Quote:
Originally Posted by TVV
OK, I will try to answer this in the most serious, and hopefully the most productive manner possible.
When it comes to the specific khanjar that started the thread, I am actually inclined to agree that it is Turkish. So I am not arguing about this particular item.
However, the very generalized statement that the vast majority of Balkan weapons from the 18th and 19th centuries are actually Turkish is incorrect on multiple levels.
There was extensive arms and armor production in the Balkans during these times, documented by the Ottoman administration itself for the purpose of administering the craftsmen and merchants and collect appropriate taxes. Elgood has done a great job of providing references to these records. In fact, a good portion of the arms and armor production in the Balkans was exported all over the Ottoman Empire and even as far as areas under nominal Ottoman control, such as Algeria for example.
|
Yet, you are generally referring again to the period POST the ottoman occupation of the Balkans!
"There was extensive arms and armor production in the Balkans during these times, documented by the Ottoman administration itself for the purpose of administering the craftsmen and merchants and collect appropriate taxes. Elgood has done a great job of providing references to these records. In fact, a good portion of the arms and armor production in the Balkans was exported all over the Ottoman Empire and even as far as areas under nominal Ottoman control, such as Algeria for example."
This all refers to the production of arms AFTER the Ottoman occupation!
Where are the archeological finds of "yathagans," (if the yathagan originated in the Balkans) or other Balkan made weapons BEFORE the Ottoman occupation?!
The Bulgarians, Serbs, Greek, Romanians and Albanians all fought bitterly against the Ottoman invasion, yet all archeological finds from that period reveal only Western European (mostly Italian and Spanish blades) and Turkish weapons.
And while we might speculate that the Turkish yataghan was inspired by the Greek kopis or the Iberian falcata, there is no historical evidence to support this. Nothing whatsoever. There isn't a single find of kopis/falcata/yathagan type blade dating from the Middle Ages. As there is no archeological evidence that curved blades with the edge on the outside were produced in the Balkans before the Ottoman occupation. Not even in the antiquity with the exception of the kopis, falcata and of the curved blades used by the Illyrians, Dacians and Thracians, namely the sica, the falx and the rhompaia that were all derived from agricultural tools, and had a single edge on the inside of the curvature.
And between their use and the appearance of curved swords passed more than 1000 years of use of straight swords.
You mentioned that the curved swords were known in the Balkans from the 9th century. I am not familiar with this, and if I remember correctly the curved blades (with the edge on the outside) appeared in the 8th century with the "people of the steppes" and were brought to Europe in the 9th century by Magyar and Turkic (Turkic meaning the ancestors of the current day Turks) tribes. Moreover, there is a big way between being known and being produced...
And by the way, the Mamluks were also Turkic.
I attach below a photo of the sword of Stephen the Great of Moldavia (kept in Topkapi Palace museum in Istanbul) who fought successfully more than 30 battles against the Ottomans while sporting his sword with a Toledo blade.
And as I said earlier, I do not consider a blade made by a Turkish smith, in a clear Turkish style (without any features that would differentiate it from a similar weapon made in Istanbul), as a Balkan blade only because it was produced in workshop located somewhere in the Balkans.
But this is my take, based on my incomplete knowledge on the subject. It may be quite far from truth but as long as I do not see compelling historical evidence to prove it wrong, I will stick to it.