Indian pseudoshashka

[ariel]

We are all familiar with the so-called Afghani pseudoshashkas ( as per Lebedinsky): Afghani blade, stamp of Mazar-i-Sharif mosque, no guard, pommel with elongated ears.
Here is an unusual variant that just ended on e-bay.
Indian blade ( even with Indian ricasso), no stamps, steel fittings a la tunkou, D-guard, round and solid pommel.

In short, as many differences as one can imagine.
My guess it is from the India/Afghan border area, exhibiting a curious amalgam of both traditions. Likely a tribal manufacture.

It looks even older than the usual Afghani ones, although who knows..

[Kubur]

Hi Ariel,
I think it's a crapmix of everything, it's also a pseudo yatagan, look at the Turkish ricasso added to hide the combinaison of different elements...
Best,

[ariel]

If you think it is a recent work, I disagree: all parts look genuine , old and worn. Yes, there are signs of recent repair ( glue under the cheeks), but my guess the wood has shrunk. The D-guard is integral to the bolster:


If you think it is a crazy old mixture of styles, we are on the same page.


And I would not call it Turkish ricasso: similar motive is seen on old Persian examples, just as a quick example.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

In my view this is genuine. I would be surprised if this was a one off morphed example but moreover a style of sword earlier than expected... an earlier variant of Shaska . Ariel over to you on the possibilities but I am looking for suitable swords to compare it with... Showing below the treatment given to Yatagan throats of blades... I begin to think this form was an earlier style of Shashka?...

[Jim McDougall]

Ibrahiim, nicely done finding that example and noting the comparative prospects with yataghan gestalt. It is truly a weapon worth discussing and evaluating further rather than dismissing it as some sort of hodgepodge. I know I have seen something similar but have yet to find it, and it seems there are is a group of sabre types which look as if they are typical sabre hilts sans their guards.

I am with Ariel in his assessments on this being a genuinely fabricated older (certainly 19th c) weapon. These kinds of hybrids have always had some degree of presence in ethnographic weapons, as innovative armorers often used whatever materials and components they had at hand.

The use of 'pseudo' in terming these weapons or for that matter any weapon form is not really in my opinion acceptable, as it implies direct connection between forms which may not have any direct or linear connection. For example, in the case of the Bukharen sabres without guard, according to well informed authorities are not at all developed from shashkas, which has sometimes been suggested. This carries into the Afghan/Uzbek case as well though obviously there must be some degree of influence present.

I think that Russian presence in these Central Asian regions certainly must have had certain impacts, if only temporal, and of course in the latter part of the century, Caucasian shashkas were known in Russian forces.

What is interesting in this example is the clearly fashioned tunkou, which compellingly recalls yataghan or Ottoman influence also very much present in degree. The ricasso recalls Indian blade forms coupled with the sweeping radius of the shamshir

Interesting weapon, and perfect for sword forum discussion!!!

[ariel]

Ibrahiim,

Here is my version of your request:
IMHO, Bukharan ( not Afghani, as per Lebedinsky!) pseudoshashkas ( sorry for a totally inappropriate term, but for want of a better one...) derive their origin not from the shashkas of Russian invaders and subsequent occupants, but from Khybers or their earlier analogs. Here is the series of graded modifications: classical Khyber at the top, early Bukharan " shashka" in the middle ( straight blade, almost triangular geometry) and classical Bukharan "shashka" ( slightly curved blade, almost "hatchet" point). The last two swords are attributed to Bukhara ( more precisely Central Asia) partly by the characteristic feature of 5 rivets ( 2x1X2).

Jim,

In a little while a paper one of my Russian colleagues and I have written together will appear in a major arms history journal. It will be dealing with the origin of yataghan blades and a large part of it will be referring to tunkou, the heretofore forgotten or neglected element of Ottoman yataghans.
Just in brief, it is not an inherently Ottoman, but a Turkic element, tracing back to nomads, Seljuks and Mongols included. This is why we see it or its renditions on some Persian and Indo-Persian blades and even in some very early European iconographic sources.

And I completely agree with Ibrahiim's point: the eared pommel of Caucasian shashka likely stems from the same element of the Ottoman yataghans.