Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post

ariel · 13th February 2022, 06:45 PM

S-shaped guard is a feature of regulation Ottoman swords from the second half of 19 century or later. They “borrowed” it from the European sabers as a part of “europeanizing” their military. The same was true about Persia.
Their relative rarity is likely explained by the relaively short time span for the use of bladed weapons.

Tulwar, shamshir, kilij, saif, all of them are “sword”, but in different languages.
How to call swords with a mix of different features?
That depends: Russian ( and, I guess, some other) schools would put emphasis
on the blade. Indeed, it is the working part of any sword. Polish school would emphasize the handle: it defines the matter of wielding the weapon.
Russian historians of weapons would call any sword, with any handle, but with a Persian blade a shamshir.
Polish ones would call a sword with a Persian blade and an Indian handle a tulwar, with a Turkish one a kilij and with an Arabic one a saif.

Intriguingly, a straight indian sword with a firangi or khanda blade but with a tulwar handle would be called a tulwar, but same blades with a basket handle would be firangi and khanda.

I do not think we can be categorical. It is a matter of local tradition and who are we to insist the locals are dead wrong and insist on our clearly european point of view ?

13th February 2022, 06:45 PM	#11
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	S-shaped guard is a feature of regulation Ottoman swords from the second half of 19 century or later. They “borrowed” it from the European sabers as a part of “europeanizing” their military. The same was true about Persia. Their relative rarity is likely explained by the relaively short time span for the use of bladed weapons. Tulwar, shamshir, kilij, saif, all of them are “sword”, but in different languages. How to call swords with a mix of different features? That depends: Russian ( and, I guess, some other) schools would put emphasis on the blade. Indeed, it is the working part of any sword. Polish school would emphasize the handle: it defines the matter of wielding the weapon. Russian historians of weapons would call any sword, with any handle, but with a Persian blade a shamshir. Polish ones would call a sword with a Persian blade and an Indian handle a tulwar, with a Turkish one a kilij and with an Arabic one a saif. Intriguingly, a straight indian sword with a firangi or khanda blade but with a tulwar handle would be called a tulwar, but same blades with a basket handle would be firangi and khanda. I do not think we can be categorical. It is a matter of local tradition and who are we to insist the locals are dead wrong and insist on our clearly european point of view ? Last edited by ariel; 14th February 2022 at 01:39 AM.