Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post

fearn · 3rd February 2006, 04:52 PM

Hi Andrew,

I think you're right about cutting, but here's Burton's idea, for what it's worth. It would be easier to illustrate, but I'll try it with words:

Basically, a slash means that the blade is sawed on one point, rather than coming straight down on it (a chop). The curved blade has two advantages.

Let's assume that we're going to slash with a one foot (30 cm long) straight sword that is 2 in (5 cm) thick, and with a saber that curves up so that its blade length is about 20 inches (50 cm) over that same foot. Its blade is also 2 inches thick.

Basically, with the saber, you slash with ~180% more blade than with the straight sword. Since length matters for the depth of the slash, a saber is definitely a better slashing weapon.

For chopping, Burton's idea about the saber's advantage depends on trigonometry. Basically, the saber cuts at an angle, rather than straight on. So the sword cuts with 2 inches of steel about the point of the cut, where the saber cuts with something like 3.3 inches of steel above the point of the cut (basically, it's 20 in curved blade/12 in straight length*2 in thick). There's more metal above the cut, and *all other things being equal*, this additional metal weighs that part of the blade down and drives it deeper.

Now, I think it would be pretty difficult to make everything else equal in order to do the experiment, but that's the idea. It's also worth noting that axes seldom have straight edges.

We haven't even talked about down-curved points (a la those nice African sickle swords), and they have a different advantage.

The point about stabbing with a curved blade is right on.

My 0.02 cents,

F

3rd February 2006, 04:52 PM	#11
fearn Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 1,247	Hi Andrew, I think you're right about cutting, but here's Burton's idea, for what it's worth. It would be easier to illustrate, but I'll try it with words: Basically, a slash means that the blade is sawed on one point, rather than coming straight down on it (a chop). The curved blade has two advantages. Let's assume that we're going to slash with a one foot (30 cm long) straight sword that is 2 in (5 cm) thick, and with a saber that curves up so that its blade length is about 20 inches (50 cm) over that same foot. Its blade is also 2 inches thick. Basically, with the saber, you slash with ~180% more blade than with the straight sword. Since length matters for the depth of the slash, a saber is definitely a better slashing weapon. For chopping, Burton's idea about the saber's advantage depends on trigonometry. Basically, the saber cuts at an angle, rather than straight on. So the sword cuts with 2 inches of steel about the point of the cut, where the saber cuts with something like 3.3 inches of steel above the point of the cut (basically, it's 20 in curved blade/12 in straight length2 in thick). There's more metal above the cut, and all other things being equal*, this additional metal weighs that part of the blade down and drives it deeper. Now, I think it would be pretty difficult to make everything else equal in order to do the experiment, but that's the idea. It's also worth noting that axes seldom have straight edges. We haven't even talked about down-curved points (a la those nice African sickle swords), and they have a different advantage. The point about stabbing with a curved blade is right on. My 0.02 cents, F