Question about integral bolsters

[Emanuel]

Hello,

A question has been bugging me for a long time now.

Where does the integral bolster on bladed weapons come from?

By integral bolster I mean that the blade, bolster and tang are all formed from one piece. Simplistically, the bolster is produced when the blade is roughly formed. Two steps are made in the stock metal. The blade is drawn to shape on one side, the tang on the other, leaving a portion of thicker material between blade and tang.

Why it exists can be explained by the need to reinforce the blade where it is weakest, subjected to the most stress.

It exists on swords and spears in the East and South-Sast Asian context. But when does this feature enter European and west Asian bladesmithing technique?

The integral bolster was not a feature of the Bronze Age, or the classical Greco-Roman period. Neither the machaira, nor the kopis, Dacian falx or the Thracian Romphaia had such a feature.

In the past, whenever I picked on this feature I was told not to worry about it, that it is know and it is just there. Whether or not a sword had an integral bolster was irrelevant.

As far as I can think however, only four weapon shapes in the Mediterranean sphere share this feature in pre-20th century times:

- the Balkan karakulak
- the Kabyle flyssa
- the Laz biçag (Black Sea Yatagan)
- Central - east Anatolian yataghan

The dated examples of the swords listed above, gleamed from this forum and from dealer databases range from 1827 on the Kabyle flyssa, 1841 on the Anatolian yataghans, 1876 on the Bulgarian karakulak, and 1888 on the Laz biçag.

All other Ottoman yataghan have a decorative bolster or ferule that is not an integral part of the blade. The oldest yataghan, produced in 1526 for Suleiman the Magnificent does not have an integral bolster. It has a bolster similar to those of Central Asian swords like the khukri and the saylaawa (khyber sword).

So where does the integral bolster come from? What other blade types have it? Is it purely a 19th-century Anatolian development? What is the timeline of its adoption?

Cheers!
Emanuel

[Timo Nieminen]

I've seen Medieval European knives with integral (as in forged-in-one-piece) bolsters. With some, I might be wrong, as they might have been welded or brazed on, but some little bolsters are clearly forged as part of the blade. Welded/brazed (or no bolster) appears to be more common.

Do early Central Asian sabres have integral tunkou (to use the Chinese name; the collar at the base of the blade, like the Japanese habaki)? I know later ones are usually separate, and not attached (just tightly fitted), but some of the early ones look like they might be integral (or welded on).

(IIRC, I've seen west Asian bronze swords with integral bolsters. Can't think of European examples. Easy to do with bronze, since you're casting instead of forging.)

[KuKulzA28]

Another example comes to mind:

Knives from Kerala have integral bolsters.

[Emanuel]

Thanks guys!

Yes on the Kerala knives, but a fair distance from Anatolia.

Timo the tukou and habaki are not integral. In the case of nihonto the habaki isn't even structural, it serves as an interface with the scabbard to protect the surface of the blade, not to reinforce the blade. And again, how and when did the integral bolster enter Anatolian bladesmithing when it is absent from neighbouring cultures?

Any reference I could check for the medieval knives? I haven't seen anything with an integral bolster.

And, to clarify, I am looking for one-piece bolster construction in ferrous bladesmithing, not bronze casting.

Cheers!
Emanuel

[Timo Nieminen]

Originally Posted by Emanuel

Timo the tukou and habaki are not integral. In the case of nihonto the habaki isn't even structural, it serves as an interface with the scabbard to protect the surface of the blade, not to reinforce the blade.

See Iaroslav Lebedynsky, De l'épée Scythe au sabre Mongol, Errance, Paris, 2008, pg 168 C(e), for a knife or sword with a possible integral collar, and pg 175 v, for a sword. I wouldn't call these bolsters, since they have a guard butted up against them, and are part of the blade, rather than the hilt. I can't tell from the drawings whether these are integral or not.

(There is at least one rivetted-on tunkou in that book; there is some diversity in how these are done.)

Originally Posted by Emanuel

Any reference I could check for the medieval knives? I haven't seen anything with an integral bolster.

Will look.

[Emanuel]

Thanks Timo!

[Timo Nieminen]

Some candidates for late Medieval knives with integral bolsters:
http://finds.org.uk/database/artefacts/record/id/86821
http://finds.org.uk/database/artefacts/record/id/86819
http://finds.org.uk/database/artefacts/record/id/86817
http://finds.org.uk/database/artefacts/record/id/86808

According to Paul Binns, integral bolsters appear in early Tudor. An iron tang is welded on to a steel blade on these, and the bolster is formed from the join: http://www.paul-binns-swords.co.uk/knives.html

[Timo Nieminen]

See JUM#13, JUM#14, JUM#16, JUM#17, JUM#18 in http://www.ucl.ac.uk/iams/newsletter...2005_feuerbach for some examples of Central Asian knives that appear to have integral bolsters.

[Emanuel]

Originally Posted by KuKulzA28

Another example comes to mind:

Knives from Kerala have integral bolsters.

Turns out the Kerala knives do not have integral bolsters. They are made from multiple parts.

[Emanuel]

Thank you Timo!


I had a quick chat with Paul Binns. It seems that in the Late-Medieval and Tudor periods knives were often made by welding a shear steel blade to a wrought iron handle. The bolster was the junction of the weld.

I got the Iaroslav Lebedynsky book, a very good source to have. There's mention of the bolster feature appearing on tatar sabres. These are generally the tounkou feature seen on Mongolian and Chinese sabres, and they area separate. The text suggests that these "manchons au talon" were sometimes forged integrally to the blade but it glosses over this without examples. Frustrating.

Unfortunately the pictures of the JUM knives aren't good enough to tell for sure. I see a collar at the base of the blade but is it integral?

Along with the examples I've listed in my original post I'll add the Bou-Saada knives and the Genoese knives they resemble.

On all of these 19th century weapons we see a thick integral bolster on thick blades, when earlier blades were thinner and did not need an integral bolster.

Emanuel

[ariel]

I have a Wedung with a - kind of- integral bolster.

[Emanuel]

And I have some sikin from Aceh with wonderful crown integral bolsters. Fine in the south-east Asian context, but not from the Mediterranean or Ottoman sphere.

Any west/central Asian examples?

Yes, the integral bolster has a medieval tradition in western European and Italian cutlery. But why and how its transfer to heavy long swords in Ottoman regions when the standard sabre design was good enough?

Why blades with heavy integral bolsters in Anatolia, the Balkans, and Algeria, coincident with a 300-year tradition of thin flat blades with separate ornamental ferules?

So, in the Mediterranean (and Black Sea) basins we have:
- Maybe Kuban/Circassian/Tatar knives and sabres - very early
- Genovese knives - early
- Anatolian yataghan with Turkush ribbon - early/middle
- Kabyle flyssa - middle
- Bulgarian karakulak - middle/late
- Ionian yataghan with T-pommel - late
- Pontic Laz bicag - very late

All coastal areas within the Ottoman sphere of influence and on the Genovese/Italian trade routes.

Emanuel

[Emanuel]

"The Art of the Muslim Knight" includes examples of Mughal, Rajasthani, and Persian kards from the 17th century with integral bolster construction. There are also examples of Ottoman kard and fork sets with integral bolsters, dating from that time.

The feature was well used in small cutlery by the 17th century then but again, how and why was it transferred to large sword blades?

[Timo Nieminen]

Hmm. We could call the karakulak, flyssa, and yataghan knives rather than swords (in the same sense that the European sword-sized messer is a "knife"). Then the question is why use integral bolsters on very large knives as well as swords. Or rather, why use something different.

I think it is enough explanation for why these are constructed differently to sabres: there're built like giant knives.

How heavy do yataghans get? My only large example has a blade the length of a typical katana blade, and is all of 400g. The grip is lighter than the original, I think. Originally, it might have been as heavy as 500g! But I have a shorter one which manages 465g; it has a really thick blade.

[Emanuel]

Thank you for staying on this Timo

I disagree with you on the typology of these weapons, but that's irrelevant so I won't get into that.

On the subject of weight, I've been thinking about it. Specifically, do you need a substantial bolster as you go up in weight and length? Was the blade liable to snap at the handle?

A typical large two-handed messer was something like 1m long, and 1.8kg ( including blade and long slab hilt) and didn't have a bolster.

I haven't weighted my flyssas but the longest has a 110cm long, 1.5cm thick blade and certainly feels heavier than 1kg.

[Timo Nieminen]

I don't think you need a substantial (or integral) bolster as the weapon gets longer and heavier. Among yataghan-like weapons, the heavier ones are more likely to have an integral bolster, but I think that's because they have heavier hilts and thicker blades at the base. That is, the extra weight follows from having the integral bolster, rather than the other way around.

The meeting of tang and blade is a potential weak point, and blades do break there. A blade with an integral bolster is less likely to break there. If the integral-bolster heavy-bladed weapons are used as weapon/tools like khukuri, then it might be important for strength. If it's a "pure" weapon, less important.

[A. G. Maisey]

I'm not going to talk about ethnic knives, or historic knives, I'm going comment only on why a maker would choose to use an integral bolster rather than a bolster or guard that is pinned and soldered.

If you pin and solder you need to drill through the blade.

Holes in blades create a weak point.

A bolster forged from, or fire welded to the blade has the opposite effect:- it strengthens the blade.

Its not necessarily because knives have a habit of breaking at the junction of blade and hilt, its just that an integral bolster is superior construction to a bolster pinned and soldered.

Then there is the factor of craftsman preference. If the maker is primarily a smith, it is easier for him to make a blade with an integral bolster than it is for him to fiddle around with drill/pin/solder. If the maker is primarily a cutler, it easier for him to drill/pin/solder than to consider an integral bolster. The cutler will get a forging that he needs to turn into a knife, a flat blade without the lump that needs to be filed to shape for a bolster is easier for him to work with.

I have made many blades in damascus with integral bolsters, I made custom knives and blades for a fairly lengthy period, about 20 years from memory, and I was an early member of the Australian Knife Makers Guild. I was primarily a smith, not a cutler.

[Emanuel]

Thank you Timo and Alan for your explanations.

I am approaching the questions from a historical point of view and while I understand the advantages of forging a blade with an integral bolster, I am also trying to understand how this preference or technique spread in a certain area and time frame.

For almost four hundred years the yataghan type of blade in the Western Ottoman empire is forged flat, with a decorative bolster soldered or fixed to the base of the blade with an adhesive, not pinned. Ivory, horn, or metal scales are pinned to the tang to form the handle and a decorative strip is affixed around the edges of the handle.

At the same time, small cutlery in Italy and in Central Asia appears with a forged or welded bolster. In Western Europe this has late-medieval roots. Knives with integral bolster are also made in Istanbul in the 1700s.

Then at some point around 1800, or maybe earlier, we see instances of the yataghan type of blade with a forged bolster, in Anatolia, Kabylia, and Bulgaria. This method does not replace the older one, and is not related to blade size in the Bulgarian context, but in Anatolia appears to accompany large blades with T-section. The forged bolster is is not a technique used in other sword or sabre designs anywhere near the Ottoman empire at the time, but some earlier 17th century Tatar sabres seem to use it.

The sporadic adoption of this method of bladesmithing makes me wonder if we have a peculiar, itinerant group (possibly ethnic) moving around and spreading this bladesmithing technique and preference. If we do, then what is the direction of this movement?

The style of very long and heavy yataghan with very substantial integral bolsters seems to become popular again towards the end of the 19th century in rural Anatolia. In this context it supposedly becomes a show feature, part of costume.

Emanuel

[Emanuel]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.