Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Ethnographic Weapons
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 7th July 2007, 08:28 PM   #1
ariel
Member
 
ariel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
Default

No doubt, the sword is beautiful!
What is the motive on the handle ? Parasols? Mughal motive.
Another puzzle: the invocation of Ali and Dhulfaghar is Shia; the Ottomans were Sunnis, AFAIK. I guess the inscription might be contemporary to the handle.
ariel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th July 2007, 09:13 PM   #2
Emanuel
Member
 
Emanuel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1,242
Default

I thought that invocations to Ali and Ali's sword were used by both Shi'a and Sunna. Don't Ottoman yataghans often have such invocations?
Emanuel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7th July 2007, 10:45 PM   #3
ham
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 190
Default

Manolo,

It is correct that this phrase glorifying 'Ali and Dhul-fakar was used among both Sunni and Shi'ite Muslims.

Oriental-Arms,

Your observation,

"that swords were used to carry early dates for commemoration of a certain event, be it a famous battle or important conquest, but in all such cases that I have seen, it was referred to the event."

intrigues me-- if I understand you correctly, you have seen Islamic blades which bear inscriptions that reference a specific historical occurrence? I regret that in all my years I have not, excepting weapons made after a European model, since this tends to be a Western practice. If there are any examples you could cite it would be most helpful.

Ham
ham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th July 2007, 07:27 AM   #4
Oriental-Arms
Member
 
Oriental-Arms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Haifa, Israel
Posts: 183
Default

Yes indeed Ham. At least twice that I remember. One on a handle of a Persian Khanjar glorying an old battle and another on a blade, I believe it was Turkish. I will have to go through my archive of photos to find it ( some 20000 photos to search). Give me some time.
Oriental-Arms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th July 2007, 07:24 PM   #5
ham
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 190
Default

Excellent, I look forward to seeing them!

Ham
ham is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th July 2007, 07:48 PM   #6
Oriental-Arms
Member
 
Oriental-Arms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Haifa, Israel
Posts: 183
Default Another early Kilij for discussion

The early date of the sword posted above raised some questions regarding its age. It was thought that this type of Kilij blades (or Pala, to pacify Ariel), are rather late. Mid to late 18 C. and onward. The sword above was dated to 1037 (1627). I am bringing up for comments another blade, of even more important provenance, and of an even earlier date:




A close up of the inscription on the obverse side near the Yelmen:



Which reads: Al Mughazi Sinan Pasha Saneye 1000 (The invader Sinan Pasha the year 1591)

And:

Bisrasm Saheb al Dawlah (Ordered by the country's ruler)


And follows with: Bismella al Rahman al Rahim (In the name of God, the most Gracious, the most merciful) and than on both sides of the blade all the attributes of God:

He is Allah, the Beneficient, the Merciful, the Sovereign, the Holy One, the Peace, the Keeper of Faith, the Protector, the Majestic, the Compeller, the Greatest, the Creator, the Maker, the Shaper, the Great Forgiver, the Dominant, the Bestower, the Sustainer, the Opener, the Knower, the Withholder, the Expander, the Abaser, the Exalter, the Bestower of Honor, the Humiliator….. and so all the 99 attributes:






Sinan Pasha is a well known figure in the Ottoman history. For most of his mature years he was a high ranking commander in the Ottoman army under Murad III and Mehmet III, and five time appointed as the Grand Vasir until his death in 1596.

Was this his sword?? Why not. The blade is definitely old. The inscription is of top quality both in inlay technique and calligraphy and fits the period style. The blade might be even earlier: On the reverse side there are traces of an earlier cartouche.

So what do we have here: A late 16 C blade that was supposed to appear in the late 18 C. may be we should reconsider our knowledge on Pala swords??
Oriental-Arms is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:06 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.