Yataghan

Jim McDougall · 21st February 2005, 08:01 PM

Hi Erlikhan,
I think possibly the term 'tughra' was probably used improperly as I was thinking it applied generally to the type cartouche seen on the blade, and in review that term should apply to such marking for the Sultan only correct? In any case you are also correct in noting that these irregular units with their non-regulation and flamboyant uniforms would not necessarily have conformed to a particular weapon or any certain markings on the blade.
Tom's note is again, quite valid, in that a weapon of this quality was most certainly privately owned, and such weapons were not issued to the ranks.

In looking at the description from the auction listing, it seems quite detailed in noting the unit, which would seem to add certain credibility to provenance . It would be interesting to know what support is provided for attribution to that particular unit.

The specific 'pandour' units were disbanded after c.1747, and had become quite out of control, as they had essentially become outlaw with their depradations and looting. The very fearsome tribal warrior nature of these units however did appeal to the military of some European countries such as France, and Austria who installed units within regimental perameters to operate as auxiliary units in their armies. Much as with Caucasians in service of Russia in Cossack regiments, these forces were entitled to use their own weapons rather than any regimental issue.

All the best,
Jim

erlikhan · 25th February 2005, 08:54 PM

Jim, tughra is the royal emblem of the sultan in charge. formed with the full name of the sultan in a decorative manner. All of them looks same from far. an example below. Struck onto items ordered by the palace , but much more, to silver or gold items produced in market, as an aproval of their grades. If they wish, gold or silversmiths could take their products to mint office and make them tested and tughra struck, to gain customer trust. if any antique is struck by tughra, it is usually significantly more expensive than a similar item without tuhgra.
Imperial forces of 19th c. liked to have exotic legions from ethnisities under their rule, perhaps as a show of their multinational vast geographies controlling power. And, when needed, as pleased local servants from the conquered tribe, to be able to control that tribe from inside, and settle down potential fury against the occupation easier.
regards

Jim McDougall · 26th February 2005, 12:18 AM

Erlikhan,
Thank you so much for the detailed explanation of that term. This is the best thing about these threads, learning and sharing information, and the data archived to help others as they continue research on these weapons. Very nicely done!
All the best,
Jim

25th February 2005, 08:54 PM	#2
erlikhan Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Istanbul Posts: 452	Jim, tughra is the royal emblem of the sultan in charge. formed with the full name of the sultan in a decorative manner. All of them looks same from far. an example below. Struck onto items ordered by the palace , but much more, to silver or gold items produced in market, as an aproval of their grades. If they wish, gold or silversmiths could take their products to mint office and make them tested and tughra struck, to gain customer trust. if any antique is struck by tughra, it is usually significantly more expensive than a similar item without tuhgra. Imperial forces of 19th c. liked to have exotic legions from ethnisities under their rule, perhaps as a show of their multinational vast geographies controlling power. And, when needed, as pleased local servants from the conquered tribe, to be able to control that tribe from inside, and settle down potential fury against the occupation easier. regards Attached Images

21st February 2005, 08:01 PM	#1
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,284	Hi Erlikhan, I think possibly the term 'tughra' was probably used improperly as I was thinking it applied generally to the type cartouche seen on the blade, and in review that term should apply to such marking for the Sultan only correct? In any case you are also correct in noting that these irregular units with their non-regulation and flamboyant uniforms would not necessarily have conformed to a particular weapon or any certain markings on the blade. Tom's note is again, quite valid, in that a weapon of this quality was most certainly privately owned, and such weapons were not issued to the ranks. In looking at the description from the auction listing, it seems quite detailed in noting the unit, which would seem to add certain credibility to provenance . It would be interesting to know what support is provided for attribution to that particular unit. The specific 'pandour' units were disbanded after c.1747, and had become quite out of control, as they had essentially become outlaw with their depradations and looting. The very fearsome tribal warrior nature of these units however did appeal to the military of some European countries such as France, and Austria who installed units within regimental perameters to operate as auxiliary units in their armies. Much as with Caucasians in service of Russia in Cossack regiments, these forces were entitled to use their own weapons rather than any regimental issue. All the best, Jim

26th February 2005, 12:18 AM	#3
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,284	Erlikhan, Thank you so much for the detailed explanation of that term. This is the best thing about these threads, learning and sharing information, and the data archived to help others as they continue research on these weapons. Very nicely done! All the best, Jim