Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Ethnographic Weapons
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 18th February 2007, 02:35 AM   #1
Pukka Bundook
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 803
Default

Jim,
Re. the backwards 'N', I was looking at a rather nice Italian 18th century flint sporting gun recently, the lock was signed, And the 'N' was backwards!

Sooo, room for thought......
Pukka Bundook is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th February 2007, 04:19 AM   #2
BSMStar
Member
 
BSMStar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Kansas City, MO USA
Posts: 312
Default

Jim, there is no reason to apologize… your points are well taken and I was just following up on them. My theory is no more correct than any other… I just chose to follow the three clues, 1. the location, 2. the language, and 3.the historical context… but my ideas are still just a theory.

Best regards,

Wayne
BSMStar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th February 2007, 12:06 AM   #3
ariel
Member
 
ariel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
Default

Wayne,
With all due respect, I can assure you with a 100% certainty that the inscription has nothing to do with Russian. This is a classic mis-representation of the Latin N, not Russian I. It is seen routinely on a multitude of Oriental blades attempting to imitate European origin. There is no place named Saiol in Russia to start with; there is Saiol in Spain and Sayol in Iran. Neither of these places are known for using Cyrillic. There is no word or name Saiol in Russian.
Furthermore, before 1918, any Russian word ending with a consonant had an additional letter Yat after the final consonant. You can see it here
http://www.omniglot.com/writing/cyrillic.htm
marked in red.
The presumed "Saiol" does not have it.
Please, can we consider it as an end of story?
ariel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th February 2007, 01:11 PM   #4
BSMStar
Member
 
BSMStar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Kansas City, MO USA
Posts: 312
Default

Ariel,

I would total agree with you, except for the glaring letter lambda at the end of the word (it is not the letter A). Look at your link (look at the 10th century version letter L – I have seen this version of the letter L in WWII Soviet Documents). If we were just debating the Cyrillic “и,” then I would have to agree with you… but where are we seeing the letter A? It may be your opinion that this is not Cyrillic. For me, being a Soviet period collector, all of the letters fall in line with being Cyrillic. Jim has placed the sword in what would be the Russian empire… of course; then again you may be right… Seiol (сеиол) = Genoa (геноа). I will assume that you are the expert and that you are correct. I apology for voicing another option. Consider it the end of the story.
BSMStar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th February 2007, 03:20 PM   #5
Jim McDougall
Arms Historian
 
Jim McDougall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,595
Default

BSMstar,
Please try to understand...I am NOT placing this sword in the Russian empire, or anywhere other than the Maghreb!
What I have said is that the markings and motif appear to be 'native' attempts at duplicating the motif from blades I have seen from the Caucusus. I was noting that this suggested that the armourer IN THE MAGHREB who was working on this blade appeared to have knowledge of these Caucasian blades.
This was what was meant by 'wild goose chase' as you were pursuing this sword coming FROM the Caucusus, which it clearly is not.

I hope this will place this line of discussion back on the right track.

The discussion of Russian letters pertaining to this sword is desperately moot.

All the best,
Jim
Jim McDougall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th February 2007, 07:13 PM   #6
BSMStar
Member
 
BSMStar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Kansas City, MO USA
Posts: 312
Default

My apologies Jim,

I was thinking a bit out loud, me thinks… I do not think the sword was made in Russia, I think this trade sword could have made its way in that direction. With the possible influences that you pointed out, I was trying to point out another possible “influence.” While the stamped letters could be anything or nothing… I was entertaining the notion that it could be something along that line of reasoning. When adding the clues, I vocalize your meaning more strongly than intended... again I apologize.


Ariel,

I am only stating an opinion that may have some validity (I have not said that anyone else is wrong)… if you believe that it is unlikely… I do not have a problem with that. Just give some supporting data that disproves my theory that these are Cyrillic letters. I would hate to dismiss outright, what may be a more interesting history with this sword.

To definitively prove the letters are not Cyrillic, one must know the history behind this specific sword (have a traceable and documented record of who has owned this sword and where they lived would leave no doubt).

Were North African trade swords being stamped with Cyrillic letters (out of North Africa)? If so, what test can one use to tell the difference North African Cyrillic like letters and true Cyrillic letters (how do we know that they did not travel to Russia where there is a large number of Islamic countries/states)?

Maybe if someone could post other examples of this exact stamp (that are known), since I am not familiar with this stamp being a common old “forgery.”

Best regards,

Wayne
BSMStar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th February 2007, 01:48 AM   #7
ariel
Member
 
ariel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
Default

Wayne,
I appreciate your inquisitiveness, but this is not Cyrillic: just a poor and worn out G that looks like C and A that lost (or never had) a horizontal bar. Not a Cyrillic L. And, please, remember the absolute need for a letter Yat (see my earlier post) that is not there. It is like a famous dog: the absense of barking was the decisive evidence...
Genoese blades were very popular in North Africa. Moroccans even had a straight-bladed Koummya named Genoui ( or Janwi, depending on transliteration) meaning "Genoese"
What you got here is a classic Moroccan Nimcha (or Saif, if one prefers it) with a Genoese or pseudo-Genoese blade . Many of those were made in Germany or Styria and just marked Genoa to uphold the tradition and the value: market analysis was used even then! Yes, shashka blades marked Genoa were made in Circassia and marked as such. But the blade of the Nimcha in question has nothing to do with shashkas: it has a vestigial Yelman, "Indian" ricasso ( most likely an imitation of European military sabers) and a single, centrally-located, narrowish and deep fuller. None of those are features of a Circassian or any other Caucasian or Transcaucasian shashka. We do not need to know the history of this particular sword: the blade tells us the entire story.
There were Caucasian blades in Arabia proper and you can see 2 here:
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=4137
See the difference?
I have a Nimcha with an old blade marked (very illegibly) O N I N I and sporting the markings of "eyelashes".
The bottom line: nice Moroccan Nimcha, definitely not a "clunker', but nothing unusual about it. Born and bred in North Africa

Last edited by ariel; 20th February 2007 at 01:59 AM.
ariel is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.