Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Ethnographic Weapons
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 7th November 2015, 06:58 AM   #8
estcrh
Member
 
estcrh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 1,492
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Battara
It is possible that the scabbard is a later replacement. I base this on the style of workmanship. If so this might explain some of the questions regarding the scabbard.

Certainly the stone on top next to the hilt is a later addition. Traditionally Ottomans did not place one there (and it would fall of anyway) and there is the issue of the style of stone setting which is more modern and not traditionally Ottoman.
I think if you look around enough you can find stones mounted just about anywere on a yatagan, but I agree with the type of setting, it is not what you would expect to see on an Ottoman weapon. You are probably right about the scabbard being a replacement, the style should give some clue to its origin but I can not remember seeing anything similar even on non-yatagan swords.
Attached Images
  
estcrh is offline   Reply With Quote
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.