Indian Mace

[Iliad]

Greetings,
A recent purchase of an Indian spiked mace. I searched the site's library but could not find anything similar, so thought that I would post these pictures for the archives. I think maybe early 1800's?
A blow from this to an unarmoured body would be very nasty indeed.
Regards to all,
Brian

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Iliad

Greetings,
A recent purchase of an Indian spiked mace. I searched the site's library but could not find anything similar, so thought that I would post these pictures for the archives. I think maybe early 1800's?
A blow from this to an unarmoured body would be very nasty indeed.
Regards to all,
Brian

Brian, I am a little bit suspicious of this mace, it has the look of some recently made reproductions from India. Did it come from a reputable dealer? Some clear close up shots may help. Here is a link were you can see some other examples. https://www.pinterest.com/worldantiq...persian-maces/

[kronckew]

i'd worry about it getting stuck in whatever you hit with it, pulling you off the horse, if you were cavalry or delaying you long enough to get zapped by someone else if infantry; and how the heck would you carry it without it spiking you or your horse every time you moved.

a 'parade' weapon for religious festivals maybe?

[Jim McDougall]

Brian,
I am with the others in thinking this a bit too 'theatrical' for an actual combative weapon. These dramatically lengthy spikes and in this kind of profusion would render this weapon more a hindrance than realistically useful item. As has been mentioned, these spikes becoming lodged in their target would effectively remove it from further use.

I agree on the 'parade' or 'dramatic prop' probability, and it seems I have seen 'staged' photos of 'fierce' warriors with these kinds of items from the latter 19th early 20th c.

[mrcjgscott]

Hello Brian,

I have to concur with Jim and the others. That smooth grip would ensure you lost your primary weapon on the first swing.

The intimidation factor of such a piece however would be invaluable, so purely as a ceremonial/parade piece makes sense to me.

Kind regards,

Chris

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by mrcjgscott

Hello Brian,

I have to concur with Jim and the others. That smooth grip would ensure you lost your primary weapon on the first swing. The intimidation factor of such a piece however would be invaluable, so purely as a ceremonial/parade piece makes sense to me.

Kind regards,

Chris

What looks smooth now may have been covered at one time. Sometimes I think the label "ceremonial/parade" gets used to quickly as a way to explain weapons that we currently do not have sufficient research on.

[Kubur]

Originally Posted by estcrh

What looks smooth now may have been covered at one time. Sometimes I think the label "ceremonial/parade" gets used to quickly as a way to explain weapons that we currently do not have sufficient research on.

I agree, always Muharam festival, it's easy. Fakir and sufi used different kind of weapons and they had nothing to do with muharam...

[mrcjgscott]

Originally Posted by estcrh

What looks smooth now may have been covered at one time.

Perfectly true.

It was the combination of a smooth grip coupled with the profusion and length of the spikes as previously mentioned, which make me agree the weapon was impractical.

I am happy to be educated on such things though...

[kronckew]

it indeed may have had a leather grip between the bulbous bits and even a velvet covered shaft.

i don't think having a more secure grip would make it any more practical, in fact i'd bet having it slip out of your hand after getting stuck in the target would be an advantage rather than pulling you along with it because you didn't lose your grip soon enough.

even if you used it and didn't lose it (or your own life) it would be rather difficult to clean.

most islamic & indopersian maces were basically ovoids or cylinders without flanges or spikes to get caught in clothing or armour (or flesh). the most extreme maybe the head shaped ones, or the flat sided hex/octa-gonal types.

even european spiked and flanged maces the pointy bits were normally anything but acute so they would be unlikely to get stuck. the more extreme decorative ones being just that, decorative.

[Edward F]

It looks to me like the real thing although realy need pictures of different areas of the weapon .Most likely the weapon was carried by foot soldier not on horse back Looks to me like a two handed weapon no need to have two bulbas points for one handed use.I agree not a great weapon to use. But its weapon.

[ward]

19th century sounds about right I have seen a number of them. It is a valid piece from that culture. Remember the rich got armor peasants were on there own.

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by kronckew

most islamic & indopersian maces were basically ovoids or cylinders without flanges or spikes to get caught in clothing or armour (or flesh). the most extreme maybe the head shaped ones, or the flat sided hex/octa-gonal types.

I have to disagree with you, take a look at this link and see how many flanged Indo-Persian maces you see.

https://www.pinterest.com/worldantiq...persian-maces/

[estcrh]

How maces like this were used, who used them and when is clearly up for debate. There are quite a few examples, no matter what, you have to admit that they are an aggressive looking weapon, maybe thats the point of them.

[estcrh]

Here is a reference to Indian spiked maces from "Weapon: A Visual History of Arms and Armor", Oct 2, 2006. I have no idea were this info came from originally.

Spiked mace. "The grip of the spikes prevented curved armor from deflecting blows."


Another reference from "Arms and Armour: Traditional Weapons of India", E. Jaiwant Paul, 2005.

"The spiked mace was particularly effective against the helmet."

[trajan]

multi spike maces with khanda hilts

[trajan]

2 ball hilt maces..note the larger size as compared to example mace.

[Iliad]

Hi Guys,
I am absolutely thrilled to have sparked such an interesting exchange of views!
Just a thought about the possibility that the spikes may cause the mace to be stuck in the victim and therefore be wrenched out of the hand of the wielder, and therefore the spiked mace being unsuitable as a weapon: what then about a Lance? It seems to my tiny mind that a Lance being thrust through the body of a 200 pound man would be much more likely to be stuck and be wrenched from the hand of the horseman? If so, then a Lance is unsuitable as a weapon and must therefore be a "Parade" item and of no practical use?
If I was confronted with someone wielding a mace like mine, I would not be merely "intimidated", I would be absolutely terrified!! But then, I am not very brave, I am a little whitehaired old man who has spent a lifetime behind a desk!
I am so glad to have posted this thread and I treasure every viewpoint.
Regards,
Brian

[estcrh]

trajan, nice collection of maces, I really like the one on the far right with both flages and spikes.

[ariel]

Rational weapon design was never a strong point of Indial military tradition.
The entire Elgood's book is one great exposition of the mystical and symbolical side of Indian weapons.
No matter how bizarre and impractical is an example of Indian sword, mace or dagger, it is quite likely to be "real".

Perhaps, only Central African examples can compete:-)

[trajan]

a few more ...

[trajan]

i agree with arial..the variety is infinite. in both ceremonial and functional examples.

[trajan]

from ornate ceremonial demon head to simple sonta type.

[Emanuel]

Hello,

From a purely physical perspective, the more spikes, the less penetration, no?

This is akin to walking or laying on a bed of nails. The force imparted by the swing is distributed over multiple points of contact, thereby reducing the force in any one point. Furthermore, the many angles of all the spikes would prevent any one spike penetrating too far as they would catch on the exterior of the wound.

My take is therefore that using such a weapon on unarmoured bodies could certainly cause nasty surface damage and probably blunt trauma as well but it would not be as effective on armour as the round ball, heavy stick, hammer/pike variety.

In regards to ceremonial use, the more decorated the offensive part of the weapon, the less likely it was used in combat. High maintenance and generally less resistant. So heavy koftgari/inlay/carving/engraving on the mace head or the blade, particularly close to the edge indicate less likely combat use. The bull/demon head maces are basically hollow and are relatively thin sheets of metal - will likely deform on impact, dispersing much of the force

Emanuel

[Emanuel]

With regards to the flanged maces, while I agree that they focus the force of the impacts into a smaller point of contact, the fancy spiral ones have very thin flanges. They may be sharpened to an edge, but they are flimsy, therefore not at all suited against armour or anything but the softest targets.

Thick un-sharpened flanges are more effective than, thin sharp ones.

Originally Posted by estcrh

Here is a reference to Indian spiked maces from "Weapon: A Visual History of Arms and Armor", Oct 2, 2006. I have no idea were this info came from originally.
...

"The spiked mace was particularly effective against the helmet."

[Jim McDougall]

This is an absolutely 'textbook' thread!!! and Brian, thank you for posting this very scary looking mace which has brought the term 'discussion' back into the mainstream here.

I must say that my initial reaction to this profusely spiked sphere mace was as with others, not necessarily a combat weapon but more parade or ceremonial. In searching online, I found the khanda hilt form of one of these on the Oriental Arms site (the one with blue background in the photos). In this it is described as Rajasthan, 18th c., and in many years of experience with Artzi, his descriptions are typically pretty reliable,so that seemed a good benchmark.

Estcrh showed a perfectly supported rebuttal to indicate that these were indeed probably quite combat useful, and the suggestion of the spikes preventing deflection off armour seemed reasonably plausible. I think Emanuel added a most valid view concerning the dissipation of penetrating force with more spikes, which are dynamics often not considered in looking at many weapon forms.

At this point, I am inclined to reconsider this may well be a combat form of mace, however, the rather open means of holding this with simple bulbs on the haft rather than the more substantial sword hilt or more pronounced hand stops remains suggestive of a more votive piece.
Many weapon forms were somewhat vestigially produced for use in temple ceremonies and processional instances.

The main purpose of the mace as I understand it is to crush and compromise armour, either to render the wearer immobile or unable to defend himself, and often to break or open the armour to gain an opening for stabbing. Clearly this would apply to plate type armour, but in India, oftenwe would be looking at mail or heavily padded cloth protection. With mail there would be a distinct threat of this becoming lodged, as well as with cloth. This returns to the case of losing the use of the mace by its being lodged in the victim, but does not preclude the concept of its use in combat. In the case of most of these warriors, they were of course armed with numerous weapons, and arms are often 'staged' in battle situations .

In many cases 'shock' action initiated attack, and often the weapons used in this opening action were often discarded as combatants moved to their secondary weapons. I would think that a line of infantry warriors charging forward with these horrifying spheres would create a most disheartening effect on their opponents.

Fascinating piece Brian!

[kronckew]

Originally Posted by estcrh

I have to disagree with you, take a look at this link and see how many flanged Indo-Persian maces you see.

https://www.pinterest.com/worldantiq...persian-maces/

the flanged maces there looked like european style ones they may have copied. the persians were in contact with the byzantines and crusaders and could have captured ones they copied. the flanges again have very wide angle 'points' to avoid getting stuck while still concentrating the force when hitting armour.

your later post also shows a nice ball mace with quite short spikes, again fine for concentrating the force and preventing skidding on plate armour, while being less likely to get stuck in cloth or mail. a lot of the really spiky maces shown have rather bent spikes which would degrade their performance.

another note, a lance is a primary weapon used mostly in a shoulder to shoulder charge, and is really designed to break or be dropped after the initial shock & penetration of your opponent, whereupon they would revert to a secondary weapon, an estoc or sabre, or maybe just a sabre. a lance is a poor weapon if you are in the melee and within sabre range of your opponent who is past your point. lancers in general in later years were lightly armed reconaissance and persuit units, good for spearing a broken and fleeing enemy.

as commented by a heavy cavalryman in a military tv series, 'once you get past the point, it's like killing rabbits'.

the horned devil maces are as noted earlier, light and generally considered qajar parade pieces. 19c maces were well past their sell-by date.

i tend to go by occam's razor - the simplest explanation is usually, but not always, the best. i remain open to persuasion. whacking a ballistic gel dummy dressed in indian style mail & plate, or padded cloth armour ala mythbusters might be informative experimental archaeology.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by Iliad

Greetings,
A recent purchase of an Indian spiked mace. I searched the site's library but could not find anything similar, so thought that I would post these pictures for the archives. I think maybe early 1800's?
A blow from this to an unarmoured body would be very nasty indeed.
Regards to all,
Brian

Please check out Forum Library...http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ht=indian+mace

and #50 at http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ACE+COLLECTION

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

The main purpose of the mace as I understand it is to crush and compromise armour, either to render the wearer immobile or unable to defend himself, and often to break or open the armour to gain an opening for stabbing. Clearly this would apply to plate type armour, but in India, often we would be looking at mail or heavily padded cloth protection. With mail there would be a distinct threat of this becoming lodged, as well as with cloth.

A mace could also give you a concussion right through armor without having to damage the armor and in the case of mail and cloth armor bones could be broken. One of the reaons you see such a wide variety of weapons in India is the wide variety of armor that warriors would be facing depending on their opponent. From cloth based armor such as peti (quilted armor) and chilta hazar masha (coat of a thousand nails), mail armor, mail and plate armor and plate armor. Weapons had to be chosen based on what type of armor your enemy would be wearing, weapons were designed to circumvent the particular strength of each type of armor, it was a vicious circle.

[kronckew]

the vicious circle continues in military armoured vehicles and infantry anti-tank weapons. a never ending circle indeed.

the oddities are that occasionally the past comes back.

the last recorded instance of an english longbow killing an enemy during a declared war was in ww2. it was a german sergeant sentry, who may have been wearing a MP's steel gorget as a badge of office., which might count as an ancient anti-armour weapon defeating an ancient form of armour.

col. 'mad jack' churchill (apparently no relation to wsc) not only carried and effectively used his longbow (it was him above). but carried his claymore into battle. he was known to say that no officer should go into battle without his sword. he also had a playing piper accompany him as he charged into battle.

, “Mad Jack,” as he came to be known, survived multiple explosions, escaped a couple of POW camps, captured more than 40 Germans at sword point in just one raid, and in 1940 scored the last recorded longbow kill in history. he said after the war “If it wasn’t for those damn Yanks, we could have kept the war going another ten years.”

[ariel]

Originally Posted by Emanuel

In regards to ceremonial use, the more decorated the offensive part of the weapon, the less likely it was used in combat. High maintenance and generally less resistant. So heavy koftgari/inlay/carving/engraving on the mace head or the blade, particularly close to the edge indicate less likely combat use.

Emanuel

Once again relying on Elgood, I must respectfully disagree.
Of course, richly-decorated weapons must have belonged to the upper crust commanders who, by the very virtue of their rank and military function, were less likely to find themselves in the melee. However, Indian weapons were avatars of deities and as such must have been richly decorated. A Rajah armed with a plain sword could not rely on divine assistance.
Such weapons were not intrinsically wall-hangers: they were just religiously appropriate and possessed mystical content. We see them now well-preserved not for the lack of trying, but because they used to belong to the elite and were stored in royal armories between the campaigns.
And, as in any army, it was the poor schlumps who carried plain weapons into the battle