Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Ethnographic Weapons

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 2nd March 2008, 10:25 PM   #29
Jim McDougall
Arms Historian
 
Jim McDougall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 9,943
Default

These are really excellent references added as to the elephants really were armed with swords on tusks or trunk, and present perspective to the feasibility.
I found the one I was looking for in "The Elephant Tusk Swords" by Thom Richardson ("Royal Armouries Yearbook" Vol.4 1999, pp.133-34).
He notes that most of the references to the use of tusk swords on war elephants belong to 15tn or 16th c. though there are earlier reports. A Castilian emissary notes swords fastened to the tusks "...like the grooved swords we use in war". A. Nikitin in "A Voyage to India in 1469-74" described the Bahmani armies of Bidar, "...large scythes are attached to the tusks and trunks of the elephants".
By 1535-7 Ferdinand Nunez in his "Chronicle" notes "...and on thier tusks they have knives fastened, with which they do much harm".

Richardson notes that although there are numerous records of them in the literature, there seem to be no contemporary illustrations of them. He suggests further that such use probably ceased by the late 16th c.

I would think that these swords on tusks may have been used as suggested in the literature, with limited use with the advent of technology and improved tactics by the 17th c. Probably with the Indian observance of tradition, the ceremonial dressing of elephants probably did include these tusk swords.
Pant describes these socket type items with blades fastened as 'tusk protectors' (dama kavacha) but it is apparantly unclear whether the term applies to the blunt end examples or the bladed ones used by Mughals.
(Pant. "Horse and Elephant Armour" p.113, 1997).

I am inclined to doubt the use of a blade attached to the trunk, as it would seem that despite the ability to properly wield one, the likely indiscriminate use of it would be too endangering to virtually anyone around it, friend or foe. I agree with Fearn on the item he describes, it is more likely a colloquial association describing the sword.

all best regards,
Jim
Jim McDougall is offline   Reply With Quote
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

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 09:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, 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.