Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post

ariel · 26th August 2019, 05:24 PM

This is a $64,000 question, but...
All frescoes show pommels in profile, and the better-preserved ones show them to be identical to the later Caucasian shashkas. None of them show a view along the edge. Thus, no conclusion can be made re. presence or absence of slits ( eared handles).

Bakradze and Kiziria published a highly-documented paper about guardless sabers of Western Georgia ( it is in Russian only, AFAIK), raising a question of them being forerunners of a classical shashka. Those Lekuris do not have eared handles.

The question of yataghan/shashka connection is tempting, but uncertain.

On the one hand, it is possible to assume that Western Georgian guardless sabers adopted the Ottoman fashion of "ears". Indeed, Western Georgia was under significant Ottoman influence ( and, occasionally, occupation). However, early yataghans ( Suleiman, Bayazet etc) did not have eared handles, and the origin of ears on later yataghans is a complete mystery. Who adopted it from whom, or was it just a parallel development still requires a lot of info we do not currently have.

On the other hand, shashka as such is not a yataghan. Yataghan was a secondary weapon of infantry, worn tucked under the belt, almost horizontally across the body, edge down, drawn directly by the right hand. Kind of a long knife.
Shashka was a primary infantry/cavalry weapon carried almost vertically along the leg, edge up, drawn by the dominant right hand reaching across the body. It never (!) had recurved blade. It was a slashing, not a cutting weapon, a saber rather than knife.

Again, the minutiae of weapons of that areal are either irretrievably lost, or not found yet. Let's hope that Turkish and Georgian weapon historians redouble their efforts to find the " pro's" and the "con's" of the potential connection between the two. They have access to primary sources that we do not have, as exemplified by the study of monumental art shown by Talantov and Dvalishvili. As of now, my answer to your question is purely circumstantial, and I shall gladly accept better evidence.

26th August 2019, 05:24 PM	#13
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	This is a $64,000 question, but... All frescoes show pommels in profile, and the better-preserved ones show them to be identical to the later Caucasian shashkas. None of them show a view along the edge. Thus, no conclusion can be made re. presence or absence of slits ( eared handles). Bakradze and Kiziria published a highly-documented paper about guardless sabers of Western Georgia ( it is in Russian only, AFAIK), raising a question of them being forerunners of a classical shashka. Those Lekuris do not have eared handles. The question of yataghan/shashka connection is tempting, but uncertain. On the one hand, it is possible to assume that Western Georgian guardless sabers adopted the Ottoman fashion of "ears". Indeed, Western Georgia was under significant Ottoman influence ( and, occasionally, occupation). However, early yataghans ( Suleiman, Bayazet etc) did not have eared handles, and the origin of ears on later yataghans is a complete mystery. Who adopted it from whom, or was it just a parallel development still requires a lot of info we do not currently have. On the other hand, shashka as such is not a yataghan. Yataghan was a secondary weapon of infantry, worn tucked under the belt, almost horizontally across the body, edge down, drawn directly by the right hand. Kind of a long knife. Shashka was a primary infantry/cavalry weapon carried almost vertically along the leg, edge up, drawn by the dominant right hand reaching across the body. It never (!) had recurved blade. It was a slashing, not a cutting weapon, a saber rather than knife. Again, the minutiae of weapons of that areal are either irretrievably lost, or not found yet. Let's hope that Turkish and Georgian weapon historians redouble their efforts to find the " pro's" and the "con's" of the potential connection between the two. They have access to primary sources that we do not have, as exemplified by the study of monumental art shown by Talantov and Dvalishvili. As of now, my answer to your question is purely circumstantial, and I shall gladly accept better evidence.