![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1,242
|
![]()
Hi Eric,
These big ones are associated with the Zeybeks. Have a look at this thread: 3 large yataghan (T-spine, T-pommel, Turkish Ribbon) and this one Zeibek Yataghan with T-shaped pommelI love the Turkish ribbon pattern on these. Emanuel |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 1,614
|
![]()
Nice yataghan. I have noticed that yataghans from Asia Minor tend to be longer in general.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 2,145
|
![]()
They are also called Bashi Bouzouk or Bashi Bouzouk.
Mercenaries and warriors It,s also the favourite insult of captain Haddock in Tintin... |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 1,497
|
![]()
Thanks for the replies, while I have seen most of the old photos posted and a few similar T handled examples, what I was really looking for was to see one with a similar measurement. In the old photos you get an idea of length but no real details and the T handled one from Artzi has the same shape but it is obviously smaller.
I think a 40 inch/106.6cm sword is very long especially when not meant for mounted use. I am 6ft+ and have a long reach, this sword still seems unwieldy. The Zeybeck/Zeibek or Bashi Bouzouk/Bashi Bouzouk in the photos do not look very tall, what I was really interested in is the upper limit to the size of yatagan, I would like to verify that there are others of this size or was this just made extra long for a very tall Turk. Below are various types of swords showing the size differences. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1,242
|
![]()
The threads I linked asked the same question regarding size. Longest ones posted were in the 90+ cm so your example 100+ seems the longest yet. Turkish ribbon also points to older manufacture. Any date on the blade?
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 1,217
|
![]()
Great swords, wonderful pictures and I really like the long katar or is that a pata ?
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 | ||||
Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 1,497
|
![]() Quote:
Here are three discriptions of these long gauntlet katar swords by three different dealers. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 | |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 1,497
|
![]() Quote:
I have posted your T handled yatagan here and another long one. The bottom one is 35 inches or 89cm total length, blade length is 29 inches or 74 cm. The middle one according to your measurements has a 28" (71cm) long blade and the top one of yours has a 29" (74cm) blade that is 1.3cm thick at the base. Last edited by estcrh; 8th February 2016 at 11:13 AM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1,242
|
![]()
Thank you.
This thread was also linked Any larger yataghan? That thread showed 3 long yataghan - 71cm blade - 92cm overall - 73cm blade The last one you posted looks like an old one with the twist core and gold inlay cartouche. Oldest date I came across on mine was 1826 I believe. I can't make out anything in your cartouche. Emanuel |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 | |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 422
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 | |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 1,497
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 422
|
![]()
I haven't yet met a sword of less than 700g that I felt was unwieldy. Not an unusual length for an infantry sword.
That said, a very light-hilted sword (which some would say "blade-heavy" instead) will feel different. Differently-wieldy, at least. (I feel this with my shorter (27" blade) and lighter (400g) yatagan.) I wonder exactly what role the ears play when you're moving it around at speed (note to self: swing my yatagan around at speed and see). |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|