|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Jan 27, 2018 0:10:43 GMT
History.  In the late 1870s, Nasir al-Din Shah, after a trip seeing southern Russia and seeing the Cossack Brigades of the Caucuses, returned to Persia and set about the creation of his "Cossack Brigades", sending a request to Tsar Alexander II, and requesting military advisors to lead and train his new cavalry force. Not coincidentally, at this time the Shah’s royal cavalry was in a very poor state, being described as having no training or discipline, and had been defeated by the British Empire in previous wars, and was now even seeing significant difficulties when fighting against the Turcoman nomads. The Qajar state, after fighting wars external and internal was completely weakened, and lacked any professional military forces. Thus, Tsar Alexander II approved Russian military advisors travelling to Persia to fulfill the Shah’s request. The brigade was then formed in 1879 by Lieutenant-Colonel Domantovich, a Russian officer. The unit would go on to become the Qajar state's most prestigious fighting force, even though it almost dissolved in 1895 due to budget cuts, disease, a mutiny, and saw service from 1879 to 1921, fighting in multiple engagements such as the 1908 bombardment of the Majlis, Defeating the Khiabani's uprising, Suppression of Pessian's revolt, and saw the end of their service after the Campaign on the Jungle Movement. Now that the essays over let's get on to the fun part. 》Hilt《 The hilt is comprised of 5 parts, these being the guard, the top bolster, grip, bottom bolster and pommel cap, and a small washer that the peen sits on. The grip is a hardwood, with ribs running down slanted on both sides, and then a single rib running vertically down the front and back of the grip. The outer grip measures 5 and 1/4 inches without counting the pommel cap, (5 and 5/8ths inches counting the pommel cap) and the inside of the grip measures at 4 and 3/8ths inches. While this may seem cramped on paper, It is remarkably comfortable to grip and handle in the open handed position. There is enough room to slide the back of the hand down, and the long upper bolster crates a nice space between the thumb and top of the guard. The ribbing on the grip provides nice traction, and is quite pretty to boot. The wooden grip measures in at 3 and 3/8ths inches, and the top bolster measures in at 11/16ths inches from top to bottom, while the bottom bolster (near the pommel) has an arc, the apex measuring in at 1 1/8ths inches from top to bottom, and slants down to 11/16ths inches top to bottom. The grip is a nice thin oval shape. Measuring from the center of the grip to the center of the knucklebow, there is 1.5 inches of space, with the measures of the bolster near the pommel cap coming in at 1 2/8ths space from the bow, and the bolster near the guard measuring in at 1 inch. The bolster near the guard measures a flat 11/6ths inches from top to bottom, while the bolster near the pommel cap has tapers towards the edge side of the grip, going from 1 1/8ths inches at the rear. to 11/16ths at the front. 《Scabbard》 The scabbard is a typical steel military scabbard, with a solid drag and a single ring. This scabbard was blackened sometime in its service life. Not much to say here other than that it holds the sword just fine. The scabbard and sword together weigh in at 3 pounds 3.2 ounces. 《Blade》 The blade is an honest thing, if a bit thin. It starts out at 5mm at the base, proceeds to 3.9mm at the center, and ends at 3mm at 1 inch from the tip. There is a shallow but broad fuller running for most of the blades length, starting at 11/16ths inches from the guard and ending at 5.75 inches from the tip. The tip itself is a strange thing, as it is like a butter knife. Not very acute at all, however it does have a bevel for a second false edge that extends 3.5 inches down the back of the blade. No doubt this was engineered to cut, with little love shown to the thrust. The sword weighs in at 1 pound and 13.5 ounces, and has a surprising 7 inch PoB. Despite sounding very bad on paper, this translates to a very lively and light feeling yet authoritative sword in this particular case. It moves easily from guard to cut, and back to guard, while retaining the feel of a very unambiguous cutting blade, but without feeling like a percussive striking sword. Overall I like it, it feel really nice in the hand, it handles sabre drill nicely, and the swords have quite a bit of history in and of themselves. (no cutting with this one as it's listed on good 'ol fleabay, gotta make room and free up some funds) Relevant PDF on a Russian officer within the Brigade. www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=10&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwj6lYPA6_bYAhUL6GMKHTxlA-AQFghXMAk&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.etd.ceu.hu%2F2014%2Fbabich_pavel.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0saVtLHBxBroRcF033aDGEPictures               |
|
|
|
Post by Pino on Jan 27, 2018 4:08:38 GMT
Very nice article!! I remember I hated this type of sword because I thought it was too heavy and awkwardly balanced for a ''shashka'' (because of the alleged super light weight) but it turns out the Russian military shashkas (both dragoon and cossack) were as heavy as this model!
So overall it is a decent cavalry sword, reminds me a bit of some German models.
Again, nice write-up!
|
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Jan 27, 2018 6:09:34 GMT
Very nice article!! I remember I hated this type of sword because I thought it was too heavy and awkwardly balanced for a ''shashka'' (because of the alleged super light weight) but it turns out the Russian military shashkas (both dragoon and cossack) were as heavy as this model! So overall it is a decent cavalry sword, reminds me a bit of some German models. Again, nice write-up! Thanks! And I guess handling truly is subjective then, but then again I also enjoyed the Spanish M1895, which speaks for itself haha. |
|
|
|
Post by elbrittania39 on Jan 27, 2018 7:01:37 GMT
Thanks for the review! Lovely swords, I love the simple D guard and rustic ascetic. Maybe I'll pick one of these up someday.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Jan 27, 2018 7:09:53 GMT
Thanks for the review! Lovely swords, I love the simple D guard and rustic ascetic. Maybe I'll pick one of these up someday. The Russian look but without the Russian premium  Well aside from the steel scabbard. Only getting more expensive, I remember these were pretty cheap, like sub 200 when I started out. Just the like the damn M1895. Used to go for 90 to 120 and now they average like 150 for an okay one. |
|
|
|
Post by elbrittania39 on Jan 27, 2018 7:54:44 GMT
Thanks for the review! Lovely swords, I love the simple D guard and rustic ascetic. Maybe I'll pick one of these up someday. The Russian look but without the Russian premium Well aside from the steel scabbard. Only getting more expensive, I remember these were pretty cheap, like sub 200 when I started out. Just the like the damn M1895. Used to go for 90 to 120 and now they average like 150 for an okay one. I haven't been buying long enough to know, have the price of most antiques gone up recently or just those few? |
|
|
|
Post by Dave Kelly on Jan 27, 2018 12:31:55 GMT
The Russian look but without the Russian premium :) Well aside from the steel scabbard. Only getting more expensive, I remember these were pretty cheap, like sub 200 when I started out. Just the like the damn M1895. Used to go for 90 to 120 and now they average like 150 for an okay one. I haven't been buying long enough to know, have the price of most antiques gone up recently or just those few? You've got in the game about 4 years too late. The supply of swords seems to have fallen off, thus prices have been creeping up. Auction houses seem to stay busy, but they charge even more for their stuff. ( Auction bids that you hear are what the seller gets. You have to add the house percentage and S&H costs on to that.) |
|
|
|
Post by MOK on Jan 27, 2018 12:44:58 GMT
This exact model of saber was also used here in Finland, although up here the scabbards were mostly leather covered wood with brass throat, chape and suspension ring. I have access to one stamped 1917 and 1918 that belonged to a dragoon regiment in southern Finland and shows signs of both damage from use (shallow dents and general roughness in the edge at the forte from parrying another blade, and a couple of sharper and deeper nicks at the foible where it was in turn parried) as well as dutiful maintenance. It's quite a lovely fighting weapon, IMO! A handy size for use on both horse and foot, good balance, a comfortable and secure grip, and a convenient to wear hilt design that still provides a little protection. And it really isn't heavy or awkward at all, at least when compared to other actual military sabers (fencing foils might be a different matter  ). |
|
pgandy
Moderator
Senior Forumite
Posts: 10,296
|
Post by pgandy on Jan 27, 2018 19:19:30 GMT
Thanks for the review.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Jan 27, 2018 22:43:15 GMT
pgandy thanks! It was fun writing it. This exact model of saber was also used here in Finland, although up here the scabbards were mostly leather covered wood with brass throat, chape and suspension ring. I have access to one stamped 1917 and 1918 that belonged to a dragoon regiment in southern Finland and shows signs of both damage from use (shallow dents and general roughness in the edge at the forte from parrying another blade, and a couple of sharper and deeper nicks at the foible where it was in turn parried) as well as dutiful maintenance. It's quite a lovely fighting weapon, IMO! A handy size for use on both horse and foot, good balance, a comfortable and secure grip, and a convenient to wear hilt design that still provides a little protection. And it really isn't heavy or awkward at all, at least when compared to other actual military sabers (fencing foils might be a different matter ). That's really interesting, I've never even heard of the Finnish usage of them. Are they rare to find in Finland?
|
|
|
|
Post by MOK on Jan 27, 2018 23:24:27 GMT
That's really interesting, I've never even heard of the Finnish usage of them. Are they rare to find in Finland? Well, not hugely so; these (or identical models by another designation) were in common enough use by Imperial Russian forces, and Finland was part of Russia until December 6, 1917 (so the dates on that particular sword I mentioned are... interesting.) Not as common as the very similar M1881, or the modified French M1822 cavalry sabers we procured after WWI, but I see them on auction sites and in antiques stores now and then, usually going for 300-500€ depending on condition. PS. In fact, given the inevitable variation in details and workmanship between the various manufacturers, I'm not entirely sure if there is any material difference between the M1881 and M1909 pattern(s), aside from the style of scabbard they seem to have come with... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2018 23:57:54 GMT
I have always felt these would be a great usable start for collectors beginning the antique trail. More economical (most of the time) than even the Japanese 92 cavalry swords. There was a similar write up way back on the old board with much the same interesting historical background.
I am a little surprised at how hefty the foible reads but that's probably a good thing. Most thinking of the term shaska always seem to think of the examples with no knuckle bow, or even know the earlier Russian designation. For such a short longevity, it sure does seem like a large passel of them made it to the US after the Gulf War.
I'm afraid I'm in a no cut fly zone these days but they would probably do well on a dealer's table. I have to start doing more events to move stuff. I'm surprised your's wouldn't sell here, as it seems an ideal audience.
Good luck with the sale.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Jan 29, 2018 22:41:20 GMT
Yeah, the old write up was actually what prompted me to get this actually. I'd agree as far as saying it's a good starter sabre, budget friendly and still a very nice example of military sabres. Also not bad to look up.
Thanks for the responses all.
Also, I've put this in the classifieds. EBay buyer backed out, in a way.
|
|
|
|
Post by likehotbutter on Jan 31, 2018 10:39:04 GMT
I wonder if they were made in the same factories as the Imperial versions. The ricassos on the Iranian versions are huge
Also note the proportion of the false edge in relation to the tip. That's one good way to tell an original as the repro idiots just lazily grind down from the middle, ending up with something looking like the Wilkinson spearpoint
|
|
|
|
Post by MOK on Feb 1, 2018 18:17:11 GMT
I wonder if they were made in the same factories as the Imperial versions. The ricassos on the Iranian versions are huge Also note the proportion of the false edge in relation to the tip. That's one good way to tell an original as the repro idiots just lazily grind down from the middle, ending up with something looking like the Wilkinson spearpoint Yeah, on the official M1881/1909 pattern the false edge only goes as far as the center line of the fuller at its end. PS. At the fuller's end, I mean (because it tapers quite strongly). |
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Feb 2, 2018 4:57:39 GMT
Yeah, I found that really cool about it. A false edge but not the usual spear point. Also MOK I find your Finnish 1881s reslly interesting, and even more interesting that imperial 1881s are more common. You lucky bird Here in America we liked shooting more than cutting I guess. |
|
pattyb0009
Member
Getting into antique sabers...
Posts: 1,983 
|
Post by pattyb0009 on Feb 2, 2018 19:27:37 GMT
In combating local uprisings and nomadic incursions, one can imagine that this pattern of sword saw much action.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Feb 3, 2018 5:56:12 GMT
In combating local uprisings and nomadic incursions, one can imagine that this pattern of sword saw much action. I'd think so, a lot of them I've seen have nicks near the foible. |
|
|
|
Post by cossack on Mar 8, 2018 4:19:34 GMT
Great write up. Thank you. Were the Persian 1909s made in Russia and exported to Persia, or were they produced in Iran under license (or without license?)? Here's mine; it was my first sword. Couldn't find a Russian 1881 that I could afford. Someday... Note how wavy the blade is. Poor temper? Abuse? Sloppy workmanship? Anyway, it's still a joy to handle. I've never cut with it. Are the Farsi markings a serial number?    More photos: Imgur - Persian Shashka |
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Mar 8, 2018 4:33:52 GMT
As far as I'm aware the Persian copys were made in Russian under lower than usual standards and then sent to Persia. The Farsi should translate into a date for the swords making or issue. But that's just what I've read online and not from any primary sources.
I think the bends in the blade may be from either sloppy workmanship and abuse, but if it has a poor tempering it should be fairly evident. Just flex it with your hands and if it stays bent then it has a poor temper.
|
|
Well aside from the steel scabbard. Only getting more expensive, I remember these were pretty cheap, like sub 200 when I started out. 
).
