QAJAR "REVIVAL" SWORD for Comment

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.

mariusgmioc · 11th October 2019, 07:04 AM

I think, I may not have expressed clear enough what I wanted to say.

Unless YOU test the sword in similar conditions to those of real battle (or very close to those conditions) YOU cannot know if it is good or not. And when I say "YOU" I do not mean, you Jim, or you MForde, but "you" in general.

All steel has a deformation threshold from where elastic deformation stops and breakage or plastic deformation occurs, and for a steel of unknown composition this threshold can only be determined by testing.

So, the blade can look and feel strong and elastic and you can bend it 5 degrees without any bad effects. But, then if you bend it just one degree more, it breaks, or much more often, becomes permanently bent.

The Qajar revival blades were not thermally treated and were made of low carbon content steels, so are nothing but purely decorative weapons.

It is something completely different from battle ready blades that have decorations applied later.

PS: These "swords" are not even mentioned in "Arms and Armor from Iran" by Mr. Manouchehr Moshtagh Khorasani which is the most comprehensive book on Persian weapons... as they are not real weapons but decorations.

mahratt · 11th October 2019, 08:27 AM

Marius, I agree with you.
But in rare cases, there are exceptions. For example, when the blades of the Qajar revival blades are made of wootz steel (like this one of my sword).
But, of course, with respect to most of the richly decorated Qajar revival blades you are right.

mariusgmioc · 11th October 2019, 01:21 PM

Every rule has some exceptions, and yes, there might be very rare examples of functional Qajar revival blades.

And yes, a wootz blade would definitely qualify for being such an exception but...

... how do you know it is a Qajar revival blade, and not an older, battle-ready blade, remounted and decorated at a later period?

mahratt · 11th October 2019, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mariusgmioc

... how do you know it is a Qajar revival blade, and not an older, battle-ready blade, remounted and decorated at a later period?

You're right again

It's quite possible

Kubur · 11th October 2019, 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mariusgmioc

... how do you know it is a Qajar revival blade, and not an older, battle-ready blade, remounted and decorated at a later period?

Easy
some of these blades are signed by sword makers from the 19th c.
Look at this MET sword (I have one from the same maker with a revival hilt...)

mariusgmioc · 11th October 2019, 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kubur

Easy
some of these blades are signed by sword makers from the 19th c.
Look at this MET sword (I have one from the same maker with a revival hilt...)

Well... nope! This is actually a confirmation that you have an older blade that was re-hilted.

Then...

1. How do you know the signature is of a 19 century swordsmith;
2. How do you know that the blade wasn't originally meant for business/battle;
3. How do you know that the signature wasn't added at the later date?!

There is a significant difference between early 19th century, when swords were still made and used in battle, and late 19th century when swords became more of a fashion item.

My two cents.

PS: I am not aware of any documented 19th century Persian swordsmiths that produced wootz. I would appreciate any information about this topic.

Kubur · 11th October 2019, 05:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mariusgmioc

PS: I am not aware of any documented 19th century Persian swordsmiths that produced wootz. I would appreciate any information about this topic.

My Dear Marius,
all your questions especially the last one, can be answered in one sentence:
It is because you are not reading books.
Please read Rivkin a study of the eastern sword
then Islamic arms and armour of the MET
then you will feel much better
stop etching your blades and read, at least to rest a bit

mahratt · 11th October 2019, 07:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mariusgmioc

I am not aware of any documented 19th century Persian swordsmiths that produced wootz. I would appreciate any information about this topic.

Marius, I’m not sure I understood your PS correctly

Therefore, I'm sorry if I answer out of place

In the 19th century, there were undoubtedly blacksmiths in Persia who made swords from wootz. They exactly produce wootz in the 19th century. There is an article of 1842, which was written by a Russian officer who was in Persia and himself observed this process.
Unfortunately, the article is written in Russian. But I can post it here if it's interesting, by attaching scanned pages.

11th October 2019, 07:04 AM	#2
mariusgmioc Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Location: Austria Posts: 1,906	I think, I may not have expressed clear enough what I wanted to say. Unless YOU test the sword in similar conditions to those of real battle (or very close to those conditions) YOU cannot know if it is good or not. And when I say "YOU" I do not mean, you Jim, or you MForde, but "you" in general. All steel has a deformation threshold from where elastic deformation stops and breakage or plastic deformation occurs, and for a steel of unknown composition this threshold can only be determined by testing. So, the blade can look and feel strong and elastic and you can bend it 5 degrees without any bad effects. But, then if you bend it just one degree more, it breaks, or much more often, becomes permanently bent. The Qajar revival blades were not thermally treated and were made of low carbon content steels, so are nothing but purely decorative weapons. It is something completely different from battle ready blades that have decorations applied later. PS: These "swords" are not even mentioned in "Arms and Armor from Iran" by Mr. Manouchehr Moshtagh Khorasani which is the most comprehensive book on Persian weapons... as they are not real weapons but decorations. Last edited by mariusgmioc; 11th October 2019 at 08:22 AM.

11th October 2019, 08:27 AM	#3
mahratt Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Russia Posts: 1,042	Marius, I agree with you. But in rare cases, there are exceptions. For example, when the blades of the Qajar revival blades are made of wootz steel (like this one of my sword). But, of course, with respect to most of the richly decorated Qajar revival blades you are right. Attached Images

10th October 2019, 06:55 PM	#1
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.

11th October 2019, 01:21 PM	#4
mariusgmioc Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Location: Austria Posts: 1,906	Every rule has some exceptions, and yes, there might be very rare examples of functional Qajar revival blades. And yes, a wootz blade would definitely qualify for being such an exception but... ... how do you know it is a Qajar revival blade, and not an older, battle-ready blade, remounted and decorated at a later period?