Turkish shamshir ?

TVV · 10th March 2006, 08:15 PM

A great, serious fighting sword, congratulations. To me, however, it seems Syrian rather than Turkish, and also I am not quite sure if "shamshir" would be an appropriate name for a fullered, slightly curved blade. But then, I do not know what else to call it as saif appears to be too generic of a term.
Regards,
Teodor

ariel · 10th March 2006, 08:33 PM

I fully agree with Teodore: Syrian. This is based on the down-turned pommel and wire covering the upper langet.
The blade , I think, is trade, Persian.
I have seen a lot of such swords, Syrian, Afghani etc and had the same question:this is not a shamshir in a strict sense , because it is not curved enough, but what should we call it? Yes, Saif is broad and generic, but I just cannot find another word.

ham · 11th March 2006, 12:53 AM

The hilting certainly is Syrian type, though Dimashq or Damascus type would be more accurate since that was where most of these were done.

The blade, however, is not Persian work. It is either a European trade blade or a Caucasian copy thereof; Elgood addreses this specifically in his Arab arms book.

Ariel, as to terminology-- are you asking by what name the original (ostensibly) bedouin owner would call this sword, or how it should be categorized by English-speaking collectors in the present?

Ham

ariel · 11th March 2006, 03:50 AM

You may be right as to the origin of the blade. Markings would help a lot.
As to the name, I guess even the locals might have called it different, just to distinguish it from other types (as, for example, large kindjal in Georgia is
called Satevari etc). Also, is there any specific "European" name? I guess not, but just in case...

Andy Davis · 11th March 2006, 10:17 AM

Well shamshir is what the auction house were selling it as but from their identification of various other pieces indicated, they knew absolutely nothing.
I have other shamshirs with much more curved blades, in what I consider the classic style but as you all say, this one doesn't really fit that.
Could be a European blade, has the build of one and its certainly heavy but I've checked and there are certainly no markings.
As regards the pommel, the way it comes back towards the guard, is that typical Syrian? Others I have seen seem more like a simple right angle.
What period would we guess this is?
Cheers
Andy

No, its not blood on the carpet....intruders would be caught in the tiger traps in the garden, before they got that far

M.carter · 11th March 2006, 12:14 PM

Hi,

as all of you guys have said, this is a Syrian saif, not a turkish shamshir. The blade however, is most likely Hungarian. Ive seen hundreds of Syrian saifs, with Hungarian blades (marked hungary), like this one. There seems to have been some strong trade in blades from hungary to Damascus. Ive even seen one Nejdi Saif, on Hermann historica a few years ago, that had a signed a Hungarian blade.

EDIT: after looking at the pics closer, I think its more likely a local copy of a hungarian blade. The double fullers on hungary blades usually ended straight and uniformly towards the forte of the blade. This one however, is different. I may be wrong though.

ariel · 11th March 2006, 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andy Davis

Well shamshir is what the auction house were selling it as but from their identification of various other pieces indicated, they knew absolutely nothing.
I have other shamshirs with much more curved blades, in what I consider the classic style but as you all say, this one doesn't really fit that.
Could be a European blade, has the build of one and its certainly heavy but I've checked and there are certainly no markings.
As regards the pommel, the way it comes back towards the guard, is that typical Syrian? Others I have seen seem more like a simple right angle.
What period would we guess this is?
Cheers
Andy

No, its not blood on the carpet....intruders would be caught in the tiger traps in the garden, before they got that far

The right angle is usually Persian, the acute (turn toward the blade) is usually Syrian , and the obtuse (away from the handle) South Arabian.

Jeff D · 11th March 2006, 04:50 PM

Hi All,

This is along the lines Mark has observed. The picture is from the King Faisal Foundation book. I will leave the debate whether the classic "Bedouin" hilt style started in Hungary to another thread.

Jeff

11th March 2006, 04:50 PM	#8
Jeff D Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: B.C. Canada Posts: 473	Hi All, This is along the lines Mark has observed. The picture is from the King Faisal Foundation book. I will leave the debate whether the classic "Bedouin" hilt style started in Hungary to another thread. Jeff Attached Images

10th March 2006, 08:15 PM	#1
TVV Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Bay Area Posts: 1,664	A great, serious fighting sword, congratulations. To me, however, it seems Syrian rather than Turkish, and also I am not quite sure if "shamshir" would be an appropriate name for a fullered, slightly curved blade. But then, I do not know what else to call it as saif appears to be too generic of a term. Regards, Teodor

10th March 2006, 08:33 PM	#2
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	I fully agree with Teodore: Syrian. This is based on the down-turned pommel and wire covering the upper langet. The blade , I think, is trade, Persian. I have seen a lot of such swords, Syrian, Afghani etc and had the same question:this is not a shamshir in a strict sense , because it is not curved enough, but what should we call it? Yes, Saif is broad and generic, but I just cannot find another word.

11th March 2006, 12:53 AM	#3
ham Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 190	The hilting certainly is Syrian type, though Dimashq or Damascus type would be more accurate since that was where most of these were done. The blade, however, is not Persian work. It is either a European trade blade or a Caucasian copy thereof; Elgood addreses this specifically in his Arab arms book. Ariel, as to terminology-- are you asking by what name the original (ostensibly) bedouin owner would call this sword, or how it should be categorized by English-speaking collectors in the present? Ham

11th March 2006, 03:50 AM	#4
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	You may be right as to the origin of the blade. Markings would help a lot. As to the name, I guess even the locals might have called it different, just to distinguish it from other types (as, for example, large kindjal in Georgia is called Satevari etc). Also, is there any specific "European" name? I guess not, but just in case...

11th March 2006, 10:17 AM	#5
Andy Davis Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: England, Northumberland Posts: 85	Well shamshir is what the auction house were selling it as but from their identification of various other pieces indicated, they knew absolutely nothing. I have other shamshirs with much more curved blades, in what I consider the classic style but as you all say, this one doesn't really fit that. Could be a European blade, has the build of one and its certainly heavy but I've checked and there are certainly no markings. As regards the pommel, the way it comes back towards the guard, is that typical Syrian? Others I have seen seem more like a simple right angle. What period would we guess this is? Cheers Andy No, its not blood on the carpet....intruders would be caught in the tiger traps in the garden, before they got that far

11th March 2006, 12:14 PM	#6
M.carter Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 176	Hi, as all of you guys have said, this is a Syrian saif, not a turkish shamshir. The blade however, is most likely Hungarian. Ive seen hundreds of Syrian saifs, with Hungarian blades (marked hungary), like this one. There seems to have been some strong trade in blades from hungary to Damascus. Ive even seen one Nejdi Saif, on Hermann historica a few years ago, that had a signed a Hungarian blade. EDIT: after looking at the pics closer, I think its more likely a local copy of a hungarian blade. The double fullers on hungary blades usually ended straight and uniformly towards the forte of the blade. This one however, is different. I may be wrong though.