Ottoman Hancer for translation

mariusgmioc · 15th March 2020, 10:56 AM

THANK YOU KWIATEK FOR YOUR HELP!

Now regarding Ariel's question, I think part of the answer is in the translation itself.

My theory is that wherever the Ottoman army went, they went there fully armed... and accompanied by skilled swordsmiths and gunsmiths necessary to repair the weapons damaged in combat. (This is based on the logic that they did not carry immense stocks of replacement weapons to simply replace the damaged ones with new stock, neither had they access to 2 day DHL/UPS/FedEx deliveries to be able to send their damaged weapons back to Turkey for repair and get them back in time for the next battle.)

And as soon as they conquered new territories, they established occupation garrisons that were manned with soldiers and... the smiths that accompanied them.

And this I believe explains how the Balkans have become a place of weapons production. This is supported by the fact that the Balkans were not known for their weapons production in the Middle Ages, but became known for that only AFTER the Ottoman occupation.

And I think this might be the case with other Ottoman occupied territories as well... like Syria in this case.

And that's how we end up with Turkish Ottoman weapons that were produced not in Turkey, but abroad.

Yet, I consider these weapons Turkish... unless they can be clearly diferentiated, either documented or stylistically from their Turkish counterparts. It will be impossible to differentiate a Yataghan made in Izmir by a Turkish smith from another Yataghan made in the Balkans, by the same smith that accompanied Ottoman army.

15th March 2020, 10:56 AM	#8
mariusgmioc Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Location: Austria Posts: 1,911	THANK YOU KWIATEK FOR YOUR HELP! Now regarding Ariel's question, I think part of the answer is in the translation itself. My theory is that wherever the Ottoman army went, they went there fully armed... and accompanied by skilled swordsmiths and gunsmiths necessary to repair the weapons damaged in combat. (This is based on the logic that they did not carry immense stocks of replacement weapons to simply replace the damaged ones with new stock, neither had they access to 2 day DHL/UPS/FedEx deliveries to be able to send their damaged weapons back to Turkey for repair and get them back in time for the next battle.) And as soon as they conquered new territories, they established occupation garrisons that were manned with soldiers and... the smiths that accompanied them. And this I believe explains how the Balkans have become a place of weapons production. This is supported by the fact that the Balkans were not known for their weapons production in the Middle Ages, but became known for that only AFTER the Ottoman occupation. And I think this might be the case with other Ottoman occupied territories as well... like Syria in this case. And that's how we end up with Turkish Ottoman weapons that were produced not in Turkey, but abroad. Yet, I consider these weapons Turkish... unless they can be clearly diferentiated, either documented or stylistically from their Turkish counterparts. It will be impossible to differentiate a Yataghan made in Izmir by a Turkish smith from another Yataghan made in the Balkans, by the same smith that accompanied Ottoman army. Last edited by mariusgmioc; 15th March 2020 at 11:46 AM.