Photo thread: ROYALTY SWORDS , ARMS & ARMOUR from around the world
 

Toshkhana sword?
 

This is a link to an article from the India Tribune news paper. :cool:
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2001/200...trum/main2.htm

A Royal War Club from Fiji
 

Click on the headline and you will get more text.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/section/0,,705,00.html

Radu Transylvanicus

* horror vacui - obsession of filling every little part of an art object with decoration, as encrusted, painted but mostly with carvings. It is to be observed particularly in Italian Renaissance, French Rococco, Thai sculpture, Islamic arts and Latino neighborhood cars :D

That pommel reminds me of the plate guard on a khanda. Could this be an indication the dagger is intended for "underhand" use?

I do have a pic of Ibn Saud's sword, but its too tiny to post anyway. As for that Yataghan, while I hate Yataghans, I would say THAT is what I call a royal sword.

Picture of Topkapi dagger from Topkapi Palace Museum. Was ordered and made in Istanbul in 1730 ,intended as a gift of Sultan Mahmud 1 to Nadir shah of Iran. On the way to Iran, the couriers received the news that Shah was killed in a rebellion and they returned back with the dagger. The hilt is emerald and all those on the scabbard are diamonds.

.

Which of course leads me to remember a fictional movie from 1964 about a complex plot to steal same dagger, entitled Topkapi

Right. Its internationally known name probably comes from that film, as it is named just as "emeralded dagger" in the museum.

Selim the 3rd
 

Ottoman Sultan Selim III , his musket (tufek) and flask , the trophy cup is a photo addition from the British exhibit

Nuku Hiva Chief of Marquesas Islands with his royal club (u`u) after a French explorer gravure, late 18th century (?).

jahangirs chillanum
 

going back to the chillanum posted here from the al sabah collection. i've always found this piece intriguing as it was moghul art at its most oppulant. interesting point though, in that its connection with janhangir is assumed (and quite rightly so). in his memoirs, he describes a dagger made and presented to him in 1619 by the masters Puran and Kalyan. he describes thie artistry involved in the dagger and the importance attributed it by him and his court. the quality of the al sabah piece leaves little doubt that this could be the same dagger. both masters were highly rewarded. this information is known and recorded but i found an interesting miniature that has some conection.
the artist ramdas recorded an event in miniature form, which was part of the padshahnama folio. painted around 1640. the event it depicted was the return of prince khurram (later, shah jahan) to the court of jahangir from his victories from the mewar campaign during the deccan wars. this event was recorded on 10th october 1617 in the jahangirnama by jahagir, and he describes embracing his son after a seperation of 11 months and 11 days. the dagger shah jahan wears is of particular interest. this painting was created some 30 years after the event, but i wonder if this could possibly have been the same dagger (wrongly noted as 1619).
pure supposition of course, and there is no reason to doubt that there were a number of similar daggers created for the mughal emperor. its interesting that this exists in painted form from a contemporary time.
this form of dagger hilt is known as the jahangiri fashion, as he asked his master craftsmen
'to make dagger-hilts of a shape that was approved at this time'
in the wallace collection, a similar dagger exists which no doubt came from the same court. the hilt is solid gold and set with diamonds and flowers of rubies with emerald leaves.
surely this too could be a contender for the one particular dagger that janhangir revered highly enough to fully describe in 1619
'some of the flowers looked as if a skillful painter had depicted them in black lines round it with a wonder-working pencil. in short, it was so delicate that i never wish it to be apart from me for a moment.'
unless he is fickle and prone to change his mind on a regular basis, i doubt if he would have given this piece to shah jahan so readily, even though he had just annexed the whole of the deccan for him :)

shah jahan
 

speaking of shah jahan, this dagger has 'done the rounds' and been widely published. its interesting the importance of the the european form in this hilt. the dagger is inscribed with shah jahans famous title - 'the second lord of the conjunction' and dated to the second year of his reign, 1629. the title, according to robert skelton, was adopted in emulation of his ancestor Timur.

czar nicholas 2nd
 

again, from elliot and snowden, the dress shashqua of nicholas 2nd, czar of russia. ivory panel on the scabbard is inlaid with the czars personal monogram.

Nice ones B.I. ! The Czar was quite the ,,foster dad,, looking at the inlayed caligraphy along the blade, its definatelly not cyrilic...

Re Shah Jahan's dagger
 

Please notice the parasol on the blade of Shah Jahan's dagger, a classic symbol of royalty; Songs from the Moghul court sometimes refer to the emperor in wording such as "Shelter us under your parasol", implying the supreme protective power of the emperor.

ranjit singh
 

the sword of ranjit singh from the wallace collection. i lifted this information from a website -

'This magnificent sword or ‘shamshir’ is one of the greatest Sikh treasures in Britain. It was acquired in Paris at some time prior to 1865 by Lord Hertford, the father of Sir Richard Wallace, founder of the Wallace Collection. He exhibited it in Paris at the ‘Musée Rétrospectif’ exhibition in that year, describing it as having belonged to ‘Runjet Sing’… an attribution that has never been doubted. It is a particularly fine and rare example of its type, the mounts being of solid gold rather than gold-damascened iron as was more usually the case with such weapons; only the most important and prestigious of swords were as richly mounted as this. The condition throughout is truly wonderful; the sword even retains its original scabbard, carrying belt and straps, all similarly mounted in pure gold. The grip is carved from exotic and highly-prized walrus ivory, probably imported at vast cost from northern Europe, while the blade is of ‘watered’ steel, a cast-crystalline crucible steel highly prized for its ‘watered’ pattern, still clearly discernable on the blade’s surface.'

an interesting point to note, this sword is item 1404 in the catalogue of 1916. laking was thorough in his appraisal, using all the accession notes (what very little there was seeing as the mojority of the pieces came from a handful of parisian auctions), his own scant knowledge of oriental arms and an apparant expert from bombay. i've tried finding more info on this 'expert' but there isnt much, although i have one more good avenue to look into. from what i gather, his 'expertise' was in the languages and terminology. this is, of course, up for debate as there are many mistakes within the catalogue. as i said, besides the mistakes, laking was thorough in including all the information he had at the time. so, why was ranjit singh never mentioned in the catalogue, which described the sword as an abbasi shamshir. another point of note. in the catalogue it describes the blade as having the 'finest qara khorassan watering'. i have no interest in terminology, nor in the many names of watering. as a collector, i know the ones that reflect the price and this is the only thing that interests me. and so, the blade holds a good strong, darkened pattern, but it is colloquelly known as 'sham' watering and this is of the lowest (commercially and finantially) grade. whether anyone would agree on the term 'sham' for this type of watering is by the by. my point is that collectively, in this day and age it would not be considered too highly (in comparison to other more striking patterns). its strange how tastes and opinions change. either way, the blade is of no consequence as the solid gold mounts and a ranjit singh association is enough to bolster the esteem of this sword were it in auction.
i've no interest in sikh pieces, as they normally are relatively late but may try and find more info on this as it would be good to know when and why the ranjit singh name was attached. although widely published, not much more info has been offered on this sword, unless anyone knows differently. hertfords knowledge and interest in oriental arms was surprisingly passing and more in the line of victorian orientalism, or 'something to hang in the billiards room'. so, if he did offer the ranjit singh attribution (which i kind of doubt due to its ommision in the catalogue) he must have had the information from the sale catalogue. i've seen many of the oriental catalogues that he owned and saw nothing of note. they are not much use as they mostly describe not much more than 'a persian sword'. an interesting point, is that when lady wallace donated the collection to the nation, she sold of his library which included the original sale catalogues. these were brought back (supposedly complete) some 30 years later from a well known aniquarian bookseller in london. there is scant handwritten notes as although hertford bought from auction, in many cases he used 'buyers' like spitzer to do the bidding for him.

Re: Jehangirs Chilanum...
 

Hi B.I.

Nice post with an interesting connection. Just a thought....The dagger in the painting does not have the top scabbard mount whereas the actual dagger does....?? Do you think the painter could have made a mistake like that considering that he was doing a painting with so much realistic detail...that too for the emperor of India...where mistakes could mean the loss of your head...?? Must admit though that it does look like the emperors dagger :).

Regards,

Karni

hi karni,
no, i think that the dagger in the miniature just backs up the quote from jahangirs memoirs -
''to make dagger-hilts of a shape that was approved at this time''
i think that with the al saba dagger, the wallace dagger and the one displayed in the miniature which shows a slightly different form of decoration, it shows the popularity of this style of weapon during jahangirs reign. as the 3 pieces show a very high quality and a display of wealth, it would be hard to assume that the al saba piece was the one described and revered by jahangir. i would say it probably was, but who knows.
what jahangir actually said was -

''one hilt came out in such a way as to create astonishment. it turned out of all the seven colours, and some of the flowers looked as if a skillful painter had depicted them in black lines round it with a wonder-working pencil. in short, it was so delicate that i wish it never to be apart from me for a moment. of all the gems of great price that are in the treasury i consider it the most precious. on thursday i girded it auspiciously with joy around my waist, and the masters who in their completion had exercised great skill and taken pains were rewarded, Ustad Puran with the gift of an elephant, a dress of honour, and a golden bracelet for the wrist, which the people of india call kara, and Kalyan with the title of 'aja ib-dast' (wondrous hand), and increased mansab (rank), a dress of honour, and a jewelled bracelet, and in the smae way everyone according to his circumstances and skill recieved favours.''

welch says the al saba dagger could have been made by these two masters, but doesnt actually commit to it being the one described in these memoirs. maybe it was, but i am not sure what the seven colours he referred to was.
either way, i think all can be connected to the courts of jahangir, which is provenance enough.

Hi Brian, have a look here, this could be the ‘seven colours’ mentioned. Here is the link. http://www.colorsystem.com/projekte/engl/66isle.htm
'In the Islamic tradition, colour is primarily seen from a metaphysical viewpoint which allows the duality of light and shadow to be recognised as the continuous possibility pervading the universe. The number seven dominates the traditional palette of colours, which are arranged in groups of three and four, with the two systems being linked. One order is based on the three colours black, white and sandlewood (related to the colour of the earth), while the other is centred on the four colours red, yellow green and blue.'

hey jens,
where on earth do you find this information :)
its a very interesting concept and one i would normally steer clear of, except that i know that this would have played a significant part in the thinking of the day.
however, 'The number seven is of great cosmological significance' makes me want to start burning josticks :)
i think these seven colours must have been of great importance of the time, enough for jahangir to make an issue of it.
fascinating stuff!

Thank you B.I.

Point well taken. Fascinating stuff really....!! :)

Regards,

Karni

I know Brian, the numbers were very important, as were the colours, the flowers and the animals. Unfortunately many does not recognise this to day - that may be why they find it so difficult to understand it all - the few tho tries to understand!

My first post around these parts
 

Hey, I've got a book on Suleyman. It's called _Des Zeitalter Süleymans
Des Prächtigen_ by M.J. Rogers & R.M. Ward.

Here's a picture of a crystal gripped dagger that might have belonged
to the royal guy himself. Maybe his family. German's not my native language.

Also my first graphic upload. Never too late to learn, I guess.

Ah, file too large. Hold on...

Well, maybe it is too late...
 

Blast it. How do you guys get your pictures to have good resolution yet be such
small file sizes? What's up with that?