![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Istanbul
Posts: 452
|
![]()
karakulak and yataghan. I think in Turkey sometimes karakulak is used as a name to describe the ear shaped hilt of yataghans ,right. I used both names to define just the hilt models of the daggers in the picture, according to the nuances between the samples. The blades of the samples are sure can not be related to yataghans. Only the hilts. karakulak - black ear trasnlation is correct. I name the longer sample as karakulak, and the shorter as a more classical yataghan according to just my understanding. (Hilt of the long sword seems a perfect yataghan type too).
In Balkans and Bulgaria especially - as far as I know) karakulak hilt form was widely used on yataghan blades.(the form of the longer dagger) , and they call the weapon only "Karakulak" , instead of "Yataghan". Correct? About the ears, an addition. http://www.oriental-arms.com/item.php?id=1551 this type is called "esekkulak" , which means "donkey ear") Last edited by erlikhan; 10th December 2004 at 01:12 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 | |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 1,668
|
![]() Quote:
Teodor |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: 2008-2010 Bali, 1998-2008 USA
Posts: 271
|
![]()
TVV welcome to the Forum... Zdrasti , priyatno mi e ... I have a feeling you will be a very good asset to this team ... I was born a few miles north of you in Romania ...
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 1,668
|
![]() Quote:
As far as the bronze weapons go, I also think that 1500 B.C. might be a little exaggerated, to me they look quite similar to some Luristan ear-pommelled daggers dating back to c. 750 B.C. . For an example take a look at p. 137 of Michael D. Coe's book (sorry, I do not have a scanner). |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Istanbul
Posts: 452
|
![]()
Yannis, the material is bronze as I told. About being fake or not, as many other, my basic criteria is who brings and offers it to market. I also understand your point of view but , about Schytian artifacts, if you search as" luristan" you will find many. They were nomads and warriors, having a superior bronze casting technology. They were also the first community to train horses enough to be used efficiently in wars starting mounted riding. First bronze, then iron working of nomads were always superior in any age(in general all kinds of metal, gold, silver etc. too), as strong,educated horses and efficient weapons were the things they needed to have whatever they wanted. As far as I know, they conquered and ruled today's Ukraine, Caucasia and Persia for several centuries, later forming a union till Egypt in 8th century b.c. So they have conquered not all, but much of the developed lands of their time .
About the date they belong to, some sources say 8-9th centuries b.c., and I knew like that till short time ago, but at that age, it had been more than 500 years since Hittites found iron working, and all near east was using iron instead of bronze, since it was much cheaper and easier to work. It doesnt seem logical for anybody to prefer expensive and difficult bronze swords at that age (but bronze continued to be used in helmets and shields, I dont know why). . And, I learned the date 1500 b.c from the site of Azerbaijan national museum . They have samples like mines. They have dated their sample to b.c. 1500. Ariel had given its link in the previous forum. I dont remember it now. He can help us but I am unable to insist on the date as I am not an expert myself. And one more sign about being fake or not, you can see many samples being sold in respectful auctions (not cyber. Real auctions). I can give you some links if you wish. Most have even much better conditions and sure much higher prices, compared to these ones. (Not only the Schytian ones, also Middle European ones, which was certainly not a civilized land in that age). Bronze stands against corrosion of natural effects under soil uncomparably better than iron. Thats why clean bronze age samples are more than much later's iron weapons of Roman, even Middle age times. But again, my judgement about being original or fake depends on just my feelings and reference books or auctions. The exact result can be taken only by carbon 14 test, nothing else i guess. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Istanbul
Posts: 452
|
![]()
www.hermann-historica-ohg.de . This is the site of a German antiques auction company. You can see the better samples of the same type, and middle european bronze swords, belonging to another nomadic tribe, Kelts.
Most of the existing bronze age weapon samples belong to 2 main cultures as far as I have seen till now. Schytian. Caucassia,Ukraine,Persia and Iraq. Name in the literature is Luristan culture. Kelt . Middle Europe. Austria, Germany, Swiss, perhaps eastern France. Literature name is Hallstad culture. Why samples of those two are seen much more, is perhaps that they were nomads , where not only noble soldiers, but all males were warriors living a tough life and needed to carry weapons to be strong enough to stay alive. I have seen pictures of Hittite or Babylonian ones too, some even having cuneiform inscriptions on them but samples belonging to those civilizations are more rare (maybe because of the this theory) and very expensive. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Athens Greece
Posts: 479
|
![]()
I didnt found not even ONE link about Scythian civilization before 700BC. For example
Scythian World claims that the tribes lived 6 to 3 centuries BC. Also it is the first time I hear about a nomadic tribe with good metallurgy. So bronze swords in 600 BC maybe where good for Scythians but they were not good enough for Persians and Greeks. Dorians came to Greece 1100 BC and overruned Achaioi because they had iron swords. Agamemnon times are over. Troia is fallen... |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|