Yataghan translation

[mariusgmioc]

Originally Posted by Kubur

Because it's full silver work some members will tell you that this Yat is Greek.
But Kubur in his infinite wisdom will tell you that this Yat is Ottoman Turkish.
Amen

Brilliant! You made my day!

[TVV]

The hilt and scabbard are Greek indeed. Mounts usually indicate where a weapon was used.

Teodor

[Kubur]

Originally Posted by TVV

The hilt and scabbard are Greek indeed. Mounts usually indicate where a weapon was used.

Teodor

Please explain to us why these mounts are Greek do you have any proof??
Silver work is not always Greek, do you have any particular element to say that?
Its funny, there is nothing wrong to change his mind...

[TVV]

Originally Posted by Kubur

Please explain to us why these mounts are Greek do you have any proof??
Silver work is not always Greek, do you have any particular element to say that?
Its funny, there is nothing wrong to change his mind...

Do we have to post multiple examples of Greek weapons with similar decorative style every time we have this argument? Seems a little tedious and counter productive, as you are stubbornly going to stick to your panturkic beliefs anyway.

For those actually interested in the decoration as a method of identifying where arms were used, Sylektis has done all the work with pictures from various Greek museums:

http://vikingsword.com/vb/showthread...t=greek+museum

http://vikingsword.com/vb/showthread...t=greek+museum

http://vikingsword.com/vb/showthread...t=greek+museum

http://vikingsword.com/vb/showthread...t=greek+museum

Everyone is free to compare the style of the museum items with the mounts of the yataghan in this thread and make their own conclusions.

[mariusgmioc]

Originally Posted by TVV

Everyone is free to compare the style of the museum items with the mounts of the yataghan in this thread and make their own conclusions.

The fact those weapons are displayed in Greek museums only means they were collected in Greece, but by no means can it be seen as evidence they were ALL made in Greece.

After all, the Ottoman army didn't conquer Greece with sticks, nor did it invade Greece to get a source of decent weaponry...

And the Balkans did became a known source of weaponry only after the Ottoman occupation, not before that.

And what about examples from Turkish museums?! Where are they?!

What about a well documented book about Turkish swordsmiths and their style, markings, etc?!

There isn't any?!

So then, in the absence of evidence we embrace the evidence of absence...

... and so, falacies are propagated and spread until they become the well known truth...

PS: If you read the captions from the museum exhibits, you may notice most say "weapons USED during Greek revolution..." not weapons MADE in Greece. However, some display quite clear Greek characteristics, being undoubtedly made in Greece while others look 100% Turkish...

[TVV]

Originally Posted by mariusgmioc

The fact those weapons are displayed in Greek museums only means they were collected in Greece, but by no means can it be seen as evidence they were ALL made in Greece.

If multiple similarly decorated weapons were all collected within the same geographic area, does not that establish a distribution pattern?

As for the made vs. used debate, would you consider takoubas with the typical tripple fuller Solingen made blades as swords from the Sahel, or from Germany?

[Kubur]

Ok now let's be serious with facts
The only argument is the silver hilt and scabbard.
Silver work repousse was used by Ottomans not only in Greece, but also in Algeria and primary in Turkey.
Yes you have Greek yataghans with silver repousse, yes the work is of a very high quality. But the design and the patterns are very different from the ones made in Turkey.
You need to look at daggers and bichaq too.
If you don't see the differences then I can't do nothing for you.

[mariusgmioc]

Originally Posted by TVV

If multiple similarly decorated weapons were all collected within the same geographic area, does not that establish a distribution pattern?

As for the made vs. used debate, would you consider takoubas with the typical tripple fuller Solingen made blades as swords from the Sahel, or from Germany?

Yes, it is exactly as you said: it establishes a DISTRIBUTION pattern but is not providing information about their origin.

If you find many WWII German weapons in Russia and see a massive amount of them in Russian museums, does this mean they were made in Russia?! In fact, even these days you may find lots of German rusty weapons in the area around present day Volgograd (formerly Stalingrad)... so can we conclude that Stalingrad was a major centre for manufacturing German weapons?!

Going a little bit further in time... the numerous Viking swords in English museums do indicate that they were made in England?

As the Ottoman army invaded the Balkans and Greece, they were accompanied by numerous Turkish swordsmiths necessary for ensuring the maintenance of their weapons.
As the Ottomans established local garrisons in the occupied areas, so they established local centres of swordmaking....

[mariusgmioc]

Originally Posted by TVV

The hilt and scabbard are Greek indeed. Mounts usually indicate where a weapon was used.

Teodor

Possibly, but I don't think so... Traces of wootz, original Turkish poem, style of decoration, all make me favour more the Turkish origin.

I have noticed a trend/fashion to allocate most of the Ottoman weapons to Greece or the Balcans, like there were no swordsmiths in Turkey, when in fact there were a lot of them. And they were among the most skilled swordsmiths of their time, working wootz and the exceptionally elaborate Turkish Ribbon pattern welded blades.

And I noticed this not only in the discussions here but also with reputed auction houses. In fact, I acquired a few "Greek" or "Balkan" Ottoman swords and daggers with the silver mounts marked with the Turgha...

I also have major doubts about several of the pieces in Elgood's book "The Arms of Greece and her Balkan Neighbours in the Ottoman Period" where he proclaims the pieces are Greek or from the Balkans without providing the faintest sliver of evidence...
Now are we supposed to swallow that only because Elgood said so?!
Well, I am certainly not!

... but then again... who am I to criticize the work Elgood?!