sucker for African sickles

[Tim Simmons]

or African sickles for a sucker? Two new bits. I had to be a little creative with the handle on one. It was all unravelled, the copper just needed putting back in place with very minor adjustment. The twisted steel was more damaged but with the help of a special home made gunge technique i now think it looks quite presentable.

No matter how hard I try I just cannot see these as real war swords. There are so many more truly offencive sickle weapons. I am going to suggest that apart from the brass or copper versions which are clearly status or parade objects. That these may be made for a more stylised tournament fighting. Like that German fencing where one wears eye protectors and one slashes from a static postion. I have seen pic of Zande? and I think Luc has a picture on his web site of a fellow with a sickle sword and shield. The chap in picture really does look like he is catching his breath before reengaging in the activity. I am sure I have seen the same picture else where or a different one but telling the same story. These swords are so very limited in function but also beautiful, I feel they must be for some sort of tournament. Also I have never encountered one that has been sharp or ever having any signs of being sharpened.

[fernando]

Maybe not so operational, same as some other ( African ) "weaponry", but they are beautyfull.
I like the little "axe head" near the forte.
Fernando

[Matt Splatt]

Hi Tim, you have some really beautiful swords there. I love these mambeli. I have always been unsatisfied by the idea that they were used to pull aside an opponents shield. I have a couple that feel like real battle weapons but they are far more simple than yours. I believe these are Boa but please correct me if I am wrong. These are both very sharp.
Could these have been used to trap a spear shaft against your shield, then pushing the shield forward use the mambeli as a fulcrum to bend the spearhead or break the shaft? Anyway it's just a thought.

[Freddy]

Nice swords, Tim.

I simply think that the form of these swords was used to hit an opponent protecting himself with a shield. You can 'go round' a shield with such a sword, much in the same way the Ethiopian 'shotel' was used.

[Tim Simmons]

One could make a hammer action with these blades. The blades strength seems only fit for that kind of movement either overhead or to the side. A hammer action blow to the skull would be seriously unpleasant the same action else where would also be quite nasty perhaps not deadly. It is possible that combat was indeed carried out to formal rules. It would not be the first instance in history.

[Flavio]

Congrats Tim!!! Very very nice!

[Luc LEFEBVRE]

Nice exemples Tim.
I had a Ngombe like yours, but I've sold it (impossible to keep all !), and it is very tall to stand.
I keep a Nsakara in my collection.
Luc

[Freddy]

Just want to add this : the little 'axe head' or 'half moon' is used for attaching a leather strap. Tim, at the base of the wooden handle you will see the iron tang curled up to form a loop. Sometimes there are also holes in the base of the handle for the same purpose.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Freddy

... the little 'axe head' or 'half moon' is used for attaching a leather strap.

No more mistery. Clever thing. Thanks Freddy

[Jim McDougall]

I think your ideas concerning the possible manner of use with these weapons is very well placed Tim. It seems that for the most part, tribal conflict in Africa was in varying degree settled by limited combat of champion warriors. I believe that Spring addressed this somewhat and the formidable appearance of certain weapons was more inclined toward psychological effect than actual practical application.
Freddy, thank you so much for explaining the purpose of that little half moon!! I had one of these interesting swords, and cannot tell you how maddening it was trying to figure out what the heck that was there for!!

BTW, which tribes and regions were these swords common to? I believe they were Congo of course, but more specific? Also I am not sure of the correct term for them (I think it is noted in "Beaute Fatale").

All best regards,
Jim

[fernando]

Hi Jim,

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

BTW, which tribes and regions were these swords common to? I believe they were Congo of course, but more specific? Also I am not sure of the correct term for them (I think it is noted in "Beaute Fatale").

Before experts will evolute further into it, this was used by the tribes Boa and Bandia. It appears that its name in Bandia is "Mambeli".

[Tim Simmons]

I am far from knowledgeable on these matters but I think this type of weapon with various styles is found in an extensive area of the Congo but also in the S. Sudan, areas influenced by Zande, Mangbetu. I would even think this form or version of the form might have been found in what is present day Ethiopia.
I am really going to town cleaning these two. They are basically only covered very light rust except and a bit except for two horrible rust cankers on each blade. I am in the process of getting rid of them. It is proving hard work indeed. I am nearly there but I will have to polish the blades a bit as the rust remover is a little harsh. pics to follow.

[Tim Simmons]

I took these scabs of rust back to the bare metal. To avoid etching do not leave the rust remover on as long as the bottle says but work in short bursts with a steel tooth brush. When bare metal the patches looked a bit weired so I had to work back. I think I have got a good balance between removing a rust canker and leaving enough dirt and patina on the rest of the blade.

[roanoa]

Hi, Tim. Fantastic blades. The similarities with the Ethiopian shotels are striking (no pun intended). And talking about shotels...... I hate to bring this up again, and I agree that my opinion is not worth that much, BUT let me start by saying that the shotel may be very curved or almost straight. Regardless of the curvature, it is virtually impossible to do any damage by "reaching around the opponent's shield". If you have a shotel you can try.... You may just be able to tickle your opponents and while doing so you will leave yourself wide open to be stabbed. I guess the "reaching around the shield" is one of those myths that eons ago someone thought of, put in writing and became gospel. Lots of these "myths" around as you all well know. The shotel is used to strike with the TIP and it has lots of periferal striking force. Then again, it's only my opinion.

[Tim Simmons]

Thank you roanoa, I would agree with you. The head, face, neck and shoulders would be very vulnerable to hammer like blows from these weapons. The more I play with this it becomes all the more obvious and the realisation of the frightful wound that must have been inflicted is not nice.

[Emanuel]

I am still waiting to receive my first shotel, but I've always had the impression that shotel are double-edged - is that correct? If so, then what would stop them being used like shamshir?

Regards,
Emanuel

[Luc LEFEBVRE]

Nice exemples Tim, I had one but I don't kept it.
I have these sickled weapons :
Luc

[Luc LEFEBVRE]

The one I had.
Luc

[Jim McDougall]

Fernando and Tim, thank you so much for answering my question, and I apologize for missing your answers. I somehow overlooked this thread while involved elsewhere and I try to avoid letting that happen. The reason I was curious is that I had one of these also, and seem to recall Congo regions noted with it but could not recall.

It does seem that 19th century collectors did tend to apply practical manners of use according to presumption by the shape of blades etc. without actually seeing them used, especially with the 'throwing knives' for example. On the shotel, the severe tip on the deeply curves examples does seem likely to have had purpose for reaching over shields in downward stroke, as well of course for hooking and slashing...but as Roanoa has noted, such movement would leave the weapon holder wide open, so without having 'been there' in the battles....predictable assumption.

As Roanoa has noted, and as we are discussing on a concurrent thread, shotels seem to have had certain range in the curvatures...hopefully others interested in these might add to the Abyssinian shotel thread


Very nice example of this type Tim, thanks for showing the interesting geometrics on the blade, and nice grouping you have shown Luc!!

Any thoughts on that opening at the base of the blade at the hilt?

All the best,
Jim

[fearn]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

--snip--

It does seem that 19th century collectors did tend to apply practical manners of use according to presumption by the shape of blades etc. without actually seeing them used, especially with the 'throwing knives' for example. On the shotel, the severe tip on the deeply curves examples does seem likely to have had purpose for reaching over shields in downward stroke, as well of course for hooking and slashing...but as Roanoa has noted, such movement would leave the weapon holder wide open, so without having 'been there' in the battles....predictable assumption.

--snip--

All the best,
Jim

Just wanted to respond to the shotel question. There is an interesting essay by Hank Reinhardt on shotel use. The relevant paragraphs are quoted below:

"Wooden swords edged with shark's teeth, draw cuts, pulling cuts, slashes -- all of these are understandable, but there has always been one type of sword and fighting technique that fills me with . . . well, I'm not sure what. You decide: The Abyssinian shotel is a long curved double-edged sword. At first glance, it looks like a Near Eastern scimitar, but on closer inspection you realize that the curve is a full half circle. And it is, I repeat, double-edged. The blade, generally, is a flattened, diamond cross section and quite stiff.

The natives fight with these swords from behind large, circular leather shields. Rather than try to cut through the shield, or feint it out of the way, they reach around it to hook their opponent with the point of the sword. I think you can image what a strange type of combat it must be. Many years ago, when the movie theaters had shorts subjects, I saw a travelogue that briefly showed two Abyssinians "fencing" with sword and shield. They hoped and ducked and bounced all around, with the long curved swords moving in very awkward ways. Really strange.

When you handle a shotel you realize that it isn't very effective for slicing, nor slashing, and certainly not built for thrusting, but it is pretty good for hooking, and that is how it should be judged." (source: There is no best sword)

He seems to be saying that he actually saw the shotel used around a shield. Weird but true, and contrary to what Roanoa was saying. We really need someone with experience using it to speak up.

My 0.02 cents,

F

[Jim McDougall]

Very, very well said Fearn!

[roanoa]

OK, guys. I do not want to argue with people who seem to know more than I do. What I am saying is simply this: I have handled probably 50 shotels. Only two had a "full" (??) curve. The others had a curvature that varied from curved to almost straight. I have seen LOTS of swords (including British) that have a much more dramatic curvature than most shotels. Nothing would prevent these swords from being used as a shotel (i.e. reach around the shield....). And most likely that's how someone may have used it. Especially if he was performing a dance in front of a camera. Last words: get a shield and a shotel and try it yourself!!!

[Jim McDougall]

Hi Roanoa,
The discussion of the manner of use of the 'shotel' seems to focus primarily on the highly parabolic sickle type examples, while the use of those with standard curve blades or even the slight recurved forms seems understood. Burton, who was in these regions in about the 1870's, and unsurprisingly, as an empassioned Anglocentric swordsman, declared that nothing was less handy than this gigantic sickle, and that "such a weapon never belonged to a race of swordsmen". He claims that such examples of weapon must have led to early emphasis to obtain swords from the Portuguese and Muslims as early as the 16th century.

It seems clear that as late as publication of Burton's book in 1885, and certainly during future colonial enterprise as late as WWII, there was little, if any true understanding of the use of the sickle shaped shotel. With the much larger volume of sabre blade mounted versions, it would almost seem that these may have been held more in a traditional sense and probably more dress or ceremonial. It was Spring who suggested that these were most probably originally used to circumvent the round shields.

I have always deferred to the martial arts enthusiasts in trying to explain the actual use of many of these weapons, and the fully parabolic deep curved blades such as on the shotel and some shamshirs seem hard to understand except for a sweeping draw cut. On the note on British swords with deep curves, I have seen British sabres (often Flank Company forms) with extremely deep parabolic curves and sharp points, with profile much as that of some shamshirs, most of these Napoleonic period.

Burton notes on p.163 that the high arc of the blade tapers to a point "...which can hardly be used". On a sickle type sword with a sharp point and the edge on the inside, it seems that a high tierce downward stroke might be effective over the shield, in traditional tribal combat. With the advent of modern warfare...undoubtedly moot.

Your knowledge and experience with Ethiopian weapons is well established here, and I offer these notes only as informational perspective on the deep curved shotels. Without sound evidence, as you say, thier use over shields in a hook fashion can only be presumed, but I would be inclined to follow your experienced opinion.

All very best regards,
Jim

[Tim Simmons]

As for the mambele I can only see a use for them as a striking weapon in a X form of strokes. Attacks to the head and shoulders with downward blows and Parry's from this postion, or upward strikes from similar to fancy fencing terms octave and septime and opportune blows from the side. It is well known that ideas about these weapons may have been formed to suit the times. These people were meant to be savage. As I mentioned before it is possible that there may have been some rule to certain forms of combat especially that involving the ruling classes. Perhaps some conflicts may have been fought out in quite sophisticated ways not always involving all the community and the disruption that would bring to a life based on varying degrees of subsistence agriculture and technology.

[Jim McDougall]

Hi Tim,
After reading your post I felt a little embarassed at choice of words ("tierce") to describe the downward stroke, which did sound a 'bit too fancy' . Also, it may have not been the correct term in the first place, but I just remembered it from discussions describing a high held position of a sword. What little fencing I ever did was back in the Errol Flynn days!!!

I agree with what you have said on the savage nature intended in combat, which is naturally quite true. It is also true that tribal warfare in Africa, from what I understand, did rely a great deal on the individual combat of select warriors to hopefully resolve certain issues.

Thanks for keeping the perspective!

All very best regards,
Jim