From whence this Bichaq?

[mariusgmioc]

Originally Posted by estcrh

From what 0liver wrote he seems to be suggesting that the blade may have originally been a yatagan that was shortened, I do not think he meant that the hilt was a yatagan hilt, just the blade, at least that is how I read it.

From what I read, Oliver refers to the whole knife as being a modified full size Yataghan and not only the blade.

Even if he were referring only to the blade, I believe that is highly improbable as there is absolutely no indication why would it be so (as Oliver didn't mention any reason).

On contrary, the engraving on the blade is small and narrow, perfectly matching the narrow blade of a knife and definitely not suitable for a wider Yataghan blade.

Moreover, if the blade were to come from a full size Yataghan that would have been immediately visible from the thickness of the blade... which I don't think is the case.

But I already made my case in an earlier comment.

[gp]

agree with Teodor; the first is typical Greek but with a repurposed blade ( originally from a yataghan) and also Marcus correctly stated the handle / grip is too small for a yataghan.
Mostly the Greek bichaqs have this handle/ grip size. The second one /Marcus'is indeed 100% Bosnian.
Both 2 very nice examples but a pity no further contributions to this thread...

[serdar]

First “bichak” doesent necesary need to be from yatagan, there were shorter yatagan knives like that one, engravings on it are too close to hasrma to be of a yatagan, and sweeping of the blade sugest it is a knife not reshaped yatagan, it is probably from algere region not greek.
Also scabard has nothing to do with balkan, why everyone put things in balkan with that ease.

[serdar]

Second is bosnian post austrian ocupation 1878 bichak, when yatagan smiths were baned to produce weapons like yatagans, they started to produce those bichaks knives, for every day use and like souveneers.