OTTOMAN PALA translation please

ilias · 17th January 2009, 05:20 PM

Hi everyone.This is the ottoman pala that I have.
I have some questions about it.
1.Can anyone translate the cartouch that it has?I know that this is difficult because the coftgari is worn out.
2.Is it wootz or something else?
3.Do you believe that the blade is ottoman or persian or ......
Thanks in advance
Ilias

ilias · 17th January 2009, 05:22 PM

Just to add some more images

Battara · 18th January 2009, 02:34 AM

What a beautiful piece. Shame some of the koftgari is missing.

ariel · 18th January 2009, 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Battara

What a beautiful piece. Shame some of the koftgari is missing.

Like a loose woman's navel ( ahem...): got rubbed off due to heavy use

Please note the wootz: how many wootz Ottoman kilijes have you seen, folks?
That's what I call RARE!

Gonzalo G · 18th January 2009, 02:20 PM

!!Woww!!

Ilias: would you be so kind to provide us with some measures? One thing I never knew, is the thickness of the blade of this weapons at their base, not counting edge or T-spine. Is it heavy? Thank you for your attention.
Regards

Gonzalo

ilias · 18th January 2009, 03:26 PM

Thank you all for the good words you said about my sword.
Aslo Gonzalo about the mesurments I will provide them to you tomorrow but I can tell you right now the weight of the blade without the hilt and the guard.
It is 650 gr.Do you think it is light enough or not?

Dom · 18th January 2009, 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ilias

1.Can anyone translate the cartouch that it has?I know that this is difficult

sorry, but the last word resisted

may be some one else will complete ?

à +

Dom

Jeff D · 18th January 2009, 06:20 PM

Great piece!

Interestingly I see a mechanical pattern or even acid etched (proximal) as well as wootz. Do you see a faint weld line?

All the Best
Jeff

Atlantia · 18th January 2009, 06:47 PM

Beautiful! Wonderful!!!
BREATHTAKING!

ilias · 19th January 2009, 10:25 PM

Dear Dom .Thank's for the translation.I know it is difficult to find out what it says.
Gonzalo the thickness of the blade at the base is 5mm and at the middle 4mm
and the total length 87cm.I believe these are the mesurments you have asked me, if you want anything else I will be happy to help.
Best regards
Ilias

Gonzalo G · 20th January 2009, 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ilias

Thank you all for the good words you said about my sword.
Aslo Gonzalo about the mesurments I will provide them to you tomorrow but I can tell you right now the weight of the blade without the hilt and the guard.
It is 650 gr.Do you think it is light enough or not?

The hilt? Do you mean the wood slabs? Anyway, 650gr seems a very good weigh, I would say "light enough". I have suspected, or guessed, that somtimes the "T" spine is made on realtively thin blades, to give them more rigidity and less vibration, with less weight, but as I don´t have any "T" spined pieces I can´t make comparisons. Geometry and construction of the blades are a subject of my outmost interests, in antique and modern edged weapons. And photos rarely give idea of point of balance, weight, form of the edge and general measures, though some idea can be gotten. I belive this is an area relatively negleted on the description and study of antique weapons. I also suspect that the adornment of yataghans over the blade, made with brass or other metals, also helps to secure the handle and diminishes vibration on the moment of hitting it´s target, but I can´t be certain. Thank you for your attention.
Regards

Gonzalo

ingvar · 4th February 2009, 05:22 AM

one question. why people keep calling this "model" a pala. This is a 100% typical kilij.

maybe im wrong, but Pala (or persian name Gaddare) looked a bit different. there was several versions but the crossguard looked the same - bent in the direction of blade. Also most had the "anatomical" pommel, one like in the Karabela type.

katana · 4th February 2009, 02:22 PM

What a fantastic blade ....

Yustas · 4th February 2009, 04:05 PM

Ingvar, i agree.
This is typical Turkish kylych.
Pala is much more straight, and has cross guard bended to the front.
But is is beutifull kylych thaugh.

TVV · 4th February 2009, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yustas

Pala is much more straight, and has cross guard bended to the front.

Source please?

Yustas · 4th February 2009, 04:55 PM

http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Kilij

The kilij (also spelled kilic) is a sword used by the Ottoman Empire starting around the late 15th century. These blades were a distinct variation on the Turko-Mongol sabers that had been used over all the lands touched by the empire of the Kahns.

The oldest surviving examples sport a long blade with a gentle curve slightly more noticeable in the distal half. The width of the blade stays thin (with a slight taper) up until the last 30% of its length, at which point it flares deeper. This distinctive flaring tip is called a "yelman" which greatly adds to the cutting power of the sword. Swords of the next couple of centuries were mainly of the Persian shamshir variety; Persian blades (that did not have the yelman) were fitted with Ottoman hilts. These hilts normally had slightly larger upper guards, and sported a bobble of a end-grip compared to the parent shamshir. In the mid 18th century the kilij produced looked much more like the original design, though shorter, much more acutely curved, and sporting a deep blade with an even deeper yelman. In addition to the flared tip, these blades have a distinct "T-shaped" cross section to the back of the blade. This allows even greater strength and hence greater ability to cause grievous wounds when cleaving. The flared and 'cut away' profile of these thick blades gave it the archetypal 'Voyages of Sinbad' appearance. Some of these shorter Kilij are also referred to as "Pala" but there does not seem to be a clear cut distinction in naming.

Yustas · 4th February 2009, 05:04 PM

It mostly a matter a diferrentiation. Kilich - is a wider therm, and pala is more narrow.
Something like a sword and a saber.

TVV · 4th February 2009, 05:11 PM

Yustas, I have read the memoirs of Bulgarian revolutionaries during the 19th century, and in them they refer to the shorter, wider version of the kilidj from the early 19th century as "pala". Personally, I give more importance to contemporary accounts than to on-line encyclopedias.
You stated that the "pala" is straighter and has upward quillons. I am sure you have a reason for this statement, and my question was not intended as argumentative - I am always looking to learn.
Regards,
Teodor

Yustas · 4th February 2009, 05:18 PM

And again, in different countries, same word may mean different things.
Example - "harbuz" in Ukrainian means - pumpkin
"arbuz" in russian means watermenlon.
So close, but there is a difference.

TVV · 4th February 2009, 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yustas

And again, in different countries, same word may mean different things.
Example - "harbuz" in Ukrainian means - pumpkin
"arbuz" in russian means watermenlon.
So close, but there is a difference.

I completely agree that the etymology of weapons can be tricky, but you still have not answered my original question.

Yustas · 4th February 2009, 05:42 PM

I have no direct link or source at the time, but this is what i figured out by looking at different variation of Turkish swords on the web. The type that ingvar posted, or one of this kind :
http://picasaweb.google.com/yura.sor...84308894373554
was always referred as pala.

TVV · 4th February 2009, 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yustas

I have no direct link or source at the time, but this is what i figured out by looking at different variation of Turkish swords on the web. The type that ingvar posted, or one of this kind :
http://picasaweb.google.com/yura.sor...84308894373554
was always referred as pala.

Yustas, the sword in the link is a late 19th century Ottoman officer's military sword, and I think it might even be a regular pattern. Many of these swords were captured during the Russo-Turkish War of 1877-78, and even as late as the Balkan War. The guard shape was inspired by earlier forms, and artistically connected to the Revival going on in the Empire at the time - you can draw parallels to similar Revival pieces in Persia from the same period.

You state that "this kind ... was always referred as pala", and I just ask - by whom?

ingvar · 4th February 2009, 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TVV

Source please?

there are many things in history you cannot source. you know.

From what i read from a historian working in Kremlin's Historic Weaponry Room, Pala is a parade version of Klij, things that differ it from a basic Klij is a specific srossguard. Early Pala had a Karabella type pommel, later Pala had a typical bulbous turkish pommel.

In this case the sourse is book "Turkish Weapons" by E. Astvatsaurian.

TVV · 5th February 2009, 03:02 AM

I looked at Astvatsaturian's book and she does indeed use the word "pala" for some of the earlier swords, without giving any reason as to why. I have to say, in comparison to Elgood, she really gives few notes and contemporary accounts in her text. I also noted that the guard shape does not seem that important in her classification, as other sword with upturned quillons are called kilidj in her book.
I think Astvatsaturian is a great author, but we should be careful before we treat published works as Gospel. Another Russian author, Kulinskiy, refers to almost every German bayonet as a hirschfanger, and we know that in german the word was used to describe a completely different weapon, which he calls "hunting dagger" ("кортик").
Personally, I prefer to use weapon names as they were used by their original users, and from what I have read, the word pala was used in the Balkans to refer to a sword, much like the one in the opening post.
Regards,
Teodor

ingvar · 5th February 2009, 03:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TVV

"hunting dagger" ("кортик")

well "kortik" means "marine dirk", and was worn by the officers only.

But did ou look at her book, or read it?

TVV · 5th February 2009, 06:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ingvar

But did ou look at her book, or read it?

I can read Russian and yes, I read the part about the pala, at the beginning of the chapter on sabres, which was pretty short. The information is somewhat scarce - it seems that Astvatsaturian had a small sample of such swords to examine - 2 swords only, to be precise. The chapter makes no attempt at explaining the name "pala" or "gaddara", and it does not attempt to explore the history of the two swords. All this makes me believe that Astvatsaturian was all that familiar with this sword type herself.
Regards,
Teodor

ingvar · 5th February 2009, 04:22 PM

then, i suppose we've met an ancient "Saber vs Sabre" type of problem

17th January 2009, 05:20 PM	#1
ilias Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: GREECE Posts: 73	OTTOMAN PALA translation please Hi everyone.This is the ottoman pala that I have. I have some questions about it. 1.Can anyone translate the cartouch that it has?I know that this is difficult because the coftgari is worn out. 2.Is it wootz or something else? 3.Do you believe that the blade is ottoman or persian or ...... Thanks in advance Ilias Attached Images

17th January 2009, 05:22 PM	#2
ilias Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: GREECE Posts: 73	Just to add some more images Attached Images

4th February 2009, 05:22 AM	#12
ingvar Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 11	one question. why people keep calling this "model" a pala. This is a 100% typical kilij. maybe im wrong, but Pala (or persian name Gaddare) looked a bit different. there was several versions but the crossguard looked the same - bent in the direction of blade. Also most had the "anatomical" pommel, one like in the Karabela type. Attached Images

18th January 2009, 02:34 AM	#3
Battara EAAF Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Louisville, KY Posts: 7,139	What a beautiful piece. Shame some of the koftgari is missing.

18th January 2009, 02:20 PM	#5
Gonzalo G Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Nothern Mexico Posts: 458	!!Woww!! Ilias: would you be so kind to provide us with some measures? One thing I never knew, is the thickness of the blade of this weapons at their base, not counting edge or T-spine. Is it heavy? Thank you for your attention. Regards Gonzalo

18th January 2009, 03:26 PM	#6
ilias Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: GREECE Posts: 73	Thank you all for the good words you said about my sword. Aslo Gonzalo about the mesurments I will provide them to you tomorrow but I can tell you right now the weight of the blade without the hilt and the guard. It is 650 gr.Do you think it is light enough or not?

18th January 2009, 06:20 PM	#8
Jeff D Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: B.C. Canada Posts: 473	Great piece! Interestingly I see a mechanical pattern or even acid etched (proximal) as well as wootz. Do you see a faint weld line? All the Best Jeff

18th January 2009, 06:47 PM	#9
Atlantia Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: The Sharp end Posts: 2,928	Beautiful! Wonderful!!! BREATHTAKING!

19th January 2009, 10:25 PM	#10
ilias Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: GREECE Posts: 73	Dear Dom .Thank's for the translation.I know it is difficult to find out what it says. Gonzalo the thickness of the blade at the base is 5mm and at the middle 4mm and the total length 87cm.I believe these are the mesurments you have asked me, if you want anything else I will be happy to help. Best regards Ilias

4th February 2009, 02:22 PM	#13
katana Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Kent Posts: 2,653	What a fantastic blade ....

4th February 2009, 04:05 PM	#14
Yustas Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 40	Ingvar, i agree. This is typical Turkish kylych. Pala is much more straight, and has cross guard bended to the front. But is is beutifull kylych thaugh.

4th February 2009, 04:55 PM	#16
Yustas Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 40	http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Kilij The kilij (also spelled kilic) is a sword used by the Ottoman Empire starting around the late 15th century. These blades were a distinct variation on the Turko-Mongol sabers that had been used over all the lands touched by the empire of the Kahns. The oldest surviving examples sport a long blade with a gentle curve slightly more noticeable in the distal half. The width of the blade stays thin (with a slight taper) up until the last 30% of its length, at which point it flares deeper. This distinctive flaring tip is called a "yelman" which greatly adds to the cutting power of the sword. Swords of the next couple of centuries were mainly of the Persian shamshir variety; Persian blades (that did not have the yelman) were fitted with Ottoman hilts. These hilts normally had slightly larger upper guards, and sported a bobble of a end-grip compared to the parent shamshir. In the mid 18th century the kilij produced looked much more like the original design, though shorter, much more acutely curved, and sporting a deep blade with an even deeper yelman. In addition to the flared tip, these blades have a distinct "T-shaped" cross section to the back of the blade. This allows even greater strength and hence greater ability to cause grievous wounds when cleaving. The flared and 'cut away' profile of these thick blades gave it the archetypal 'Voyages of Sinbad' appearance. Some of these shorter Kilij are also referred to as "Pala"* but there does not seem to be a clear cut distinction in naming.*

4th February 2009, 05:04 PM	#17
Yustas Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 40	It mostly a matter a diferrentiation. Kilich - is a wider therm, and pala is more narrow. Something like a sword and a saber.

4th February 2009, 05:11 PM	#18
TVV Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Bay Area Posts: 1,597	Yustas, I have read the memoirs of Bulgarian revolutionaries during the 19th century, and in them they refer to the shorter, wider version of the kilidj from the early 19th century as "pala". Personally, I give more importance to contemporary accounts than to on-line encyclopedias. You stated that the "pala" is straighter and has upward quillons. I am sure you have a reason for this statement, and my question was not intended as argumentative - I am always looking to learn. Regards, Teodor

4th February 2009, 05:18 PM	#19
Yustas Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 40	And again, in different countries, same word may mean different things. Example - "harbuz" in Ukrainian means - pumpkin "arbuz" in russian means watermenlon. So close, but there is a difference.

4th February 2009, 05:42 PM	#21
Yustas Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 40	I have no direct link or source at the time, but this is what i figured out by looking at different variation of Turkish swords on the web. The type that ingvar posted, or one of this kind : http://picasaweb.google.com/yura.sor...84308894373554 was always referred as pala.

5th February 2009, 03:02 AM	#24
TVV Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Bay Area Posts: 1,597	I looked at Astvatsaturian's book and she does indeed use the word "pala" for some of the earlier swords, without giving any reason as to why. I have to say, in comparison to Elgood, she really gives few notes and contemporary accounts in her text. I also noted that the guard shape does not seem that important in her classification, as other sword with upturned quillons are called kilidj in her book. I think Astvatsaturian is a great author, but we should be careful before we treat published works as Gospel. Another Russian author, Kulinskiy, refers to almost every German bayonet as a hirschfanger, and we know that in german the word was used to describe a completely different weapon, which he calls "hunting dagger" ("кортик"). Personally, I prefer to use weapon names as they were used by their original users, and from what I have read, the word pala was used in the Balkans to refer to a sword, much like the one in the opening post. Regards, Teodor

5th February 2009, 04:22 PM	#27
ingvar Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 11	then, i suppose we've met an ancient "Saber vs Sabre" type of problem