Yi saber

josh stout · 13th June 2007, 06:47 PM

This is a Yi saber with the typical Tibetan style blade and distinctive large round pommel. I do not know if the Yi produced such blades or traded for them from Tibet, but they are identical to Tibetan blades. The handle, pommel and scabbard are fairly diagnostic though scabbards from Eastern Tibet are very similar when done without fittings. The pommel is the real sign this is Yi. This one may be ivory, but they come in a variety of materials while all maintaining the same shape. I have posted several pictures, as most people are not familiar with this kind of sword.

http://i77.photobucket.com/albums/j6...duation376.jpg

http://i77.photobucket.com/albums/j6...duation375.jpg

http://i77.photobucket.com/albums/j6...duation372.jpg

http://i77.photobucket.com/albums/j6...duation374.jpg

I hope these are interesting.
Josh

Jim McDougall · 13th June 2007, 07:42 PM

Hi Josh,
Very interesting sword of Tibetan/Bhutanese form. This looks like a good 'working' example rather than the examples of more ceremonial mounts of Tibet and Bhutan with profuse fretwork. I have never quite understood exactly how these swords with more of a knob type pommel could be determined either Tibetan or Bhutanese. I have always thought of course of the Tibetan 'ke tri' with trilobate pommel, but it seems I have seen both hilt types attributed to Tibet, while never seeing a ke tri attributed to Bhutan.

I am really puzzled by the 'Yi' term. Was that not the Korean dynasty?
Are you saying this sword is Korean?

Best regards,
Jim

Andrew · 13th June 2007, 08:07 PM

Hi Jim. Josh was, I believe, referring to the Yi "Minority" in China:

http://www.paulnoll.com/China/Minorities/min-Yi.html

Best,
Andrew

ariel · 13th June 2007, 08:48 PM

Just a bit of legalistic quibbling:
Why saber?
Usually, saber is defined as a ( mostly) single-edged, curved blade ( shamshir, Kilij).
Palash ( or any other spelling) has a straight blade that is single edged. Sword is a straight blade that is double-edged.
At least, that is how they are defined by the Russian weapon specialists ( Miller, Astvatsaturyan, Trubnikov, etc).
Thus, Tibetan swords are , strictly speaking, palashes. No?

Many weapons ( Kora, sossun patah etc, mostly Indian) cannot be classied according to that principle. Also, what to do with straight, but partially double-edged blades ( Khanda, for example) or even fully double-edged ( firangi)?

Jim McDougall · 13th June 2007, 09:34 PM

Hi Andrew,
Thanks for the clarification

I'm way behind in my homework on China!!

and I figured it was something like that as there was sound implication in Josh's identification.
All the best,
Jim

Jim McDougall · 13th June 2007, 09:56 PM

Hi Ariel,
I think the terminology thing is one of the most confounding things in weapons study, and that is multiplied by semantics, colloquial terms, transliteration and general terms that broadly cover all forms of edged weapons in certain category.

I do know that in regulation swords the term sabre is often applied to straight military swords especially in British cavalry weapons. For example in the 1780's there was a straight sabre termed a spadroon with straight single edged blade , and it was generally accepted among basket hilt swords that a straight single edge sword was a 'backsword' while the double edged was a 'broadsword. This became even more confusing when the Scottish basket hilts of the 17th-19th c. began being termed 'claymores'. The claymore was of course a huge two hand broadsword of the 16th c-17thc and the term in Gaelic meant 'great sword'.

To make matters even more confusing on Indian swords, when is a 'sabre' a tulwar and when is it a shamshir? the standard tulwar hilt seems to be well placed as far as correct term, but there are those with Persian type hilts that are also called tulwars.....so are we calling it by the blade or the hilt?

In North Africa, the huge broadsword we all know as kaskara, as I have discussed over the years....has never been called a kaskara in the Sudan, in fact the Sudanese have no knowledge of the term. It is simply called a sa'if, just as in Morocco and Algiers the 'nimcha' is called sa'if. In Arabia the long straight sabres are called sa'if. I have seen Ottoman kilij type hilts with straight shamshir blades instead of the distinct short, yelman blade kilij...so is it a kilij or a shamshir? I call it a shamshir with Ottoman hilt.

This goes on and on, and it really is confusing. I guess the only solution is to apply the best description possible including defining features........as far as applying a term here I guess its preference. Technically if described by the standards of Eastern Europe or Turkey..pallasche would fit. It seems I have only ever seen them termed as Tibetan swords without further definition.

tomato/tomahto I guess

All the best,
Jim

13th June 2007, 06:47 PM	#1
josh stout Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 407	Yi saber This is a Yi saber with the typical Tibetan style blade and distinctive large round pommel. I do not know if the Yi produced such blades or traded for them from Tibet, but they are identical to Tibetan blades. The handle, pommel and scabbard are fairly diagnostic though scabbards from Eastern Tibet are very similar when done without fittings. The pommel is the real sign this is Yi. This one may be ivory, but they come in a variety of materials while all maintaining the same shape. I have posted several pictures, as most people are not familiar with this kind of sword. http://i77.photobucket.com/albums/j6...duation376.jpg http://i77.photobucket.com/albums/j6...duation375.jpg http://i77.photobucket.com/albums/j6...duation372.jpg http://i77.photobucket.com/albums/j6...duation374.jpg I hope these are interesting. Josh

13th June 2007, 07:42 PM	#2
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,194	Hi Josh, Very interesting sword of Tibetan/Bhutanese form. This looks like a good 'working' example rather than the examples of more ceremonial mounts of Tibet and Bhutan with profuse fretwork. I have never quite understood exactly how these swords with more of a knob type pommel could be determined either Tibetan or Bhutanese. I have always thought of course of the Tibetan 'ke tri' with trilobate pommel, but it seems I have seen both hilt types attributed to Tibet, while never seeing a ke tri attributed to Bhutan. I am really puzzled by the 'Yi' term. Was that not the Korean dynasty? Are you saying this sword is Korean? Best regards, Jim

13th June 2007, 08:07 PM	#3
Andrew Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: USA Posts: 1,725	Hi Jim. Josh was, I believe, referring to the Yi "Minority" in China: http://www.paulnoll.com/China/Minorities/min-Yi.html Best, Andrew

13th June 2007, 08:48 PM	#4
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Just a bit of legalistic quibbling: Why saber? Usually, saber is defined as a ( mostly) single-edged, curved blade ( shamshir, Kilij). Palash ( or any other spelling) has a straight blade that is single edged. Sword is a straight blade that is double-edged. At least, that is how they are defined by the Russian weapon specialists ( Miller, Astvatsaturyan, Trubnikov, etc). Thus, Tibetan swords are , strictly speaking, palashes. No? Many weapons ( Kora, sossun patah etc, mostly Indian) cannot be classied according to that principle. Also, what to do with straight, but partially double-edged blades ( Khanda, for example) or even fully double-edged ( firangi)?

13th June 2007, 09:34 PM	#5
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,194	Hi Andrew, Thanks for the clarification I'm way behind in my homework on China!! and I figured it was something like that as there was sound implication in Josh's identification. All the best, Jim

13th June 2007, 09:56 PM	#6
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,194	Hi Ariel, I think the terminology thing is one of the most confounding things in weapons study, and that is multiplied by semantics, colloquial terms, transliteration and general terms that broadly cover all forms of edged weapons in certain category. I do know that in regulation swords the term sabre is often applied to straight military swords especially in British cavalry weapons. For example in the 1780's there was a straight sabre termed a spadroon with straight single edged blade , and it was generally accepted among basket hilt swords that a straight single edge sword was a 'backsword' while the double edged was a 'broadsword. This became even more confusing when the Scottish basket hilts of the 17th-19th c. began being termed 'claymores'. The claymore was of course a huge two hand broadsword of the 16th c-17thc and the term in Gaelic meant 'great sword'. To make matters even more confusing on Indian swords, when is a 'sabre' a tulwar and when is it a shamshir? the standard tulwar hilt seems to be well placed as far as correct term, but there are those with Persian type hilts that are also called tulwars.....so are we calling it by the blade or the hilt? In North Africa, the huge broadsword we all know as kaskara, as I have discussed over the years....has never been called a kaskara in the Sudan, in fact the Sudanese have no knowledge of the term. It is simply called a sa'if, just as in Morocco and Algiers the 'nimcha' is called sa'if. In Arabia the long straight sabres are called sa'if. I have seen Ottoman kilij type hilts with straight shamshir blades instead of the distinct short, yelman blade kilij...so is it a kilij or a shamshir? I call it a shamshir with Ottoman hilt. This goes on and on, and it really is confusing. I guess the only solution is to apply the best description possible including defining features........as far as applying a term here I guess its preference. Technically if described by the standards of Eastern Europe or Turkey..pallasche would fit. It seems I have only ever seen them termed as Tibetan swords without further definition. tomato/tomahto I guess All the best, Jim