![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Virginia
Posts: 539
|
![]()
Hello Artzi,
Have located 30-40 kilij sword with long inscriptions on the blade, the majority of these were done with the square kufic calligraphy. Most are not dated but some also have the name of the current ownt and when Sultan or Shah the time period of that hilting can be established. The blades that a date can be determined are from early 16th century to the 19th century, with the majorty usung the suare kufic script. This yataghan form a private collection I have permission to show: http://turkishyatghan2.blogspot.com/ The gold is inlay, believe it to be with the Turkish techinque of a triangular punch overlay and then the gold applied. The calligraphy has a similar vertical line, also the slanted accent marks, but no diamond shaped dots. Your kilij's calligraphy had the diamond shaped dots. So we have similarities and dis-similarities between these two examples. Look carefully at the signature on the yataghan... The great majority of calligraphy I find on 16th century Turkisih kilijs has the square kufic script. rand |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Virginia
Posts: 539
|
![]()
Here is a known 16th century example from Topkapi....
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Paris (FR*) Cairo (EG)
Posts: 1,142
|
![]() Quote:
the problem of Topkapi identification for what ever they show in display, is subject at a lot of suspicions ![]() when you see for instance; - the wooden stick from Moïse, used by him to create miracles ... ![]() - the wooden soup ban from Ibrahim (Abraham) ![]() I doubt about their ability or their volontary to be correct ... again 2 days ago (I still yet be in Istanbul) visited the Topkapi for the 4th time, I was perplexed front to some identifications ![]() à + Dom |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
|
![]()
Well, the items you describe, just like some other objects allegedly belonging to Mohammed are strictly religious artifacts and as such are beyond any fruitful discussion.
This does not mean that many other objects ( swords included) related to the merely mortals are misidentified to a degree greater than in many ( if not all) other major museums. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|