QAJAR "REVIVAL" SWORD for Comment

Ibrahiim al Balooshi · 8th October 2019, 05:15 PM

Reference;
A. https://www.academia.edu/36217967/Su..._Mahdist_Sudan

Quote"Decorations & Calligraphy.

Many Sudanese swords blades were covered with calligraphic inscriptions, either real or pseudo-inscriptions (Fig. 3). Sometimes these inscriptions are connected to symbolic dates such as 1718 or animals such as the snake and the dragon. The Arabic calligraphy etched in the blade was typical ‘thuluth’ script. Thuluth is a script version of calligraphy invented by the Persian ofﬁcial ibn Muqlah Shirazi. Most often they were religious inscriptions from the Qur’an, but also these weapons wear the names of places of production like Omdurman and manufacturing dates. This type of decoration was also used on other Sudanese weapons including dervish axes and daggers. These calligraphic ornamentations will have been placed to serve a purpose. It is clear that the verses of the Qur’an, Arabic and the writing act in general as magical and symbolic elements. Calligraphy is present as a motif rather than as actual writing. Its main function is talismanic; sometimes lucky-charms or gris-gris are also attached to the handle of the weapon." Unquote.

kahnjar1 · 8th October 2019, 08:41 PM

Thank you for the comments. I fully expected that this sword was probably used primarily in a ceremonial roll, but I have no doubt that given the right circumstances it could also be used as a true weapon. As I mentioned, the blade is quite sharp (no sign of resharpening), and flexible.

Kubur · 8th October 2019, 10:07 PM

It might be Indian as well, the hilt is not typical from these Persian swords.
Clearly very end of the 19th if not very early 20th c. 1880-1914
They were also used for Persian theater Tazieh as mentionned by Mahrat.

ariel · 8th October 2019, 11:10 PM

Kubur:
The hilt of this Qajar sword is not Indian, it is vice versa: Indian hilts of that configuration were modeled after Persian examples.
Indo-Persian culture was almost completely one-way street:from Persia to Moghuls and from them to the rest of India.

Jim,

I am with Marius. Of course, under certain “ conditions” these swords could have been used as weapons. But so did forks or candlesticks.
Revival swords were manufactured en masse as a propaganda tool, to instill a sense of pride in Iran’s Achaemenid past among the masses. Having inspired the needed emotion they were sold to tourists or suchlike.
In reality, at that time Iran was too impotent to engage in any kind of military adventure and was busily ( and rather inefficiently) trying to convert its anachronistic army into a European -like force. They were making ( and buying) European-style swords ( that were also virtually useless by the end of 19 century, but emphasized luxurious mustaches of their officers).

Kubur · 9th October 2019, 09:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ariel

Kubur:
The hilt of this Qajar sword is not Indian, it is vice versa: Indian hilts of that configuration were modeled after Persian examples.
Indo-Persian culture was almost completely one-way street:from Persia to Moghuls and from them to the rest of India.

I agree with you Ariel, of course.
I think that most - if not all- the forum members know about Indo Persian relations. These are very well established facts.
I confirm what I wrote: this hilt is very basic and it might be Indian 19th c or very - very - late Persian early 20th c.

Jim McDougall · 9th October 2019, 01:32 PM

Thank you Ariel for this extremely well honed insight into the 'climate' in which these ceremonial type swords were used in these performance events. I had often heard of these referred to as 'passion plays' , but never fully understood the manner in which these weapons were used (as well illustrated by Dima), nor the political circumstances of Iran during these times described as you have explained.

Actually I was not disagreeing with what Marius said, simply the way he said it. Ironically, by analogy, his comment ('how would you know?)personally directed toward the observation by Mforde pretty much proved my point, that even a blunt instrument(weapon, or comment) can produce potentially harmful result. As I was pointing out, and in accord with your comment on the use of virtually many objects as weapons of opportunity, even a combatively inert weapon could well be used 'in the moment'. While I am sure Marius probably did not mean the words to come across the way I perceived, the initial effect seemed pertinent.

I think Mforde's riposte well qualifies his observation, and elaborates on the most obvious condition in discussing this interesting sword, that each item in this category must be evaluated on its own merits. Naturally hands on examination provides the necessary character and facts typically denied by photos unless highly detailed closeups, but here we can offer only assessments presumed without such physical examination.

Thank you Ibrahiim for the additional insights into the Sudanese thuluth covered weapons which I had mentioned in analogy. These weapons have certain parallels to the sword pictured in the OP in that they are covered in similar calligraphic script, and are often debated as to whether they were actually used in combat.
As I had mentioned, while many of these kaskara were indeed blunt and likely used by certain key individuals in the field in as yet unclear manner, I have seen examples with sharply honed and flexible blades which certainly could have been combatively used. The accounts describing these found strewn on the battlefield among other weapons suggests they may well have been.

Again, this mention of the Sudanese swords is intended only as an analogy toward the use of ceremonial or symbolically imbued weapons in an actual combative situation.

ariel · 10th October 2019, 06:55 PM

Jim,
I think Marius did not mean anything objectionable. Likely, it was a grammar issue. In Russian and Hebrew conversational languages, for example, both innocuous and aggressive inquiries routinely use “you” as the address instead of a passive form or faceless “we”. English, on the other hand, is very persnickety in this regard.
Have no idea how it is in his native tongue, but I would not hold it against him in this case.

My 5 cents.

As to the Revival swords, I personally do not like them at all. Far too theatrical to my taste. Never had one, never will.

8th October 2019, 10:07 PM	#3
Kubur Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 2,145	It might be Indian as well, the hilt is not typical from these Persian swords. Clearly very end of the 19th if not very early 20th c. 1880-1914 They were also used for Persian theater Tazieh as mentionned by Mahrat. Attached Images

9th October 2019, 01:32 PM	#6
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,192	Thank you Ariel for this extremely well honed insight into the 'climate' in which these ceremonial type swords were used in these performance events. I had often heard of these referred to as 'passion plays' , but never fully understood the manner in which these weapons were used (as well illustrated by Dima), nor the political circumstances of Iran during these times described as you have explained. Actually I was not disagreeing with what Marius said, simply the way he said it. Ironically, by analogy, his comment ('how would you know?)personally directed toward the observation by Mforde pretty much proved my point, that even a blunt instrument(weapon, or comment) can produce potentially harmful result. As I was pointing out, and in accord with your comment on the use of virtually many objects as weapons of opportunity, even a combatively inert weapon could well be used 'in the moment'. While I am sure Marius probably did not mean the words to come across the way I perceived, the initial effect seemed pertinent. I think Mforde's riposte well qualifies his observation, and elaborates on the most obvious condition in discussing this interesting sword, that each item in this category must be evaluated on its own merits. Naturally hands on examination provides the necessary character and facts typically denied by photos unless highly detailed closeups, but here we can offer only assessments presumed without such physical examination. Thank you Ibrahiim for the additional insights into the Sudanese thuluth covered weapons which I had mentioned in analogy. These weapons have certain parallels to the sword pictured in the OP in that they are covered in similar calligraphic script, and are often debated as to whether they were actually used in combat. As I had mentioned, while many of these kaskara were indeed blunt and likely used by certain key individuals in the field in as yet unclear manner, I have seen examples with sharply honed and flexible blades which certainly could have been combatively used. The accounts describing these found strewn on the battlefield among other weapons suggests they may well have been. Again, this mention of the Sudanese swords is intended only as an analogy toward the use of ceremonial or symbolically imbued weapons in an actual combative situation. Last edited by Jim McDougall; 9th October 2019 at 02:38 PM.

8th October 2019, 05:15 PM	#1
Ibrahiim al Balooshi Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Buraimi Oman, on the border with the UAE Posts: 4,408	Reference; A. https://www.academia.edu/36217967/Su..._Mahdist_Sudan Quote"Decorations & Calligraphy. Many Sudanese swords blades were covered with calligraphic inscriptions, either real or pseudo-inscriptions (Fig. 3). Sometimes these inscriptions are connected to symbolic dates such as 1718 or animals such as the snake and the dragon. The Arabic calligraphy etched in the blade was typical ‘thuluth’ script. Thuluth is a script version of calligraphy invented by the Persian ofﬁcial ibn Muqlah Shirazi. Most often they were religious inscriptions from the Qur’an, but also these weapons wear the names of places of production like Omdurman and manufacturing dates. This type of decoration was also used on other Sudanese weapons including dervish axes and daggers. These calligraphic ornamentations will have been placed to serve a purpose. It is clear that the verses of the Qur’an, Arabic and the writing act in general as magical and symbolic elements. Calligraphy is present as a motif rather than as actual writing. Its main function is talismanic; sometimes lucky-charms or gris-gris are also attached to the handle of the weapon." Unquote.

8th October 2019, 08:41 PM	#2
kahnjar1 Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: CHRISTCHURCH NEW ZEALAND Posts: 2,786	Thank you for the comments. I fully expected that this sword was probably used primarily in a ceremonial roll, but I have no doubt that given the right circumstances it could also be used as a true weapon. As I mentioned, the blade is quite sharp (no sign of resharpening), and flexible.

8th October 2019, 11:10 PM	#4
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Kubur: The hilt of this Qajar sword is not Indian, it is vice versa: Indian hilts of that configuration were modeled after Persian examples. Indo-Persian culture was almost completely one-way street:from Persia to Moghuls and from them to the rest of India. Jim, I am with Marius. Of course, under certain “ conditions” these swords could have been used as weapons. But so did forks or candlesticks. Revival swords were manufactured en masse as a propaganda tool, to instill a sense of pride in Iran’s Achaemenid past among the masses. Having inspired the needed emotion they were sold to tourists or suchlike. In reality, at that time Iran was too impotent to engage in any kind of military adventure and was busily ( and rather inefficiently) trying to convert its anachronistic army into a European -like force. They were making ( and buying) European-style swords ( that were also virtually useless by the end of 19 century, but emphasized luxurious mustaches of their officers).

10th October 2019, 06:55 PM	#7
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Jim, I think Marius did not mean anything objectionable. Likely, it was a grammar issue. In Russian and Hebrew conversational languages, for example, both innocuous and aggressive inquiries routinely use “you” as the address instead of a passive form or faceless “we”. English, on the other hand, is very persnickety in this regard. Have no idea how it is in his native tongue, but I would not hold it against him in this case. My 5 cents. As to the Revival swords, I personally do not like them at all. Far too theatrical to my taste. Never had one, never will.