Afghan shashkas

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by carlos

This piece was bought diretly in Kabul.

Wow! that was quick!
I like the work in the scabbard fittings, and it seems openwork was very much favored in Afghan weaponry.
Thanks very much Carlos.

[CharlesS]

I am delighted to see these swords getting some attention on the forum! I have been a fan of them for some time, though I realize they fall into the strange collecting category of "rare but not highly sought after". Perhaps it's because Caucasian shashkas are more "blingy" and found in greater numbers.

I have handled about 5 of these including my two shown, and they may vary in length and blade type, but are generally always heavier than the Caucasian shashka.

My two are both quite heavy even to the point of becoming somewhat cumbersome to handle. The hilt styles are the same with simple riveted-through scales. The blades are not particularly well forged. Note that forging flaws abound on the larger example even to the point of partially ruining the chiseled panels at the forte.

Those panels are reminiscent of Persian style cartouches but are actually far cruder by comparison.

Each sword has some form of arsenal mark. The larger one has it chiseled into the forte panel on one side. The smaller example has it inlaid in gold on one side with an Arabic inscription I have not had translated.

Even with some faults, these versions are certainly unique, worth appreciating, and as far as I know, this style is unique to Afghanistan.

[ariel]

Charles,
I am uneasy with the definition of marks as " arsenal" ones. Those were embossed stamps.
Yours are way more interesting: they look like private purchase. There are so many varieties of them, it is almost inavoidable to conclude that all ( or most) of them were made in different workshops.
The " golden" one has a date: 126? ( can't figure the last numeral).
If Hijra, it would be somewhere between 1844-52.
If Jalali, - 1881-90.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Carlos,

Seems to me the end of the scabbard was broken and a brass chape was added to fix the damage. That's why the scabbard looks much longer than the blade.

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by CharlesS

I am delighted to see these swords getting some attention on the forum! I have been a fan of them for some time, though I realize they fall into the strange collecting category of "rare but not highly sought after". Perhaps it's because Caucasian shashkas are more "blingy" and found in greater numbers.

I have handled about 5 of these including my two shown, and they may vary in length and blade type, but are generally always heavier than the Caucasian shashka.

My two are both quite heavy even to the point of becoming somewhat cumbersome to handle. The hilt styles are the same with simple riveted-through scales. The blades are not particularly well forged. Note that forging flaws abound on the larger example even to the point of partially ruining the chiseled panels at the forte.

Those panels are reminiscent of Persian style cartouches but are actually far cruder by comparison.

Each sword has some form of arsenal mark. The larger one has it chiseled into the forte panel on one side. The smaller example has it inlaid in gold on one side with an Arabic inscription I have not had translated.

Even with some faults, these versions are certainly unique, worth appreciating, and as far as I know, this style is unique to Afghanistan.

Charles, very good shashkas. Thank you! The shashka with a black handle has a blade with an arsenal stamp. Engraving was done later. By the way, it seems to me that the bolster has been repaired. A shashka with a white handle is most likely a private order, which was carried out by the master not from the arsenal. But, I would suggest that this white-handed checker belonged to the officer who ordered the decoration in gold. But this is just my guess.

[mahratt]

My favorite Afghan shashka. It is made by the private master and does not have any stamps of an arsenal (factory). But I really like her beautiful Persian blade from wootz steel.

[CharlesS]

Mahratt,

This is the nicest one I have seen. It looks to be a Persian mid-19th-century shamshir trade blade(with "AssadAllah" workshop marks and cartouche) made into a shashka. I love it... beautiful quality from top to bottom!

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by CharlesS

Mahratt,

This is the nicest one I have seen. It looks to be a Persian mid-19th-century shamshir trade blade(with "AssadAllah" workshop marks and cartouche) made into a shashka. I love it... beautiful quality from top to bottom!

Yes Charles
I agree with you. This is the nicest one I have seen.

[CharlesS]

Have you translated the stylized Arabic on the scabbard mounts? Do you think the scabbard is a converted Afghan shamshir scabbard, or "born with" this sword??

[kwiatek]

Originally Posted by CharlesS

I am delighted to see these swords getting some attention on the forum! I have been a fan of them for some time, though I realize they fall into the strange collecting category of "rare but not highly sought after". Perhaps it's because Caucasian shashkas are more "blingy" and found in greater numbers.

I have handled about 5 of these including my two shown, and they may vary in length and blade type, but are generally always heavier than the Caucasian shashka.

My two are both quite heavy even to the point of becoming somewhat cumbersome to handle. The hilt styles are the same with simple riveted-through scales. The blades are not particularly well forged. Note that forging flaws abound on the larger example even to the point of partially ruining the chiseled panels at the forte.

Those panels are reminiscent of Persian style cartouches but are actually far cruder by comparison.

Each sword has some form of arsenal mark. The larger one has it chiseled into the forte panel on one side. The smaller example has it inlaid in gold on one side with an Arabic inscription I have not had translated.

Even with some faults, these versions are certainly unique, worth appreciating, and as far as I know, this style is unique to Afghanistan.

The inscription on the blade says:

عمل فقیر حسین (۰)١٢٦

‘amal-i faqir husayn 126(0)

“Work of Poor Husayn, 126(0) (1844-45)”

[Kubur]

Originally Posted by kwiatek

The inscription on the blade says:

عمل فقیر حسین (۰)١٢٦

‘amal-i faqir husayn 126(0)

“Work of Poor Husayn, 126(0) (1844-45)”

Your translations are amazing, thank you, for the Tunisian daggers too.
Question: are you sure that it is Poor and not Husayn the sufi?

[Sakalord364]

Originally Posted by CharlesS

I am delighted to see these swords getting some attention on the forum! I have been a fan of them for some time, though I realize they fall into the strange collecting category of "rare but not highly sought after". Perhaps it's because Caucasian shashkas are more "blingy" and found in greater numbers.

I have handled about 5 of these including my two shown, and they may vary in length and blade type, but are generally always heavier than the Caucasian shashka.

My two are both quite heavy even to the point of becoming somewhat cumbersome to handle. The hilt styles are the same with simple riveted-through scales. The blades are not particularly well forged. Note that forging flaws abound on the larger example even to the point of partially ruining the chiseled panels at the forte.

Those panels are reminiscent of Persian style cartouches but are actually far cruder by comparison.

Each sword has some form of arsenal mark. The larger one has it chiseled into the forte panel on one side. The smaller example has it inlaid in gold on one side with an Arabic inscription I have not had translated.

Even with some faults, these versions are certainly unique, worth appreciating, and as far as I know, this style is unique to Afghanistan.

Interesting you mention they seem to be overweight, now I’m assuming afghans had access to original shashkas when they first started making these afghan style shashkas, and shashkas are known for their lightness. Perhaps in afghan doctrine cavalrymen used heavy swords? Or perhaps all cavalrymen in general prefer heavy swords?