Shamshir Hooking Thrust?

ariel · 9th January 2007, 12:49 PM

Somehow, my replies are not being posted. Thus, I repeat.
Several thoughts:
The hooking move is very pretty and flashy, and would be good for the "Pirates of the Caribbean III". However, it is totally inefficient for two reasons:
1. The axis of the thrust and the axis of the sword do not coincide. Thus, mechanically, the thrust would go sideways and lose power.
2. The defence against it is simple and intuitive: just take the "third" or the "fourth" depending on the side of the attack. After that, slice from the wrist or the elbow at an unprotected right arm or the head. Finito.
As to the certainty that there must be Persian manuscripts describing shamshir techniques... Well, find them. Until then, reliance on miniatures ( stylized and static) would be very unconvincing. We see a lot of miniatures depicting Persian pahlavans wrestling with lions. Hardly the best way to study martial arts.
Eliashvili's manual on "Parikaoba", ie Khevsur fencing (thanks, Rivkin!) is the only known (to me, of course) detailed description of a " Middle Eastern " (so to speak) swordplay. This was possible for two reasons:
1. Khevsurs were very isolated and preserved their medieval way of life well into the 20th century, including carrying and using weapons, conducting mock and real duels etc.
2. Eliashvili went there and meticulously documented everything in great detail.
In contrast, all other surrounding societies abandoned swords in favor of firearms long ago and the knowledge of their use was extinguished. The ethnographers were not interested in this aspect of culture: there are no known (to me) contemporary monographs.
Thus, we are left free to invent any move we wish using shamshirs, yataghans, kilijes etc. The relation between the historical reality and our flights of fancy is tenuous, at best. Relying on some local guru who claims that he learned the techiques as a child from his old neighbor who, in turn, was a brother-in-law of the grandmother of a former water carrier in the reserve cavalry unit, is like learning medicine from the "National Enquirer".
Any sword is a compromise between the efficiency of the attack and the defence. The flashier the move the riskier it is. Shamshirs are superb slashing weapons if used unimpeded. They are not very comfortable for a swordplay ( see Zablocki). They are not, never were, and mechanically could not be, effective stabbing weapons. One can hammer nails with pliers and open beer bottles with hammers. Good luck...

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Threaded Mode

9th January 2007, 12:49 PM	#8
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Somehow, my replies are not being posted. Thus, I repeat. Several thoughts: The hooking move is very pretty and flashy, and would be good for the "Pirates of the Caribbean III". However, it is totally inefficient for two reasons: 1. The axis of the thrust and the axis of the sword do not coincide. Thus, mechanically, the thrust would go sideways and lose power. 2. The defence against it is simple and intuitive: just take the "third" or the "fourth" depending on the side of the attack. After that, slice from the wrist or the elbow at an unprotected right arm or the head. Finito. As to the certainty that there must be Persian manuscripts describing shamshir techniques... Well, find them. Until then, reliance on miniatures ( stylized and static) would be very unconvincing. We see a lot of miniatures depicting Persian pahlavans wrestling with lions. Hardly the best way to study martial arts. Eliashvili's manual on "Parikaoba", ie Khevsur fencing (thanks, Rivkin!) is the only known (to me, of course) detailed description of a " Middle Eastern " (so to speak) swordplay. This was possible for two reasons: 1. Khevsurs were very isolated and preserved their medieval way of life well into the 20th century, including carrying and using weapons, conducting mock and real duels etc. 2. Eliashvili went there and meticulously documented everything in great detail. In contrast, all other surrounding societies abandoned swords in favor of firearms long ago and the knowledge of their use was extinguished. The ethnographers were not interested in this aspect of culture: there are no known (to me) contemporary monographs. Thus, we are left free to invent any move we wish using shamshirs, yataghans, kilijes etc. The relation between the historical reality and our flights of fancy is tenuous, at best. Relying on some local guru who claims that he learned the techiques as a child from his old neighbor who, in turn, was a brother-in-law of the grandmother of a former water carrier in the reserve cavalry unit, is like learning medicine from the "National Enquirer". Any sword is a compromise between the efficiency of the attack and the defence. The flashier the move the riskier it is. Shamshirs are superb slashing weapons if used unimpeded. They are not very comfortable for a swordplay ( see Zablocki). They are not, never were, and mechanically could not be, effective stabbing weapons. One can hammer nails with pliers and open beer bottles with hammers. Good luck...