Turkish sword , good stuff ?

ariel · 8th November 2018, 10:18 PM

As a matter of fact, Sudanese crossguards resemble not the Ottoman , but rather old Mamluk guards.
One only has to check the book by Yucel to see that they are virtually identical twins, only the Sudanese are cruder.

Ottoman ones are slender, with thin langets and are either silver or brass ( or silvered brass) Both Mamluk and Sudanese are massive and made out of iron.

And the general construction of the entire swords is virtually identical : straight double-edged blades . Some Sudanese kaskaras have furrows virtually identical to the Mamluk one: the last one of the attached is an ancestor of the Doukerry:-)

This is not surprising: Egyptian Mamluks controlled or semi-controlled Sudan for centuries, well before the establishment of the Ottoman Empire.
Then, the Ottomans took some later Mamluk swords and modified them. I suspect that Persian influence played a role there.

Edster · 9th November 2018, 01:49 AM

Jim,

Thanks for the compliment.

Ariel,

I agree that your examples look externally similar to the kaskara. But I've not seen how their grip, cross-guard and blade are joined. Does the C-G have a slot in it that fits over the tang to the top of the blade with two grip scales held in place with the common three rivets OR do they go together like the kaskara with all wedged together by a one piece wooden grip fitted into the C-G hole and supported by the top langets? If the early swords and the kaskara assemblies are virtually the same, I support your view completely.

The inside of the C-G shown as the subject sword is very similar to the kaskara. The quillon profile, materials, and methods of making are not alike, but that's not the point

Say in 1800 or so some shade tree blacksmith in Eastern Sudan had an imported German blade and needed to make a C-G that would secure the three pieces together, he would look for a model that he could adapt to his needs. I believe he would like what the subject sword, contemporary and at hand, presents, forge a likeness from iron, and the prototype kaskara would be born.
He is unlikely to search for an Abbasid relic to copy.

Best regards,
Ed

ariel · 9th November 2018, 12:32 PM

Ed,

I have no idea how Mamluk and Ottoman guards were secured. I looked at mine and could not find any mastique or rivets. Sudanese and Syrians used wrappings of different materials and degree of sophistication. On top of purely engineering questions there is the atrocious quality of Yucel illustrations : see my pictures. It seems superficially that Ottoman guards just fit their upper langets into slots of the handle. But that would not assure any security of attachment and there are many examples of bent langets totally outside of the slots and the guards are still rock solid.

If anybody here knows the secret, I would be very grateful for revealing it to me.

I do not think we have to insist on absolute similarity of handles to claim
belonging to the same family. Persian, North and South Arabian, Baloch, Turkish or Indian shamshirs have very different handles, but there is no doubt that they belong to the same family and have a common ancestor: their blades are the same and often came from the same source i.e. Persian trade blades.

Kaskaras and early Mamluk swords have remarkably similar blades, and the added similarity of crossguards is just an additional point. Not a miracle, taking into account geographic proximity and close relations between the two societies. Whether the original source was pre-Islamic Arabia or Byzantine spathion I do not know. One can even speculate that even pre-Islamic straight swords came from the spathion. Then one might get boggle down in the question of Sassanid straight swords and the spathion etc. Separating descent and parallel development is always a semi-impossible task. The word “perhaps” must be used generously:-)

Your point about Abbasids is well taken, but that is not what I had in mind. It is not that Sudanese copied slender Persian guards ( which they did not), but the Ottomans. I must have not made myself clear. Sorry.

Edster · 9th November 2018, 04:22 PM

Ariel,

I agree with most of your assertions. Afterall a broadsword is a pretty simple 3 to 4 part device over time, not counting the elaborate hand guards of the Renaissance. The main variation is how the parts were fabricated and mechanically secured over time.

Take care,
Ed

francantolin · 23rd November 2018, 03:43 PM

Hello everybody,
I cleaned the blade with bicarbonate first
( remove some rust ) and then with white vinegar ( gently etched. !?!.. )
it turned deeper and has a lot of contrasts,
but no pattern ..
Do you think it's wootz steel ?
( I read about dendritic wootz but ?...)

serdar · 30th May 2023, 01:52 PM

It may be some kind of crucible steel.
Ottoman guards were secured using resins, in higher and lower concentrations of powdered substances adeto resin.
But one thing many people take wrong, pala is a straighter sword with upswept hilt and bird like nandle like karabela.
19 century kilij is not pala, kilij has evolved over time 16 ct example is more staighter and longer, 19 ct is shorter and more curved and suited for foot use.
But pala is a shorter, broader blade almost straight just slightli curved.

8th November 2018, 10:18 PM	#1
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	As a matter of fact, Sudanese crossguards resemble not the Ottoman , but rather old Mamluk guards. One only has to check the book by Yucel to see that they are virtually identical twins, only the Sudanese are cruder. Ottoman ones are slender, with thin langets and are either silver or brass ( or silvered brass) Both Mamluk and Sudanese are massive and made out of iron. And the general construction of the entire swords is virtually identical : straight double-edged blades . Some Sudanese kaskaras have furrows virtually identical to the Mamluk one: the last one of the attached is an ancestor of the Doukerry:-) This is not surprising: Egyptian Mamluks controlled or semi-controlled Sudan for centuries, well before the establishment of the Ottoman Empire. Then, the Ottomans took some later Mamluk swords and modified them. I suspect that Persian influence played a role there. Attached Images

9th November 2018, 01:49 AM	#2
Edster Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 411	Jim, Thanks for the compliment. Ariel, I agree that your examples look externally similar to the kaskara. But I've not seen how their grip, cross-guard and blade are joined. Does the C-G have a slot in it that fits over the tang to the top of the blade with two grip scales held in place with the common three rivets OR do they go together like the kaskara with all wedged together by a one piece wooden grip fitted into the C-G hole and supported by the top langets? If the early swords and the kaskara assemblies are virtually the same, I support your view completely. The inside of the C-G shown as the subject sword is very similar to the kaskara. The quillon profile, materials, and methods of making are not alike, but that's not the point Say in 1800 or so some shade tree blacksmith in Eastern Sudan had an imported German blade and needed to make a C-G that would secure the three pieces together, he would look for a model that he could adapt to his needs. I believe he would like what the subject sword, contemporary and at hand, presents, forge a likeness from iron, and the prototype kaskara would be born. He is unlikely to search for an Abbasid relic to copy. Best regards, Ed Last edited by Edster; 9th November 2018 at 02:04 AM.

9th November 2018, 12:32 PM	#3
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Ed, I have no idea how Mamluk and Ottoman guards were secured. I looked at mine and could not find any mastique or rivets. Sudanese and Syrians used wrappings of different materials and degree of sophistication. On top of purely engineering questions there is the atrocious quality of Yucel illustrations : see my pictures. It seems superficially that Ottoman guards just fit their upper langets into slots of the handle. But that would not assure any security of attachment and there are many examples of bent langets totally outside of the slots and the guards are still rock solid. If anybody here knows the secret, I would be very grateful for revealing it to me. I do not think we have to insist on absolute similarity of handles to claim belonging to the same family. Persian, North and South Arabian, Baloch, Turkish or Indian shamshirs have very different handles, but there is no doubt that they belong to the same family and have a common ancestor: their blades are the same and often came from the same source i.e. Persian trade blades. Kaskaras and early Mamluk swords have remarkably similar blades, and the added similarity of crossguards is just an additional point. Not a miracle, taking into account geographic proximity and close relations between the two societies. Whether the original source was pre-Islamic Arabia or Byzantine spathion I do not know. One can even speculate that even pre-Islamic straight swords came from the spathion. Then one might get boggle down in the question of Sassanid straight swords and the spathion etc. Separating descent and parallel development is always a semi-impossible task. The word “perhaps” must be used generously:-) Your point about Abbasids is well taken, but that is not what I had in mind. It is not that Sudanese copied slender Persian guards ( which they did not), but the Ottomans. I must have not made myself clear. Sorry. Last edited by ariel; 9th November 2018 at 12:57 PM.

23rd November 2018, 03:43 PM	#5
francantolin Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Posts: 905	Hello everybody, I cleaned the blade with bicarbonate first ( remove some rust ) and then with white vinegar ( gently etched. !?!.. ) it turned deeper and has a lot of contrasts, but no pattern .. Do you think it's wootz steel ? ( I read about dendritic wootz but ?...) Attached Images

9th November 2018, 04:22 PM	#4
Edster Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 411	Ariel, I agree with most of your assertions. Afterall a broadsword is a pretty simple 3 to 4 part device over time, not counting the elaborate hand guards of the Renaissance. The main variation is how the parts were fabricated and mechanically secured over time. Take care, Ed

30th May 2023, 01:52 PM	#6
serdar Member Join Date: Feb 2023 Posts: 123	It may be some kind of crucible steel. Ottoman guards were secured using resins, in higher and lower concentrations of powdered substances adeto resin. But one thing many people take wrong, pala is a straighter sword with upswept hilt and bird like nandle like karabela. 19 century kilij is not pala, kilij has evolved over time 16 ct example is more staighter and longer, 19 ct is shorter and more curved and suited for foot use. But pala is a shorter, broader blade almost straight just slightli curved.