Translation please

Tim Simmons · 25th March 2019, 08:20 PM

I do not mean to be aggressive in anyway . Hyping up poor quality really serves no good. It stunts development , research , learning and worst of all art appreciation. Sorry if that sounds hard but do you really want to push prices up for lesser work.

TVV · 25th March 2019, 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tim Simmons

I do not mean to be aggressive in anyway . Hyping up poor quality really serves no good. It stunts development , research , learning and worst of all art appreciation. Sorry if that sounds hard but do you really want to push prices up for lesser work.

Tim, are you rating the quality of the silver work on this sword compared to other late 19th century Ottoman military swords, or against master pieces of silversmiths from around the world and of all ages?

Tim Simmons · 25th March 2019, 09:06 PM

I this case the craftsmanship, laying out and technique of execution of the overall design. The formal layout out of the floral motifs on the cross guard are rather rough and the some what better floral motifs in the centre are poorly bordered. Work is governed by many circumstances , environments, technologies and cultures . I also mentioned war as a disruptive force on manufacturing. However having in mind the origins of this piece and the fact that silver a material with trappings of status the work is poor. A person could write volumes on art and function, art society and culture. For us looking and research is best. This is an okay sword with okay-ish decoration just because it is silver does not make poor work good.

Kubur · 25th March 2019, 09:14 PM

So clearly it was a general comment, please have look at books on Ottoman silver work then we can compare and discuss...

Jim McDougall · 25th March 2019, 09:19 PM

Actually I had not even considered monetary issues or those kinds of values myself, and naturally I cannot speak for others. My only concern was that the quality or lack thereof may be related to the work of artisans working in regions outside the main centers, whose skills and tools might be of lesser degree. This would be a factor in estimating the age, provenance and other matters in identifying the weapon.

I know that with colonial weapons there are obvious issues with quality, materials and workmanship not to mention components used in refurbishing which are not necessarily compatible aesthetically. Such items have certain inherent values historically which of course do not coincide with valuation of discerning collectors typically.

As Teodor has well noted, comparisons must be specified categorically to better understand the relevance of the observation.

Victrix · 25th March 2019, 09:56 PM

Ahem, do we have any Arabic reader here who can oblige the original post and translate the writing on the blade? It might not even be real Arabic. It could be imaginary pseudo-Arabic as seen on some Hungarian ”trophy” blades in Ottoman style. Also, is the Roman style arms and armour trophy stand engraving on the hilt common on Ottoman arms? I thought Islamic art typically is abstract or geometric. Hungary on the other hand likes to use Roman imagery as it was once the Roman province of Pannonia. Seems to me that Jim is not far off the mark (no pun intended!)

ariel · 25th March 2019, 11:33 PM

Personally, I see nothing Russian or Caucasian here. IMHO ,this is a garden variety Ottoman officer 19-20 century sword with perhaps a “blingy” silver handle ( or just silver plated). The inscription is most likely in old Turkish that is unreadable by modern Turks : at least half a dozen of my colleagues from Turkey and their highly educated kin in Turkey just shrugged their shoulders. Perhaps, a university professor of old Ottoman might be of help.

Decorative style is not informative: most decorated Ottoman swords of that period were embellished in “Turkish Baroque” style. And if it’s ain’t Baroque, don’t fix it:-)

Victrix · 26th March 2019, 09:40 AM

Well, then it could be just about anything... Regarding Ottoman Trophy of Arms, I found this in Wiki ”Every sultan of the Ottoman Empire had his own monogram, called the tughra, which served as a royal symbol. A coat of arms in the European heraldic sense was created in the late 19th century. Hampton Court requested from the Ottoman Empire the coat of arms to be included in their collection. As the coat of arms had not been previously used in the Ottoman Empire, it was designed after this request, and the final design was adopted by Sultan Abdul Hamid II on 17 April 1882.” See picture attached. Something like this could be engraved on the hilt. The engraving at the top of the trophy of arms on the hilt could just be a tughra?

Kubur · 26th March 2019, 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Victrix

Well, then it could be just about anything... Regarding Ottoman Trophy of Arms, I found this in Wiki ”Every sultan of the Ottoman Empire had his own monogram, called the tughra, which served as a royal symbol. A coat of arms in the European heraldic sense was created in the late 19th century. Hampton Court requested from the Ottoman Empire the coat of arms to be included in their collection. As the coat of arms had not been previously used in the Ottoman Empire, it was designed after this request, and the final design was adopted by Sultan Abdul Hamid II on 17 April 1882.” See picture attached. Something like this could be engraved on the hilt. The engraving at the top of the trophy of arms on the hilt could just be a tughra?

Of course it is!

Kubur · 26th March 2019, 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ariel

Decorative style is not informative: most decorated Ottoman swords of that period were embellished in “Turkish Baroque” style. And if it’s ain’t Baroque, don’t fix it:-)

Yes it's baroque Ariel again right - OMG - you are the new guru...

Jim McDougall · 26th March 2019, 06:03 PM

Guys, I am amazed!! You really got this figured out perfectly.
Ariel, your 'baroque' thing was priceless!!!!

So Kubur, now I see the tughra in that uh, decorative web on the guard. I completely missed it .

While we know this is Ottoman and 19th c. what about those curious hanging mounts on the scabbard, distinctly like those on latter 19th c shashka scabbard. I cant think of another use of those mounts, I thought Ottomans used the European type dual rings .

26th March 2019, 09:40 AM	#8
Victrix Member Join Date: Apr 2017 Location: Sweden Posts: 755	Well, then it could be just about anything... Regarding Ottoman Trophy of Arms, I found this in Wiki ”Every sultan of the Ottoman Empire had his own monogram, called the tughra, which served as a royal symbol. A coat of arms in the European heraldic sense was created in the late 19th century. Hampton Court requested from the Ottoman Empire the coat of arms to be included in their collection. As the coat of arms had not been previously used in the Ottoman Empire, it was designed after this request, and the final design was adopted by Sultan Abdul Hamid II on 17 April 1882.” See picture attached. Something like this could be engraved on the hilt. The engraving at the top of the trophy of arms on the hilt could just be a tughra? Attached Images Last edited by Victrix; 26th March 2019 at 09:51 AM.

25th March 2019, 08:20 PM	#1
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,843	I do not mean to be aggressive in anyway . Hyping up poor quality really serves no good. It stunts development , research , learning and worst of all art appreciation. Sorry if that sounds hard but do you really want to push prices up for lesser work.

25th March 2019, 09:06 PM	#3
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,843	I this case the craftsmanship, laying out and technique of execution of the overall design. The formal layout out of the floral motifs on the cross guard are rather rough and the some what better floral motifs in the centre are poorly bordered. Work is governed by many circumstances , environments, technologies and cultures . I also mentioned war as a disruptive force on manufacturing. However having in mind the origins of this piece and the fact that silver a material with trappings of status the work is poor. A person could write volumes on art and function, art society and culture. For us looking and research is best. This is an okay sword with okay-ish decoration just because it is silver does not make poor work good.

25th March 2019, 09:14 PM	#4
Kubur Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 2,145	So clearly it was a general comment, please have look at books on Ottoman silver work then we can compare and discuss...

25th March 2019, 09:19 PM	#5
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,192	Actually I had not even considered monetary issues or those kinds of values myself, and naturally I cannot speak for others. My only concern was that the quality or lack thereof may be related to the work of artisans working in regions outside the main centers, whose skills and tools might be of lesser degree. This would be a factor in estimating the age, provenance and other matters in identifying the weapon. I know that with colonial weapons there are obvious issues with quality, materials and workmanship not to mention components used in refurbishing which are not necessarily compatible aesthetically. Such items have certain inherent values historically which of course do not coincide with valuation of discerning collectors typically. As Teodor has well noted, comparisons must be specified categorically to better understand the relevance of the observation.

25th March 2019, 09:56 PM	#6
Victrix Member Join Date: Apr 2017 Location: Sweden Posts: 755	Ahem, do we have any Arabic reader here who can oblige the original post and translate the writing on the blade? It might not even be real Arabic. It could be imaginary pseudo-Arabic as seen on some Hungarian ”trophy” blades in Ottoman style. Also, is the Roman style arms and armour trophy stand engraving on the hilt common on Ottoman arms? I thought Islamic art typically is abstract or geometric. Hungary on the other hand likes to use Roman imagery as it was once the Roman province of Pannonia. Seems to me that Jim is not far off the mark (no pun intended!)

25th March 2019, 11:33 PM	#7
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Personally, I see nothing Russian or Caucasian here. IMHO ,this is a garden variety Ottoman officer 19-20 century sword with perhaps a “blingy” silver handle ( or just silver plated). The inscription is most likely in old Turkish that is unreadable by modern Turks : at least half a dozen of my colleagues from Turkey and their highly educated kin in Turkey just shrugged their shoulders. Perhaps, a university professor of old Ottoman might be of help. Decorative style is not informative: most decorated Ottoman swords of that period were embellished in “Turkish Baroque” style. And if it’s ain’t Baroque, don’t fix it:-)

26th March 2019, 06:03 PM	#11
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,192	Guys, I am amazed!! You really got this figured out perfectly. Ariel, your 'baroque' thing was priceless!!!! So Kubur, now I see the tughra in that uh, decorative web on the guard. I completely missed it . While we know this is Ottoman and 19th c. what about those curious hanging mounts on the scabbard, distinctly like those on latter 19th c shashka scabbard. I cant think of another use of those mounts, I thought Ottomans used the European type dual rings .