Nomadic swords

[Ren Ren]

Originally Posted by ariel

Kubur,
Guom’s tunkou is not surprising: Vietnam , just like Korea and Japan got their inspiration from China. And Mongols were there also, 13 century.

If guards similar in style to Japanese tsuba appear in Vietnam no later than the 13th century, then we can see the sleeves on the blades much later. In my opinion, habaki were borrowed in the first third of the 17th century, when Japanese weapons became incredibly popular in Vietnam, especially in its central part, in the possessions of the chua Trinh.

[Philip]

Originally Posted by Ren Ren

If guards similar in style to Japanese tsuba appear in Vietnam no later than the 13th century, then we can see the sleeves on the blades much later. In my opinion, habaki were borrowed in the first third of the 17th century, when Japanese weapons became incredibly popular in Vietnam, especially in its central part, in the possessions of the chua Trinh.

Agreed. A large number of Japanese swords were exported to not only Vietnam but to Siam as well as early as the 16th cent., when expatriate colonies of Japanese merchants existed in towns such as Hoi An near the coast in central Annam. Their popularity continued into the following century. Stylistic influence in the form of serrated seppa (washers inserted between the habaki and the tsuba , and the apertures known as hitsu-ana cut into the tsuba, remained characteristic of many Vietnamese hilts into the end of the 19th cent. This, despite the lack of a functional rationale on a Vietnamese hilt since they were not made to be readily disassembled, and no provision was made in the scabbard for a by-knife and skewer. Their presence is purely stylistic but speaks to the persistence of a Japanese aesthetic in the arms culture of the region.

Yes, the disc shaped guard appears earlier in mainland SE Asia, you see it widely on the bronze-hilted steel-bladed sabers found in large numbers in Vietnam and Cambodia and thought to date from the 13th to 15th cent. as you propose.

[Ren Ren]

Originally Posted by Philip

Yes, the disc shaped guard appears earlier in mainland SE Asia, you see it widely on the bronze-hilted steel-bladed sabers found in large numbers in Vietnam and Cambodia and thought to date from the 13th to 15th cent. as you propose.

First of all, I have to apologize - of course in central Vietnam, power belonged to the chua Nguyen, the chua Trinh ruled in the north of the country.

I think that the influence of the Japanese arm culture was common to all parts of Vietnam. Chinese influence was also significant in the north part Tonkin. The influence of Cambodia and especially the state Champa is very noticeable in Annam, the central part of the modern territory of Vietnam. Unfortunately, I know only one article by Peter Dekker devoted to the study of the weapon of Champa.

[ariel]

You can also look here:
http://www.fightingarts.com/reading/article.php?id=183
Very good introduction: short and to the point ( pun intended).

[ariel]

One potential explanation for the ascendance ( not the appearance) of the " inverted tunkou" may be purely artistic.


At some stage of the game ( my guess 14-15 century), in the Islamic areal tunkou lost its engineering meaning and became purely decorative. Inscriptions on the blade became popular. Stamps and cartouches were far too small to accomodate a dedication, a prayer or even a motto. Necessarily, they had to be oriented longitudinally. Also, they had to utilize a " less-working" part of the blade, the lower quarter or so, adjacent to the handle/ handguard. On top of that, placing them along the edge would mean an inevitable loss of the sacral inscription as a result of repeat sharpening. The solution was simple: place them along the spine. And here, cutlers could combine the above practical points with the existing fashion of tunkou: short segment of decoration occupying the entire width of the blade adjacent to the handguard and a long inscription along the spine. A quick example is shown.

This was a homage to the traditional tunkou, that utilized the " upside down" pattern. From that point on the majority of single-edged Islamic blades were decorated in that manner and the "classical" tunkou simply vanished.

Of course, this does not explain the initial appearance of the inverted tunkou, but perhaps it explains the later popularity of it.

Just a thought...

[Peter Dekker]

Good point Ariel. I currently have two sabers here with Mamluk inspired blade decor, chiseled in relief from the forte. Both have a long inscription on the longer, upper part.

As for the habaki (鎺) / tunkou (吞口, literally "swallowing mouth"), I agree with Philip that they are most likely of different origin. They are both solutions to the same problem but were developed independently.

The earliest form of habaki I've been able to find so far is on a Japananese sword now held in the Metropolitan Museum, accession number 32.13.2a, b. It is attributed by the museum to the 6th century A.D., however Japanese sources don't mention this type, called kabutsuchi until the early 8th century. (See Markus Sesko; Koshirae) Either way, it seems to far predate the tunkou and there has been no instance in Japan that the shape of this piece had any protrusion going up the blade.

The antique record hasn't left much for us from China, and those pieces that are found are hard to access and often not cataloged well. But, such tunkou are also seen on Chinese statues of the 8th century, suggesting that like the art of forging swords, this particular piece also originated in China and reached Japan directly or through Korea.

See picture for the Met's example.

[Philip]

Originally Posted by ariel

One potential explanation for the ascendance ( not the appearance) of the " inverted tunkou" may be purely artistic.


At some stage of the game ( my guess 14-15 century), in the Islamic areal tunkou lost its engineering meaning and became purely decorative. Inscriptions on the blade became popular. Stamps and cartouches were far too small to accomodate a dedication, a prayer or even a motto. Necessarily, they had to be oriented longitudinally. Also, they had to utilize a " less-working" part of the blade, the lower quarter or so, adjacent to the handle/ handguard. On top of that, placing them along the edge would mean an inevitable loss of the sacral inscription as a result of repeat sharpening. The solution was simple: place them along the spine. And here, cutlers could combine the above practical points with the existing fashion of tunkou: short segment of decoration occupying the entire width of the blade adjacent to the handguard and a long inscription along the spine. A quick example is shown.

This was a homage to the traditional tunkou, that utilized the " upside down" pattern. From that point on the majority of single-edged Islamic blades were decorated in that manner and the "classical" tunkou simply vanished.

Of course, this does not explain the initial appearance of the inverted tunkou, but perhaps it explains the later popularity of it.

Just a thought...

Ariel, your train of thought is quite plausible, it makes perfect sense in light of the aesthetic requirement of making room for long inscriptions. But when I look at the image, I think of something else. The long panel at the spine is not really joined to the element at the base of the blade. Well, they may be touching at a corner of each element, but if we were trying to look at this as a subsequent adaptation of the "traditional" tunkou shape (i.e. in its original, functional guise), the theory loses some steam because an actual tunkou would have to be of unitary construction in order to serve its purpose. The confluence of shapes defined by the inscription panels on the shamshir blade does not seem to be a realistic carry-over from an actual fabrication made of metal sheet and attached via a friction fit around the base of the blade.

Rather, what I see on this Persian example is the traditional tunkou outline (with tongue extending forward on the edge side) SUPPLEMENTED BY an elongated panel ahead of it, along the spine, serving as a border for the extended inscription. You could even think of the space for the dorsal inscription as the visual equivalent of those chiseled elongated panels containing animals that you see on the Seljuk blade whose image I posted on this thread previously. Just that in the case of your shamshir, the two areas are scrunched very close together with no significant empty space in between them.

[ariel]

Well, it depends how one looks at it:-)
As you say, the 2 panels may be a "clasical" tunkou with a separate inscription panel, or an analogy of a "Chinese" tunkou with a slit in the middle.
But how about my own example? It is dated 1217, the koftgari is worn and partially lost, but the base-located wall-to-wall decoration and the " upside-down" orientation of a very long inscription at the top is obvious.
And, of course, one should not forget the tunkou on the great majority of Persian khanjars and the yataghans from Turkey: they all have the "upside-down" pattern. In the latter case, tunkou became just a triangular element with the long side along the spine , including just the cheap crude incision of the outlines.

My point is that with time the orientation of tunkou flipped over from the edge-located to the spine-located. What was the reason I have no idea, but a placement of long inscriptions along the spine fits nicely with the general idea.