A German halberd for coments

fernando · 21st January 2009, 11:52 PM

Hi Michael,

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matchlock

... Would you perhaps consider applying some oilve oil to the iron? It looks so barren dry to me ... Olive oil was used on iron parts in European armories thru the centuries; after about three to four weeks, when it has dried it turns into a very stable yellowish patina supplying a perfect surface protection. I have been employing olive oil on iron parts for thirty years.

...

Done ... in both Halberd and Partisan.
Olive oil would never occur to me ... although it abunds in Portuguese houses. I used to oil blades with sewing machine oil; would that be wrong?
Fernando

Matchlock · 22nd January 2009, 01:41 PM

Hi, Fernando,

No oil is wrong. Olive oil which is no doubt abundant in Portugal is just the historic treatment. It dries within a few weeks and will stay there.

m

fernando · 22nd January 2009, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matchlock

... No oil is wrong. Olive oil which is no doubt abundant in Portugal is just the historic treatment. It dries within a few weeks and will stay there ...

Danksche

.

Anandalal N. · 22nd January 2009, 01:52 PM

Hi Michael,

In the Partisan type arms you posted the one on the far right has a cross bar below the blade. One opinion was that this was for the purpose of winding the matchcord for the firing of cannon. After seeing your images I can see that this is not possible with silk tassels so close to it. Any idea of the purpose?

By the way Fernando you are on a roll. I love the stuff you have been posting.

Matchlock · 22nd January 2009, 02:30 PM

Hi Anandalal,

I should refer to that transverse bar just as a sort of stylized quillons which, in earlier and fighting or hunting pole arms, were meant to ward off an enemy's or animal's body and stop it from sliding sort of on to the haft.

Had they been matchholders they would have been shaped somewhat like the serpentines on muskets, with a wing nut for tightening the two halves. This would, as you remarked, not be possible that close to the tassels though.

Michael

Anandalal N. · 22nd January 2009, 03:23 PM

Hi Michael,

The reason I posed the question is that a significant number of early Cingalese patisthana copy the partisan right down to the transverse bar. However, they do not have fabric decoration. Yes, it would be logical to expect the serpentine with a wing nut. But in early Cingalese matchlocks the serpentine is present with no wing nut. I would assume the serpentine and wing nut would be needed where one required precision such as in a matchlock where the range and the direction of travel of the serpentine was pre-determined and the match had to be brought precisely to the pan. In the event of a detached match as in artillery, this would not be required.

In the event of an enemy trying to run along the blade with the blade thorugh him I would assume the wings supporting the balde should stop them.

Thanks again for your thoughts.

Atlantia · 22nd January 2009, 03:45 PM

Wow Fernando!

Another amazing piece! How do you do it?
I think perhaps YOU are 'Fernando Jones' and have discovered a long lost Armoury somewhere?

LOL, if you have I wouldn't mind helping explore it!
Well, as long as any traps defending it don't look like the picture Matchlock posted!!

Matchlock · 22nd January 2009, 05:42 PM

Hi Anandalal,

I completely agree with your thoughts. All oriental matchlocks (Turkish, Arabian, Indian, Sri Lankan, Cingalese and Chinese - hope I did not forget any important country) have in common that they feature no wing nut on the serpentine.

When the head of the serpentine was of small tubular shape or the two halves of the serpentine (actually the serpentine is not "split" as it would not have a spring loaded function then) were thick enough to act as a tightening spring, German matchlocks did not need a wing nut either.

In Europe, transverse reinforced stopping bars seem to have originated from 8th to 9th centuries lugged spears.

Transverse bars are mostly found on 15th-19th century boar spears where, interesting enough, they often consist of a piece of staghorn and are leather bound to the haft right below the iron socket of the blade to stop dead an onrunnig animal.

When it comes to partizans/spontoons, transverse bars are often kept as the stylized remains of a former functional element.

Michael

fernando · 22nd January 2009, 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atlantia

Wow Fernando! Another amazing piece! How do you do it?

What an adventure, Gene; i had to invest a significant part of my (yet to come) pension fund

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atlantia

... I think perhaps YOU are 'Fernando Jones' and have discovered a long lost Armoury somewhere? ...

Tell me something new; Jones is my middle name

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atlantia

... Well, as long as any traps defending it don't look like the picture Matchlock posted!!

22nd January 2009, 05:42 PM	#8
Matchlock (deceased) Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Bavaria, Germany - the center of 15th and 16th century gunmaking Posts: 4,310	Lugs and transverse stopping bars on pole arms Hi Anandalal, I completely agree with your thoughts. All oriental matchlocks (Turkish, Arabian, Indian, Sri Lankan, Cingalese and Chinese - hope I did not forget any important country) have in common that they feature no wing nut on the serpentine. When the head of the serpentine was of small tubular shape or the two halves of the serpentine (actually the serpentine is not "split" as it would not have a spring loaded function then) were thick enough to act as a tightening spring, German matchlocks did not need a wing nut either. In Europe, transverse reinforced stopping bars seem to have originated from 8th to 9th centuries lugged spears. Transverse bars are mostly found on 15th-19th century boar spears where, interesting enough, they often consist of a piece of staghorn and are leather bound to the haft right below the iron socket of the blade to stop dead an onrunnig animal. When it comes to partizans/spontoons, transverse bars are often kept as the stylized remains of a former functional element. Michael Attached Images

22nd January 2009, 01:41 PM	#2
Matchlock (deceased) Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Bavaria, Germany - the center of 15th and 16th century gunmaking Posts: 4,310	Hi, Fernando, No oil is wrong. Olive oil which is no doubt abundant in Portugal is just the historic treatment. It dries within a few weeks and will stay there. m

22nd January 2009, 01:52 PM	#4
Anandalal N. Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 84	Hi Michael, In the Partisan type arms you posted the one on the far right has a cross bar below the blade. One opinion was that this was for the purpose of winding the matchcord for the firing of cannon. After seeing your images I can see that this is not possible with silk tassels so close to it. Any idea of the purpose? By the way Fernando you are on a roll. I love the stuff you have been posting.

22nd January 2009, 02:30 PM	#5
Matchlock (deceased) Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Bavaria, Germany - the center of 15th and 16th century gunmaking Posts: 4,310	Hi Anandalal, I should refer to that transverse bar just as a sort of stylized quillons which, in earlier and fighting or hunting pole arms, were meant to ward off an enemy's or animal's body and stop it from sliding sort of on to the haft. Had they been matchholders they would have been shaped somewhat like the serpentines on muskets, with a wing nut for tightening the two halves. This would, as you remarked, not be possible that close to the tassels though. Michael

22nd January 2009, 03:23 PM	#6
Anandalal N. Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 84	Hi Michael, The reason I posed the question is that a significant number of early Cingalese patisthana copy the partisan right down to the transverse bar. However, they do not have fabric decoration. Yes, it would be logical to expect the serpentine with a wing nut. But in early Cingalese matchlocks the serpentine is present with no wing nut. I would assume the serpentine and wing nut would be needed where one required precision such as in a matchlock where the range and the direction of travel of the serpentine was pre-determined and the match had to be brought precisely to the pan. In the event of a detached match as in artillery, this would not be required. In the event of an enemy trying to run along the blade with the blade thorugh him I would assume the wings supporting the balde should stop them. Thanks again for your thoughts.

22nd January 2009, 03:45 PM	#7
Atlantia Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: The Sharp end Posts: 2,928	Wow Fernando! Another amazing piece! How do you do it? I think perhaps YOU are 'Fernando Jones' and have discovered a long lost Armoury somewhere? LOL, if you have I wouldn't mind helping explore it! Well, as long as any traps defending it don't look like the picture Matchlock posted!!