black sea yataghan

[Zifir]

Hi,

The arabic date seems to me as 1303 which can be correctly converted as 1885-1886.

However, from 1840 onwards the Ottomans started to use a second calendar which was called the Rumi calendar. The basic aim was to use a calendar which was compatible with the European calendar. Anyway, if your date is a Rumi date, then its Gregorian equivalent is 1887-1888.

best,

[Jeff D]

Thank you Zfir !!!

I know the Ottomans switched to a Julian (Solar) Moslem calender in the early part of the 19th century (to try to correlate with the Julian Gregorian European calendar) but I had no idea what it was called or if it was close to the Hijri (lunar) calandar.

The number 3 is unusal here, is this script used in any particular portion of the Ottoman empire?

Thank you again
Jeff

[Zifir]

The unusual style of the number '3' in the date may have something to do with workmanship. Because, the same is true for the Gregorian date 1888 on the sword. Very weird 8's indeed I think the same think is valid for the numbers in the Hijri date.

[Jeff D]

Thank you again Zifir,

I am a little confused. Is the Arabic number three used here common? I am used to seeing it written as below.

You are right about the 8's I actually found the Islamic date first and it took a while to figure out that the 8's made a Gregorian date Duh

All the best
Jeff

[Zifir]

In hand writing, the numbers 2 and 3 have slightly different forms. I attached two examples, the first one is 9240 and the second one is 33,600. You can see how the numbers 2 and 3 in handwriting are different than their printed forms. I hope this helps.

Best,

[Jeff D]

Hi Zifir,

Yes this does help. Essentially, this "written" script of 3 could come from any where the Rumi calendar, was used. Unfortunately it doesn't particularly add anything to what has already been noted on the origin of the Black Sea yataghan.

Thank you once again it is great to have your imput.

Jeff

[Jim McDougall]

It is amazing how long this discussion of these 'Black Sea' yataghans has continued, especially the 'controversy' over thier origins. The evidence for origin in North Africa consists of the single example presented in Mr. Tirri's book, which as mentioned, was discussed at the talk presented by him several years ago. This theory was supported by a caption in a Michael German catalog from London, which had suggested a North African origin without corroborating support, as well as an entry from I believe a Russian book suggesting the same.

I began studying these curious yataghans in 1996 when I acquired my first example. Back then these were actually considered relatively rare, and there was considerable speculation about them. I discovered that they had been shown in the equally rare German publication "Schwert Degen Sabel" by Gerhard Seifert, a prominant German arms scholar, in 1962. They were identified there as Kurdish-Armenian yataghans, and in subsequent communications with the author I found that his attribution had derived from a scholarly article written in 1941 and presented by the Danish Arms and Armour Society. References for this article derived further from a Hungarian arms scholar who had travelled in regions of the Black Sea, Caucusus etc. in the latter 19th century. These weapons were provenanced from Turkish regions c.1850's, and I did confirm thier presence and dates collected in the museum listed in communications with that museum.
After several years of confirming this data, communications with various authors and scholars, in later years these weapons were confirmed in museums in Istanbul by Lee Jones, then of course, the ultimate confirmation by Ariel in his discovery and positive identification to the Laz group.
It seems more than dozens of these have now entered collections, most associated with those found in regions described near Trans-Caucasian regions including Trebizon, Erlikan and the Caucusus.
I was also present at the forementioned talk given by Mr. Tirri in Baltimore, which was indeed very well presented. My only question was...if this sword form originated in North Africa....why was there only one left.....with all the others migrating to the regions near the Black Sea?
While the evidence supporting North African origin is admittedly compelling since it does resemble a flyssa, I am more drawn to the evidence that I discovered in the years I have researched these. I think that with the movement of Ottoman mercenaries from these regions to North Africa, an example of these being subsequently decorated there with flyssa type motif is quite plausible.

Yet the debate will undoubtedly continue.
Best regards,
Jim