Black Sea Yataghan (Again !?)

Oriental-Arms · 16th May 2006, 06:33 PM

We have just received a new book, EDGED WEAPONS in the collection of the Russian museum of Ethnography (ISBN 5-7331-0341-8). Many interesting items.

I was glad to find in the book the three following swords and took the liberty to post them here:

#1 is defined as Kopesh, Iranian or Kurds(?) Length 24 ½ inches

#2 is also defined as Kopesh, Iranian Turks or Kurds(?), length 24 ½ inches

#3 is defined as Saber “Shoi” or Kopesh, Kazakhastan, length 29 inches.

I believe they are all more of the same: Variations of the Black Sea Yataghan. #2 looks as if converted from a Bayonet blade. #3 is most interesting as it has the Black Sea Yataghan classical blade with a classical Turkish Yataghan handle.

I do not know if this clarify more or add to the confusion around these swords but it is definitely very interesting.

Rivkin · 16th May 2006, 07:32 PM

We just recently discussed the atributions made by this museum with respect to their latest exposition - straight double edged Qajar revival sword was named "XVIIIth century Zulfakar" etc.

In light of this I would be sceptic with respect to their opinions, I think it is ineed a laz bichaq. There are kurds, both muslims and ezids living in Trabzon, so I guess kurdish affiliation is possible.

ariel · 16th May 2006, 11:47 PM

Artzi,
I looked everywhere and could not find it. What seller did you use?

Oriental-Arms · 17th May 2006, 04:49 AM

Rivkin: Of course the origins suggested by the museum are wrong. i brought it just to show the confusion regarding the origin of these swords. There are many other wrong definitions in the book.

Ariel: i received the book from a Russian colleague. I will check with him the source.

Mark · 17th May 2006, 07:17 PM

#1 looks almost like a shotel. Such a deep curve. Do you think that it, too is converted from a less-curved sabre? It lacks the flowing line of a blade made specifically to that shape, to my eye.

Oriental-Arms · 17th May 2006, 08:45 PM

Mark

Good comment - thanks. The deep curvature and the blade wide fullers are not very typical. Only the pommel ears suggest the affinity to the Black sea Yataghan.

Some time ago (I can not find the thread) I posted a similar one (The central one in the photo below):

It was suggested that it is converted from a bayonet and even the bayonet model and make were suggested. The fact that the fullers are etched in a pattern similar to this found on some Kindjal / Qamas was also discussed and suggested as a later addition to the converted bayonet.

The similarity of this sword to #1 above is staggering. Even the ribbed grips and pommel ears are similar. Also here the fullers are etched (so says the text in the book) so I would think it is NOT a converted item but some close relative of the Black Sea Yataghan, may be closer to the Caucasus region.

ariel · 17th May 2006, 10:03 PM

I remember, it was a Turkish bayonet. This still allows for the Laz origin; as a matter of fact, they might be produced by the same person ( or workshop). One can hardly get closer to the Caucasus per se than Lazistan, it is almost Minghrelia.
I am, however, puzzed by the 3rd one: apparently, there is a specific name for it in Kazakhstan. It would be unlikely to have a specific name for a totally foreign sword. And Kazakhs are Turkic people.....
These Laz Bichaks are the damnedest thins I know; the moment you think you nailed them, some new piece of information pops up!

Aral Sea yataghan?

Mark · 19th May 2006, 10:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ariel

I remember, it was a Turkish bayonet. This still allows for the Laz origin; as a matter of fact, they might be produced by the same person ( or workshop). One can hardly get closer to the Caucasus per se than Lazistan, it is almost Minghrelia.
I am, however, puzzed by the 3rd one: apparently, there is a specific name for it in Kazakhstan. It would be unlikely to have a specific name for a totally foreign sword. And Kazakhs are Turkic people.....
These Laz Bichaks are the damnedest thins I know; the moment you think you nailed them, some new piece of information pops up!

Aral Sea yataghan?

Now you know how I have been feeling about dha ...

I just noticed how bizarre the middle sword of the original photo is - it looks like it has a piece of a Western sabre hilt, and the end of the pommel is turned sharply up in a very awkward-looking way. Maybe you were supposed to brace your wrist inside the fork, to keep it straight during the stroke?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

16th May 2006, 06:33 PM	#1
Oriental-Arms Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Haifa, Israel Posts: 183	Black Sea Yataghan (Again !?) We have just received a new book, EDGED WEAPONS in the collection of the Russian museum of Ethnography (ISBN 5-7331-0341-8). Many interesting items. I was glad to find in the book the three following swords and took the liberty to post them here: #1 is defined as Kopesh, Iranian or Kurds(?) Length 24 ½ inches #2 is also defined as Kopesh, Iranian Turks or Kurds(?), length 24 ½ inches #3 is defined as Saber “Shoi” or Kopesh, Kazakhastan, length 29 inches. I believe they are all more of the same: Variations of the Black Sea Yataghan. #2 looks as if converted from a Bayonet blade. #3 is most interesting as it has the Black Sea Yataghan classical blade with a classical Turkish Yataghan handle. I do not know if this clarify more or add to the confusion around these swords but it is definitely very interesting.

16th May 2006, 07:32 PM	#2
Rivkin Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 655	We just recently discussed the atributions made by this museum with respect to their latest exposition - straight double edged Qajar revival sword was named "XVIIIth century Zulfakar" etc. In light of this I would be sceptic with respect to their opinions, I think it is ineed a laz bichaq. There are kurds, both muslims and ezids living in Trabzon, so I guess kurdish affiliation is possible.

16th May 2006, 11:47 PM	#3
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Artzi, I looked everywhere and could not find it. What seller did you use?

17th May 2006, 04:49 AM	#4
Oriental-Arms Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Haifa, Israel Posts: 183	Rivkin: Of course the origins suggested by the museum are wrong. i brought it just to show the confusion regarding the origin of these swords. There are many other wrong definitions in the book. Ariel: i received the book from a Russian colleague. I will check with him the source.

17th May 2006, 07:17 PM	#5
Mark Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 987	#1 looks almost like a shotel. Such a deep curve. Do you think that it, too is converted from a less-curved sabre? It lacks the flowing line of a blade made specifically to that shape, to my eye.

17th May 2006, 08:45 PM	#6
Oriental-Arms Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Haifa, Israel Posts: 183	Mark Good comment - thanks. The deep curvature and the blade wide fullers are not very typical. Only the pommel ears suggest the affinity to the Black sea Yataghan. Some time ago (I can not find the thread) I posted a similar one (The central one in the photo below): It was suggested that it is converted from a bayonet and even the bayonet model and make were suggested. The fact that the fullers are etched in a pattern similar to this found on some Kindjal / Qamas was also discussed and suggested as a later addition to the converted bayonet. The similarity of this sword to #1 above is staggering. Even the ribbed grips and pommel ears are similar. Also here the fullers are etched (so says the text in the book) so I would think it is NOT a converted item but some close relative of the Black Sea Yataghan, may be closer to the Caucasus region.

17th May 2006, 10:03 PM	#7
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	I remember, it was a Turkish bayonet. This still allows for the Laz origin; as a matter of fact, they might be produced by the same person ( or workshop). One can hardly get closer to the Caucasus per se than Lazistan, it is almost Minghrelia. I am, however, puzzed by the 3rd one: apparently, there is a specific name for it in Kazakhstan. It would be unlikely to have a specific name for a totally foreign sword. And Kazakhs are Turkic people..... These Laz Bichaks are the damnedest thins I know; the moment you think you nailed them, some new piece of information pops up! Aral Sea yataghan?