![]() |
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: England, Northumberland
Posts: 85
|
![]()
Hello all
Well interesting from my view, as its the only one of the type that I have and I've not seen that many. It took enough encouragement to get the friend to sell it too but I think worth the effort. Disregarding the hilt, which is certainly a replacement, though appears old, the workmanship on the grip, horn or ivory I dont know, seems fine and the back strap area seems very good. Blade on the other hand, while reasonably short, seems very heavy. Not sure if that is typical but feels awkward to weild. Genuine certainly, as it has a lot of pitting to the one side, where it has obviously lbeen put down or hung up for a long time. Thankfully the faint engraving is on the better side. I'm thinking Persian rather than Turkish but what era? All thoughts appreciated as always. Cheers Andy |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
EAAF Staff
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 7,200
|
![]()
Your right, the ivory work is beautiful.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: England, Northumberland
Posts: 85
|
![]()
Thought I better give the measurements. 36" in total length.
Im still thinking Persian but hope someone will either confirm or say a alternative. That Qajar period is a pretty long dynasty isnt it, so when in its life time? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 2,718
|
![]()
No Andy, the Qajar period is not all that long 1795-1925.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 176
|
![]()
Hello,
The crossguard seems to be a later, crude "blacksmith" quality replacement. A sword with a beautiful hilt as this one aught to have had a much better crossguard. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Greensboro, NC
Posts: 1,083
|
![]()
I would classify this one as Indo-Persian, circa 18th century with replaced crossguard. For two examples with near identical carved ivory grip please refer to Arms and Armour, Traditional Weapons of India by E. Jaiwant Paul p. 16. Claims to be shamshir of Augangzeb, 17th century. Also, Persian Arms and Armour, by Orez Perski, p. 288 120a. This is classifed Indo-Persian, circa 18th century. Perhaps these grips became fashionable amongst Mughal nobility and this is why we see several examples.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 | |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
|
![]() Quote:
The author (or, more precisely, the Chief Editor , of this book) is Antoni Romuald Chodynski. This is a very frequent mistake made by many people and needs to be corrected. Nothing personal. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 | |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Greensboro, NC
Posts: 1,083
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|