Napoleon's Mamelukes weapons.
 

Was there a uniformity in the small arms of Napoleon's Mameluke Guard?
Over the years I've seen oe or two khanjars that were described as belonging to Napoleon's Mamelukes, but with no documented proof.

Goya's painting "The Second of May 1808:The charge of the Mamluks" is perhaps the most famous period depiction of these soldiers.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...f_May_1808.jpg

Hi, as French, I had to meet the challenge
and propose some pictures of Mameluke Empire period
... and weapons ...
it is not easy ... as the iconography on this subject is poor

there is NO such guarantee about the authenticity for what I found ...

hope so that represent a part of realty, and none a part of "romanticism" ...

http://img545.imageshack.us/img545/8...mluksegypt.jpg

should be (?) extracted from
" VOYAGES DANS LA BASSE ET LA HAUTE ÉGYPTE, PENDANT LES CAMPAGNES DE BONAPARTE, EN 1798 ET 1799. "
Par Vivant Denon
mamluk weapons (?)

http://img819.imageshack.us/img819/5...lukweapons.jpg

à +

Dom

Imagery
 

Although not of Napoleons guard, I do have 2 very fine 18th century French engravings of Mameluke horsemen, they are certainly proud and dignified individuals. In both instances they have bow and arrows, both quiver mounted to their right sides and they both carry a fine thin lance that looks to be approx 7-8 feet long. One does carry a sabre under his robes/cloak but it is no were near as curved as the sabres illusrated above and the hilt can no be clearly seen.

Gav

Dmitry, you have PM.

Hi, not 100% relevant, but still nice to see, this is a sabre made for Napoleon, while he was in Egypt.

Isn't this the one some members of his family sold, three years ago, in auction for a few million $, eventually to another member of his family?

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...leon%27s+sword

No, it is not the same sword. The one on recent sale was of "european style" while this is of mameluke style.

Another interesting matter would be the source of their weapons?

Were they made by the French, or in Egypt, when Napoleon bought his 2000 Mameluke mercenaries?

IIRC, the Mamlukes were sort like a caste, and as such they probably wore blades of their own property.

OTOH, the Vieille Garde had Music bands dressed and attired in the Turkish/Mamluke way. Weapons for the latter were of Mamluke style, but French in actual provenance.

The mameluke style sword was adopted by many European armies, both for their musicians and for field use. The quality and features of these blades vary accordingly.

Click on the thumbs for a larger image:



http://i353.photobucket.com/albums/r...h_DSCN1301.jpg

http://i353.photobucket.com/albums/r...h_DSCN1300.jpg

http://i353.photobucket.com/albums/r...kEBay16003.jpg

http://i353.photobucket.com/albums/r...ay160011-1.jpg

http://i353.photobucket.com/albums/r...kEBay16009.jpg

http://i353.photobucket.com/albums/r...6Taconvill.jpg

http://i353.photobucket.com/albums/r...he_Mamluks.jpg

The Mamelukes were perhaps the most fearsome warrior caste the French had ever yet encountered (Ronald Pawly).

Quoting the same author, they had highly valuable arms, which certainly they brought with them to France. However the decree embodying the Mameluke corps stated that, the French government had to provide them weapons; this meant a real arsenal issued to every man, made at Manufacture de Versailles, under Mameluke patterns: An axe, a mace, a blunderbuss, a carbine, four holstered pistols, a dagger and a scimitar ... the axe, mace and blunderbuss being more for cerimony and parade purposes

Oh, SuperMan(uel), my amigo.
It would be such a great contribution for the forum happyness if, instead of posting links to your photo store, you would upload picture attachments to the resident server.

Piensa neso :cool:

.

Estimado Nando,

It's very nice to correspond with you again. Thank you for the data on the mamelukes.

The reasons I use the links instead of the attachments are these.

1. I already have the pictures downloaded to a personal photo depot. OTOH, I would need to take new pictures, process them, resize them according to this forum limitations, then post. I don't have that much time!
That would severely hamper my desire to post and contribute to the forum.

2. Occasionally, some of my items will change hands. When that's the case, I remove the images from my server. I feel it is improper to be using somebody elses weapon's pictures, perhaps even illegal!

3. "Todo pasa, todo queda": Nothing's forever. Any of our readers interested in the subject can download the pics themselves, for their own use today. Tomorrow? Lo que sera, sera.

Warmest regards

Manolo

Caution - I am not a lawyer - but my understanding ...
 

My understanding of copyright law (caution - I am not a lawyer) is that copyright is held by the person creating the picture (unless a third party has contracted for the work). If you buy an item at auction, the auction house (or the ebay seller) retains the rights to the catalog / sale pictures. If you use their pictures beyond 'fair use,' you will need their permission. Owning the item obviously affords one the opportunity to create another picture. Pictures you have taken of items in your collection remain your intellectual property beyond your lifetime regardless of whether you retain the item, unless you specifically transfer ownership of the pictures. If you permit a friend to take pictures of items in your collection, copyright for those pictures is held by the photographer, not by you.

When someone researching a few years from now excitedly googles into a relevant thread only to find it useless because the pictures are gone, who do you suppose gets their frustrated email?

Got your message, Manolo; points of view noted.
Definitely (nowadays) i have lots of time myself :shrug: .
I also erase pictures from my computer resident (not web) library, when pieces eventually go away.
But i don't tink it is illegal to preserve them in a/the forum archives for future memory, as long as they were posted while the item was ours.
Saludos
Nando

Manolo, we certainly don't want to put you to too much trouble. But if you have ever been referred back to an old thread in our archives and found nothing but "image removed" icons amongst the text you might understand our frustration. Without the weapons in discussion properly illustrated the text often becomes completely useless. As Lee pointed out, you own the rights to these photos regardless of who you might sell the weapon to down the line. And you certainly don't need to reshoot these. The image below i simply dragged off your site. it was already well within the size specs for this site so i didn't need to to anything to it, just upload. I can delete this post (and image) if this offends you, but this will preserve these images connected to this thread for as long as this site exists therefore keeping the conversation and continued research viable. :)

I notice that Lee's comprehensive input concerning the legal issue arrived here one minute before my post, making my empirical observations a bit surpassed.
The reason is that i actually started first but, despite my text was shorter, i take much longer to write and recheck it, assuming english is not my mother language :shrug: .
Yes, Lee is right, searching for a thread in order to check on a determined item and finding only blank squares with the photo depot logo, is like looking at a garden without flowers.

Tu servidor
Nando

Guys,

You have been wonderful hosts. For you, I'll try to post originals. But please forgive the ocassional lapse.

Best regards.

Manolo