Watering on a tulwar blade

tom hyle · 27th January 2005, 12:58 PM

Have you considered that this is a non-original koftgari applie where a larger one had gone missing? In any event, the larger hatched area doesn't seem that unusual to me though. Perhaps the man who did the hatching and the man who did the gold laying were traditionally different men? Speculation.....

Jens Nordlunde · 27th January 2005, 01:37 PM

There are no traces of a bigger decoration on either side of the blade, so I doubt that can be the reason.
In one of my books, I have unfortunately forgotten which, but it could be in the one by Francois Bernier, Travels in the Mogul Empire A.D. 1656-1668, the author writes, that customers can look in books with many different designs before they order a hilt. This could indicate that it was the goldsmith who made the hatching for koftgari, but it does not mean that he did, maybe he had the hatching made at the blade smith’ after his instructions – I will have to go on reading.

tom hyle · 27th January 2005, 02:04 PM

It seems like I've heard or read that the gold-layer does the hatching, but I'm unsure, so thought I'd point out the possibility. I wonder if they had some kind of ink they used to lay out the writing/design on the hatched area, or if they did it free-hand, too.

Jim McDougall · 28th January 2005, 12:23 AM

Excellent description of the characteristics and proper terminology on these blades by Mr. Hyle

!! Really puts things into perspective.
I agree that it would be interesting to know more on the entire sword posted by Jeff, although it appears to be as I suggested a Tatar sabre ("Bron w Dawnej Polsce", Prof. Zdzislaw Zygulski, 1975, Warsaw, #145).

Many years ago discussing the yelman with a Polish gentleman, who was a fencing master, and not surprisingly fascinated with the development of the sabre... he noted that this feature was often described by a colloquial Polish term which meant 'feather', alluding rather tongue in cheek to the extra weight applied to the end of the blade. I had heard a number of other references to the purpose of the yelman in discussions usually noting the added weight concept. Obviously there seems to be ,as always conflicting views on the practical application of certain blade features, and the alternate explanation referring to blade vibration seems quite plausible as well.

Incidentally, just noticed a remarkable resemblance in the blade on Jens' sword to the large Chinese 'oxtail' blades found on late 18th c. ring pommel hilt sabres. The blades with biconcave peak on back of blade have the same early falchion form. Perhaps these 'oxtail' blade forms are survivors of the early blade forms previously mentioned from the sabre blades that evolved in China's frontiers to the west?

Best regards,
Jim

Jeff D · 28th January 2005, 02:10 AM

Hi Guys,

So sorry for the tardy response, work has been very busy lately. As Jim noted this is a tatar saber from Gutowski's book, I posted it as I could not see how it could explain the origin of the yelmen to the tatars. As always Jim cleared this up with his explanation of Tatar being a generalized term for the steppe tribes. Thanks Tom for the definitions, Can I ask where they are obtained? I didn't realize how hard it is to find a clear definition of a yelman. I was under the mistaken impression that it was any false edge on a saber, your definition makes more sense.
As soon as time permits I think I will start a new thread on this topic so as not to dilute this excellent thread.

Thanks all.
Jeff

tom hyle · 28th January 2005, 03:45 AM

Unfortuneately my mind is such as to rarely provide documentary or referential sources; a constant difficulty for those who recieve communication from me....
There is recurrent confusion around the term Tartar; for many centuries it is commonly used to refer to the primarily Turkic peoples of the Eurasian stepper, commonly including, but not limitted to Kazaks, Turks, Huigars, Mongols, etc. Also for centuries, it has been used to refer to specific tribes, often somewhat localized of course.
There seem to be 3 possible explanations that come to mind:
1/Some Tartars live nearby. You are not a Tartar. They are Tartars, and that's enough for you; your people don't know their tribal name; you don't know any other Tartars; you think they're "Tartars."
2/There are tribes that seem to have no other name but "Crimean Tartars" or "Blue Tartars" (though how much this is a foriegn inaccuracy is unclear). Such tribes may become in shorthand "Tartars" to someone who is unaware of the broader implications of the term. Essentially similar to #1
3/It was originally the name of one tribe, and got more generally applied, as with Roman, Zulu, Mongol....the problem I see with this is this usually occurs through conspicuous conquest, and we know other names for conspicuously conquering/ruling Tartar tribes, like Mongol and Turk?.....
All this confusion is not helped by the fact that these people, their culture, and their vast historical influence, are largely ignored in the "West", and after the irritating way of "Science" which seeks boundaries more often than centers (by it's defining nature), who get attached to the other cultural areas they border, rather than being seen as their own; so Huigars and Manchus are viewed as Chinese, Cossaks and Magyars as Slavs/Europeans, Turks as psuedo-Arabic, etc. Of course there's blending along cultural borders, but this case seems to be only looked at in that one way; as a vast frontier between cultural realms, rather than a valid and important realm in its own right, and I think that this is, well, bogus.
So Tartar Tartar Tartar, say I; let's all eat a bagel and some yogurt

Mare Rosu · 28th January 2005, 07:03 PM

JENS
I also had the first impression on the scratches as did TOM HYLE That the scratches were sort of an "erasure" of something prior that was on the blade. However you sort of put that idea to sleep.
Jens
You stated that you had the inscriptions translated. Would you care to share with us what that translation is?

You may not be aware of my expertise on edge weapons, I know a blade from the pointie end to da other end, and I offer my service to you, sir. At no cost to you I will be more than happy to inspect your blade and give you my 100% guarantee as to what the sword is. All you have to do is send me the sword for a complete examination. The total time for the me to do this will be a few years as I want you to be satisfied on my analysis.

27th January 2005, 01:37 PM	#2
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	There are no traces of a bigger decoration on either side of the blade, so I doubt that can be the reason. In one of my books, I have unfortunately forgotten which, but it could be in the one by Francois Bernier, Travels in the Mogul Empire A.D. 1656-1668, the author writes, that customers can look in books with many different designs before they order a hilt. This could indicate that it was the goldsmith who made the hatching for koftgari, but it does not mean that he did, maybe he had the hatching made at the blade smith’ after his instructions – I will have to go on reading. Attached Images

28th January 2005, 07:03 PM	#7
Mare Rosu Deceased Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: USA, DEEP SOUTH, GEORGIA, Y'all hear? Posts: 121	OFFER JENS I also had the first impression on the scratches as did TOM HYLE That the scratches were sort of an "erasure" of something prior that was on the blade. However you sort of put that idea to sleep. Jens You stated that you had the inscriptions translated. Would you care to share with us what that translation is? You may not be aware of my expertise on edge weapons, I know a blade from the pointie end to da other end, and I offer my service to you, sir. At no cost to you I will be more than happy to inspect your blade and give you my 100% guarantee as to what the sword is. All you have to do is send me the sword for a complete examination. The total time for the me to do this will be a few years as I want you to be satisfied on my analysis.

27th January 2005, 12:58 PM	#1
tom hyle Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 1,254	Have you considered that this is a non-original koftgari applie where a larger one had gone missing? In any event, the larger hatched area doesn't seem that unusual to me though. Perhaps the man who did the hatching and the man who did the gold laying were traditionally different men? Speculation.....

27th January 2005, 02:04 PM	#3
tom hyle Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 1,254	It seems like I've heard or read that the gold-layer does the hatching, but I'm unsure, so thought I'd point out the possibility. I wonder if they had some kind of ink they used to lay out the writing/design on the hatched area, or if they did it free-hand, too.

28th January 2005, 12:23 AM	#4
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,189	Excellent description of the characteristics and proper terminology on these blades by Mr. Hyle !! Really puts things into perspective. I agree that it would be interesting to know more on the entire sword posted by Jeff, although it appears to be as I suggested a Tatar sabre ("Bron w Dawnej Polsce", Prof. Zdzislaw Zygulski, 1975, Warsaw, #145). Many years ago discussing the yelman with a Polish gentleman, who was a fencing master, and not surprisingly fascinated with the development of the sabre... he noted that this feature was often described by a colloquial Polish term which meant 'feather', alluding rather tongue in cheek to the extra weight applied to the end of the blade. I had heard a number of other references to the purpose of the yelman in discussions usually noting the added weight concept. Obviously there seems to be ,as always conflicting views on the practical application of certain blade features, and the alternate explanation referring to blade vibration seems quite plausible as well. Incidentally, just noticed a remarkable resemblance in the blade on Jens' sword to the large Chinese 'oxtail' blades found on late 18th c. ring pommel hilt sabres. The blades with biconcave peak on back of blade have the same early falchion form. Perhaps these 'oxtail' blade forms are survivors of the early blade forms previously mentioned from the sabre blades that evolved in China's frontiers to the west? Best regards, Jim

28th January 2005, 02:10 AM	#5
Jeff D Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: B.C. Canada Posts: 473	Hi Guys, So sorry for the tardy response, work has been very busy lately. As Jim noted this is a tatar saber from Gutowski's book, I posted it as I could not see how it could explain the origin of the yelmen to the tatars. As always Jim cleared this up with his explanation of Tatar being a generalized term for the steppe tribes. Thanks Tom for the definitions, Can I ask where they are obtained? I didn't realize how hard it is to find a clear definition of a yelman. I was under the mistaken impression that it was any false edge on a saber, your definition makes more sense. As soon as time permits I think I will start a new thread on this topic so as not to dilute this excellent thread. Thanks all. Jeff

28th January 2005, 03:45 AM	#6
tom hyle Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 1,254	Unfortuneately my mind is such as to rarely provide documentary or referential sources; a constant difficulty for those who recieve communication from me.... There is recurrent confusion around the term Tartar; for many centuries it is commonly used to refer to the primarily Turkic peoples of the Eurasian stepper, commonly including, but not limitted to Kazaks, Turks, Huigars, Mongols, etc. Also for centuries, it has been used to refer to specific tribes, often somewhat localized of course. There seem to be 3 possible explanations that come to mind: 1/Some Tartars live nearby. You are not a Tartar. They are Tartars, and that's enough for you; your people don't know their tribal name; you don't know any other Tartars; you think they're "Tartars." 2/There are tribes that seem to have no other name but "Crimean Tartars" or "Blue Tartars" (though how much this is a foriegn inaccuracy is unclear). Such tribes may become in shorthand "Tartars" to someone who is unaware of the broader implications of the term. Essentially similar to #1 3/It was originally the name of one tribe, and got more generally applied, as with Roman, Zulu, Mongol....the problem I see with this is this usually occurs through conspicuous conquest, and we know other names for conspicuously conquering/ruling Tartar tribes, like Mongol and Turk?..... All this confusion is not helped by the fact that these people, their culture, and their vast historical influence, are largely ignored in the "West", and after the irritating way of "Science" which seeks boundaries more often than centers (by it's defining nature), who get attached to the other cultural areas they border, rather than being seen as their own; so Huigars and Manchus are viewed as Chinese, Cossaks and Magyars as Slavs/Europeans, Turks as psuedo-Arabic, etc. Of course there's blending along cultural borders, but this case seems to be only looked at in that one way; as a vast frontier between cultural realms, rather than a valid and important realm in its own right, and I think that this is, well, bogus. So Tartar Tartar Tartar, say I; let's all eat a bagel and some yogurt