OTTOMAN PALA translation please

ingvar · 4th February 2009, 05:22 AM

one question. why people keep calling this "model" a pala. This is a 100% typical kilij.

maybe im wrong, but Pala (or persian name Gaddare) looked a bit different. there was several versions but the crossguard looked the same - bent in the direction of blade. Also most had the "anatomical" pommel, one like in the Karabela type.

katana · 4th February 2009, 02:22 PM

What a fantastic blade ....

Yustas · 4th February 2009, 04:05 PM

Ingvar, i agree.
This is typical Turkish kylych.
Pala is much more straight, and has cross guard bended to the front.
But is is beutifull kylych thaugh.

TVV · 4th February 2009, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yustas

Pala is much more straight, and has cross guard bended to the front.

Source please?

Yustas · 4th February 2009, 04:55 PM

http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Kilij

The kilij (also spelled kilic) is a sword used by the Ottoman Empire starting around the late 15th century. These blades were a distinct variation on the Turko-Mongol sabers that had been used over all the lands touched by the empire of the Kahns.

The oldest surviving examples sport a long blade with a gentle curve slightly more noticeable in the distal half. The width of the blade stays thin (with a slight taper) up until the last 30% of its length, at which point it flares deeper. This distinctive flaring tip is called a "yelman" which greatly adds to the cutting power of the sword. Swords of the next couple of centuries were mainly of the Persian shamshir variety; Persian blades (that did not have the yelman) were fitted with Ottoman hilts. These hilts normally had slightly larger upper guards, and sported a bobble of a end-grip compared to the parent shamshir. In the mid 18th century the kilij produced looked much more like the original design, though shorter, much more acutely curved, and sporting a deep blade with an even deeper yelman. In addition to the flared tip, these blades have a distinct "T-shaped" cross section to the back of the blade. This allows even greater strength and hence greater ability to cause grievous wounds when cleaving. The flared and 'cut away' profile of these thick blades gave it the archetypal 'Voyages of Sinbad' appearance. Some of these shorter Kilij are also referred to as "Pala" but there does not seem to be a clear cut distinction in naming.

Yustas · 4th February 2009, 05:04 PM

It mostly a matter a diferrentiation. Kilich - is a wider therm, and pala is more narrow.
Something like a sword and a saber.

TVV · 4th February 2009, 05:11 PM

Yustas, I have read the memoirs of Bulgarian revolutionaries during the 19th century, and in them they refer to the shorter, wider version of the kilidj from the early 19th century as "pala". Personally, I give more importance to contemporary accounts than to on-line encyclopedias.
You stated that the "pala" is straighter and has upward quillons. I am sure you have a reason for this statement, and my question was not intended as argumentative - I am always looking to learn.
Regards,
Teodor

ingvar · 4th February 2009, 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TVV

Source please?

there are many things in history you cannot source. you know.

From what i read from a historian working in Kremlin's Historic Weaponry Room, Pala is a parade version of Klij, things that differ it from a basic Klij is a specific srossguard. Early Pala had a Karabella type pommel, later Pala had a typical bulbous turkish pommel.

In this case the sourse is book "Turkish Weapons" by E. Astvatsaurian.

TVV · 5th February 2009, 03:02 AM

I looked at Astvatsaturian's book and she does indeed use the word "pala" for some of the earlier swords, without giving any reason as to why. I have to say, in comparison to Elgood, she really gives few notes and contemporary accounts in her text. I also noted that the guard shape does not seem that important in her classification, as other sword with upturned quillons are called kilidj in her book.
I think Astvatsaturian is a great author, but we should be careful before we treat published works as Gospel. Another Russian author, Kulinskiy, refers to almost every German bayonet as a hirschfanger, and we know that in german the word was used to describe a completely different weapon, which he calls "hunting dagger" ("кортик").
Personally, I prefer to use weapon names as they were used by their original users, and from what I have read, the word pala was used in the Balkans to refer to a sword, much like the one in the opening post.
Regards,
Teodor

ingvar · 5th February 2009, 03:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TVV

"hunting dagger" ("кортик")

well "kortik" means "marine dirk", and was worn by the officers only.

But did ou look at her book, or read it?

4th February 2009, 05:22 AM	#1
ingvar Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 11	one question. why people keep calling this "model" a pala. This is a 100% typical kilij. maybe im wrong, but Pala (or persian name Gaddare) looked a bit different. there was several versions but the crossguard looked the same - bent in the direction of blade. Also most had the "anatomical" pommel, one like in the Karabela type. Attached Images

4th February 2009, 02:22 PM	#2
katana Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Kent Posts: 2,658	What a fantastic blade ....

4th February 2009, 04:05 PM	#3
Yustas Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 40	Ingvar, i agree. This is typical Turkish kylych. Pala is much more straight, and has cross guard bended to the front. But is is beutifull kylych thaugh.

4th February 2009, 04:55 PM	#5
Yustas Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 40	http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Kilij The kilij (also spelled kilic) is a sword used by the Ottoman Empire starting around the late 15th century. These blades were a distinct variation on the Turko-Mongol sabers that had been used over all the lands touched by the empire of the Kahns. The oldest surviving examples sport a long blade with a gentle curve slightly more noticeable in the distal half. The width of the blade stays thin (with a slight taper) up until the last 30% of its length, at which point it flares deeper. This distinctive flaring tip is called a "yelman" which greatly adds to the cutting power of the sword. Swords of the next couple of centuries were mainly of the Persian shamshir variety; Persian blades (that did not have the yelman) were fitted with Ottoman hilts. These hilts normally had slightly larger upper guards, and sported a bobble of a end-grip compared to the parent shamshir. In the mid 18th century the kilij produced looked much more like the original design, though shorter, much more acutely curved, and sporting a deep blade with an even deeper yelman. In addition to the flared tip, these blades have a distinct "T-shaped" cross section to the back of the blade. This allows even greater strength and hence greater ability to cause grievous wounds when cleaving. The flared and 'cut away' profile of these thick blades gave it the archetypal 'Voyages of Sinbad' appearance. Some of these shorter Kilij are also referred to as "Pala"* but there does not seem to be a clear cut distinction in naming.*

4th February 2009, 05:04 PM	#6
Yustas Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 40	It mostly a matter a diferrentiation. Kilich - is a wider therm, and pala is more narrow. Something like a sword and a saber.

4th February 2009, 05:11 PM	#7
TVV Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Bay Area Posts: 1,660	Yustas, I have read the memoirs of Bulgarian revolutionaries during the 19th century, and in them they refer to the shorter, wider version of the kilidj from the early 19th century as "pala". Personally, I give more importance to contemporary accounts than to on-line encyclopedias. You stated that the "pala" is straighter and has upward quillons. I am sure you have a reason for this statement, and my question was not intended as argumentative - I am always looking to learn. Regards, Teodor

5th February 2009, 03:02 AM	#9
TVV Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Bay Area Posts: 1,660	I looked at Astvatsaturian's book and she does indeed use the word "pala" for some of the earlier swords, without giving any reason as to why. I have to say, in comparison to Elgood, she really gives few notes and contemporary accounts in her text. I also noted that the guard shape does not seem that important in her classification, as other sword with upturned quillons are called kilidj in her book. I think Astvatsaturian is a great author, but we should be careful before we treat published works as Gospel. Another Russian author, Kulinskiy, refers to almost every German bayonet as a hirschfanger, and we know that in german the word was used to describe a completely different weapon, which he calls "hunting dagger" ("кортик"). Personally, I prefer to use weapon names as they were used by their original users, and from what I have read, the word pala was used in the Balkans to refer to a sword, much like the one in the opening post. Regards, Teodor