New Kilij

ariel · 20th June 2005, 05:40 PM

I completely agree with Yannis: this is an Ottoman one. The bulbous "pistol" handle and the slit in the scabbard are unmistakeable.
However, Ottoman doesn't mean Turkish: the Empire included the entire Middle East, Egypt (albeit nominally), the Balkans etc. Thus, while the overall style is unquestionably "Ottoman", this sword could have come from rather unexpected places. That is where the question of decorations of the scabbard becomes important.
The blade could have been locally-made or imported from Iran (despite being official enemies, the two empires traded with each other quite extensively, including wepons). Thus, it may be of inferior "localizing" quality than the decorations that were made by a master using peculiarly-national patterns.

20th June 2005, 05:40 PM	#21
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	I completely agree with Yannis: this is an Ottoman one. The bulbous "pistol" handle and the slit in the scabbard are unmistakeable. However, Ottoman doesn't mean Turkish: the Empire included the entire Middle East, Egypt (albeit nominally), the Balkans etc. Thus, while the overall style is unquestionably "Ottoman", this sword could have come from rather unexpected places. That is where the question of decorations of the scabbard becomes important. The blade could have been locally-made or imported from Iran (despite being official enemies, the two empires traded with each other quite extensively, including wepons). Thus, it may be of inferior "localizing" quality than the decorations that were made by a master using peculiarly-national patterns.