Tatar saber for discussion

[Perkun]

Thank you everyone for such wonderful insightful responses.
Jeff, applying KISS method (which I really like) is the best policy and in this light your observation and interpretation seems most plausable to me.
As a matter of fact it was exactly in this fashion ("a gold filled hole") that this mark was described to me by my friend who personally examined the saber.
Tom,
Not yet having the chance to examine the sword in person I cannot answer if the cross hatching on the spine is a form of decoration or a sign of mechanical abuse. The "step" (or a double step as it is repeated at the point of the blade forming a "cut out" in the middle of it) is a common feature on Polish sabers and the book by Jacek Gutkowski cited above shows a couple of examples of Tatar sabers with this feature.
As to the spine markings if we rule out tamgas then a possibility of them being an Armenian maker's marks should be examined, perhaps it represents the letter "h".

[RSWORD]

A georgeous sword that you have posted and quite rare indeed. I cannot add too much to the discussion but do have an example that Jose has kindly referred to and will be glad to post pictures for comparison purposes and hopefully additional education.

In regards to dating, Gutowski in his book "Bron' I Uzbrojenie Tatarow" makes an argument that one can date these sabers by the crossguard size. Later examples seem to show the Caucasian influences and have become very short compared to earlier examples. Generally, examples with the short crossguards can be dated to the late 17th to turn of 18th century. It will be interesting on Perkuns example once he has it in hand to find out if the blade is an imported. Most often, blades were imported and the profile of Perkuns example is that of Shamshir form and may be an imported Persian or Ottoman example and could be watered. My example has an archetypal blade form and really shows how the early Eurasian blade profiles lasted well into the 17th century.

I agree with Jim that neither mark on your sword is a Tamga sign. The "S" shape on the spine is very similar to marks on my sword blade. Mine are found at the top of the blade on both sides just below the spine. My example has 21 of these marks down each side of the blade. If one looks closely, in example 68 in Gutowski's book, that blade has a similar "S" shape marking along the top of the blade near the spine. I believe all the crosshatching on the spine of your blade contained many of these "S" shape marks but it looks as though many have worn away over the years. I do not know what these marks could represent as the example in the book looks to be a Persian imported blade, yours is undetermined as of yet, and my example seems to be of Lvov manufacture.

Gutowski mentions as Jim referenced that only one Tatar sword is known with a Tatar Tamga mark and in that example it is inlaid on the scabbard. My example has the Tamga mark done in silver inlayed on the blade and appears to be the same mark as the example referenced by Jim which is currently in the Polish army musuem. I would be most interested if any of Rivkins resources can identify the family or clan of this particular mark.

A fascinating discussion and I hope to learn more about Tamga marks on my sword and I look forward to Perkun getting his example in hand to learn more about his blade.

Rascalfully yours,

Rick

[Perkun]

I am just drooling all over my key board......
Will write something coherent later.

[Rivkin]

Fugh, I'm not an expert on turkology, so it can all be bs, but:

AFAIK tamga is usually just a signature. Turkish writing evolved from hieroglaphic to alphabet based, and so did the tamgas. There are 3 types of tamgas - consisting of one symbol (Type I). Usually these are the old ones, correspond to pictogramms or hieroglyphs. Very often have a totemic (or animistic) symbolism.Type II - tamgas consisting of two symbols that are symmetric or anti-symmetric to each other. These tamgas usually have to be understood as a combination of individual characters forming a word (with some of the vowels, especially initial vowels omitted). Why turks specifically liked symmetric writings (like swastika - two letters "a") I don't think anyone knows. The third type is tamgas composed of completely different letters, again these are already writing using an alphabet.

Concerning the first sword - these symbols can be tamga, or they can be not, I don't know. However in turkish alphabet this lazy n is usually "t" (however sometimes m or if looked from a different agnle -o and dz can be written quite similarly). Example - attached is an example from Karachai (turkish tribe from northern Caucasus).

Conerning the second sword - that's a classical tamga, probably modified Type II (symmetric with respect to one axis, anti-symmetric with respect to another). The letters involved seem to be "a or ae" and "n".

I'm not an expert in tatar to know which word exactly they coded like this...
Concerning family names - nothing comes up immediately, unfortunately because the letters are very popular ones, there are dozens of tamgas that use at least one of these letters + something else - for example a circassian tamga on the second picture, but did not yet find something exactly like this.

[Rivkin]

Another lazy n (this time it's "m" ?). From the writings of ancient bulgars.

And one more thing - eastern turks (I guess our tatars ?) write from right to left. Western (bulgars etc.) from left to right.

[Jim McDougall]

Kirill,
Thanks very much for this excellent data on tamgas! Since these typically dont occur very often on the swords from these regions, this has not been a hot topic in research for some time (the research my material is from dates from over 8 years ago!!). Its great to have the topic reopened, especially with these fantastic examples. Excellent input!
All the best,
Jim