Pala Kilic Wootz? with European Hilt.

[sirupate]

Originally Posted by Norman McCormick

Hi,
After a good wipe down and an oiling.
Regards,
Norman.

What a fabulous sabre Norman

[Norman McCormick]

Hi,
First of all my apologies to everybody for the rather curt replies to your interesting posts. I've been a wee bit busy and not had the time to reply as I would like to. Thanks to ALL for your appreciation of this piece, I must admit it's a bit of a lovely beast. I have in the past few days written to several academic institutions in the hope of getting some resolution to the translation of the script, if this is at all possible, as I suspect this is the key to a more definitive answer as to the origins of the blade. The auction descriptions I posted I think are quite interesting. The blade description in the second single item lot would appear to give credence to the idea of Austrian use of European made blades in the Kilic/Pala style which probably should not be much of a surprise as, as we all know, middle Eastern blade styles were widely copied after Napoleon's enterprises in Egypt. I would also point out that the second sword in the first lot is obviously a trophy blade mounted in the style of the day hence we have two distinct pieces. I think it is worth pointing out that the possible European manufactured blade as described has decoration very much in the fashion of 18thC early 19thC European made blades i.e. sun in splendour etc. I am very much of the opinion that although an Austrian sword has a European made kilic/pala style blade I doubt very much indeed that it would be decorated with obvious Islamic script given the rancour between these two empires and the terrible conflict that went on for so long. Thanks once again for all your continued interest.
My Regards,
Norman.

[sirupate]

Norman; "I doubt very much indeed that it would be decorated with obvious Islamic script given the rancour between these two empires and the terrible conflict that went on for so long"
Good point Norman

[Kubur]

I fully agree with both for two reasons:
First, they probably hated the Ottomans and Muslims.
Second, because the sword-maker had probably no clue about Arabic writing.
BUT, they did these pseudo-writings and decorations on the blades to imitate the Ottoman blades. It means that they liked the design and the decorations. The Greeks did almost the same.

Kubur

[Norman McCormick]

Originally Posted by Kubur

BUT, they did these pseudo-writings and decorations on the blades to imitate the Ottoman blades. It means that they liked the design and the decorations.
Kubur

Hi Kubur,
I can't remember seeing a positively identified European made blade in the 'Eastern' style that had Islamic script psuedo or otherwise on the blade but as always I'm open to contradiction.
My Regards,
Norman.

P.S. I am aware that there was a trade in arms made in the 'Eastern' style by European manufacturers for export to countries where that style was prevalent.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by Norman McCormick

Hi Kubur,
I can't remember seeing a positively identified European made blade in the 'Eastern' style that had Islamic script psuedo or otherwise on the blade but as always I'm open to contradiction.
My Regards,
Norman.

P.S. I am aware that there was a trade in arms made in the 'Eastern' style by European manufacturers for export to countries where that style was prevalent.

I agree Norman, while European trade blades of course often carried spurious markings and inscriptions, these had to do with imbued quality implications as well as certain appeal to certain clientele. However, as far as I have ever known, no attempts were ever made to duplicate any sort of Arabic or other Islamic form inscriptions, cartouches or markings. There was sometimes copy of 'Arabesque' style motif, which was simply decorative and of course false 'damascene'.

On the other hand, European style markings and inscriptions were often copied by native artisans in various ethnographic spheres, and these of course were typically readily recognizable as false.

The efforts to duplicate "Eastern " style by the west was primarily metallurgical, to the watered steel quality of the blade, as well as often to blade features such as yelman, yataghan type recurve etc .
When Osborne was researching to develop the British cavalry sabre which became the M1796, he examined numerous 'Oriental' forms such as kilic; shamshirs and tulwars. A good number of early models for officers had distinct yelmans on blades and at least one had a yataghan type blade.

[Kubur]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

However, as far as I have ever known, no attempts were ever made to duplicate any sort of Arabic or other Islamic form inscriptions, cartouches or markings. There was sometimes copy of 'Arabesque' style motif, which was simply decorative and of course false 'damascene'.

Hi Guys,

I agree with you for Western Europe. After the French expedition in Egypt, Western Europeans (mainly French & British) started to produce the "sabres a l'orientale", just copies of Islamic / Ottoman kilij with pistol grip. But the marks and decorations on the blades were purely Europeans.

I don't agree with you for Central and Eastern Europe. I think that the swords in this thread (Norman's sword and the three swords that I presented) are purely Austrians. As Jim said Poland or Bulgaria have a long history with the Islamic world and Ottoman weapons (as the Karabella hilt).
Nevertheless I don't know any Ottoman example identical to the swords in this thread. If you find one Ottoman example with such blades, please put it on line as I did. A last word, we cannot discard that the sword-markers working for the Austrian Empire came from the Ottoman Empire. Such blades are admirable and require a lot of knowledge.

Best,
Kubur