[Jim McDougall]

Another outstanding topic Ariel!!!and its great to get these kinds of discussions going so that we can better understand these peculiarities of certain weapon forms, and in some cases revise long held thoughts with comprehensive evidence and observations.

I have personally never seen Manouchers book, so I cannot effectively offer critique, however I can well understand the noted emphasis on Iranian origin for not only this sword form but many other arms and armour and many other cultural aspects. If I understand correctly the book was published under the auspices of the Iranian Ministry of Culture in order to fulfill a perceived need for more information on Persian arms in the west.

In "Polish Sabres:Origins and Evolution" (Jan Ostrowski, 1979), the author describes of course the Polish affinity for these sabres with the distinctive trilobate hilt, and notes the earliest prototypes for them from captured examples at the Siege of Vienna (1683). In this reference he notes that these had developed in Turkey under Persian influence in the early 17th century. The etymology is noted, patently dismissing the Italian 'cara bella' notion, but more credence to the possibility of Karabel (western Turkey) with primarily a phonetic connection as the only evidence.

Robert Elgood (1994, "Arms & Armour of Arabia") notes the Shah Abbas I connection and that in 1623 he took Baghdad and the town of Karbala in Iraq. Here he suggests that the 'karabella' type hilts seen worn by him in later miniatures perhaps may be commemorative of these events. It is further suggested that the term may have been a Polish corruption of the name of Karbala in Iraq, the location of an important Sh'ia shrine as well as the reference previously noted.
Prior to the Siege of Vienna, Poland was according to Elgood, in alliance with Persia against the Ottomans. While this may suggest earlier awareness of these hilts via the Persians, it does not seem to be the case. It is noted by Ostrowski the first exposure to the karabella by the Poles was at Vienna.

This returns to the apparant Ottoman presence of the karabella form, and as seen here with the sword of Selim the Grim (1470-1520). It would seem that the hilt form of his sword was established in that period, and likely became a favored form being worn even a hundred years later. Perhaps with the 1623 incursions by Shah Abbas I into Iraq as previously noted, he adopted this then traditional Ottoman hilt form seen worn by him in the miniatures.
This is of course presuming that the sword of Selim was not rehilted as suggested in the 16th century as swords entered Topkapi.

I think the hilt must have originated in Turkey, as suggested with the sword of Selim the Grim or at least been in use c.1623, becoming somewhat commemorative in Persia in form, but probably superceded there by the shamshir as a favored form. The form would seem to have remained in place in Ottoman context in degree, with those captured at Vienna in 1683. Here in turn, these became once again, commemorative with the Polish adopting the form as thier national parade sabre.

It is a bit of a paradox that this particular hilt form occurs significantly in Arabia, with the obviously Ottoman influenced hilt, and the affinity of the Arabs for Persian blades. As Eastern European, primarily Hungarian but some Polish blades also were heavily traded into Arabia, one cannot deny possibility of these karabella swords also coming in.

It seems that perhaps this might explain the Persian connection in the development of the karabella hilt, as well as the probable source for the term. The Persian influence in Mughal, Afghan and other regions does not reflect the karabela style hilt in notable degree at least in swords I would think because the shamshir was more prevalent later. It is interesting to note that in many cases Ottoman hilts are also evident.

All best regards,
Jim