Article: Notes on development of modern sabers - Role of Eastern Europe & the Hussars

Rivkin · 29th December 2004, 03:04 PM

hm. Again, I'm not exactly convinced. If it was so much an eastern european weapon, why only very few of them where in fact produced there ? At least the ones I've seen are mostly solingen. Am I wrong on this ?

Concerning chinese/japanese - japanese old straight swords are little bit more different from tachi (katana is a relatively new weapon) than kiliji from a hussar's sabre. In fact there is such thing as late chinese swords, imitating japanese technologies, and yes in this case I'll say without any doubdts that their origin is in Japan.

Radu Transylvanicus · 29th December 2004, 06:24 PM

Wolviex: A bit of a Tartaric fashioned Pole but definatelly one, as far as mustaches i`ve seen no old illustrations with Polack dudes without one (so is Hungary with the exception of King Matthias Corvinus and the Catholical clerics) regardless it was pandur, pancerny, huszaria, szlachta, hajdouks and so on ... what about Pan Wolodjowsky, shaking his right and left all the time... ?

Rivkin: its OK to stake out personal skepticism but how about most logical thing where were the first modern curved sabers (with classical elements) manufactured ? The first Hussars saber produced in the West like anyone would rationally expect was in Austria (probably Styria) after late 16th century, why because Eastearn European hussard brough it up there; probably Wolviex (he works for the National History Museum in Krakow, Poland as assistant-curator ) could tell you likely how made in Solingen the Hungarian-Polish hussar swords were...

sorry, not the case until much later...
As far as the other geographical extreme, look at the photos 15, 16, 17, where in middle East have you seen before montures like that ?

Are those Ottoman or any Middle Eastearn sabers

? I really dont think I need to bring more proof in support ... Curved sabers (scimitar family) where brought five hundred years before Ottoman incursions and the scimitar itself is not an Ottoman invented produvt but the Pala and perhaps the Kilij too were ! Sabers like the Ottoman scimitars were produced in oriental-(ised) Europe massively, specially in the conquered teritories, including Hungary after the lost battle of Mohacs when much ground was under Ottoman rule and thats one related thing but different. They had a great impact and were exactly appreciated by many until late in history and between Berlin and Istanbul sometimes its harder to tell where it begun and where it ended than in case of Japan of course (a one minded, self sufficient, closed to foreigners, separated island would have its track better printed, no doubt)...
Its really not a shallow theory but a fact ... and there werent only a few but tons of them produced, mass production enough to equip armies, just probably you havent got chance to see them, I did ...

Rivkin · 30th December 2004, 02:19 AM

I'm not trying to prove that eastern european or polish sabre was not a precursor to a modern sabre, but I believe it's much more complicated than this - solingen and passau weapon production technologies, spanish moore influence, turks, mongols and etc. are all involved in this story.

Concerning guards - picture B shows typical muslim guard. Picture 16 - is it a mix of nimcha and karabela

? Picture 18 - seen many times on shamshirs.
Picture 17 is unique, but unfortunately this type of guard did not survive (I think ?) in post-Blucher times, and does not appear on all regulation patterns before it. Is it the only thing they did - they invented new guards for old swords ?

Again I would really see something of a common turkish (like in seljuk-mongol-ottoman) origin, and try to understand what are the changes in _blades_ that been made.

P.P.S. I constantly have arguments with caucasians who come with great classification of "foreign" iranian shamshir vs. "authentic" caucasian shashkas with the same idea that it's so hard to say definitely "here is something that have never seen before" - shashka is nothing more than a guard's type...

Jim McDougall · 30th December 2004, 04:26 AM

Wolviex,
As you note, Professor Zygulski wrote, "Rembrandts 'Lisowczyk: A Study of Costume and Weapons" which appeared in the "Bulletin du Musee National de Varsovie", VI, 1965, #2,3, p.43-67, as is footnoted in the outstanding article he wrote ; "The Winged Hussars of Poland" (Arms and Armor Annual, ed. Robert Held, 1973, pp.90-103).

In "Polish Armies:1569-1696" (1) by Richard Brzezinski, Osprey, 1987, it is noted on p.5 that Rembrandts famed "Polish Rider" has often been 'mislabeled' as an officer of 'Lisowski cossacks', noting that Chroscicki (Ars Auro Prior, Warsaw, 1981) has finally identified it as a portrait of a Lithuanian nobleman, Martin Alexander Oginski. He had the portrait painted in 1655 while studying in the Netherlands.

While this sounds like the final word on the actual identity of the subject, there is still the usual debate and speculation, but the painting is most definitely Rembrandts work.
In "Rembrandts Eyes" (Simon Schama, N.Y. 1999) notes on p.599;
"...only a gentleman of the horse would have known how to sit on the mount, Polish style, not erect but leaning forward, the right hand curled backward to grasp the head of the 'buzdygan', the battle mace, left hand on the reins".

In looking again at the painting I see that the larger sword under the riders right leg is not an estoc but a large sabre (pallasche?),and the hilt of the light sabre is visible worn on his left side. In some illustrations of hussars they are seen with the estoc under the left leg.The Islamic forces had a form of estoc or straight rapier termed 'mec', but I am not clear on if they were saddle mounted like the Eastern European estocs or carried differently. In the Sudan, in an illustration which I will have to relocate, a rider on horseback is seen wearing an Ottoman hilt sabre, and under his left leg is mounted a kaskara in the same manner as the estocs of Eastern Europe.

Radu,
Actually I recognized Lebedynsky's work immediately and simply went to the volume I had seen them in. This was one of the reasons I mentioned properly crediting the illustrations. In a discussion with him a number of years ago I asked about using one of his illustrations. He indicated he had no problem with using his illustration (referring of course to in an article) as long as it was properly credited. While this is an informal discussion forum, it is still subject to copyright legality and more than anything a matter of courtesy to credit published material. As I noted also, it is helpful to readers to have references for furthering thier own research, which is why I usually provide them with comments or notes.
You've done excellent work in this presentation! and I think brought forth an outstanding topic which has important influence on the study of the development of many ethnographic swords, not just regimental military forms.
Please keep up the good work!!!!

All best regards,
Jim

wolviex · 31st December 2004, 10:12 AM

Dear Friends!
My Internet is crashed, I'm completly out of free time, so (Radu!) please forgive me my absence. In short I'll try to give you all some answers.

Jim: thank you for your help about Rembrand's Polish rider. With my bookshelf packed because of removal, and because of Christmas time in Poland, it's hard to get for me any book. This isn't Lisowczyk, that's for sure, cause when this painting was made (1655 y.) this formation was disbanded from 20 years. But Lisowczyk riders looks very similiar, because it's light cavalryman anyway. The first western articles about this painting claimed that it isn't Polish rider but Christian knight and glorifications of knighthood. You're right, and prof. Zygulski proved it, this man is sitting on horse in Polish mannere, so there is no doubt (except for armament and other things) this is Polish rider. There is no doubt this was painted on real, living model of Polish nobleman. There is no sign of so many Polish armament amongst other sumptous accesorries in Rembrand's property-room, so probably this man carried it with himself. It's Oginski's portrait? - very interesting, I'll check it, because it's not the first try of identify this man. He was Rembrand's son, then someone different, now it's Oginski - we'll see

Radu: mustaches where important but not always, and I would call it stereotype! Fashion in Poland was changing rapidly. The Polish nobleman (szlachcic) without mustaches is shaven on western fashion. It was common that noblemen returning from west, east or where ever, were bringing new fashion styles with them - AND SOMETIMES THEY WERE RETURNING WITHOUT MUSTACHES, SHOCKING EVERY RESPECTABLE NOBLEMAN

Rivkin: uhh ohh, you're hardly to convince. I'll make desperate attempt to convince you.
You're absolutly right about similarity of Polish sabres from 16th century to eastern ones. You're also right it's not so easy to say "because this was that and that" and the modern sabre is pure Polish influence. But...

1. Everything lays in details. Poland in 16 and 17th century was a country of many crossing influences. Polish sabre is nothing more but product resultant of western and eastern edged weapons. So the Hungarian-Polish sabres are similiar to persian sword, thumbring were much earlier made with valonese swords, knuckleguard isn't Polish invention too, it was known many, many years earlier. But all of this crossed in Poland, and here was improved. The handle was inclined, on eastern and western weapons it was straight. The blade was curved delicate not strong like in Turkish sabres, the knuckleguard was curved on specific angle. This all was Polish improvement. The changes in shapes, styles - notice how many new styles of sabres were introduced in Poland only during 17th century! In eastern world from centuries we have got the same forms, the same shapes. Shamshir looked in 16th century similiar to that from 18th century in general. How something so permament could rapidly at the end of 17th century inspire whole Europe, then World?

2. Poland in 17th century was one of the most important countries, not only in eastern-european politics, it's obvious, just look at historical map, and realize how huge this country was in 16 and 17th cent.! Importance of Poland depended also in trade. Not only. Take a look at Polish fashion influences, Swedish noblemen were wearing on Polish mannere! Russians were speaking in Polish in high societies, etc. And the Fashion is not only clothes but in those times weaponry too!

3. "Modern sabre" was introduced to Europe at the end of 17th and beginning of 18th century. It becames rapidly popular weapon, which push out rapiers, swords to the background. Why then? Wasn't it the same time, where perfect weapon - Polish Hussar sabre was introduced (here is more about this weapon http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=67 ) and when great Polish victory at Vienna occured? It's obvious that winner's weapon is much more desired!

It not exclude influence of east, but generally indicated great role of eastern Europe on rapidly development of "modern" sabres in Europe!
4. Blades for Polish sabres were made not only in Solingen but also in Passau, Genoa, they were imported from Persia etc., but in Poland they're produced too. But all of them were made on special orders, that's why blades from genoa visible on Hungurian-Polish sabres appears only on Polish armament in 16/17th century, not in whole Europe. Anyway for me it's natural, if someone produce great stuff I'll buy it, no matter it's Polish, German or Persian.

5. If you're still not convinced I have last argument which is not substantial argument. Influence of Polish sabre on develompent of European sabre is so called historical true. It was affirmed many years ago, before the war. There is even an interesting diagram of development and mutually influences of Western, Eastern and Polish sabres, made by our expert Stanislaw Meyer (available below!) where you can clearly see how it happened. Even if you find some errors (i.e. in dating) I think generally it's ok. Anyway it's quoting even today by authorities, and no one has negate this, so it's so called historical true.
If you're still not convinced because you've different theory of development of modern sabres, share it with us. It's your turn to, maybe, change the history!

Best regards and HAPPY NEW YEAR

Bigger diagram is here http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...x/DSCF4467.jpg

Rivkin · 31st December 2004, 03:22 PM

Wolviex:

Thank you very much ! I should probably clarify myself - I've always been convinced that the modern sabre is a polish influence

. Reading my previous posts, may be I was too agressive towards Radu's justification of this idea, but I'm not against the idea as it is.

What I don't agree with is that european curved swords is a product of _only_ polish/eastern european influence, and the direct eastern influence had no place in it. If I'm wrong, than I'm sorry.

Radu Transylvanicus · 31st December 2004, 07:32 PM

Rivkin, And maybe I shouldve brought in the theory more about the ,,deli and sipahi,, influence and about ,,kurda,, or hungarian saber made under Ottoman rule, very much like the Arabian saif and so on, it wasnt in the times of migratory invasions when Orient influenced Europe in swords ...

30th December 2004, 04:26 AM	#4
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,192	Wolviex, As you note, Professor Zygulski wrote, "Rembrandts 'Lisowczyk: A Study of Costume and Weapons" which appeared in the "Bulletin du Musee National de Varsovie", VI, 1965, #2,3, p.43-67, as is footnoted in the outstanding article he wrote ; "The Winged Hussars of Poland" (Arms and Armor Annual, ed. Robert Held, 1973, pp.90-103). In "Polish Armies:1569-1696" (1) by Richard Brzezinski, Osprey, 1987, it is noted on p.5 that Rembrandts famed "Polish Rider" has often been 'mislabeled' as an officer of 'Lisowski cossacks', noting that Chroscicki (Ars Auro Prior, Warsaw, 1981) has finally identified it as a portrait of a Lithuanian nobleman, Martin Alexander Oginski. He had the portrait painted in 1655 while studying in the Netherlands. While this sounds like the final word on the actual identity of the subject, there is still the usual debate and speculation, but the painting is most definitely Rembrandts work. In "Rembrandts Eyes" (Simon Schama, N.Y. 1999) notes on p.599; "...only a gentleman of the horse would have known how to sit on the mount, Polish style, not erect but leaning forward, the right hand curled backward to grasp the head of the 'buzdygan', the battle mace, left hand on the reins". In looking again at the painting I see that the larger sword under the riders right leg is not an estoc but a large sabre (pallasche?),and the hilt of the light sabre is visible worn on his left side. In some illustrations of hussars they are seen with the estoc under the left leg.The Islamic forces had a form of estoc or straight rapier termed 'mec', but I am not clear on if they were saddle mounted like the Eastern European estocs or carried differently. In the Sudan, in an illustration which I will have to relocate, a rider on horseback is seen wearing an Ottoman hilt sabre, and under his left leg is mounted a kaskara in the same manner as the estocs of Eastern Europe. Radu, Actually I recognized Lebedynsky's work immediately and simply went to the volume I had seen them in. This was one of the reasons I mentioned properly crediting the illustrations. In a discussion with him a number of years ago I asked about using one of his illustrations. He indicated he had no problem with using his illustration (referring of course to in an article) as long as it was properly credited. While this is an informal discussion forum, it is still subject to copyright legality and more than anything a matter of courtesy to credit published material. As I noted also, it is helpful to readers to have references for furthering thier own research, which is why I usually provide them with comments or notes. You've done excellent work in this presentation! and I think brought forth an outstanding topic which has important influence on the study of the development of many ethnographic swords, not just regimental military forms. Please keep up the good work!!!! All best regards, Jim Last edited by Jim McDougall; 30th December 2004 at 04:41 AM.

31st December 2004, 10:12 AM	#5
wolviex Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Poland, Krakow Posts: 418	Dear Friends! My Internet is crashed, I'm completly out of free time, so (Radu!) please forgive me my absence. In short I'll try to give you all some answers. Jim: thank you for your help about Rembrand's Polish rider. With my bookshelf packed because of removal, and because of Christmas time in Poland, it's hard to get for me any book. This isn't Lisowczyk, that's for sure, cause when this painting was made (1655 y.) this formation was disbanded from 20 years. But Lisowczyk riders looks very similiar, because it's light cavalryman anyway. The first western articles about this painting claimed that it isn't Polish rider but Christian knight and glorifications of knighthood. You're right, and prof. Zygulski proved it, this man is sitting on horse in Polish mannere, so there is no doubt (except for armament and other things) this is Polish rider. There is no doubt this was painted on real, living model of Polish nobleman. There is no sign of so many Polish armament amongst other sumptous accesorries in Rembrand's property-room, so probably this man carried it with himself. It's Oginski's portrait? - very interesting, I'll check it, because it's not the first try of identify this man. He was Rembrand's son, then someone different, now it's Oginski - we'll see Radu: mustaches where important but not always, and I would call it stereotype! Fashion in Poland was changing rapidly. The Polish nobleman (szlachcic) without mustaches is shaven on western fashion. It was common that noblemen returning from west, east or where ever, were bringing new fashion styles with them - AND SOMETIMES THEY WERE RETURNING WITHOUT MUSTACHES, SHOCKING EVERY RESPECTABLE NOBLEMAN Rivkin: uhh ohh, you're hardly to convince. I'll make desperate attempt to convince you. You're absolutly right about similarity of Polish sabres from 16th century to eastern ones. You're also right it's not so easy to say "because this was that and that" and the modern sabre is pure Polish influence. But... 1. Everything lays in details. Poland in 16 and 17th century was a country of many crossing influences. Polish sabre is nothing more but product resultant of western and eastern edged weapons. So the Hungarian-Polish sabres are similiar to persian sword, thumbring were much earlier made with valonese swords, knuckleguard isn't Polish invention too, it was known many, many years earlier. But all of this crossed in Poland, and here was improved. The handle was inclined, on eastern and western weapons it was straight. The blade was curved delicate not strong like in Turkish sabres, the knuckleguard was curved on specific angle. This all was Polish improvement. The changes in shapes, styles - notice how many new styles of sabres were introduced in Poland only during 17th century! In eastern world from centuries we have got the same forms, the same shapes. Shamshir looked in 16th century similiar to that from 18th century in general. How something so permament could rapidly at the end of 17th century inspire whole Europe, then World? 2. Poland in 17th century was one of the most important countries, not only in eastern-european politics, it's obvious, just look at historical map, and realize how huge this country was in 16 and 17th cent.! Importance of Poland depended also in trade. Not only. Take a look at Polish fashion influences, Swedish noblemen were wearing on Polish mannere! Russians were speaking in Polish in high societies, etc. And the Fashion is not only clothes but in those times weaponry too! 3. "Modern sabre" was introduced to Europe at the end of 17th and beginning of 18th century. It becames rapidly popular weapon, which push out rapiers, swords to the background. Why then? Wasn't it the same time, where perfect weapon - Polish Hussar sabre was introduced (here is more about this weapon http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=67 ) and when great Polish victory at Vienna occured? It's obvious that winner's weapon is much more desired! It not exclude influence of east, but generally indicated great role of eastern Europe on rapidly development of "modern" sabres in Europe! 4. Blades for Polish sabres were made not only in Solingen but also in Passau, Genoa, they were imported from Persia etc., but in Poland they're produced too. But all of them were made on special orders, that's why blades from genoa visible on Hungurian-Polish sabres appears only on Polish armament in 16/17th century, not in whole Europe. Anyway for me it's natural, if someone produce great stuff I'll buy it, no matter it's Polish, German or Persian. 5. If you're still not convinced I have last argument which is not substantial argument. Influence of Polish sabre on develompent of European sabre is so called historical true. It was affirmed many years ago, before the war. There is even an interesting diagram of development and mutually influences of Western, Eastern and Polish sabres, made by our expert Stanislaw Meyer (available below!) where you can clearly see how it happened. Even if you find some errors (i.e. in dating) I think generally it's ok. Anyway it's quoting even today by authorities, and no one has negate this, so it's so called historical true. If you're still not convinced because you've different theory of development of modern sabres, share it with us. It's your turn to, maybe, change the history! Best regards and HAPPY NEW YEAR Bigger diagram is here http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...x/DSCF4467.jpg Attached Images

29th December 2004, 03:04 PM	#1
Rivkin Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 655	hm. Again, I'm not exactly convinced. If it was so much an eastern european weapon, why only very few of them where in fact produced there ? At least the ones I've seen are mostly solingen. Am I wrong on this ? Concerning chinese/japanese - japanese old straight swords are little bit more different from tachi (katana is a relatively new weapon) than kiliji from a hussar's sabre. In fact there is such thing as late chinese swords, imitating japanese technologies, and yes in this case I'll say without any doubdts that their origin is in Japan.

29th December 2004, 06:24 PM	#2
Radu Transylvanicus Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: 2008-2010 Bali, 1998-2008 USA Posts: 271	Wolviex: A bit of a Tartaric fashioned Pole but definatelly one, as far as mustaches i`ve seen no old illustrations with Polack dudes without one (so is Hungary with the exception of King Matthias Corvinus and the Catholical clerics) regardless it was pandur, pancerny, huszaria, szlachta, hajdouks and so on ... what about Pan Wolodjowsky, shaking his right and left all the time... ? Rivkin: its OK to stake out personal skepticism but how about most logical thing where were the first modern curved sabers (with classical elements) manufactured ? The first Hussars saber produced in the West like anyone would rationally expect was in Austria (probably Styria) after late 16th century, why because Eastearn European hussard brough it up there; probably Wolviex (he works for the National History Museum in Krakow, Poland as assistant-curator ) could tell you likely how made in Solingen the Hungarian-Polish hussar swords were... sorry, not the case until much later... As far as the other geographical extreme, look at the photos 15, 16, 17, where in middle East have you seen before montures like that ? Are those Ottoman or any Middle Eastearn sabers ? I really dont think I need to bring more proof in support ... Curved sabers (scimitar family) where brought five hundred years before Ottoman incursions and the scimitar itself is not an Ottoman invented produvt but the Pala and perhaps the Kilij too were ! Sabers like the Ottoman scimitars were produced in oriental-(ised) Europe massively, specially in the conquered teritories, including Hungary after the lost battle of Mohacs when much ground was under Ottoman rule and thats one related thing but different. They had a great impact and were exactly appreciated by many until late in history and between Berlin and Istanbul sometimes its harder to tell where it begun and where it ended than in case of Japan of course (a one minded, self sufficient, closed to foreigners, separated island would have its track better printed, no doubt)... Its really not a shallow theory but a fact ... and there werent only a few but tons of them produced, mass production enough to equip armies, just probably you havent got chance to see them, I did ... Last edited by Radu Transylvanicus; 29th December 2004 at 10:28 PM.

30th December 2004, 02:19 AM	#3
Rivkin Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 655	I'm not trying to prove that eastern european or polish sabre was not a precursor to a modern sabre, but I believe it's much more complicated than this - solingen and passau weapon production technologies, spanish moore influence, turks, mongols and etc. are all involved in this story. Concerning guards - picture B shows typical muslim guard. Picture 16 - is it a mix of nimcha and karabela ? Picture 18 - seen many times on shamshirs. Picture 17 is unique, but unfortunately this type of guard did not survive (I think ?) in post-Blucher times, and does not appear on all regulation patterns before it. Is it the only thing they did - they invented new guards for old swords ? Again I would really see something of a common turkish (like in seljuk-mongol-ottoman) origin, and try to understand what are the changes in _blades_ that been made. P.P.S. I constantly have arguments with caucasians who come with great classification of "foreign" iranian shamshir vs. "authentic" caucasian shashkas with the same idea that it's so hard to say definitely "here is something that have never seen before" - shashka is nothing more than a guard's type...

31st December 2004, 03:22 PM	#6
Rivkin Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 655	Wolviex: Thank you very much ! I should probably clarify myself - I've always been convinced that the modern sabre is a polish influence . Reading my previous posts, may be I was too agressive towards Radu's justification of this idea, but I'm not against the idea as it is. What I don't agree with is that european curved swords is a product of _only_ polish/eastern european influence, and the direct eastern influence had no place in it. If I'm wrong, than I'm sorry.

31st December 2004, 07:32 PM	#7
Radu Transylvanicus Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: 2008-2010 Bali, 1998-2008 USA Posts: 271	Rivkin, And maybe I shouldve brought in the theory more about the ,,deli and sipahi,, influence and about ,,kurda,, or hungarian saber made under Ottoman rule, very much like the Arabian saif and so on, it wasnt in the times of migratory invasions when Orient influenced Europe in swords ...