Thank you very much for all the kind words, but I'm way over my head oftering the appraisal here, but:

a. Assuming that the sword is russian - Zlatoust, Tula independent makers are the possibility. The problem is that the signature is clearly in arabic (amal...), but russians used cyrillic or stamps (solingen stamps for germans working in russia, zlatoust stamps for zlatoust). Additionally their work was mainly designed for cossacks, not georgians, so it would be strange to see them making this sabre.
Additionally the produce of Zlatoust was considering vastly inferior to high end georgian makers until very late in XIX century.

b. Attached is a "khevsurian sabre" from Astvatsaturjan's book - as you can see it's almost idential to "mountain sabre" from Askhabov's book so it's no wonder we have all these problems in identification.

c. There are however some things in the motiff that look strange to me:
First of all - given attached three images of istambul-bik - first one is from this sabre, second one is transcauscasian istambul-bik, and the last one on the right is a dagestanian.

It seems that the one from the sabre is more transcaucasian. Zigzag pattern that is placed on the hilt and guard - it's also more of a georgian thing, like one on the shashka's blade (image attached).

Than as you can see - images on the blade have a mesh-like background - does it look similar to the zigzag pattern on the next attached image ? I don't know it looks somewhat similar to me.

Than 8-fold ovals on the hilt - this is certainly something very georgian - appears also on the khevsurian sabre in Astvatsaturjan p.343 (khevsurian sabre). Mjalhista's sun is much bigger and sometimes somewhat elongated in one direction.

Other elements of the ornament (Muchal-bik etc.) are also analogous to Dagestani elements, but different nevertheless.

I strongly suspect the origin of the blade being Tiflis. It's not even impossible that it was ordered by a wealthy Tsova-Tushin or Khevsur, remembering that khevsurian swords signed "Ferrara" used to cost 25 cows and up, this blade does not seem like being much more expensive than that. Some of mountainers acquired considerable wealth as a result of military actions, so it does not seem improbable to me.

WOLVIEX, JENS: I envy you for having a copy of that book!
Please excuse my lack of manners and overconfidence but so far here I consider my opinions are close to a certitude but if I go on to the rest of the presented items it would merely be a guess, so I leave Jeff, Jim and even more Rivkin to bring more light at least on the "Caucasian scimitar"...
Pane Wolvieksowky, you bring me light on my "Transylvanian mystery sword" and you can enslave my brain ...
Jens, Why I insist on Mysore is only because I came across pieces from similar to almost identical degree from the Mysore...
Jens, please tell me more about the therm "khurasani", I want to learn as much as I can about the Hindu scimitars ! I used kilij but probably i shouldve gone for the term scimitar, Genus (scimitar) vs. Family (kilij).
Is this particular Indo-Persian type of scimitar a "khurasani" ? I was looking for a descriptive nomenclature for the non-talwar Hindu Scimitars! Is it a Hindu or Persian word (sounds very Persian to me: Isfahan, Teheran, Hamadan, Zahadan, Khurasan :D ); is it lingvisticaly widespread ? Not even one mention on the quintesentially archaic Camron Stone's "Glossary of Arms and Armor" , not a word either on Anthony Tirri's "Islamic weapons - Maghrib to Moghul" which is another book from the Pandora's box :D ... but at least the inside the last one I found two zoomorphic pommelheads: first one, somehow similar (page 283) and a second one, very similar (page 284) pommel head catalogued as makkara (monster) rather then leopard/tiger I assigned. Also Tirri (the author) labels vaguely enough the hilts as "Central Indian" ...
Cheers !

Hi Radu,

To say from where different enamel works come is not easy, other than some colours were made more successfully in some places than in others, and that some colours were only made in one place, like light blue in Lahore. This said, I am aware of that enamellers minakars did travel, or maybe more correctly, were ‘moved’ to other centres. About this Hendley writes in ‘Jeypore Enamels’: ‘Maharaja Man Singh (1590-1615) is stated to have brought five Sikh enamel workers from Lahore, and the fact that the descendants of these men still produce their colours (1886) from that town to carry on the trade of there forefathers confirms that tradition’. So someone working in the Delhi style suddenly found himself working somewhere else – but I doubt that he changed his style, as this was part of his family tradition, learned from father to son for many generations. This ‘moving’ around would lead to a mixture of styles in the different centres, the newer the enamelled items are, the bigger the mixture would become in the different centres, so I have no problem with Mysore.

Here is what T.H.Hendley writes, in ‘Ulwar and its Art Treasurers’, about the sword bought in Bernares in 1854, and since then in the Ulwar armoury: ‘Plate XXXIV. Sword. Shamsher khurasani. Curved steel blade, with silver enamelled sword hilt’. He then goes on describing the sword in detail. He does not explain the word khurasani, but as the word shamsher refers to the type of blade, the word khurasani must, I think, refer to the type of hilt. Could be that this kind of hilts origin from Khorasan/Khurasan where Merv/Marv is, NW of Afghanistan; on, or close to the Silk Road – I don’t know at the moment.

The Makkara is the Indian word for this monster used widely in the SEA area; it is even used on old Tibetan and Nepalese bronze sculptures, as part of their religious symbolism, and it most likely goes back to ancient time.

Pictures 16 & 17. - This second hekmet seems like an rare, interesting item: its not the flutted tear shape Ottoman chichak and it is not the spiked dome ("half egg") Indo-Persian khula-khud , it seems to be Timurid Persian , i see Mongol and I see Persian in it, I also think it goes 18th century and beyond.
One could atribute it to Ottomans as well but unless one of us reads the inscription (Persian, Turkish, Arabic?) so far I'll stick with the upper mentioned story.
I am sure Wolviex has already gotten the answer ... Jens ?

On the Caucasian scimitar (I am completely in a new land to me here so have mercy !) is there a chance it is an Azeri sword, the niello was a much exported trade Georgia to Azerbaijan and viceversa so wouldnt make perfect sense to consider Azeri too since the Muslim artwork can be observed !?(Armenia (including Khevsur) and Georgia Orthodox , Daghestan Muslim ...IMHO...)) Wouldnt you say ?

All right Radu, I don’t know!

I have however a few comments to the helmet. I don’t think it looked like that from the start, but if you remove the top ‘hat’, and the decorations (are they Niello?) you will see what the original helmet looked like, and I think it is old, but I wont try to guess how old. Later some creative person found the helmet too good to be melted down, so he modernized it, and I think I can agree that this could have been in late 18th or in 19th century.

No commentary on the mail? High quality mail is rivetted or welded. The links are often of flat or rectangular section; I'm not sure why, other than to facilitate rivetting (sometimes only the ends of the links are flattened). Interesting in combination with the lavishness of the decorative work; the low quality often noted on things meant for show rather than use? These mail coifs are of often questioned usefulness and are often spoken of as decorative, but many I've seen are of proper battle mail, and while it won't save your skull from cracking, it's still of some help....

Tom: you are absolutely right about mail used in the helmet from the 16 & 17 pictures. The rings, which are joining the rest of the mail with the helmet, aren't original. Take a closer look at it, and you will see, that other rings are just as they should be, and they are much different from these above them. I don't know the story, but most probably is, this part of mailing was destroyed, and someone (I suppose just after the II WW) made a quick repair. It should be done better, but the time was very hard in Poland in those days, and many repairings and restorations were made cursorily. If you take a very close look you will probably see that they aren't attached properly.

It's a shame I still don't have a book "Uzbrojenie Tatarów" (Tartars armament) by Mr. Gutowski, so I can't be sure, but if my memory serves me well, it is described as Tartar's helmet from the 19th century...as far as I remember. :)

Regards!

Right you are. Thanks.

Could it be that Khurasani refers to the damascus in the blade. Blades are often refered to as Khora Khorasan Khora Taban etc and perhaps Khurasani refers to Khorasan damascus steel. If the blade mentioned is a Persian import and of the black Persian watering then this could be a possibility.

Tartar Sauce
 

Is that the Timurid/Mongol I saw on it ? It had mainly to do with shape , I paid no detail attention to the chainmail, just considered is there. The conical spiked helmet, not domed nor fluted nor tear shaped and the "yin-yang" like mystical symbol pointed more than anything towards that consideration .
Why so early (18th century and beyond ) is because vaguely I recall similar shaped Mongolic (hence Tartar...) helmets anywhehre between 15th and beggining of 18th century, in Timurid & Safavid Persia or Mughul Empire.
The best source to see this helmets would be Indo-Persian miniatures and I will try to find some representative ones... Does anyone own ilustrations from the Tarikh-i-Khandana-i-Timuria manuscript or similar, that might help me spot some light on my theory !
I will not opose at all to the very late theory (19th century) but I am trying my luck to research to push it further as I "have a feeling" (there you go, I said it !!!) its earliear but please consider that I am not considering the chainmail for the moment...
How about the inscription, anyone dare ?

Thanks to our friend BI, who send me a few scans from mentioned book by mr Gutowski, I can post a few facts in here.

First of all, the inscription, which is visible on the helmet, is not deciphered yet - but, on one of the round field we can see a date "1219" which is 1804 year in Europe (not visible on my pics). That, I think, should convince us all it is 18/19th century piece, as I and Jens have guessed before.

About Tartar's helmet. Again thanks to BI, there is a wide explanation about evolution of these helmets in Mr Gutowski's book. Let me quote for you few sentences:


Jacek Gutowski, Uzbrojenie Tatarow, T. I, Warszawa 1997:

"(...) From the Middle Ages to the 17th cent. the Tartars always used helmets identical in terms of function. They were constructed of somewhat shallow skull-caps, protecting the upper part of the head and flaps protecting the back of and sides of the neck and cheeks. (...) From the end of the 15th cent., due to Caucasian-Turkish influences, the misiurka began to be used - a type of helmet with the skull-cap reduced to a slightly vaulted plate. Misiurka was the most commonly-used helmets of the end of the 16th - end of the 18th cent. Other types did not however disappear entirely. In luxury, richly-decorated helmets, skull caps of early conical and spherical-conical forms appear as late as the end of the 17th cent. In anachronic helmets from the north Caucasus they lasted even to the end of the 18th cent [here is the reference to helmet shown here, then author is describing the way of dating helmets and their ornaments]"

Regards to BI!

I don't really know anything about armor, but:

1. To me it looks like a northern caucasian helmet - AStvatsaturjan 104p. shows fully armored Circassian (year 1830).
2. "Tatar" would suggest Nogai or Kumyk nations, however:
3. Three curling something :) is one of the most popular Osethian symbols. Kumyks have something similar, but their three curling something usually has animals - hypogryths and so on.

So - is it Osethian ?

Thank you very much for your vote of confidence, although I think that Ariel or Jim would be way more knowledgable on this issue.

Concerning Azerbajan, the weapons' production in this country is greatly underappreciated for two reasons:
a. It lacked big production centers, therefore statistically it's much more likely to have something produced in Dagestan or Georgia rather than Azerbajan.
b. Most of the production was not performed by azeris, moreover there are two distinct possibilities: northern production - lezgins (and therefore the weapons produced are classified as produced in Dagestan), southern production - armenians (and therefore the weapons are classified as Transcaucasian/armenian).

Concerning the motiff - before 1850 most of smiths in Tiflis were muslims. The motiff is similar to typical Dagestani motiff, but in my opinion contains certain important changes that make it more likely to be produced somewhere to the south, and georgia makes a logical choise.

Concerning christianity - it's very hard to classify Khevsurs, Tsova-Tushin and other mountainous tribes as christian. Pagano-christian, or formally christian would be a better representation. Armenia, just like most of georgian tribes, is more like our understanding of what "christian" means.

helmet
 

back to the helmet, a similar piece in the hermitage. also, to reinforce the dating, this one dates to the same period (but a few years younger). the overall shape does indeed recall an earlier period of ottoman influence, but the shape is also a development of the earlier (and shallower) tartar helmets, as is the decoration.
thanks again to michal for this post and the images from his museum.
i think it down to mr. nordlunde to step onto the stage and provide a translation.

It says that the helmet is Circassian. Well, all northern Caucasus helmets (osethian, circassian etc.) seem similar to each other (at least to such an ignoramus as me).

Hi B.I., Here is the translation. Although it must have been written after the exhibition in Poland in 1978, it is written in strange Danish.

The helmet belowe comes from the same museum, and the text says, short as it is: Ancient Mogul helmet.

86. Helmet. Circassian, 1785-86. Made by Ali, son of Khadzji Baki. Steel, silver, textile, braid; gilding, Niello, engraving. Height 20.2; diameter 17.1. Origin: prior to 1926 – Marble Palace(?), Leningrad; after 1926 – Eremitage. Inv. No. 3331. Exhibited: Poland, 1978. Bibliography: Bron Kaukazu, page 20, no 5.

The form of the helmet reproduces the types of the Middle Age and the decorations are made in Circassian style. Among the inscriptions which are part of the ornamental composition, the maker Ali, son of Hadzji Baki, is mentioned twice, year 1200 H. (1785-86) and the owner Inajat Krim Girej Bek. It is well known that this type of helmets were part of the parade equipment of the Mountain Lifeguard Squadron around 1840.

It's correct - Marble Palace, after 1926 - Hermitage.

Very interesting is attributing the ownership to Inajat Krim Girej Bek.
Does "Krim Girej Bek" mean "Girey, bek of Crimea" ? Then it's most likely that the owner was a crimean tatar (there were crimean circassians, but Girey is a tatar ruling family). The production of helmet then is most likely Kabarda - crimean khans used to send their children to Kabarda to study (atalychestvo).

I have to make a small correction - recently I've read some materials on tamga (coat of arms) of circassian clans. It seems that tremendous number of such clans beared tamga symbolizing their descent - typical ingush, osethian, georgian symbols are in no way can be considered as rare for circassian tamgas. Therefore I have to say that it's probably not enough to see an osethian symbol on the above mentioned helmet to attribute it as osethian - it can still be circassian, just bearing a tamge with an "osethian-like" symbol.

Btw I've just realized the name of this symbol - it's a threefoil swastika, so it's not that uncommon with other caucasian nations, but still originally it's more of an osethian one.

To those who love caucasian-celtic connections it's also known as celtic spiral.

I stand corrected - while Khan-Girey family descents from crimean Gireys, they were Bzhedug (circassian tribe) princes; I guess it may that son or grandson of this Girey, Khan Girey born in 1808 was a famous circassian writer/philosopher.