![]()  | 
	
| 
			
			 | 
		#19 | 
| 
			
			 Member 
			
			
			
				
			
			Join Date: Jan 2006 
				
				
				
					Posts: 936
				 
				
				
				
				
				 | 
	
	
	
		
		
			
			 
			
			I also like the blade and wootz pattern. 
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
	I agree with RSWORD that it's an earlier blade. My only comment is that I do not see it as "earliy kilij form", if by "early" one meant pre-18th Century. To me, this particular "yelman" looks more like a false edge, which could have been added/filed later. The "early" blades with yelmans of that form appear around 16th C, and this one does not look that old ![]() I'd not call both swords A.alnakkas shows as Kilijes.  | 
| 
		 | 
	
	
	
		
		
		
		
			 
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
			
		
		
		
	 | 
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread | 
| Display Modes | |
		
  | 
	
		
  |