Odd Sword

[ariel]

There is not a trace, not a hint, not a whiff of Hebrew here. If you need confirmation, Artzi Yarom is the source.

There is not a trace, hint or whiff of Old Slavonic Glagolitic here, either.


Having seen the most recent pics, I thought that Soares was the obvious answer. Fernando beat me to it :-))))

Pure Western Europe.

[Ian]

Ibrahiim: Your last post may be on target. While, at one time, the second inscription may have meant something to someone, that meaning seems to have been lost over time and today we are left with an unintelligible mystery. Thanks for your pursuit of many and varied possibilities, even in scripts that are archaic today!

Ariel: Western Europe may well be the source, and I think there is a general consensus that this is a European blade.

Ian

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by Ian

Ibrahiim: Your last post may be on target. While, at one time, the second inscription may have meant something to someone, that meaning seems to have been lost over time and today we are left with an unintelligible mystery. Thanks for your pursuit of many and varied possibilities, even in scripts that are archaic today!

Ariel: Western Europe may well be the source, and I think there is a general consensus that this is a European blade.

Ian

Salaams Ian, For sure the blade is European ...I would say Portuguese, Italian or German style like Papenheimer or something similar... but the script...whilst it may mean nothing is taunting since it is so close to some of the varieties like OCS and Hebrew... I just cant match a European alphabet to it... I still think Hebrew may be the answer however I am sure it will turn up some day...

Actually, though it would be nice to crack the code it doesn't really matter since the essence of the idea and the peculiar circumstances of this blade and others like it into and out of the Red Sea Arena are more clearly understood with such examples albeit with much skulduggery attached. Fortunately we have uncovered this practice of hilt switching having shone the bright light (of field research) into that dark corner..

It's no great surprise since even great museums around the world are infiltrated with very clever stuff...As they say... "If only they could talk" ?

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by ariel

There is not a trace, not a hint, not a whiff of Hebrew here. If you need confirmation, Artzi Yarom is the source.

There is not a trace, hint or whiff of Old Slavonic Glagolitic here, either.


Having seen the most recent pics, I thought that Soares was the obvious answer. Fernando beat me to it :-))))

Pure Western Europe.

Salaams ariel, Are you referring to the sword at $1? since the SOARES inscription is not the project I am trying to translate?? Observe the Norwegian for the word Svare...which means answer respond or reply... seems like a reasonable solution except its got an S on the end but these inscriptions are rarely accurate...

However, please do look at the letters on #1 and tell me what language in western Europe uses the form that is similar to A 51UU A

Where the two A looking characters are quite different to European A style having a vee or tee shaped crossbar and which is almost identical to OCS.

Where the letter Zayin (similar to a 5 with no top) is a Hebrew Cursive letter...

Where the two letter U forms are also Hebrew. They appear as almost IJ close together...

Finally if you have a better idea or your associate can help by all means lets hear it from that quarter ...

Which European language/western language might this be from? I would be delighted to hear it.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[fernando]

Think of the X's not as letters but as 'separators', as often happens.
Then you a continued sequence of the terms related, mispell allowed, with the latin verb ORARE (orar em portuguese, meaning to pray).

[Jim McDougall]

Ibrahiim, you have undertaken a daunting task in trying to decipher this inscription on what appears to be a genuine early European blade, and probably of any one of the nationalities you note. There was so much diffusion of blades that it is difficult to align according to known phrases and invocations except by pure speculation. It seems early, perhaps 17th c, and probably of an arming sword as you mention.

You have conducted a superbly admirable investigation into the most esoteric field in the study of these blades, the mysterious and as Ian has noted, now long lost meaning of these inscriptions, markings and invocations.

While the lettering and arrangements of characters and letters may not correspond precisely to any single alphabet or language, for that matter even translate into recognizable words, there are many variables in possible explanation.
First of all, and particularly in the Solingen case, the application of lettering and inscriptions were carried out by artisans who were in essence, often 'artistically' copying these from other examples. In most cases of course not only were they not speakers of the other languages, they were likely only moderately literate in their own.

In other instances, there was the use of acrostics and gemetria or number values signified by letters. These curious grouping of letters, sometimes symbols or sigils, were probably not particularly easy to transcribe, and in these kinds of 'coded' messages, the omission or misrepresentation of any may render any translation meaningless.

Still, it is truly rewarding and fascinating to see a discussion where the participants are actively looking at and evaluating the many possibilities which may be at hand.

It is good to see the focus on this blade, and its possible origins.

Nicely done, thank you,
Jim

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Ibrahiim, you have undertaken a daunting task in trying to decipher this inscription on what appears to be a genuine early European blade, and probably of any one of the nationalities you note. There was so much diffusion of blades that it is difficult to align according to known phrases and invocations except by pure speculation. It seems early, perhaps 17th c, and probably of an arming sword as you mention.

You have conducted a superbly admirable investigation into the most esoteric field in the study of these blades, the mysterious and as Ian has noted, now long lost meaning of these inscriptions, markings and invocations.

While the lettering and arrangements of characters and letters may not correspond precisely to any single alphabet or language, for that matter even translate into recognizable words, there are many variables in possible explanation.
First of all, and particularly in the Solingen case, the application of lettering and inscriptions were carried out by artisans who were in essence, often 'artistically' copying these from other examples. In most cases of course not only were they not speakers of the other languages, they were likely only moderately literate in their own.

In other instances, there was the use of acrostics and gemetria or number values signified by letters. These curious grouping of letters, sometimes symbols or sigils, were probably not particularly easy to transcribe, and in these kinds of 'coded' messages, the omission or misrepresentation of any may render any translation meaningless.

Still, it is truly rewarding and fascinating to see a discussion where the participants are actively looking at and evaluating the many possibilities which may be at hand.

It is good to see the focus on this blade, and its possible origins.

Nicely done, thank you,
Jim

Salaams Jim, Thank you for your kind words and encouragement. As you know the ''whats in a word conundrum'' accelerates into hyperspace once the Runic/ Talismanic and hidden meanings of Latin, Hebrew or associated script arrives in the 21st Century from way back when... For example as Fernando has explained the x is not an x and sometimes the spelling is contrived.

Your analysis on the swords birthplace is likely and though I knew very little about European blades before now this opportunity to get down and examine them here has been a great experience.

A number of additional things have surfaced in this thread not least the complicated Pommel which I believe in its own right would make a fantastic exhibit in a creditable Museum since it is a genuine old Omani Dancing Sword part probably from the early days of dancing swords in the early first or second decade of the 19thC . Not only does it portray an Islamic 6 pointed star but on another face a very impressive gridded keyboard arrangement playing with the arabic figure five O...The Talismanic 5.

Having this detail on library is so important to potential students and in its own right this Pommel could form the basis for a very good PHD study.

Thanks again for your post.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

For all readers I would like to quote a remarkable piece from wikipedia which underpins the almost impossible task (unless your rubic cube reassembly time is under 25 seconds) of unscrambling these sword inscriptions...

I QUOTE "The Pernik sword
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia~

The Pernik sword is a medieval double-edged iron sword unearthed in the ruins of the medieval fortress of Krakra near Pernik, western Bulgaria, on 1 January 1921. It bears an inscription in silver inlay on the blade.

The sword is preserved in the National Archaeological Museum of Bulgaria in Sofia under inventory number 2044. The sword is 96 centimetres (38 in) in length and up to 4.5 cm (1.8 in) in width.

The inscription, written in the Latin alphabet, was long considered incomprehensible. It reads as follows:

“ +IHININIhVILPIDHINIhVILPN+ ”

Two decipherments have been proposed. One view, expressed in the original archaeological publication about the sword, has been that the text represents a series of Latin abbreviations of sacred formulae that were intended to bring good fortune, as found on other swords from the 12th and 13th centuries.

Following the transcriptions proposed by other authors for similar letter sequences, one Bulgarian author suggested a tentative reading of the Pernik inscription along the lines of "IH(ESUS). IN I(HESUS) N(OMINE). IH(ESUS) VI(RGO). L(AUS) P(ATRIS) I(HESUS) D(OMINI) H(RISTUS). IN IH(ESUS) VI(RGO). L(AUS) P(ATRIS) N(OSTRIS)",

that is to say "Jesus -- in Jesus' name -- Jesus, the Virgin -- praise of the Father, Jesus, the Lord, Christ -- in Jesus, the Virgin - praise of Our Father" (the de-abbreviated words have not been consistently declined).

To put this into perspective, it may be observed that on other swords, the common formula in nomine domini, "in the Lord's name" was abbreviated in ways ranging from the unmistakable NNOMNEDMN to the heavily distorted NINOMINED, OIEDOMINI, INNIOINNEDINI, etc.

Longer inscriptions could be incoherent and contracted to the point of complete opacity, for example INPMPNC I(n) n(omine) p(atris) M(ater) p(atris) n(ostri) C(hristi), "In the name of the Father. Mother of Our Father Christ" or IINBITTPINI I(esus). I(n) n(omine) b(eati) I(esu). T(rinitas). T(rinitas). P(atris) I(esu) n(omine) I(n), "Jesus -- in the name of the blessed Jesus -- Trinity -- Trinity -- Of the Father -- of Jesus -- the name -- in".

A more recent attempt at decipherment, dating from 2005, suggested that the inscription was in an early West Germanic language (Austro-Bavarian or Lombardic of ca. the 6th to 8th century). The proposed parsing is "IH INI NI hVIL PIDH, INI hVIL PN", meaning "I do not await eternity, I am eternity", or literally "I inside not time wait, inside time am" (hvil being cognate to English while and German Weile). If the parsing is plausible or at least the identification of the written language is correct, the text is of great importance to the history of Germanic languages". UNQUOTE.

I might add~"Whilst somewhat bewildering to Ethnographic Sword enthusiasts" !!

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Notes; See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pernik_sword

[fernando]

Wouldn't the Bulgarian author's suggestion be all but a linear approach ? or otherwise being based on strong evidence or scholarship reasoning ... .
The popular (that not born) name of Jesus, a term Latinized from the Greek, doesn't feature the H after the I.
Unless we consider its translation to archaic english, which i am afraid would make it a longer shot in this situation.
Also the allusion to his virginity wasn't currently called upon inscriptions, instead, that of Mary, as we all know to be mentioned in countless situations.
But then again, he must have his reasons