Persian Shamshir with Turkish Hilt

ward · 16th August 2007, 08:20 PM

Lot of good shamshir info in this articel ok to print out

http://users.rcn.com/wardc/scan2.tif

ward

rand · 16th August 2007, 11:32 PM

Hey Ward,

Thanks for posting Olivers article. Have a feeling that article has some age, believe Olivers opinion about when shamshir was developed would be earlier now. Was surprised he said beginning of 17th century. Know Oliver had a shamshir dated in the 1590's twenty five years ago. There are now shamshirs known with earlier art designs on blade suggesting at least an early 16th century date for the designs on blade. Also Zaki go's even further, saying the long, thicker wedge section, shallow curved blade devoped was 1500-1650.

rand

ward · 17th August 2007, 01:19 AM

I will email Mr. Pinchot and ask him.

rand · 17th August 2007, 02:30 AM

Tell Oliver I said hi.....

rand

ward · 17th August 2007, 08:03 PM

Reply--

Ward,

I do stand by the data contained in the article. Dating the origin of the shamshir is a difficult process which by its nature cannot be considered precise-- even dated examples show considerable variance, as noted in the frequency distribution applied to blades signed Assad Allah in Mayer's work on p. 7.
As for the shamshir you mentioned, the blade was very heavy, deeply curved and of wedge section with a relatively active pattern of silver-gray contrast. Its inscription was tiny and since the digits were worn, magnification from a number of angles was required in order to read it accurately. Ultimately it proved to be from the early 1620s.

O.P.

rand · 17th August 2007, 08:43 PM

Hi Ward,

Is Oliver referring to the shamshir with a double rung ladder pattern, armor piercing tip and stag horn grip scales?

Regarding blade shapes, we know there was a huge change in the culture surrounding the develoopement of the Ottoman Empire. The Sultans heavily supported the artisan community and the Arts flourished which includes the arms and armor arts as well.

If you regard the shamshir as developing in the early 17th century you leave a fairly good size void for known 16th century swords. We have examples of the single edges curved blade beginning in Eastern Europe 6-8th century as shown in a post by Artzi.

Seems to me that finding examples of shamshir with known time period of use will be about the only way to solve this mystery for sure and that has not surfaced yet.

It sort of gets back to the question on the kilij from the time of Mehmet II's sword, what is the progression of the kilij in the Ottoman Empire? There are some large voids there too.

By the way, I like Oliver and respect his opinion, just am thinking outside the box on this and lean toward a different opinion.

Wonder what the response to a shamshir blade with first half 16th century ornamentaion would be?

Am still looking at the photo's of your square barrel... thats just an amazing gun.

Will look for Zaki's shamshir progression and post his line drawing sword progression.

rand

16th August 2007, 11:32 PM	#2
rand Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Virginia Posts: 539	Shanshir Article Hey Ward, Thanks for posting Olivers article. Have a feeling that article has some age, believe Olivers opinion about when shamshir was developed would be earlier now. Was surprised he said beginning of 17th century. Know Oliver had a shamshir dated in the 1590's twenty five years ago. There are now shamshirs known with earlier art designs on blade suggesting at least an early 16th century date for the designs on blade. Also Zaki go's even further, saying the long, thicker wedge section, shallow curved blade devoped was 1500-1650. rand

17th August 2007, 02:30 AM	#4
rand Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Virginia Posts: 539	Tell Oliver hi... Tell Oliver I said hi..... rand

17th August 2007, 08:43 PM	#6
rand Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Virginia Posts: 539	1620's Blade Hi Ward, Is Oliver referring to the shamshir with a double rung ladder pattern, armor piercing tip and stag horn grip scales? Regarding blade shapes, we know there was a huge change in the culture surrounding the develoopement of the Ottoman Empire. The Sultans heavily supported the artisan community and the Arts flourished which includes the arms and armor arts as well. If you regard the shamshir as developing in the early 17th century you leave a fairly good size void for known 16th century swords. We have examples of the single edges curved blade beginning in Eastern Europe 6-8th century as shown in a post by Artzi. Seems to me that finding examples of shamshir with known time period of use will be about the only way to solve this mystery for sure and that has not surfaced yet. It sort of gets back to the question on the kilij from the time of Mehmet II's sword, what is the progression of the kilij in the Ottoman Empire? There are some large voids there too. By the way, I like Oliver and respect his opinion, just am thinking outside the box on this and lean toward a different opinion. Wonder what the response to a shamshir blade with first half 16th century ornamentaion would be? Am still looking at the photo's of your square barrel... thats just an amazing gun. Will look for Zaki's shamshir progression and post his line drawing sword progression. rand

16th August 2007, 08:20 PM	#1
ward Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 637	Lot of good shamshir info in this articel ok to print out http://users.rcn.com/wardc/scan2.tif ward

17th August 2007, 01:19 AM	#3
ward Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 637	I will email Mr. Pinchot and ask him.

17th August 2007, 08:03 PM	#5
ward Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 637	Reply-- Ward, I do stand by the data contained in the article. Dating the origin of the shamshir is a difficult process which by its nature cannot be considered precise-- even dated examples show considerable variance, as noted in the frequency distribution applied to blades signed Assad Allah in Mayer's work on p. 7. As for the shamshir you mentioned, the blade was very heavy, deeply curved and of wedge section with a relatively active pattern of silver-gray contrast. Its inscription was tiny and since the digits were worn, magnification from a number of angles was required in order to read it accurately. Ultimately it proved to be from the early 1620s. O.P.