Help needed identifying shamshir wootz blade

[William Fox]

Dear members,

This is my first post on this forum. I have been collecting antique edged weapons for many years, since I was twelve, I'm now 36.

Years ago I started collecting German pattern welded damascus swords, mostly 19th and early 20th century vintage, and became fascinated with the art of European 'Damascus' blades. Inevitably I tried to find out what real damascus blades were all about, and I began to study Persian sword making and wootz steel. I spent time looking at examples in museums and books, and finally, very recently, I have purchased an example of a wootz steel Persian shamshir. The grip seems to be in bad shape, with signs of old repairs, but the blade looks pretty good.

The blade has two cartouches, with some other writing. I asked a friend in the Middle East if he could help me translate them, but although he is a calligrapher, he is not expert in Persian / Farsi. He thinks that one cartouche says: 'made by Zaman Esfahani'.

Can anyone help me with translating what is written on this blade, and also tell me anything about its age and who Zaman was.

Many thanks in advance for any advice!

Kind regards

Will

[mariusgmioc]

Can't help you with the translation but to me, it looks like the blade is older than the grip, possibly 18th century.
The photos are not very good, but the blade appears to be in pretty good condition. Could you discern any pattern in the wootz?

[William Fox]

Originally Posted by mariusgmioc

Can't help you with the translation but to me, it looks like the blade is older than the grip, possibly 18th century.
The photos are not very good, but the blade appears to be in pretty good condition. Could you discern any pattern in the wootz?

Thanks.

You are correct. To me, it looks like the blade is an old quality piece, but the hilt has been repaired, or the blade re-hilted, in an unskilled way. It is firm in the hilt and could be used in combat, but it was crudely done.

I have a feeling that the old Persian blade was at some point in its history disassembled and was later put back into use somewhere in Arab world, probably the Gulf. I say this because the re-hilt is so crudely done. If it had been constructed in one of the major cities like Damascus surely it could have been done better. There is some form of plaster crammed into the gaps, to give it extra strength! This is the sort of field repair I would expect was done in the Hejaz. All of this is just a felling, nothing more.

[estcrh]

Maybe someone on the forum can answer how the grip of a Syrian shamshir is different from the grip of a Persian shamshir. This looks like a persian blade but is it a Syrian sword with a Persian blade, or a Persian sword?

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by estcrh

Maybe someone on the forum can answer how the grip of a Syrian shamshir is different from the grip of a Persian shamshir. This looks like a persian blade but is it a Syrian sword with a Persian blade, or a Persian sword?

Hello my friend. I will try to answer your question. Here are a photos hilts of Persian and Syrian Shamshir. And with the other photos I've highlighted the main features of which say it is Syrian Shamshir handle.

I hope that in spite of my bad English, I was able to explain the differences

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by William Fox

The blade has two cartouches, with some other writing. I asked a friend in the Middle East if he could help me translate them, but although he is a calligrapher, he is not expert in Persian / Farsi. He thinks that one cartouche says: 'made by Zaman Esfahani'.

I do not read Farsi. But I will try to make a guess. The cartouche on the blade of your shashmir likely written: "Assadula Isfahani". Although, of course, I could be wrong. Then members will correct me.

I think your Shamshir blade can be dated to the end of 18 - the middle of the 19th century.

[Jeff D]

Hi Will,

I think your friend has it right. "Zaman Isfahani". I believe he was active early to mid 19th century.


Jeff

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by mahratt

Hello my friend. I will try to answer your question. Here are a photos hilts of Persian and Syrian Shamshir. And with the other photos I've highlighted the main features of which say it is Syrian Shamshir handle.

I hope that in spite of my bad English, I was able to explain the differences

Thanks!!!!

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by William Fox

Dear members,

This is my first post on this forum. I have been collecting antique edged weapons for many years, since I was twelve, I'm now 36.

Years ago I started collecting German pattern welded damascus swords, mostly 19th and early 20th century vintage, and became fascinated with the art of European 'Damascus' blades. Inevitably I tried to find out what real damascus blades were all about, and I began to study Persian sword making and wootz steel. I spent time looking at examples in museums and books, and finally, very recently, I have purchased an example of a wootz steel Persian shamshir. The grip seems to be in bad shape, with signs of old repairs, but the blade looks pretty good.

The blade has two cartouches, with some other writing. I asked a friend in the Middle East if he could help me translate them, but although he is a calligrapher, he is not expert in Persian / Farsi. He thinks that one cartouche says: 'made by Zaman Esfahani'.

Can anyone help me with translating what is written on this blade, and also tell me anything about its age and who Zaman was.

Many thanks in advance for any advice!

Kind regards

Will

Salaams William Fox, This is a great sword from the stable of...as you say Zaman Isfahan...and I discovered another write up indicating its provenance using a similar sword which I have recomposed and redrawn viz;

Quote"With octagonal grips covered in black shagreen leather, steel pommel and guard of characteristic form. The blade Shamshir (lions tail), forged of wootz steel and inlaid at the forte, VICTORY FROM GOD AND CONQUEST NIGH, together with a baduh or magic square, and a polylobate cartouche containing the maker?s name, WORK OF ZAMAN ISFAHANI, a well-known smith said to have been a student of Assad Allah. Mid-18th century".Unquote.

There is further detail on another website by the world renowned Oliver Pinochet of Imperial Auctions and this Forum where the discussion as to true signatures including Zaman Isfahan exist and the variables concerning their authenticity... and indeed if there was a sword maker called assad - allah Please see~

http://auctionsimperial.com/om-the-p...f-assad-allah/

Indeeed it would not be the first time that a spurious name appeared and went on for several centuries for example ANDREA FERRERA...and in its many spellings. It would be interesting to discover if Zaman Isfahan was simply an extension of the expertise of one such sword making school/workshop (Assad - Allah) so that the tradition of the name on a sword was simply extended in time.

In fact looking at http://www.vikingsword.com/ethsword/shamshir/ this on Forum, by Lee Jones, whose detail indicates that the sword can be clearly compared. Note that the life span of the sword maker, Assad - Allah, would have needed to be in excess of 500 years !!

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[Jens Nordlunde]

In Islamic Armourers and Their Works by L.A.Mayer, Albert Kundig, Geneva, 1962, on page 78 he mentions a Zaman Isfahani.
"Zaman Isfahani, a pupil od Asad Allah, is known by at least two swords.
1. One made in 1836 in Kabul.
2. No date, but in the National Museum in Denmark.

[estcrh]

A PERSIAN QAJAR DYNASTY SHAMSHIR SWORD

With octagonal grips covered in black shagreen leather, steel pommel and guard of characteristic form. The massive blade of considerable curvature, forged of highly-contrasted black wootz steel and inaid at the forte, VICTORY FROM GOD AND CONQUEST NIGH, together with a baduh or magic square, and a polylobate cartouche containing the maker?s name, WORK OF ZAMAN ISFAHANI, a well-known smith said to have been a student of Assad Allah. In its velvet-covered wooden scabbard with black wootz suspension bands and pierced chape.Mid-18th century. Light wear. Overall length 101.4 cm.

[ariel]

Assadulla worked in the first half of the 17th century. I doubt that a sword made in 1836 could have been forged 100 years later by a direct pupil of Assadulla: a workshop initially belonging to one and maintaining its activity is more plausible.

The name of Zaman Isfaghani is pretty well known; likely he was famous even in his times. Thus, forging his signature much later was likely a burgeoning business, just like Assadulla's.

Either the pics of your blade are pretty poor, or the blade should be re-etched to reveal its true pattern.

Don't be upset about the handle: all organic materials have a limited life span, and, IMHO, most if not all 17-18 century swords have second or third handles.

And count your blessings: very nice shamshir!

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

...world renowned Oliver Pinochet ...

[mahratt]

Guys, let's not talk constantly mistaken clichés and misconceptions. "Assadulla worked in the first half of the 17th centuries" - which we have evidence of this? Stamp (cartouche) Assadula Isfahani put on the blades and in the 19th century.

There is a good version of that Assadula - "Lion of Allah" is a brand, which confirms the quality of the blade. She was a good explanation of why the name "Assadula" was put on the blades almost 300 years.

[ariel]

Ibrahim and Estcrh:


Isn't it a bit strange to see " Qajar dynasty" and "mid 18th century" in the same description?

Qajars rule started in 1785 or 1794 depending on the count:-)

[ariel]

Physical existence of a Safavid swordmaker named Assadullah ( var.) is suggested by the famous episode of a helmet and by the existence of Kalb Ali, who signed his blades as " son of Assadullah" and was referred to as such by various sources.
Forged signatures of both are encountered on the blades from different countries and different centuries.
Khorasani's assertion that "Assadullah" was a sign of high quality bestowed by the guild is easily refuted by a plethora of junky blades with that ( often illiterate) signature.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by mahratt

Guys, let's not talk constantly mistaken clichés and misconceptions. "Assadulla worked in the first half of the 17th centuries" - which we have evidence of this? Stamp (cartouche) Assadula Isfahani put on the blades and in the 19th century.

There is a good version of that Assadula - "Lion of Allah" is a brand, which confirms the quality of the blade. She was a good explanation of why the name "Assadula" was put on the blades almost 300 years.

Salaams mahrat, The conundrum surrounding this phenomena...That of signatures taking on a life of their own when in fact what we may well be looking at is the same illusion that surrounds ANDREA FERRERA inscriptions. Surely that is the sort of question we are constantly puzzling over?...

There is no doubt that the inscriptions were placed and there may be many that are accurate in the date...but it is entirely logical that if Assad-Allah was simply the signature but the man himself (though he may have been real) was more connected to the "workshop signature" that produced high quality blades...and that if that is allowable...then there is a fair chance that all of the follow on signatures including Zaman Isfahan were also placed for the same reason.

I don't necessarily follow the reasoning on the lion brand either...It is perhaps worth noting that Shamshiir means Lions tail and I would suggest that it may also be a Lions Tale!!

There is hardly any information on the characters, however, research may reveal something...Having a signed cartouche on blades does not prove the person existed...but it does point to a top class sword making facility/workshop...likely to be at Royal Workshop quality or close to it.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by Jens Nordlunde

In Islamic Armourers and Their Works by L.A.Mayer, Albert Kundig, Geneva, 1962, on page 78 he mentions a Zaman Isfahani.
"Zaman Isfahani, a pupil od Asad Allah, is known by at least two swords.
1. One made in 1836 in Kabul.
2. No date, but in the National Museum in Denmark.

Salaams Jens, LA Mayer states Quote"No contemporary chronicle mentions him as a living being and no details of historical value are known about his life or work".Unquote.

Indeed it does appear as very suspect and I have to conclude that there is a very strong likelihood that no such persons were ever involved in swordmaking and that the signatures were cleverly construed to give the illusion they were real people when they were no more than clever early marketing tools.

A full account of this very question of signatures on Shamshiir blades may be found at http://auctionsimperial.com/om-the-p...f-assad-allah/


I add later...from http://www.vikingsword.com/ethsword/shamshir/ Shamshir Quote."blades will often include one or more of the following inscriptions: the maker's name, the owner's name, a dedication to a ruler, quotations from the Koran and talismanic devices. The most celebrated swordsmith to create shamshirs, Assadullah (or: Asad Allah, Asad Ullah, Asadullah) of Isfahan, worked during the high renaissance of the Safavid Persian Empire in the time of Shah 'Abbas, who reigned between 1588 and 1629 A.D. Essentially no actual details of Assadullah's life are known. Inscriptions proclaiming blades to be his work are common and vary greatly in position of inscription placement, technique and style of execution, wording and calligraphy. Mayer notes inscribed dates associated with Assadullah range from 811 AH to 1808 AD and Elgood reports a wootz blade also inscribed as the work of Assadullah but dated 1921 A.D. - a span of about 500 years! Another famed swordsmith from this same time and place was Assadullah's son Kalb 'Ali (or: Quli Ali) for whom an equally variable and large number of inscriptions have also been documented. From the large numbers of blades so inscribed and from the variations in style, it becomes obvious that these blades cannot be solely the work of the named swordsmith or even of a particular workshop. Considering the variation in the inscribed dates and rulers it seems unlikely that these inscriptions were truly made to deceive contemporary buyers, hence these inscriptions may essentially have been intended as talismanic devices. Exactly which of the blades bearing the signatures of these and other celebrated smiths are actually the work of these smiths is likely now entirely unknowable. Rawson advises assessment of the worthiness of a blade to bear the mark of a great swordsmith, however this does not allow definite attribution of authorship. On the basis of a broad heavy blade bearing a bold, complex wootz pattern, Figel attributed a few of the swords in his collection to Assadullah, as inscribed, however the cataloger of his collection at the time of auction was understandably more cautious." Unquote.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by William Fox

Dear members,

This is my first post on this forum. I have been collecting antique edged weapons for many years, since I was twelve, I'm now 36.

Years ago I started collecting German pattern welded damascus swords, mostly 19th and early 20th century vintage, and became fascinated with the art of European 'Damascus' blades. Inevitably I tried to find out what real damascus blades were all about, and I began to study Persian sword making and wootz steel. I spent time looking at examples in museums and books, and finally, very recently, I have purchased an example of a wootz steel Persian shamshir. The grip seems to be in bad shape, with signs of old repairs, but the blade looks pretty good.

The blade has two cartouches, with some other writing. I asked a friend in the Middle East if he could help me translate them, but although he is a calligrapher, he is not expert in Persian / Farsi. He thinks that one cartouche says: 'made by Zaman Esfahani'.

Can anyone help me with translating what is written on this blade, and also tell me anything about its age and who Zaman was.

Many thanks in advance for any advice!

Kind regards

Will

Salaams William Fox, Your thread is indeed an excellent one... in reading the many details regarding signatures on Shamshiirs I conclude that the following is perhaps the nearest I would agree with; from http://www.vikingsword.com/ethsword/shamshir/

Quote"Considering the variation in the inscribed dates and rulers it seems unlikely that these inscriptions were truly made to deceive contemporary buyers, hence these inscriptions may essentially have been intended as talismanic devices."Unquote.

I have to say that I am at the same time delighted with the wording since Talismanic inscription is an important area in its own right. To be clear I think the illusion of an actual person is very much in line with the invention albeit a masquerade and a play with words not so much as to lie or cheat a buyer moreover to classify a workshop (though it may well be that other workshops also used the signature as well) as the producer of fine blades. Many Toledo, Solingen and other centres did the same thing with European swords... Running Wolf, Moons, Sickle marks, ANDREA FERRERA ...

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[mariusgmioc]

Hello William,
Although the photos you provided are not of very good quality, after a more careful examination, judging by the shape (amplitude of curvature), technique of the inscriptions and aspect of wootz, I believe your Shamshir is a late 17th century blade (of undoubtedly Persian origin). As with regards with the hilt, it is the original shape, with only the scales being replaced (and they could have been replaced practically anywhere). It is certainly a very beautiful blade.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by mariusgmioc

Hello William,
Although the photos you provided are not of very good quality, after a more careful examination, judging by the shape (amplitude of curvature), technique of the inscriptions and aspect of wootz, I believe your Shamshir is a late 17th century blade (of undoubtedly Persian origin). As with regards with the hilt, it is the original shape, with only the scales being replaced (and they could have been replaced practically anywhere). It is certainly a very beautiful blade.

I am inclined to agree, and as Ariel has noted, hilts were often replaced to maintain serviceability or in many cases as these blades changed hands.

As Ibrahiim has well noted, the cartouche with this signature would seem to be associated with talismanic imbuement of this very attractive blade, as seen with the bedough square adjacent.
As Mahratt has noted, we must be cautious in observing these inscriptions of these profoundly known makers as indeed they, just as famed makers in Toledo, North Italy and Germany had their very names become fixtures in the implication of quality in blades.

Though Mayer's work is a most venerable source, and typically most reliable, some of the references are notably brief but serve well as benchmarks for the subsequent research that has transpired.

I think Oliver Pinchot's work on the Assad Adulah blades has become a well established reference on the topic of these markings on Persian blades, and his reputation and knowledge has indeed become well known in the international arms community.

As mentioned with the case of the legendary Andrea Ferara which became legion in the famed Scottish swords, we cannot be absolutely certain of the true existence of the original personage. What is certain is that the name became the byword for excellence in the blades on which it was present.

That this practice might have in some cases been applied to substandard blades with the application naturally alluding to these well known blades seems rather anticipated.

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

Salaams mahrat, The conundrum surrounding this phenomena...That of signatures taking on a life of their own when in fact what we may well be looking at is the same illusion that surrounds ANDREA FERRERA inscriptions. Surely that is the sort of question we are constantly puzzling over?...

There is no doubt that the inscriptions were placed and there may be many that are accurate in the date...but it is entirely logical that if Assad-Allah was simply the signature but the man himself (though he may have been real) was more connected to the "workshop signature" that produced high quality blades...and that if that is allowable...then there is a fair chance that all of the follow on signatures including Zaman Isfahan were also placed for the same reason.

I don't necessarily follow the reasoning on the lion brand either...It is perhaps worth noting that Shamshiir means Lions tail and I would suggest that it may also be a Lions Tale!!

There is hardly any information on the characters, however, research may reveal something...Having a signed cartouche on blades does not prove the person existed...but it does point to a top class sword making facility/workshop...likely to be at Royal Workshop quality or close to it.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Wa-alaikum us-salaam Ibrahiim. Tell me, my friend, you know how to look Persian swords early and mid-17th century? Not the ones that were published in a book dr. Manoucher Khorasani. Those that are 100% made in the 17th century.

None of them are no cartush "Assadula" ... Do not you think it strange?

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by mahratt

Wa-alaikum us-salaam Ibrahiim. Tell me, my friend, you know how to look Persian swords early and mid-17th century? Not the ones that were published in a book dr. Manoucher Khorasani. Those that are 100% made in the 17th century.

None of them are no cartush "Assadula" ... Do not you think it strange?

Mahratt, that is amazing ! I have never seen the monumental book by the great expert of all Persian arms, Manoucher, but of the weapons shown in that book, there are none ascribed to Assad Adullah?

I for one do think that is very strange, especially since this book has been acclaimed by him to be the last word on these Persian swords.
Perhaps, these inscriptions are indeed for trade blades only?

Are you familiar with the article by Oliver Pinchot? I need to find my copy and read it again!!

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by ariel

Khorasani's assertion that "Assadullah" was a sign of high quality bestowed by the guild is easily refuted by a plethora of junky blades with that ( often illiterate) signature.

I'm not saying that he fully agrees with Dr. Manoucher Khorasani opinion. I believe that "Assadula" - it was a brand. But this does not mean that no one has done poor quality swords, signing their cartouche "Assadula". If you have a brand, it is sure there will be a fake.
The same is true today. There branded Rolex watch. They cost $ 10,000. And there is a Chinese fake. It also says "Rolex". But they cost $ 10.

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Mahratt, that is amazing ! I have never seen the monumental book by the great expert of all Persian arms, Manoucher, but of the weapons shown in that book, there are none ascribed to Assad Adullah?

I for one do think that is very strange, especially since this book has been acclaimed by him to be the last word on these Persian swords.
Perhaps, these inscriptions are indeed for trade blades only?

Are you familiar with the article by Oliver Pinchot? I need to find my copy and read it again!!

Jim, Dr. Kirill Rivkin said that in this book (interesting and certainly useful book) all Persian swords, only the second half of the 18th century and 19th century. I watched the Persian swords of the 17th century in the Armoury palata (Kremlin, Moscow). In form they are very different from the swords of the book Dr. Manoucher Khorasani. Is no doubt that in the Armory palata Persian swords of the 17th century. There are documents to prove it.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by mahratt

Jim, Dr. Kirill Rivkin said that in this book (interesting and certainly useful book) all Persian swords, only the second half of the 18th century and 19th century. I watched the Persian swords of the 17th century in the Armoury palata (Kremlin, Moscow). In form they are very different from the swords of the book Dr. Manoucher Khorasani. Is no doubt that in the Armory palata Persian swords of the 17th century. There are documents to prove it.

If Kirill Rivkin says that in Manouchers book the swords represented are only second half 18th and into 19th centuries, then I would presume that comment to be compellingly accurate knowing the level of his knowledge and experience.

It seems, after rereading the remarkable article by Oliver Pinchot, that dated examples of 17th century shamshirs are relatively uncommon, thus often the method of recognizing them is primarily by the character of the blade itself. Apparantly Mayer (1962) was able to identify a good number of Assad Allah blades signed, but these all were apparently AFTER the reign of Shah Abbas I. As his reign was c. 1587-1628 (Stone) then these still would fall into 17th century.
Mayer (opcit.) notes that despite the questionable historicity of the name Assad Allah, the name was associated with fine sword blades in Persia by the late 17th c . and notes dated blades supporting this.

I am inclined to agree with your view that Assad Allah was likely used in the sense of a 'brand or quality imbuement, and that in time there were many copies of lesser quality produced to capitalize on the name as a marketing ploy.

[ariel]

Jim,
The problem is not only with Persian swors, but with any swords. The older they are, the rarer they are.
Weapons are perishable, and we have only one example of Seljuk swords ( in the Furussia collection), no Ottoman weapons prior to Mehmet II, virtually no Caucasian weapons prior to the end of the 18th century.

However, the book of Khorasani does contain several shamshirs of Safavid period signed by Assadullah Isfaghani.

# 73 ( p. 422) shows shamshir of Shah Abbas with Assadullah' s signature.
#74: the same
#75: the same
#76: the same
# 77: shah Abbas, signed by Kalbeali
# 78: the same
#79: shah Abbas/ Safi: signed by Assadullah

After that there are swords belonging to the later shahs , also signed with Assadulla's and Kalbeali's names. Those, of course, cannot be directly attributable to the original father/ son team, but on what grounds can we claim that ##73-79 are forgeries? They are openly mentioned in the book, with extensive photography, and all can see them and reach reasonable conclusions.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by mahratt

Wa-alaikum us-salaam Ibrahiim. Tell me, my friend, you know how to look Persian swords early and mid-17th century? Not the ones that were published in a book dr. Manoucher Khorasani. Those that are 100% made in the 17th century.

None of them are no cartush "Assadula" ... Do not you think it strange?

Salaams mahratt, Your comments are much appreciated. In trying to give a similar example in European work when I say ~ Many Toledo, Solingen and other centres did the same thing with European swords... Running Wolf, Moons, Sickle marks, ANDREA FERRERA ... I over simplify the situation since in the Persian scenario it is a far more deliberate and sustained proceedure whereby the sword factory use the illusion of the signature over several centuries almost as a trade mark. Naturally other workshops tried to cut in on the deal...and in some cases that can be looked on as somewhat frauduleny though imperfect signatures or badly done would reflect as bad quality craftsmanship thus undermining their efforts... and your later post on Rolex is agreed as an example.

The remark placed at thread by Jim sums it up nicely~ Quote"
I am inclined to agree with your view that Assad Allah was likely used in the sense of a 'brand or quality imbuement, and that in time there were many copies of lesser quality produced to capitalize on the name as a marketing ploy."Unquote.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[mahratt]

Guys, look at life realistically.

Unfortunately, the inscription is not the blade does not mean anything. Who prevents the early 19th century to make Shamshir and sign it - "1650"?

Let's talk about the items that are 100% provenance. Shamshir 17th century - diplomatic gifts, the kings of the property - they remained a couple dozen. Only they have the 100% provenance, only their date - 100% correct. They are different from what we mean by "Shamshir" geometry (Shamshir and those that we see in the book Dr. Manoucher Khorasani), and cartush with "Shah Abbas" and "Assadula" them not ....

Unfortunately, in many museums around the world data shamshir (and not only) are not correct ... From this error, that appear in the books. These errors are due to the fact that the books of the authors believe what is written in the museum.

For example, I come to the museum in a small town in Russia, and see the Persian shashmshir. Around him the label. On the label is written: "Russian saber 14th century.." I would have thought that such errors are only in Russia. But, I traveled a lot in Europe. And in museums in different cities also saw such errors (incorrect date)....

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

Salaams mahratt, Your comments are much appreciated. In trying to give a similar example in European work when I say ~ Many Toledo, Solingen and other centres did the same thing with European swords... Running Wolf, Moons, Sickle marks, ANDREA FERRERA ... I over simplify the situation since in the Persian scenario it is a far more deliberate and sustained proceedure whereby the sword factory use the illusion of the signature over several centuries almost as a trade mark. Naturally other workshops tried to cut in on the deal...and in some cases that can be looked on as somewhat frauduleny though imperfect signatures or badly done would reflect as bad quality craftsmanship thus undermining their efforts... and your later post on Rolex is agreed as an example.

The remark placed at thread by Jim sums it up nicely~ Quote"
I am inclined to agree with your view that Assad Allah was likely used in the sense of a 'brand or quality imbuement, and that in time there were many copies of lesser quality produced to capitalize on the name as a marketing ploy."Unquote.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Wa-alaikum us-salaam Ibrahiim! You're absolutely right.