Question about integral bolsters

Emanuel · 16th February 2016, 06:10 PM

I'll update this thread with a yataghan dated 1239/1826, with Turkish ribbon pattern welding and T-spine and integral bolster construction. This makes it the earliest example of integral bolster on such a sword I've seen, and contemporary with the earliest dated flyssa.

Originally posted in "3 large yataghan...".

kronckew · 16th February 2016, 07:00 PM

my karaculak yataghan,or shepherd's knife from bulgaria has an integral bolster. way back someone mentioned it might be 18c. (photo) blade is not 't' section.

structurally, the blade is like a beam, if you drill holes in it on the neutral axis which generally runs down the centre of the blade and tang, you lose very little if any structural strength. the further away from this neutral axis, the greater the compressive and tensile stress that acts on the material. on blades without integral bolsters, they usually have a sudden reduction in blade width where the blade enters the guard, if any and separate bolster, in order to fit inside the dimensions of the grip. this produces a structural incongruity and especially if the 'corner' is square, will allow progressive cracking and failure at this notch due to the high stress that a notch causes there. an integral bolster neatly avoids this.

a khukuri does not have an integral bolster, many now sport 'habaki' style bolsters to guide it into the scabbard, but khukuris are mostly differentially hardened and tempered such that the spine and tang/blade juncture are left a lot less brittle that the cutting 'sweet spot'. a bent khukuri (or sword) can be bent back into shape, a snapped one cannot easily be mended in the field.

ariel · 17th February 2016, 03:55 AM

I have a yataghan looking like Bulgarian karakulak, with Sarajevo-like "nuclear" decorations on the handle and integral bolster, dated 1838 ( NOT Islamic date!)

I think we may be talking about parallel development. If bladesmiths had a common idea of a blade, what prevented them to have a common idea of an integral bolster?

Emanuel · 17th February 2016, 03:19 PM

I think if we looked we would find that most all yataghan blades,and most other swords are heat treated in this manner. There is no reason to harden the tang/blade transition area.

The karakulak underscores my point.
Basically ALL Balkan yataghan don't have integral bolster.
Karakulak and Ionian yataghan ALL HAVE integral bolster. These things were contemporary in the same geographic area.

The cutler/swordsmith separation brings more questions to mind.
We have early knives in Istanbul and Italy with integral bolster.
Then we have short sword yataghan in the Balkans without integral bolster.
At the same time we have big knife karakulak in Bulgaria and very long sword yataghan in Ionia (western Anatolia) with integral bolster. Who made the knives and who made the swords?

My thinking is that we're seeing commonalities between bladesmithing traditions ultimately associated with common populations, specifically the Yoruks of both Thrace and the Ionian coast.

ariel · 17th February 2016, 04:27 PM

My only hesitation relates to the fact that Turkmen knives do not have integral bolsters. On the contrary, they had to be made of some kind of copper alloy to be used for slaughtering animals in a "halal" fashion.

16th February 2016, 06:10 PM	#1
Emanuel Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 1,242	I'll update this thread with a yataghan dated 1239/1826, with Turkish ribbon pattern welding and T-spine and integral bolster construction. This makes it the earliest example of integral bolster on such a sword I've seen, and contemporary with the earliest dated flyssa. Originally posted in "3 large yataghan...". Attached Images

16th February 2016, 07:00 PM	#2
kronckew Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Room 101, Glos. UK Posts: 4,215	my karaculak yataghan,or shepherd's knife from bulgaria has an integral bolster. way back someone mentioned it might be 18c. (photo) blade is not 't' section. structurally, the blade is like a beam, if you drill holes in it on the neutral axis which generally runs down the centre of the blade and tang, you lose very little if any structural strength. the further away from this neutral axis, the greater the compressive and tensile stress that acts on the material. on blades without integral bolsters, they usually have a sudden reduction in blade width where the blade enters the guard, if any and separate bolster, in order to fit inside the dimensions of the grip. this produces a structural incongruity and especially if the 'corner' is square, will allow progressive cracking and failure at this notch due to the high stress that a notch causes there. an integral bolster neatly avoids this. a khukuri does not have an integral bolster, many now sport 'habaki' style bolsters to guide it into the scabbard, but khukuris are mostly differentially hardened and tempered such that the spine and tang/blade juncture are left a lot less brittle that the cutting 'sweet spot'. a bent khukuri (or sword) can be bent back into shape, a snapped one cannot easily be mended in the field. Attached Images Last edited by kronckew; 16th February 2016 at 07:12 PM.

17th February 2016, 03:55 AM	#3
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	I have a yataghan looking like Bulgarian karakulak, with Sarajevo-like "nuclear" decorations on the handle and integral bolster, dated 1838 ( NOT Islamic date!) I think we may be talking about parallel development. If bladesmiths had a common idea of a blade, what prevented them to have a common idea of an integral bolster?

17th February 2016, 03:19 PM	#4
Emanuel Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 1,242	I think if we looked we would find that most all yataghan blades,and most other swords are heat treated in this manner. There is no reason to harden the tang/blade transition area. The karakulak underscores my point. Basically ALL Balkan yataghan don't have integral bolster. Karakulak and Ionian yataghan ALL HAVE integral bolster. These things were contemporary in the same geographic area. The cutler/swordsmith separation brings more questions to mind. We have early knives in Istanbul and Italy with integral bolster. Then we have short sword yataghan in the Balkans without integral bolster. At the same time we have big knife karakulak in Bulgaria and very long sword yataghan in Ionia (western Anatolia) with integral bolster. Who made the knives and who made the swords? My thinking is that we're seeing commonalities between bladesmithing traditions ultimately associated with common populations, specifically the Yoruks of both Thrace and the Ionian coast.

17th February 2016, 04:27 PM	#5
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	My only hesitation relates to the fact that Turkmen knives do not have integral bolsters. On the contrary, they had to be made of some kind of copper alloy to be used for slaughtering animals in a "halal" fashion.