Ottoman/Albanian Khanjar scabbard markings

[mariusgmioc]

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.

[TVV]

Originally Posted by mariusgmioc

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.

Very logical approach, but it ignores the cultural context entirely. Apart from the location of where something was produced or assembled, the cultural context matters.

I am attaching an example. The weapon in the attached photo derives from the Italian storta, especially in terms of the blade and the guard. The blade itself was made in Europe, quite possibly Italy as well or Central Europe. It is hard to say who fashioned the grip, which is decorated in Ottoman style. If I had to make an educated guess, a descendant of Jewish migrants from Iberia seems like a plausible option. Its intended user was almost certainly a corsair of either Turkish origins or a Dutch or English renegade.

If we follow your approach, then this is really an Italian cutlass or an Italian/Ottoman hybrid. And yet, Eric Claude would call this an Algerian nimcha, even though apart from being assembled in Algeria, its parts, makers and users were not Algerian per se. He does so because these nimchas were regionally specific to Algeria, where they were used by corsairs operating out of Algerian ports.

When I refer to a weapon as Albanian or Sudanese or Viking, it is a cultural and regional attribution rather than a claim on ethnic origins. The latter is usually very difficult to lay an absolute claim on anyway.

[mariusgmioc]

Originally Posted by TVV

Very logical approach, but it ignores the cultural context entirely. Apart from the location of where something was produced or assembled, the cultural context matters.

I am attaching an example. The weapon in the attached photo derives from the Italian storta, especially in terms of the blade and the guard. The blade itself was made in Europe, quite possibly Italy as well or Central Europe. It is hard to say who fashioned the grip, which is decorated in Ottoman style. If I had to make an educated guess, a descendant of Jewish migrants from Iberia seems like a plausible option. Its intended user was almost certainly a corsair of either Turkish origins or a Dutch or English renegade.

If we follow your approach, then this is really an Italian cutlass or an Italian/Ottoman hybrid. And yet, Eric Claude would call this an Algerian nimcha, even though apart from being assembled in Algeria, its parts, makers and users were not Algerian per se. He does so because these nimchas were regionally specific to Algeria, where they were used by corsairs operating out of Algerian ports.

When I refer to a weapon as Albanian or Sudanese or Viking, it is a cultural and regional attribution rather than a claim on ethnic origins. The latter is usually very difficult to lay an absolute claim on anyway.

What you are saying only validates my point.

You call this an ALGERIAN NIMCHA precisely because it has some very distinctive features of an Algerian nimcha... while it might have been assembled in Morocco or in Egypt, or in Malta. Yet you clasify it based on the clear distinctive features. Same way a yataghan that has all the features of a Turkish yataghan is still a Turkish yataghan even if it was assembled in Bosnia.

However, if the yataghan displays some distinctive features that sets it apart from the mainland Turkish yataghans, like a characteristic front bolster and pommel or some specific decorations, then it can be considered as a Greek/Bosnian yataghan.

[Ian]

Gentlemen,

Let me offer an analogy from a completely different and modern perspective. In Australia we no longer manufacture automobiles, pickups, or trucks. However, we do assemble vehicles from parts imported from overseas. Until recently, we had a venerable old Australian car company called Holden. For the last 20 years or so it has imported parts from Japanese manufacturers and assembled the vehicles in Australia, and branded them as Holdens, and therefore Australian vehicles (not Japanese). However, some of those same Japanese carmakers exported fully assembled vehicles to Australia and sold them here under their own brand name. Exactly the same vehicles but two different companies, one Australian and one Japanese.

Elsewhere, local assembly outside the country of origin can add certain "preferred local options," and might even create its own industry to manufacture a new version, imitating the original and eventually achieving comparable quality. In time the original form becomes rebranded as a local product.

It happens a lot. Can we not have the same scenario with swords?

Whatever designation is given depends on who is talking. Australian/Japanese? Turkish/Armenian?

If an Armenian insists his yataghan is an Armenian sword, I'm not going to argue with him. It's his sword. So I'm happy to say that an Armenian adaptation of an Ottoman yataghan or kilij is an Armenian sword when it has been made or assembled in Armenia and used by an Armenian. Just as I'm happy to drive my Australian Holden Colorado pick-up that was assembled in Australia.