Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post

ariel · 19th February 2007, 12:06 AM

Wayne,
With all due respect, I can assure you with a 100% certainty that the inscription has nothing to do with Russian. This is a classic mis-representation of the Latin N, not Russian I. It is seen routinely on a multitude of Oriental blades attempting to imitate European origin. There is no place named Saiol in Russia to start with; there is Saiol in Spain and Sayol in Iran. Neither of these places are known for using Cyrillic. There is no word or name Saiol in Russian.
Furthermore, before 1918, any Russian word ending with a consonant had an additional letter Yat after the final consonant. You can see it here
http://www.omniglot.com/writing/cyrillic.htm
marked in red.
The presumed "Saiol" does not have it.
Please, can we consider it as an end of story?

19th February 2007, 12:06 AM	#35
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Wayne, With all due respect, I can assure you with a 100% certainty that the inscription has nothing to do with Russian. This is a classic mis-representation of the Latin N, not Russian I. It is seen routinely on a multitude of Oriental blades attempting to imitate European origin. There is no place named Saiol in Russia to start with; there is Saiol in Spain and Sayol in Iran. Neither of these places are known for using Cyrillic. There is no word or name Saiol in Russian. Furthermore, before 1918, any Russian word ending with a consonant had an additional letter Yat after the final consonant. You can see it here http://www.omniglot.com/writing/cyrillic.htm marked in red. The presumed "Saiol" does not have it. Please, can we consider it as an end of story?