Strange Yataghan

ham · 6th February 2006, 06:31 PM

Tim, before you sip that bitter have a look at this:
An early-mid 18th century German hunting sword fitted with a heavy double edged blade. Note the close similarity in the guard, also the one-piece grip.
There is another similar with a different form of blade ending on eBay shortly. When it does I will attach the link for further comparison.
Your observation regarding hunting and the aristocracy is a reasonable one. What it does not take into consideration is that though such swords began as hunting implements, they quickly became popular with officers and then, as is usually the case, with common soldiers as sidearms. Further, we are not seeing the sword above in its pristine state. The hilt parts are heavily worn-- note the corrosion on the ferrule. By contrast, the guard is bright. It has been cleaned over time, so that any embellishment which would originally have been found there is long gone.

Ham

Tim Simmons · 6th February 2006, 07:05 PM

That is very interesting Ham and I will agree that you have shown a similarity but just look how weak the handle of the one in discussion is, and then compere it to the one you have post. What do you make of the fresh file marks? Tim

Jim McDougall · 6th February 2006, 07:47 PM

The example Ham has posted presents interesting support for probable European provenance of the sword in discussion, very Oriental appearing guard as well recalling those of the Chinese jian. Trade with the Orient was well established in these times and Chinese weapons were keenly favored by aristocrats who proudly displayed them in thier estates.

These lighter and smaller swords known as hunting swords often served as 'riding swords' and sidearms favored by the gentry during the 17th century before the advent of the smallsword in Europe. They became well known as sidearms favored by officers, who of course were in effect members of the gentry as well. This was especially known among maritime figures, and the hangers of these forms became well known among naval officers, officers on trade vessels and the familiar examples seen carried by pirates. They of course served well in close quarters combat as aboard ships, and in other instances were comfortably worn in city wear and riding, as well as in many combat situations found good purpose during melee. Despite thier utilitarian associations, these hangers were effective sidearms for defense.

By the 18th century, hunting hangers had become well established among gentry, and often were produced as esteemed gifts and presentations in many situations. Their use as weapons is clearly shown in the Lebedynsky reference I have cited as well as many others, and larger more combat intended blades were indeed added for mounted use. Since regulation swords were not entirely in place as yet, especially for officers, who maintained free reign to carry sword styles either in vogue, heirloom or presented as they saw fit. The auxiliary forces of course carried whatever weapons they favored or had captured.

Best regards,
Jim

ham · 8th February 2006, 03:33 AM

Tim, what I have tried to show here is not that I dug up another sword with a similar guard-- that tends to leads to "the chicken or the egg" reasoning. Rather, I am trying to present the notion that one ought to search out and recognise formal groups, in this case guards, which tie together like examples.
Here is another of this type:

http://cgi.ebay.com/OLD-CONTINENTAL-...QQcmdZViewItem

Comparison leads to second deduction-- these similarly-hilted weapons share a spectrum of blade forms: we have one mounted as a yataghan, one symmetrical and another single-edged. This also supports a European origin for the sword under examination. The most general requirement I suppose is to broaden one's knowledge of forms as much as possible. Fortunately for most of us, it's a pleasure.

As for the scratches on the guard, I can barely make them out I'm afraid. However given the condition of the ferrule relative to the guard, I would suggest that the scratches are indicative of cleaning which was more enthusiastic than skilled. Finally, I don't seem to be able to find any Chinese swords in any of my references with guards that bear more than a vague similarity with that of the one under discussion. Can you provide an example please?

Ham

Jeff D · 8th February 2006, 04:34 AM

Oh boy I know I am gonna get it now, taking on both Jim and ham, But, this one smacks of a pieced together specimen. At minimum it has been heavily and poorly messed with. 1) I will start with the corrosion on the hilt lanyard rivet and ferrule are completely different than the guard and the blade. Accepted that the guard and blade have been heavily cleaned, but I would expect more pitting if it started the same. 2) the ferrule is broken, that is usually a sure sign that the hilt has been switched and did not fit correctly. 3) the ferrule does not fit the guard ie; it doesn't curve to conform to the curve of the back of the guard. is that a piece of leather in between? lastly and the weakest 4) the over all appearace is "off". Now I will brace my self for the replys

. As ham has stated this is a pleasure.

Jeff

6th February 2006, 06:31 PM	#1
ham Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 190	Tim, before you sip that bitter have a look at this: An early-mid 18th century German hunting sword fitted with a heavy double edged blade. Note the close similarity in the guard, also the one-piece grip. There is another similar with a different form of blade ending on eBay shortly. When it does I will attach the link for further comparison. Your observation regarding hunting and the aristocracy is a reasonable one. What it does not take into consideration is that though such swords began as hunting implements, they quickly became popular with officers and then, as is usually the case, with common soldiers as sidearms. Further, we are not seeing the sword above in its pristine state. The hilt parts are heavily worn-- note the corrosion on the ferrule. By contrast, the guard is bright. It has been cleaned over time, so that any embellishment which would originally have been found there is long gone. Ham Attached Images Last edited by ham; 6th February 2006 at 06:46 PM.

6th February 2006, 07:05 PM	#2
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,937	That is very interesting Ham and I will agree that you have shown a similarity but just look how weak the handle of the one in discussion is, and then compere it to the one you have post. What do you make of the fresh file marks? Tim

6th February 2006, 07:47 PM	#3
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,741	The example Ham has posted presents interesting support for probable European provenance of the sword in discussion, very Oriental appearing guard as well recalling those of the Chinese jian. Trade with the Orient was well established in these times and Chinese weapons were keenly favored by aristocrats who proudly displayed them in thier estates. These lighter and smaller swords known as hunting swords often served as 'riding swords' and sidearms favored by the gentry during the 17th century before the advent of the smallsword in Europe. They became well known as sidearms favored by officers, who of course were in effect members of the gentry as well. This was especially known among maritime figures, and the hangers of these forms became well known among naval officers, officers on trade vessels and the familiar examples seen carried by pirates. They of course served well in close quarters combat as aboard ships, and in other instances were comfortably worn in city wear and riding, as well as in many combat situations found good purpose during melee. Despite thier utilitarian associations, these hangers were effective sidearms for defense. By the 18th century, hunting hangers had become well established among gentry, and often were produced as esteemed gifts and presentations in many situations. Their use as weapons is clearly shown in the Lebedynsky reference I have cited as well as many others, and larger more combat intended blades were indeed added for mounted use. Since regulation swords were not entirely in place as yet, especially for officers, who maintained free reign to carry sword styles either in vogue, heirloom or presented as they saw fit. The auxiliary forces of course carried whatever weapons they favored or had captured. Best regards, Jim

8th February 2006, 03:33 AM	#4
ham Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 190	Tim, what I have tried to show here is not that I dug up another sword with a similar guard-- that tends to leads to "the chicken or the egg" reasoning. Rather, I am trying to present the notion that one ought to search out and recognise formal groups, in this case guards, which tie together like examples. Here is another of this type: http://cgi.ebay.com/OLD-CONTINENTAL-...QQcmdZViewItem Comparison leads to second deduction-- these similarly-hilted weapons share a spectrum of blade forms: we have one mounted as a yataghan, one symmetrical and another single-edged. This also supports a European origin for the sword under examination. The most general requirement I suppose is to broaden one's knowledge of forms as much as possible. Fortunately for most of us, it's a pleasure. As for the scratches on the guard, I can barely make them out I'm afraid. However given the condition of the ferrule relative to the guard, I would suggest that the scratches are indicative of cleaning which was more enthusiastic than skilled. Finally, I don't seem to be able to find any Chinese swords in any of my references with guards that bear more than a vague similarity with that of the one under discussion. Can you provide an example please? Ham

8th February 2006, 04:34 AM	#5
Jeff D Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: B.C. Canada Posts: 473	Oh boy I know I am gonna get it now, taking on both Jim and ham, But, this one smacks of a pieced together specimen. At minimum it has been heavily and poorly messed with. 1) I will start with the corrosion on the hilt lanyard rivet and ferrule are completely different than the guard and the blade. Accepted that the guard and blade have been heavily cleaned, but I would expect more pitting if it started the same. 2) the ferrule is broken, that is usually a sure sign that the hilt has been switched and did not fit correctly. 3) the ferrule does not fit the guard ie; it doesn't curve to conform to the curve of the back of the guard. is that a piece of leather in between? lastly and the weakest 4) the over all appearace is "off". Now I will brace my self for the replys . As ham has stated this is a pleasure. Jeff