The Sword of Osman was an important sword of state used during the enthronement ceremony of the sultans of the Ottoman Empire. The sword was named after.
Table of contents
Of course I would be more than happy to receive a translation and, also important, a hint how to place the photos properly.
Sword of Osman
On the right photo the blade edge is on the lower side, so we thought it would be correct. Thank you in advance for any help. Best regards; Hermann aka Jerry. Join Date Aug Posts 1, Hi Jerry, Some Persian hilts have quillions like a Pulowar, but the 'pommel' end is more like a Shamshir, is that what you mean?
Join Date Aug Posts May I ask about the historical background of this sword? Orientalism is thus a style of thought based upon an ontological and epistemological distinction made between the Orient and the Occident. It is a Western style of dominating, restructuring and building hegemony over the Orient. No worries Jerry, Its just more fun to see the full sword When will the book be released?
I managed to translate the right picture, the squares are the same word repeated, its Rooh in arabic which means spirit can also symbolise the angel gabriel. Atleast to an arab, not sure about persians the verse is a Quranic verse; Here it is: Hi Gene, yes, exactly thats what it is. Hello Sancar, yes, Suleiman the Lawgiver, the Magnificient. Gentlemen, thank you very much for your kind help. It is always a pleasure to correspond with people having knowledge about our beloved edged weapons. Thank you for that. We have another juvenile delinquent we can't answer to.
About Korea
It's a German crusader sword from the 13th Century, captured probably by Mameluck warriors. They continued to use it as a weapon and stored it in Alexandria. We are not able to read this inscription. So maybe one of the fellow members here can provide us with an answer. Because of the book we will be happy to post and advertise it on this forum, the release of the book will be in Winter Thank you so much for your kind help! Originally Posted by Jerry H.
If it would be the one, I could come probably in legal trouble, if not, my answer wouldn't be of any help regarding to the translation I have asked for. So this is a cul-de-sac for me. What I can say is, that even from that pic the hilt looks close to the one I have in mind. Sancer, you have allready helped me with swords, so forgive If I appear ungrateful, it is definitely not my intention. Kindest regards; Hermann aka Jerry.
Sword engraving on a sword of Suleiman I
Don't worry about it Jerry. I understand completely The reason I asked is because some of the blades from that era were rehilted later. And that type of "C" guards are popular in the 18th century. Another detail is, some swords were presented to sultan as heirloom or gifts from other countries. New inscriptions are written to these swords also. That can be misleading when you try to identify sword's origin and age.
A sword that was identified as beloning to Suleiman I might actually be a much older sword from Iran, India or Mamluk. Think of a hypothetical 15th century tulwar, sent to Ottoman sultan as a gift in 17th century and rehilted in late 18th century. This kilij in picture I sent earlier is one of two famous swords that belongs to Kanuni Suleiman Khan. It is presented in the lobby of Chief of General Staff of Turkish army's office. It is a Turkish kilij but I suspect it to be rehilted at a later date. There are two verses of a poem inscribed to the blade, which very roughly translated as: Kanuni's second famous kilij is this one: This one has a hilt and a cross-guard contemporary to Kanuni's era.
Ottoman weapons
Dear Sancar, thanks again for your understanding. That makes a valuable and important point. Yes, we have thought about this. When I had this one in my hand it seemed to me that the quillon to tang fit is nearly perfect and seamless, but you're right, adding a new hilt happened very often. We are in the process of finalizing the entire book. It would be a pleasure for me to introduce the book here on the forum asap in a different post. These weapons were effective against armored troops, and typically were smooth or had flanges or blades protruding from the top of the weapon.
The start of the use of artillery in the Ottoman Army is not very definite. One of the arguments is that the Ottomans used cannons in the Battles of Kosovo and Nukap and most certainly by the s. The Balkans was used by the Ottomans as both a human and technical source concerning the advancement and the use of their artillery pieces. In the siege of Baghdad where the Ottomans retook the city from the Persians , gunners of European descent served on the lines.
The table below gives us a clear view of the trends. To add to this the 16th century brought the latest technical advancements in gun making to the Ottomans; in the form of Jews fleeing from the Spanish Inquisition. Archival evidence supports the notion that the Ottoman artillery was famous for the size of its cannon, and their number; from the highly mobile antipersonnel Abus gun to the massive Great Turkish Bombard. These bombards were a product of specialised study in the production of 'giant guns' known literally as castle smashers 'kale-kob'.
Although such weapons being primarily used in sieges; where they were cast on site due to the logistical difficulties attributed to transport them there, they were used as late as when massive stone-firing guns were used with some effect against British ships during the Dardanelles Operation , throwing pound marble with a range of 1 mile.
Accuracy was achieved by using wadded shots wrapped in sheepskin with ready-measured stacks of powder. Unlike the European powder, the Ottoman powder is thought to be better for upon firing; it produced white smoke rather than black smoke. The most famous battle in which these bronze 'bombards' were used is at the siege of Constantinople in The bombards weighed 19 tons, took men and sixty oxen to emplace, and could fire just seven times a day. The Fall of Constantinople was perhaps "the first event of supreme importance whose result was determined by the use of artillery", when the huge bronze cannons of Mehmed II breached the city's walls, ending the Byzantine Empire , according to Sir Charles Oman.
The most commonly used gun is known as a battering gun darbzen. This gun fired 0. These guns were used more in fortresses as the emphasis was given to small to medium-calibre guns.
Small-calibre bronze pieces were also used on galleons and river boats; they weighed between 3. However, most riverboats had an armoury of cast-iron guns which fired 0. The transportation of just two bombards proved to be a logistically challenging task. They were dragged to the Fall of Constantinople by 70 oxen and men. The casting of these bombards are described by Kritoboulos He describes the clay mould and the core which was strengthened by iron, wood, earth and stone.
Logs of wood along with charcoal are placed inside the furnace and all the holes except the tapping channels are closed. Then bellows are put to work until the metal inside is in a fluid state. The liquid bronze is then poured into the clay mould where it is then chiseled and polished.