help on a strange sword , translation on arab inscription ...

[BerberDagger]

here a detail.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Salaams All, Not being expert in Chinese weapons ... It does however strike me that the blade profile which by the way I can see no evidence of Damascening wootz or any such pattern... is like/similar to modern Chinese martial arts Tai Chi sword blades. It also looks faintly theatrical... I may be wrong ... The Pommel looks like it has Chinese(shapes) around the inner circle and the pommel ring looks missing from the top... where a tassel would normally be tied. The small rings top and base of the hilt look Chinese in style.

It inspires me to look more closely at the broader subject of Chinese Swords.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[BerberDagger]

Hi, I disagree ... the style is spanish XV Century not chinese , the blade is damascus ... maybe a composite sword but chinese is very hard !!!

can i have link of the similar chinese sword you mean please ? I never seen a similar chinese sword...

thank you a lot

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by BerberDagger

Hi, I disagree ... the style is spanish XV Century not chinese , the blade is damascus ... maybe a composite sword but chinese is very hard !!!

can i have link of the similar chinese sword you mean please ? I never seen a similar chinese sword...

thank you a lot

Salaams BerberDagger ~ I assume this is for me to answer?... Yes. Possibly this is a composite... Not beyond the possibility of a theatrical made up job nor perhaps influenced by Toledo Oriental form..but I don't think it is old nor do I think it is genuine. I think it is interesting. The writing on the hilt appears to be not Arabic but more Chinese looking cloud designs. The blade (and it may be your picture) does not appear to be Damascus...The brass cross guard looks recently cast. It may have some similarity to 15th C but in my opinion it is a new reproduction.

As a contributor I only make observations and whereas you may wish to set out to prove a swords provenance ... I don't think I need to process the details proving that it is not.

You asked for comments by posting the thread ... I am simply doing that.

The floor, however,is all yours .. Go ahead and prove the link to 15th C.
(Please see below Joan of Ark.)
Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[David]

Originally Posted by BerberDagger

Hi, I disagree ... the style is spanish XV Century not chinese , the blade is damascus ... maybe a composite sword but chinese is very hard !!!

I do agree with you that this is not really a Chinese style weapon. However the Chinese have been making repro and fantasy swords based on designs from all over the world for some time now. This is why i suggested the Chinese origin. Not because the sword has traditional Chinese elements. I also agree that the cross guard casting looks cheap and contemporary in the photos. I think we are dealing with a contemporary repro here regardless of the country of origin.
Like Ibrahiim i also see no sign that this blade is damascus steel. What do you base this assumption on?

[Iain]

Originally Posted by BerberDagger

Hi, I disagree ... the style is spanish XV Century not chinese , the blade is damascus ... maybe a composite sword but chinese is very hard !!!

can i have link of the similar chinese sword you mean please ? I never seen a similar chinese sword...

thank you a lot

To further add to what David said, I'd be curious what you believe your sword to be?

It is always difficult to convince someone who has a piece in hand if their own opinion is already fixed.

I agree with what the other posters in this thread have said that there is not an Arab description.

This is not, in my opinion, an object of antiquity and could well be a Chinese product as suggested by other posters.

The other possibility is that this is a European reproduction, however would not likely make it particularly old either, at the oldest perhaps a late 19th century decorative item.

[RSWORD]

Thank you for posting a closer picture of the blade however from the picture provided I can see no evidence that this is a Damascus blade. I do see some surface scratches but can't see any evidence of a pattern. Also, there seems to be a couple of spots along the edge where the blade has folded up, presumably when the edge has struck something. The way it is folded up would suggest that this blade is not tempered with a hard edge. It would suggest that the steel is rather soft. A hard edge would chip away, not fold over. Also, the unevenness of the ridge line suggests a poorly made blade. I think at best here you have a 19th century piece made for hanging on the wall.

[BerberDagger]

thanks at all fo opinion ... I would made a precisation:
I known this sword is not period , I ve a large collection of genuine viking and medieval swords olso with museum provenence so i m not a stupid collector ! I dont search people who tell me that this sword is antique!!!

only i would find a catalogue description for it .... i dont see chinese manner in pommel and guard more european victorian but i m open to change idea if all the ideas of collectors suggest chinese offer me images and documentation abaut...

thank you

[Iain]

Originally Posted by BerberDagger

thanks at all fo opinion ... I would made a precisation:
I known this sword is not period , I ve a large collection of genuine viking and medieval swords olso with museum provenence so i m not a stupid collector ! I dont search people who tell me that this sword is antique!!!

I don't anyone had suggested you were somehow a "stupid collector".

only i would find a catalogue description for it .... i dont see chinese manner in pommel and guard more european victorian but i m open to change idea if all the ideas of collectors suggest chinese offer me images and documentation abaut...

thank you

My opinion would be a Victorian period decorative piece.

[David]

Originally Posted by BerberDagger

thanks at all fo opinion ... I would made a precisation:
I known this sword is not period , I ve a large collection of genuine viking and medieval swords olso with museum provenence so i m not a stupid collector ! I dont search people who tell me that this sword is antique!!!

only i would find a catalogue description for it .... i dont see chinese manner in pommel and guard more european victorian but i m open to change idea if all the ideas of collectors suggest chinese offer me images and documentation abaut...

thank you

I don't think there is any reason to get defensive and certainly no one is suggesting that you are stupid. We are all insisting that the blade is NOT damascus because NONE of us can see ANY evidence of it in your photographs. This has become a sticking point in this thread because you make the claim for damascus in your opening post and then later support that claim with what you refer to as an "expert" opinion that it is indeed damascus. "the blade is damascus steel and probably 18th century" So again i would ask WHY you believe this is so?
Regarding a "catalogue description", personally i cannot see the point beyond "European style wall hanger". Technically i would suggest that this is not truly an ethnographic weapon. It makes gestures towards historical swords, but is probably not an exact repro of any particular known historical weapon. My thoughts on the possibility that this is a Chinese repro are based upon the motif in the pommel and nothing more. It looks vaguely Asian, though i doubt it is any kind of writing. Though it could well have been incorporated into this pommel by a European maker to give this sword an exotic hint of "orientalism".