Turkish Shamshir

ALEX · 21st October 2015, 09:11 AM

Agree with Teodor, many of these have all kinds of blades, European and/or earlier blades. I saw a few with early wootz blades.

Do you think this blade is Persian, Caucasian, or could be Armenian(?).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kubur

... Last point, it's not a shamshir, but a kilij in Turkish or a saif in Arabic.
Best,
Kubur

Kubur, as you know Kilij and Saif mean "sword" or "saber" in their respective languages. in a conventional sense, "Kilij" has more pronounced curve and yelman, and generally wider blade. Miguel's sword is variation of both, but is a shamshir nevertheless.

estcrh · 21st October 2015, 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALEX

Kubur, as you know Kilij and Saif mean "sword" or "saber" in their respective languages. in a conventional sense, "Kilij" has more pronounced curve and yelman, and generally wider blade. Miguel's sword is variation of both, but is a shamshir nevertheless.

Irrespective of what the different terms mean/meant in different times, countries and cultures "saif" and "kilij" now refers to two different types of swords. Kilij refering to the strictly Ottoman sword with a distintive grip, while saif refers to the sword with the type of grip pictured below, of course people can use whatever term they choose but why use any other term besides kilij for the Ottoman sword with the distinctive kilij grip? If it has a "karabela" grip it is a karabela, if it has a "kilij" grip it is a kilij, if it has a "saif" grip it is a saif.

ALEX · 21st October 2015, 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by estcrh

Irrespective of what the different terms mean/meant in different times, countries and cultures "saif" and "kilij" now refers to two different types of swords. Kilij refering to the strictly Ottoman sword with a distintive grip, while saif refers to the sword with the type of grip pictured below, of course people can use whatever term they choose but why use any other term besides kilij for the Ottoman sword with the distinctive kilij grip? If it has a "karabela" grip it is a karabela, if it has a "kilij" grip it is a kilij, if it has a "saif" grip it is a saif.

Right, that was exactly my point about the Kilij)
Also, the grip alone does not define the type of sword. it's a whole sword that does, and primarily the blade. The grip (and the sword on it) that you pictured above is not saif. Saif is an Arabic word for "sword", and represents Arabian/Bedouin sword type with (usually) straight blade. The one pictured above is Indian.

estcrh · 21st October 2015, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALEX

The grip (and the sword on it) that you pictured above is not saif. Saif is an Arabic word for "sword", and represents Arabian/Bedouin sword type with (usually) straight blade. The one pictured above is Indian.

I and many other people would consider it to be a saif, maybe an Indian saif but still a saif, you certainly would not call it a tulwar. As I said, it does not matter what the origin of the term is, how it is used in our times can and does differ from its original meaning. The term "saif" for many people in our times has come to describe swords from many different cultures with this distinctive hilt. As I said people can use terms whatever way they want but when I hear the word "saif" this is what I see in my mind, just like when I hear "kilij" I picture the distinctive Ottoman hilt, while the blades may differ the hilt is a very static item.

Kubur · 21st October 2015, 11:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by estcrh

I and many other people would consider it to be a saif, maybe an Indian saif but still a saif, you certainly would not call it a tulwar. As I said, it does not matter what the origin of the term is, how it is used in our times can and does differ from its original meaning. The term "saif" for many people in our times has come to describe swords from many different cultures with this distinctive hilt. As I said people can use terms whatever way they want but when I hear the word "saif" this is what I see in my mind, just like when I hear "kilij" I picture the distinctive Ottoman hilt, while the blades may differ the hilt is a very static item.

Hi Strech,

I agree for the end of what you wrote.

I think that the blade is Caucasian or Persian. But some members will tell.

Anyway it's a pure Turkish / Ottoman sword.

Best,

ALEX · 21st October 2015, 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by estcrh

I and many other people would consider it to be a saif, maybe an Indian saif but still a saif, you certainly would not call it a tulwar. As I said, it does not matter what the origin of the term is, how it is used in our times can and does differ from its original meaning. The term "saif" for many people in our times has come to describe swords from many different cultures with this distinctive hilt. As I said people can use terms whatever way they want but when I hear the word "saif" this is what I see in my mind, just like when I hear "kilij" I picture the distinctive Ottoman hilt, while the blades may differ the hilt is a very static item.

and many people call it wrong! Saif is an Arabic word for Arabian sword type. Calling an Indian tulwar Saif because it has non-tulwar hilt is like calling indian sword Kilij because it has yelman. The "Origin of the term" does matter! and dismissing it in favor of how it is used in "our time" is simply not correct as it defies history)

estcrh · 21st October 2015, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALEX

The "Origin of the term" does matter! and dismissing it in favor of how it is used in "our time" is simply not correct as it defies history)

Just like "katar" and many other terms, its good to know the origins, history and the original meanings but you also have to adjust with the times, armor and weapons terms are fluid and they do change over time.

ALEX · 21st October 2015, 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by estcrh

Just like "katar" and many other terms, its good to know the origins, history and the original meanings but you also have to adjust with the times, armor and weapons terms are fluid and they do change over time.

..sorry, I do not understand what this means.
Katar is katar and will remain katar over time. why would any term change for the same type of weapon? Why all of the sudden some call an Indian sword Saif? the term is used inadvertently by many but it is not good reason to "adjust". Also, where did you see this handle type being associated with or called Saif?

Kubur · 21st October 2015, 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALEX

Right, that was exactly my point about the Kilij)
Also, the grip alone does not define the type of sword. it's a whole sword that does, and primarily the blade. The grip (and the sword on it) that you pictured above is not saif. Saif is an Arabic word for "sword", and represents Arabian/Bedouin sword type with (usually) straight blade. The one pictured above is Indian.

I don't agree at ALL.
It's the GRIP who defines the sword.
The blades are traded, captured or whatever.
A kattara or a Kaskara with German blades, are they German swords?
No they are Omani and Sudanese...
To be more precise, the DNA of the sword are the GRIP and the SCABBARD.

Best,
Kubur

Kubur · 21st October 2015, 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kubur

I don't agree at ALL.
It's the GRIP who defines the sword.
The blades are traded, captured or whatever.
A kattara or a Kaskara with German blades, are they German swords?
No they are Omani and Sudanese...
To be more precise, the DNA of the sword are the GRIP and the SCABBARD.

Best,
Kubur

I mean the HILT not the grip!

ALEX · 21st October 2015, 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kubur

I don't agree at ALL.
It's the GRIP who defines the sword.
The blades are traded, captured or whatever.
A kattara or a Kaskara with German blades, are they German swords?
No they are Omani and Sudanese...
To be more precise, the DNA of the sword are the GRIP and the SCABBARD.
Best,
Kubur

It really depends. There's no single rule. However, the blade is usually gets re-hilted, not the hilt gets re-bladed

Ideally, the blade would match the hilt at least ethnographically. If not, that is of no argument. if an Indian tulwar blade gets Ottoman handle, it would not become Ottoman sword! it'll remain indian tulwar blade with Ottoman handle. granted, some people will be quick to call it Ottoman, but that's another story)

Kubur · 21st October 2015, 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALEX

It really depends. There's no single rule. However, the blade is usually gets re-hilted, not the hilt gets re-bladed

Ideally, the blade would match the hilt at least ethnographically. If not, that is of no argument. if an Indian tulwar blade gets Ottoman handle, it would not become Ottoman sword! it'll remain indian tulwar blade with Ottoman handle. granted, some people will be quick to call it Ottoman, but that's another story)

I see your point and I respect your opinion.
But I don't agree at all.
Let me give you another example:
- a pistol or a long gun made in the Balkans during the Ottoman rule with an Italian barrel and a French lock. What is it for you?
For me, it's an Ottoman pistol or a pistol from the Balkans.
It's the same for the swords, if your tulwar is reused and re-hilted by the Ottomans, it's an Ottoman sword.

ALEX · 21st October 2015, 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kubur

I see your point and I respect your opinion.
But I don't agree at all.
Let me give you another example:
- a pistol or a long gun made in the Balkans during the Ottoman rule with an Italian barrel and a French lock. What is it for you?
For me, it's an Ottoman pistol or a pistol from the Balkans.
It's the same for the swords, if your tulwar is reused and re-hilted by the Ottomans, it's an Ottoman sword.

this is why I said it all depends. I agree, the pistol is Ottoman because it was made in the Balkans during Ottoman rule, I assume by a common/known design.
The tulwar blade on Ottoman sword would not be as such.... but Persian blade would. Ottomans used Persian blades on some of their swords by design. This is why there are general terms such as trade blade, as well as Indo-Persian, Indo-Arab, multi-cultural, etc. it was a mix, but the blade would (generally) come or considered first, by design! As I said, the blades were re-hilted, not hilts re-bladed. and this was my point

If tulwar is occasionally rehilted by the Ottomans, i.e. with Ottoman hilt (which would be quite uncommon, and I think does not even exist), that would be a composite, Indo-Ottoman piece, not by design but by accident

A.alnakkas · 21st October 2015, 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by estcrh

Irrespective of what the different terms mean/meant in different times, countries and cultures "saif" and "kilij" now refers to two different types of swords. Kilij refering to the strictly Ottoman sword with a distintive grip, while saif refers to the sword with the type of grip pictured below, of course people can use whatever term they choose but why use any other term besides kilij for the Ottoman sword with the distinctive kilij grip? If it has a "karabela" grip it is a karabela, if it has a "kilij" grip it is a kilij, if it has a "saif" grip it is a saif.

Why is an Indian hilt design is identified with the Arab word for sword?

A.alnakkas · 21st October 2015, 03:56 PM

The word saif predates this hilt design by well, quite alot of time. The Arabs called swords "saif" (I emphasize that saif simply means sword) even when sword hilts are of a different design. So how come this type of hilt became 'saif' ?

ALEX · 21st October 2015, 04:04 PM

exactly my point, Lotfy. I also did not understand how something would become something else all of the sudden) thank you for making it so clear.

Kubur · 21st October 2015, 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALEX

Kubur, as you know Kilij and Saif mean "sword" or "saber" in their respective languages. in a conventional sense, "Kilij" has more pronounced curve and yelman, and generally wider blade. Miguel's sword is variation of both, but is a shamshir nevertheless.

Hi Alex,
I agree, but to complete your post
Kilij is a sword in Turkish, no more.
"Pronounced curve and yelman", I guess you describe a pala
Best,
Kubur

estcrh · 21st October 2015, 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kubur

Kilij is a sword in Turkish, no more.

Maybe in Turkey but not for many English speaking people with an interest in Ottomans swords, the term "kilij" in our times has come to refer to a specific type of hilt on an Ottoman sword.

ALEX · 21st October 2015, 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kubur

Hi Alex,
I agree, but to complete your post
Kilij is a sword in Turkish, no more.
"Pronounced curve and yelman", I guess you describe a pala
Best,
Kubur

I already mentioned that Kilij is Turkish word for sword (just as Saif is Arabic word for sword). Pala is a shorter and later version of Kilij.

Miguel · 21st October 2015, 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALEX

Agree with Teodor, many of these have all kinds of blades, European and/or earlier blades. I saw a few with early wootz blades.

Do you think this blade is Persian, Caucasian, or could be Armenian(?).

Kubur, as you know Kilij and Saif mean "sword" or "saber" in their respective languages. in a conventional sense, "Kilij" has more pronounced curve and yelman, and generally wider blade. Miguel's sword is variation of both, but is a shamshir nevertheless.

Hi Alex, Thanks for your comments, I am not sure where the blade was made I have been trying to match the stamp but without success so far.
Regards
Miguel

Kubur · 21st October 2015, 07:56 PM

I have seen some stamps like that on Persian qaddara.
One member said that these Persian blades are from Caucasus, but he's a not a reliable source on Persian weapons. But I come back to your blade, the question stays open, it could be from Persia or Caucasus (because of the groves similar to some shashqa).

Miguel · 21st October 2015, 07:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ALEX

Agree with Teodor, many of these have all kinds of blades, European and/or earlier blades. I saw a few with early wootz blades.

Do you think this blade is Persian, Caucasian, or could be Armenian(?).

Kubur, as you know Kilij and Saif mean "sword" or "saber" in their respective languages. in a conventional sense, "Kilij" has more pronounced curve and yelman, and generally wider blade. Miguel's sword is variation of both, but is a shamshir nevertheless.

Hi Alex, Thanks for your comments, I do not know where the blade was made and have been trying to match the stamp without success so far.
Regards
Miguel

21st October 2015, 03:56 PM	#15
A.alnakkas Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Kuwait Posts: 1,340	The word saif predates this hilt design by well, quite alot of time. The Arabs called swords "saif" (I emphasize that saif simply means sword) even when sword hilts are of a different design. So how come this type of hilt became 'saif' ?

21st October 2015, 04:04 PM	#16
ALEX Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 936	exactly my point, Lotfy. I also did not understand how something would become something else all of the sudden) thank you for making it so clear.

21st October 2015, 07:56 PM	#21
Kubur Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 2,145	I have seen some stamps like that on Persian qaddara. One member said that these Persian blades are from Caucasus, but he's a not a reliable source on Persian weapons. But I come back to your blade, the question stays open, it could be from Persia or Caucasus (because of the groves similar to some shashqa).