Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ariel
Dear Alina,
The Ottoman swords you posted are all from 15th century. Mameluke Yelman-ed swords date to earlier times. As I said, since we have no evidence of Ottoman Yelman-ed swords before the 15th century, we have no way of knowing whether they had them simultaneously with Mamelukes.As to your denial that you provided any example of a Mameluke Yelman-ed sword of 13th century, please look back at your earlier post mentioning Yusel's sword #37, belonging to Husam al-Din Lajin (1297-1299) and made by al-Ustad al-Halabi ( "of Aleppo", which is in modern Syria).
As to the Persian origin of Kilij, please be kind enough and provide pictures of authentic Persian Kilijes with Yelmans dating to... what? ... 12-13th century? Earlier? That will surely prove your point that Persia might have been the conduit of Yelman's transfer to Turkey and Egypt.
I shall be very grateful for the opportunity to learn something new.
Best wishes.
|
Aside from #37, there is no evidence for an early Mamluk kilic. I find the attribution of Yucel's to be dubious, because the very nature of dating a sword is inexact. Just because a sword is attributed to someone, doesn't mean he carried it. In addition, unattributed swords are difficult to place because some designs persisted for a span of several hundred years, and some earlier designs resemble some later designs. For that reason, I don't find the dating of sword #37 to the 13th century to be very convincing. It is the only kilic-type sword I've ever seen dated that early - a full century and a half before they begin to show up commonly in either Mamluk Egypt or the Ottoman empire. I think it's healthy to view a sword that anomalous with a high degree of skepticism.
As to the Persian sources, I don't have any images of Persian swords with yelmans at the moment. Persian arms and armor have always taken a back seat to Ottoman arms and armor for me. However, just because I don't have them doesn't mean they don't exist. They certainly show up in the art of the period, as I've shown. David Nicolle's book "Arms and Armor of the Crusading Era" lists two 14th century Persian kilics with yelmans. But he admits that it's very difficult to date such weapons, and that they could be as late as the 15th or 16th centuries.
Given all of those difficulties, I think that we have to go with the preponderance of the evidence. The preponderance of the evidence shows that the kilic began appearing in the 15th century in both the Ottoman and Mamluk sultanates roughly simultaneously.