Hi,
I don't know how relevant this is in the context of Thai/Burmese sword play, but Egerton Castle argued that European swords were originally thought of as weapons of offense and only during the renaissance did this attitude change. It follows that the complexity of the hilt was a good indicator of the degree of defence expected from the blade and furthermore the coverage afforded by the hilt also offered a clue to the "tightness" of the prevailing swordplay. According to this thesis, as fencing evolved, so did hilts.
I have seen Thai fencing and swords, but am totally unsure as to how the modern forms would compare against their classical era. I was told in Thailand by a professor of antiquities that their now traditional swords were modelled on the Japanese blade, but were furnished in accord with local tastes. My guess is, and that is all, that most of their old swordplay would have been in single time, relying on bodily evasion or armour for defence and the sword was used primarily for attacking.
Cheers
Chris
|