Question about integral bolsters

Emanuel · 12th November 2013, 01:10 AM

Quote:

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 · 12th November 2013, 01:24 AM

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 · 13th November 2013, 11:42 PM

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

Emanuel · 14th November 2013, 03:57 AM

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 · 14th November 2013, 01:16 PM

"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 · 14th November 2013, 09:28 PM

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 · 14th November 2013, 10:34 PM

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.

12th November 2013, 01:24 AM	#2
Emanuel Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 1,242	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

13th November 2013, 11:42 PM	#3
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	I have a Wedung with a - kind of- integral bolster.

14th November 2013, 03:57 AM	#4
Emanuel Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 1,242	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

14th November 2013, 01:16 PM	#5
Emanuel Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 1,242	"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?

14th November 2013, 09:28 PM	#6
Timo Nieminen Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 422	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.

14th November 2013, 10:34 PM	#7
Emanuel Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 1,242	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.