Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveF
mahratt, ariel, Jim,
Thanks for your comments and for your thorough summary of the work behind the proper identification of the source of these swords, Jim.
When I first saw this sword it reminded me of something I'd seen on the Africanarms.com website: http://www.africanarms.com/gallery?2...tagan-84-cm-gr This included a link to a sword in the British Museum that was collected in Morocco and presented to the museum in 1892: https://www.britishmuseum.org/collec...ct/E_Af-5986-a.
It was only when I saw discussions on here from years ago, proving the sword's home to be in the Trabzon region that I understood why African Arms called it a Black Sea Yataghan.
Is it unusual that a weapon native to the eastern Black Sea should have a few examples emerging out of North Africa? Is it possible that some copies of the original design were made in North Africa, or is my imagination getting the better of me? |
To paraphrase the famous Latin expression "Viae Domini imperceptae sunt", we can say: "the ways of the swords are inscrutable". Weapons have always been actively moving around the world. So it is not surprising that the sword of Lazes, who, as mentioned above, were sailors, ended up in Morocco. It is also logical that the one who bought Laz Bichak in Morocco (and naturally did not see such a weapon before) decided that this sword was from North Africa.
As an example of unusual "journeys of swords", I suggest looking at this sword in the photo. It is kept in the collection of the Hermitage in St. Petersburg (Russia). We see a Georgian handle and an Indian blade. An unimaginable combination. But nevertheless it exists. And if an Indian blade could have ended up in the Caucasus in the 18th - early 19th centuries, it is not surprising that Laz Bichak ended up in North Africa in the late 19th century