Date

Rick · 16th April 2006, 03:41 PM

Okay then !

I thought 1816 was way too early for this sword type .

Thanks to all of you Gentlemen .

ariel · 16th April 2006, 04:02 PM

Yes, it is 1321, or 1903 Gregorian
I use
http://www.rabiah.com/convert/convert.php3
Can we see the entire sword, please?

Rick · 16th April 2006, 05:52 PM

Hi Ariel , follow the link provided in post # 6 in this thread .

ham · 16th April 2006, 06:29 PM

The reason for this is that the numerals are added from lowest to highest:

1321 is notation for:

1 + 20 + 300 + 1000 after hijra

Ham

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

16th April 2006, 03:41 PM	#1
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,336	Okay then ! I thought 1816 was way too early for this sword type . Thanks to all of you Gentlemen .

16th April 2006, 04:02 PM	#2
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Yes, it is 1321, or 1903 Gregorian I use http://www.rabiah.com/convert/convert.php3 Can we see the entire sword, please?

16th April 2006, 05:52 PM	#3
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,336	Hi Ariel , follow the link provided in post # 6 in this thread .

16th April 2006, 06:29 PM	#4
ham Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 190	The reason for this is that the numerals are added from lowest to highest: 1321 is notation for: 1 + 20 + 300 + 1000 after hijra Ham