Early Pandor Yataghan sabre??

TVV · 22nd July 2010, 07:48 PM

I have a bad feeling for this one - the blade looks really rough, almost like it was cut from a sheet of steel. The guard and the rest of the hilt do not match, and I am not sure this could be explained away with a pandour attribution. I am sorry, but to me it looks like a composite piece.
Regards,
Teodor

Dmitry · 22nd July 2010, 08:08 PM

FWIW, the turned down guard is similar in shape to the European hunting swords of the 1770s-1790s, albeit a crude one.

Jim McDougall · 22nd July 2010, 08:32 PM

I must agree with Teodor, and this appears very much an item made 'in the style of' a yataghan type sword, which has some age, but most likely late 19th century. It has an almost theatrical appearance in the stylized elements, and the blade as noted seems like sheet stock, very heavy and thick looking.
The curious guard, which is a block like interpretation of a weapon of the hirschfanger form in a grouping of these in a museum in Vienna, attributed to pandours, but probably actually of later provenance. One of these has the 'Vivat Pandur' motto on the blade, which was a popular slogan added much later in recognition of these troops which had by then achieved a dubious notoriety.

The original pandour units of Baron von Trenck were assembled in 1744, though numbers of these units had been auxiliaries in Austrias Imperial armies since the early 18th century. As auxiliary units, these troops used exotic and often wild looking fashion and all types of 'oriental' type weaponry, operating as foragers and skirmishers that typically exceeded regulation. When thier depradations became out of control, they were disbanded and von Trenck was imprisoned, where he died in prison in 1749.
The concept for these auxiliary units continued in similar application in a number of Continental armies, including Germany's 'Freikorps'.

While the original pandour forces indeed had certain reference to a degree of use of the yataghans, these were among a wide range of variants of swords and hangers as these troops were privately raised and from regions in the Balkans and East Europe, with 'oriental' costume and weapons favored. For this item, that attribution seems improbable, though I very much enjoy seeing this very esoteric topic brought up!!!

By the 19th century, certain exotic units existed as auxiliaries in a number of armies, but the 'vivat pandur' inscriptions were typically bravado placed on hunting weapons in my opinion...very much like 'Remember the Alamo' on some hunting type Bowies. This example seems far later than even the period of these units. Just my opinion, and I wish I could be more optimistic. I sure hate to welcome your post with not so good news.

Best regards,
Jim

ariel · 22nd July 2010, 10:42 PM

double posting, sorry....

ariel · 22nd July 2010, 11:01 PM

Dora Boskovic in her book about Yataghans in the collection of the State Muzeum in Zagreb writes that the famous memoires of Baron Franjo von Trent (1711-1749, unit established allegedly in 1743) were a later forgery. Also, using European imid-18-th century iconography of travels through the Balkans with sketches of the exotically-looking locals with their even more exotic weapons, there is not a single yataghan in sight until at least end of 18th century. Thus, she doubts ( or dismisses altogether) the idea of von Trent arming his pandours with yataghans.

I also have my antennae twitching: something is not right about this yataghan, for the same reasons outlined earlier by others. The quality of the blade can be judged only by the current owner, but I cannot believe that any actual yataghan user would have put the handle backwards!
I also do not enjoy passing bad news, sorry....

Dmitry · 22nd July 2010, 11:37 PM

Here is a Pandur combination sword-pistol from the book by J.LUGOSI - KARDOK.
It has a yataghan-like blade, which he dates to the 1700s.

Jim McDougall · 23rd July 2010, 12:39 AM

The excellent book by Ms. Boskovic seems to be an outstanding reference, and I wish I had a copy! It is interesting about the reference to Baron von Trencks memoires being a forgery, but as sensationalized as his case was in the times it does not seem surprising that such things would occur.

What are a matter of well established and documented fact are the descriptions of the exploits of his units of pandours, which as noted were disbanded in 1749 as he was imprisoned. It is important to note that these troops under his command were assembled from mercenaries that were comprised of numerous ethnic groups from various regions. They were an essentially privately assembled force of irregular troops who obviously would have used thier own weapons, though acting as auxiliaries for the Imperial Army of Austria.

Since these troops were essentially private and operating outside the regulatory standards of the army, it seems that it would be impossible to determine exactly what weapons were used by whom, and they were using all types of weapons from regions which had been under Ottoman suzerainty.
There were of course yataghans of Ottoman form used throughout the Balkans, including Croatia, which comprised the larger component of von Trencks forces. Since these troops essentially became outlaw, it seems unlikely provenanced examples would have been reliably documented.

While I would not question the well established authority of this very esteemed author and curator, I am admittedly a bit surprised at the assertion that no yataghans were in use in these regions, thus presumably could not have been used by von Trencks pandours. This would be like saying that the 'trench gun' shotguns were not ever used in Viet Nam, since they were outside regulation .

It must be conceded that a great number of the weapons that are believed to have been used by pandours, particularly the horsemen,often had heavier deep bellied 'yataghan' blades, and typically European style hilts or in many cases karabela or shallow yataghan eared types, along with of course varying European style sabres. The foot troops, however, seem to have in some degree carried the more familiar yataghan as a secondary weapon in the sash in janissary fashion. It seems I was once corrected in my assumption that Balkan or European forces fighting Turks would not have also had yataghans

some years ago.

The attached map is to illustrate the proximity of these regions, and the likely potential diffusion of the yataghan, as well as a couple of the illustrations illustrating 'panduren' and are probably among those being disputed....and our man in question, the Baron.

Dmitry · 23rd July 2010, 02:35 AM

That is an excellent point. To my knowledge there was no uniformed "pandur sword" pattern.
I feel that for the sake of posterity it must be stressed that to call a European hunting sword a "Pandur sword" based only on the blade marked VIVAT PANDUR would be erroneous.
This was, in my opinion, just a popular hirschfanger and jagdplaute blade inscription in the mid to late 1700s, which possibly and probably originated in Austria.

Jim McDougall · 23rd July 2010, 03:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dmitry

That is an excellent point. To my knowledge there was no uniformed "pandur sword" pattern.
I feel that for the sake of posterity it must be stressed that to call a European hunting sword a "Pandur sword" based only on the blade marked VIVAT PANDUR would be erroneous.
This was, in my opinion, just a popular hirschfanger and jagdplaute blade inscription in the mid to late 1700s, which possibly and probably originated in Austria.

Thanks very much Dmitry, I very much appreciate the support on that. Its been about 15 years since my original research on this intriguing topic, and while these Vivat Pandur swords are really attractive and appealing, they are just as noted.
R.D.C. Evans ("The Plug Bayonet" ) also wrote some great material on this motto on the plug bayonets with the motto.

All best regards,
Jim

22nd July 2010, 08:32 PM	#3
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,194	I must agree with Teodor, and this appears very much an item made 'in the style of' a yataghan type sword, which has some age, but most likely late 19th century. It has an almost theatrical appearance in the stylized elements, and the blade as noted seems like sheet stock, very heavy and thick looking. The curious guard, which is a block like interpretation of a weapon of the hirschfanger form in a grouping of these in a museum in Vienna, attributed to pandours, but probably actually of later provenance. One of these has the 'Vivat Pandur' motto on the blade, which was a popular slogan added much later in recognition of these troops which had by then achieved a dubious notoriety. The original pandour units of Baron von Trenck were assembled in 1744, though numbers of these units had been auxiliaries in Austrias Imperial armies since the early 18th century. As auxiliary units, these troops used exotic and often wild looking fashion and all types of 'oriental' type weaponry, operating as foragers and skirmishers that typically exceeded regulation. When thier depradations became out of control, they were disbanded and von Trenck was imprisoned, where he died in prison in 1749. The concept for these auxiliary units continued in similar application in a number of Continental armies, including Germany's 'Freikorps'. While the original pandour forces indeed had certain reference to a degree of use of the yataghans, these were among a wide range of variants of swords and hangers as these troops were privately raised and from regions in the Balkans and East Europe, with 'oriental' costume and weapons favored. For this item, that attribution seems improbable, though I very much enjoy seeing this very esoteric topic brought up!!! By the 19th century, certain exotic units existed as auxiliaries in a number of armies, but the 'vivat pandur' inscriptions were typically bravado placed on hunting weapons in my opinion...very much like 'Remember the Alamo' on some hunting type Bowies. This example seems far later than even the period of these units. Just my opinion, and I wish I could be more optimistic. I sure hate to welcome your post with not so good news. Best regards, Jim Attached Images

22nd July 2010, 10:42 PM	#4
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	double posting, sorry.... Last edited by ariel; 22nd July 2010 at 11:02 PM.

22nd July 2010, 11:37 PM	#6
Dmitry Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 607	Here is a Pandur combination sword-pistol from the book by J.LUGOSI - KARDOK. It has a yataghan-like blade, which he dates to the 1700s. Attached Images

23rd July 2010, 12:39 AM	#7
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,194	The excellent book by Ms. Boskovic seems to be an outstanding reference, and I wish I had a copy! It is interesting about the reference to Baron von Trencks memoires being a forgery, but as sensationalized as his case was in the times it does not seem surprising that such things would occur. What are a matter of well established and documented fact are the descriptions of the exploits of his units of pandours, which as noted were disbanded in 1749 as he was imprisoned. It is important to note that these troops under his command were assembled from mercenaries that were comprised of numerous ethnic groups from various regions. They were an essentially privately assembled force of irregular troops who obviously would have used thier own weapons, though acting as auxiliaries for the Imperial Army of Austria. Since these troops were essentially private and operating outside the regulatory standards of the army, it seems that it would be impossible to determine exactly what weapons were used by whom, and they were using all types of weapons from regions which had been under Ottoman suzerainty. There were of course yataghans of Ottoman form used throughout the Balkans, including Croatia, which comprised the larger component of von Trencks forces. Since these troops essentially became outlaw, it seems unlikely provenanced examples would have been reliably documented. While I would not question the well established authority of this very esteemed author and curator, I am admittedly a bit surprised at the assertion that no yataghans were in use in these regions, thus presumably could not have been used by von Trencks pandours. This would be like saying that the 'trench gun' shotguns were not ever used in Viet Nam, since they were outside regulation . It must be conceded that a great number of the weapons that are believed to have been used by pandours, particularly the horsemen,often had heavier deep bellied 'yataghan' blades, and typically European style hilts or in many cases karabela or shallow yataghan eared types, along with of course varying European style sabres. The foot troops, however, seem to have in some degree carried the more familiar yataghan as a secondary weapon in the sash in janissary fashion. It seems I was once corrected in my assumption that Balkan or European forces fighting Turks would not have also had yataghans some years ago. The attached map is to illustrate the proximity of these regions, and the likely potential diffusion of the yataghan, as well as a couple of the illustrations illustrating 'panduren' and are probably among those being disputed....and our man in question, the Baron. Attached Images Last edited by Jim McDougall; 23rd July 2010 at 01:38 AM.

22nd July 2010, 07:48 PM	#1
TVV Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Bay Area Posts: 1,660	I have a bad feeling for this one - the blade looks really rough, almost like it was cut from a sheet of steel. The guard and the rest of the hilt do not match, and I am not sure this could be explained away with a pandour attribution. I am sorry, but to me it looks like a composite piece. Regards, Teodor

22nd July 2010, 08:08 PM	#2
Dmitry Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 607	FWIW, the turned down guard is similar in shape to the European hunting swords of the 1770s-1790s, albeit a crude one.

22nd July 2010, 11:01 PM	#5
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Dora Boskovic in her book about Yataghans in the collection of the State Muzeum in Zagreb writes that the famous memoires of Baron Franjo von Trent (1711-1749, unit established allegedly in 1743) were a later forgery. Also, using European imid-18-th century iconography of travels through the Balkans with sketches of the exotically-looking locals with their even more exotic weapons, there is not a single yataghan in sight until at least end of 18th century. Thus, she doubts ( or dismisses altogether) the idea of von Trent arming his pandours with yataghans. I also have my antennae twitching: something is not right about this yataghan, for the same reasons outlined earlier by others. The quality of the blade can be judged only by the current owner, but I cannot believe that any actual yataghan user would have put the handle backwards! I also do not enjoy passing bad news, sorry....

23rd July 2010, 02:35 AM	#8
Dmitry Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 607	That is an excellent point. To my knowledge there was no uniformed "pandur sword" pattern. I feel that for the sake of posterity it must be stressed that to call a European hunting sword a "Pandur sword" based only on the blade marked VIVAT PANDUR would be erroneous. This was, in my opinion, just a popular hirschfanger and jagdplaute blade inscription in the mid to late 1700s, which possibly and probably originated in Austria.