 5.000. The tulwar took only 20-25 hours to reach the same level of polish. The starting condition was almost similar.
I used Seno 3207 Fine-Etch-Crystal (Sodium persulfate) for etching the blade, which brings out the finest details but no color-contrast. Normally all the blades treated with Seno 3207 have a grey to black finish after etching, but only this one have a golden glimmer. I read, that this was the most desired type of wootz in the old days. It is hard to see, maybe the sword have the Kirk Narduban pattern.

My questions are the following:
1: Can anybody explain the grey lines, which i highlighted?

2: What ist the best way to etch this blade? I plan to make a solution with 5% Nitric acid and 5% Fecl3 in ethanol. I will fill the solution in a pipe and dive the blade into the solution for ~5 seconds. But i am quite anxious, because the blade is so rare and valuable. The polishing was finished in early september, but i am to fearful to etch the blade. The first attempt was to weak und nonuniform.

The Pictures:
Kilidsch_0 is the whole blade directly after etching
Kilidsch polished and unpolished should be clear
Kilidsch1 is the front area with the hardening pattern
Klidsch3a shows clearly the grey lines i mentioned
Kilidsch4 is the blade after cleaning with Autosol Metal-Polish

I am very sorry for the bad pictures. Originally they were made only for my personal documentation.

Measurements:
Length of sword without the handle: 82 cm or 32,3 inches
Balance point: ~25 cm or 9,8 inches from crossguard
Weight: 965g or ~34 oz.


Best wishes
Roland

[ALEX]

Roland,
The blade is certainly tempered/heat-treated if it is that tough. My first impression was that it is sheer steel or sham wootz, although it has appearance of wootz near the edge. The fact that initial etch did not improve the pattern also indicative of that. Let's hope better etch will reveal it better.
There is no need to submerge the whole blade in the tube, I think it is not necessary in case of one sword. The same result can be achieved just by applying the etchant with the brush or cotton cloth.
I also noticed the central fuller... not exactly as I'd expect on early Ottoman blade...
... just initial observations at this point.
Are those gray lines part of the pattern or incised/cut on the surface?
Great job polishing the blade by the way. Outstanding!
--
Also, can we see closeup of the hilt and cross? Is handle made of stone or hardwood?

[A.alnakkas]

I think its wootz, not shear steel. Though dont think its Mamluke, the fullering and the dots is more similar to northern Indian/Afghan types.

Can we see more of the hilt please?

[ALEX]

Good observation! the blade remainds of what one would expext on Indian/Afghan pulowar. I also think it is not Ottoman. The steel could be sham wootz, but need to see more.

[Kurt]

Originally Posted by ALEX

Good observation! the blade remainds of what one would expext on Indian/Afghan pulowar. I also think it is not Ottoman. The steel could be sham wootz, but need to see more.

Hi Alex ,
This is an Ottoman Karabela end of 17 century.
Kurt

[ALEX]

Kurt, speaking of blade only - below is a typical Afghan pulowar with Kilij profile, false edge and central fuller. I cannot recall early Ottoman blade with narrowly cut central fuller like this. Those have much better, more elaborate fullers... just a thought

[A.alnakkas]

This is why I asked for close ups of the hilt. Because there is some East Europeans who buy old Indian swords and rehilt them as karabelas. This possibly could be one, but we can only get close to knowing if we look at the hilt.

[ALEX]

This is one way to tell. Another is to NOT to look at the hilt, and look at the blade alone as the hilt and/or cross can be old. but seeing closeups will certainly help.

[ariel]

Originally Posted by A.alnakkas

This is why I asked for close ups of the hilt. Because there is some East Europeans who buy old Indian swords and rehilt them as karabelas. This possibly could be one, but we can only get close to knowing if we look at the hilt.

I am with you. IMHO, too, this is a modern hybrid of a 19th century N. Indian blade and recently made handle/crossguard.
A close look at the handle is very important.

[Roland_M]

Originally Posted by ariel

I am with you. IMHO, too, this is a modern hybrid of a 19th century N. Indian blade and recently made handle/crossguard.
A close look at the handle is very important.

Hello and thanks for all the comments.

Here is a Picture of the handle. The handle is quite loose. Maybe the handle was added later to the blade. I bought the blade as a Mamluk sword.

The sham look is because of the weak etching, the real pattern is much more complex.

I dont believe that it was made in the late 19. century, the blade have dozens of nicks and was very intensively used in more than one combat.
I found another kilij in the internet, which looks similar from 16. century.

Best wishes
Roland

[ALEX]

Roland,
Thank you for closeup of the handle. It helps a lot... now, the bad news...
as A.alnakkas and Ariel noted, it is not Mamluk, Ottoman, and not 17th Century. The handle is recently added. the blade is of old indian tulwar or pulwar as noted earlier. please do not estimate the age of the blade by condition, nicks and pitting.. this is only indicative of how it was stored and cared for. the metal can look very old very fast Similarly, try not to compare to other so-called Karabelas on Internet. Comparing shapes and general profiles is wrong way to study, it takes way more. One can call it "Mamluk sword" of course, but this would be only indicative of its shape, not historic authenticity... not the best way to study and collect ethnographic arms. again, sorry for bad news, but that's the case here.

[A.alnakkas]

If anything, nicks tell signs that the blade was once abused by someone who did not know how to properly use a sword.

I REALLY like this blade, even though the hilt is not authentic and its sold to you as something else, its still a good piece. The blade is many levels over the usual North Indian production, its length, well made fullers and yelman and your excellent polish makes me think its a good item in any collection! Though I hope you did not pay for it what people generally pay for Mamluke items :-)

[Roland_M]

Originally Posted by ALEX

Roland,
Thank you for closeup of the handle. It helps a lot... now, the bad news...
as A.alnakkas and Ariel noted, it is not Mamluk, Ottoman, and not 17th Century. The handle is recently added. the blade is of old indian tulwar or pulwar as noted earlier. please do not estimate the age of the blade by condition, nicks and pitting.. this is only indicative of how it was stored and cared for. the metal can look very old very fast Similarly, try not to compare to other so-called Karabelas on Internet. Comparing shapes and general profiles is wrong way to study, it takes way more. One can call it "Mamluk sword" of course, but this would be only indicative of its shape, not historic authenticity... not the best way to study and collect ethnographic arms. again, sorry for bad news, but that's the case here.

Thank you for the informations. Here is the Kilij from the Internet i found. It looks very similar. I am a little astonished about the many informations you can gather from my bad pictures. I would suggest, to wait until the etching job is finished to make a final judgement.

[ALEX]

Roland, the key word is "similar". these two blades have common features, like most of the blades general forms kept similar for very long time, but they are centuries and continents apart. I am afraid the etching will not change anything except of improving the contrast of the pattern.

[Roland_M]

Originally Posted by ALEX

Roland, the key word is "similar". these two blades have common features, like most of the blades general forms kept similar for very long time, but they are centuries and continents apart. I am afraid the etching will not change anything except of improving the contrast of the pattern.

Alex, other very similar swords are in the book: "Islamic swords and swordsmiths" from Unsal Yucel, from Plate 100 to 113, especially on Plate 112 and 113.

Here are two Pictures of the untouched and uncleaned sword.


"I am afraid the etching will not change anything except of improving the contrast of the pattern" This was the second attempt, in which i tried out something new (etching with a cloth instead of a brush), the first was much better.

[Kubur]

I agree with all my colleagues said previously.
Indian blade 19th, and may be a Polish hilt (grip) from the 21th c.
They are really good in Poland to do new hilts...
Kubur

[estcrh]

"Mamluk" is a term that gets tossed around but what really is a mamluk sword, were are the images of known authentic representitive examples that can be used to compare other swords against.

[A.alnakkas]

Originally Posted by Roland_M

Alex, other very similar swords are in the book: "Islamic swords and swordsmiths" from Unsal Yucel, from Plate 100 to 113, especially on Plate 112 and 113.

Here are two Pictures of the untouched and uncleaned sword.


"I am afraid the etching will not change anything except of improving the contrast of the pattern" This was the second attempt, in which i tried out something new (etching with a cloth instead of a brush), the first was much better.

Can you post pictures of the sword from Yucel's book?

[A.alnakkas]

a similar pulwar

[ALEX]

Originally Posted by Roland_M

Alex, other very similar swords are in the book: "Islamic swords and swordsmiths" from Unsal Yucel, from Plate 100 to 113, especially on Plate 112 and 113...

I do not recommend comparing pictures/images when determining origin. yes, this is great way to study, but the devil is in details that can be seen only with experience and the "gut feeling" that insues mostly from handling. I certainly saw Yuncel's book and some swords pictured in it. of course they are "similar", but they are not the same. this is a critical point I am trying to convey.

Look at what A.alnakkas posted above. There are Indian blades that resemble so called "mamluk" form even more. one just needs to know and feel the difference, it'd be impossible to describe I think.

Estcrh, see Bashir Mohamed book "The Arts of the Muslim Knight" for some great examples of Mamluk arms (from Egyptian to Iraqi Ottoman dynasties - 16-19th C).

[spiral]

Roland, I know its hard, but these guys are correct... It
has been faked using an old Indian/Afghani blade.

If you've lost money Id try for redress against the devious sellers as soon as possible. if that's not possible then consider it a lesson learned.

Looking for similarities as a beginner doesn't work... look to spot the differences.

Better luck next time.

spiral

[Emanuel]

Hello,

Starting this summer I noticed a seller on ebay listing a lot of apparently very nice sabres with wootz blade and karabela-type hilt.

While the wootz blades looked very good, the overall assembly looked odd. In addition, I have not seen too many legitimetely old karabela sabres with wootz blades.

I am also of the opinion that the above sabre is a marriage of Indian blade with newer hilt and guard.

It IS a nice blade though...

Emanuel

[estcrh]

So now that this has been settled, how do you know if a sword is "Mamluk", your talking about a period of hundreds of years which ended in the early 1800s when Mohamed Ali Pasha (the first Khedive of Egypt) wiped them out for the most part.

There must have been many different types of swords used over the hundreds of years that Mamluks existed. Of course the chances of a very old sword suddenly appearing would be quitre slim so what about late period Mamluk swords, is there a definitive style that can be readily identified as being Mamluk or is it all guess work and sales pitch.

I can not remember seing any late period sword labeled as being "Mamluk" that did not turn out to be something else entirely, either European, Ottoman etc. Anyone here have some knowledge of this subject?

[Kubur]

For the 19th c. we call Mamluk the copies of Ottoman kilij used by French and British armies, called 'a la mamelouk'...
Or the arms made for the Mamluk troups in Napeoleonic army...
Kubur

[Andrew]

Roland, does the blade of your original sword have an un-sharpened ricasso?

[ariel]

Roland,
Andrew asked a very good question.

In general, the so-caled "eastern" swords were very often of a saber pattern: curved and with the edge on the convex side.

Some had the so-called "yelman", ie widened part of the blade close to he tip, often sharpened on both sides.


The problem is that these 2 features are seen on the blades from all over, from N. Africa to India, and cannot pinpoint the origin and the age of the sword. As Alex has stressed, the devil is in the details: width, length, thickness, T-structure, structure of the fullers, other incisions, inscriptions, materials, etc, etc, etc.

Yours is definitely not Mamluk ( Egypt, Syria, parts of Iraq). IMXO, it was assembled from an old ( 19th cen) N. Indian blade and modern everything else. If you do not want to accept the opinions of several Forumites with rather extensive experience, nobody can or wishes to force you.

But just for the future:
- All of us got fooled, especially at the beginning of our collecting careers. You are not alone, old son :-(
- There is no substitute for experience and reading, reading, reading.... Any collector should have more books than collected objects.
- Never accept seller's description at face value
- Never try to convince yourself that an object you desperately want is genuine despite obviously glaring features to he contrary ( in your case, how could a Mamluk,- ie very, very old,- sword have completely pristine handle and crossguard?)
- If an object looks and costs too good to be true, it usually is.
- Repeat these points 5 times before making any bid.
- This will decrease your "wall of shame" rate by 90%, but, unfortunately, you ( just like all of us) will still be " had" occasionally. High-class museums ( including Wallace Collection) fell prey to even higher-class forgers. At the end of the day, no defensive armour can withstand a good offence by a blade.

All the best.

[Sancar]

I also agree with everyone above. This is not a memlük kilij. But this is still a beautiful wootz blade. As long as you did not pay too much above its worth, you have no reason to be sad about it.

[A.alnakkas]

I actually fell for such a karabela once! but it had a high carbon steel blade with a Yelman... will try to find photos, I dont remember the blade exactly but it wasnt as good as this one. Would have sucked if the item I returned had such a good blade lol.