How did they measure sword blades?
 

In The Wonder that was India (p. 503) 1 angula is 8 barly corns or 3/4 in.

In The Jahangirnama (p. 473) a fingers width is said to be 2.032 cm 4/5 in..

In Hidu Arms and Ritual (p. 205) the best sword blades should be 100 fingers (101.6 cm) long, a nimcha has a blade of 50 fingers (50.8 cm), and other blades have a length between these two measurers. It is, however, mentioned that a sword blade should be an even number of fingers, or all kinds of misfortune will fall upond you head.

But how did they measure the blades? From the hilt to the tip in a straight line, or along the back of the blade?

I have tried to do both on two of my blades.
The Indian blade is 77 cm long measured in a straight line, and only a fraction longer measured along the back of the blade. This gives 37.893 fingers, so I would say it is 38 fingers - which is an even number.

The shamshir blade is 79 cm long mesured in a straight line, or 38.879 fingers, so I would say 39 fingers - an uneven number.
But measured along the back of the blade it is 81 cm or 39.862 fingers, so I would say 40 fingers - and even number.

In catalogues I think measurers are mostly given measured in a straight line, but from the measurers above this may not be the way the did it in India in the old days.

Any comments will be welcome.

As always Jens, you pose fascinating questions, as only a master of the esoterica of Indian arms with many decades of study could! :)
It seems this topic has come up a number of times over the years, and it seems like it was years ago when we were poring through A.L. Basham's great work.

It seems the barley corn was a key element in standards of measure in a number of regions and cultures (it seems it remains a measure in U.K. shoe sizes if the note I saw on line is correct).
In study on the Khevsur's of the remote Caucasian regions of Georgia, their tradition of dueling typically did not result in notable wounds beyond bruises, however if a man was wounded, he was entitled to compensation.
This was determined by measuring each wound using BARLEY CORNS.
("Seven League Boots", R.Halliburton, 1935).

As you note, the key is 'how many barley corns determine the finger width?'.

Using a standard of measure which could obviously vary depending on the item being used ( an arms length; a pace or foot length etc) would result in certain disparities of course,

I think most of these would be 'rule of thumb' :) sorry.

The length of the shamshir by using geometric methods seem like it would be by the measure from root to blade point in straight line, rather like TV sets are measured by the straight diagonal corner to corner on the screen.

Like most things, determinates are relative and it seems subjective.
The best blades (or 'good' blades) are determined by length? It would depend on by whose standards. A 'good' cavalry blade is better if longer for its reach from horseback.....but then Rajputs usually dismounted to fight, so then would a shorter sword be better...for the close quarters melee?

A lot of relativity, subjectivity and interpretation as far as understanding what these things meant in their times as described by contemporaries, but opens intriguing doors to understanding them better.

Jim, it is interesting to notice, that Jahangir was borne 1569 AD and ruled 1605-1627 AD.
The quote from Hindu Arms and Ritual is from 1570 AD.
So it is likely, but not proven, that the same measurers were used in his time. To this can be added, that the swords shown, following the 1570 text shows three swords, and at least two of them have/are European blades!!!
I am really wondering, why would they show two European swords - and one nimcha??
The author had a great varity of swords to show, and does so later, but why choose these three swords, when it comes to the blade length??

You bring up excellent points Jens!
If a measure of sword blades prevalent in India, and in a set period (c.1570), was in place, then how would blades from external sources be placed in accord with the 'superstitious' or traditional standards?

I had not even thought of that factor given the vast volume of blades which entered Indian entrepots from Europe and other sources. If these standards were so rigidly applied, then would many of the blades have been dismissed because they fell outside required standards such as these measures?

It certainly does not seem so, but perhaps such things were not particularly adhered to in later times as colonial powers intervened and the convenience of available blades increased along with the situation of diminishing local industry.

Should I guess, then I would say, that they maybe later paid less attention to the length of the swords, and more to from where the swords came. Guessing of course, as the superstition was very big - still is in some areas - even in Europe. Dont leave a pair of sissors open on a table, dont lick an iron knife, dont give your friend a knife, you never know when he will use it on you, if you see a black kat crossing the street in front of you.... and so on.
Maybe the English's, German's, Italian's and the othe blade producing countries did know about the demand of the 'lucky' and 'unlucky' lengths of the blades - I dont know.
But I do believe that the blades were measures along the backside of the blade, and not in a straight line.

Jawa/Bali are historically Indianised states.

In both places one of the ways in which to determine suitability of a keris for its owner was/is to measure the length of the blade using various formulas. One of these formulas involves finger width.

The correct blade length is dependent upon the width of each individual owner's fingers. It is not a universal measurement: the blade that is perfect for me might spell disaster for somebody else.

One of the ways in which the actual measurement is done is by laying alternating index fingers on the width of the blade> left finger>right finger>left finger>right finger --- and so on until the point is reached, if you finish with too little remnant to accommodate another finger, or if there is an overhang of the last finger, there are varying schools of thought about how to deal with this.

I had read somewhere that keris were measured using thumb width, but not sure of accuracy of that statement. I have little knowledge on the keris, but do know there is of course an enormous amount of superstition and religious elements at hand in their character. I have always understood the number of luk (waves) were auspicious and certain number might be unlucky.
Also the character of the pamor was key in determining the blade's effect toward the owner. I have always wondered if blades were custom made for clients or if the purchase of blades was purely happenstance and each blade had to be scrutinized for these features' compatibility to each owner.

Naturally the imported blade phenomenon had no effect on the keris in its cultural sphere(s) so that was not a factor in its matters.

Jens, I think you are right, in Indian context the blades were measured along the back of the blade profile. I doubt that European blade producers had any concept of the superstitious matters involved with foreign swords.
Blades were produced according to developing western technologies and much more involved with blades which could be used effectively in both cut and thrust.

Jim, I know of a number of ways in which keris blades were measured, as I wrote:- "---one of the ways in which to determine suitability ---"

the fingers can be used in various ways, a folded palm leaf, or a length of cord can be used. There are lots of ways.

Sometimes a keris would/will be made to a specific measurement, but if a believer is buying an already made keris he will check measurement before parting with money.

As to "luck", what is lucky for you might be very unlucky for me. The amount of belief surrounding the keris is enormous.

As far as I can see there are 3 reasonable ways to measure the length:
1) Along the spine side.
2) From the base to the tip.
3) Along the edge side (although this last one might require some care).

If we can assume that men of that time had the ability to reason as much as we do (which i think we can). What do you take as your solution when you have 3 results from approaching how you measure things with 3 methods? The reasonable thing to do (usually) is to take the median solution (or the solution that sits between two extremes but may not an exact median). Which begs the question. How long is it along the edge?

Also here is a method I use to measure blades that I included in a response video I made some time ago (I have it cued up to that part of the video): Blue Tape Method

Quite sure along the back.

1: In earlier times the people used their foots, arms, fingers, thumbs and so on for measuring. One inch equals one thumb. With the thumb one can only measure along the edge. Measurement tapes were also very rare.

2: If we measure a blade which is 100 cm long with a curvature of 3 cm, it is only a very small difference, if one measure along the edge or from point to point.

3: I am very sure, that in Japan the length of blade is measured along the back edge (1 Shaku= 1 foot; 1 Sun ~ 1.25 inch).


Roland

As you can see from my first post, the authors are not in agreement about the width of a finger, as one writes 3/4 in. and another 4/5 in.

Not that it makes much difference, but I see that I have made a mistake - as I wrote that the best sword should be 100 fingers, and that would be quite a sword to handle - the correct number is 50 fingers. I also wrote that the nimcha should have a blade of 50 fingers - it should of course be 25 fingers - sorry for the mistake.

I find it interesting that the author of The Wonder That was India writes that 8 barly corns are equal to a finger, but how can we be sure that barly corns now and then had the same size?
To the Indians, at the time, it would be natural to use barly corns for a measure, and then say it was equal to a finges width.
To use a fingers width alone would make the measuring very uncertain, as it is likely that the sword smiths fingers would be broader than the fingers of the on who ordered the sword.
I also find it interesting that the length of the different blades are given, but not the way the blade is measured.

When reading further in Hindu Arms and Ritual (pp. 205-206) you will see this.
"Moreover, you should know that the masters and experts of this art agree that any sword is to be regarded as auspicious which has the mark of an umbrella or a sivalinga (which are essential to the infidels if India and hang aroun their neck), or the profile of a standard (alam) or the leaves of pipal [?] tree [my comments - the pipal tree is Figus religiosa or sacred fig] which are very well know in India; or the profile of the blue water-lily flower (nilofar, Nymphaea cyanea), or an earring."
I am fascinated to read about the earring, and I am wondering what it would look like.

Please Google to see the Pipal tree's leaves and the Blue water lily.
The umbrella is well known, but untill the Mughal empire started to crumble no one but royals dared to use it.

Roland, on Japanese swords the cutting edge is the same as the measurement used for blade length (nagasa), it is a straight line. That is how I measure all of my swords as well.

Could be that the Japanese did measure in a straight line - but did the Indians do this as well?
Could be, that other culturers did measurer in a diffent way, but what I am especially interested in is the way the Indians did it.

Indian and other general ethnographic weaponry is not my field, fifty years ago it was, but then I began to specialise.

I most humbly suggest that the modern Western European idea of measurement of a weapon is not the same, nor does it have the same objectives as the medieval and archaic idea of Indian measurement of a weapon.

As a collector, or even a student of Indian weaponry one may decide upon a method of measurement that will produce a number which relates to a universal standard. This will satisfy the objective of present day student or collector:- he wants to know how long the blade is.

Based upon transmitted medieval mores which still exist outside of India, and for all I know, perhaps within India as well, the objective of a medieval Indian when he measured a blade was not to relate the length of the blade to a universal standard, but rather to an esoteric standard, and by doing so ensuring that the weapon was suitable for his personal use.

In a field other than Indian weaponry I have very often offered the opinion that it is impossible to understand a cultural artifact (ie, weapon) in the absence of an understanding of the way in which the people of that culture thought at the time the cultural artifact was produced. I rather think that perhaps the same might be true of Indian swords.

Salaams All...I wrote an article based on a book that set down the different weights and measures in the Souk in Oman...It is bewildering !! I am not sure if an Indian sword was a standard length or if it had a variety of lengths to chose from .. each sword would be peculiar to its owner would it not?...I note that Nimcha meaning half sword could be long or short..but offer that only in passing. I don't know.

Would a sword not be fitted to the height of the wearer so that it hung at the waist in the proper manner... Did the officer requiring a sword not get fitted at the Military Officers Uniform outfitters for this reason?.... Again I dont know...

Please see http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...t=Muttrah+souk at post 7 for the variation in weights and measures and add to that for India the Barley Corn situation... :)

"And once you have mastered that lot, you must start on the difference between Muscat maund, which equals 24 kiyas, each kiyas representing the weight of 6 MTD., and an Omani maund which equals 24 kiyas, each kiyas representing the weight of 6 Omani baizas, remembering that 5 Omani baizas are the same weight as 1 MTD. and that in arabic a maund is a mun; 200 Muscat maunds = 1 bahhar, which is the same weight both on the coast and in the interior but varies when applied to different produce, a bahhar of salt or firewood being equivalent to 400 Muscati maunds".


During pre-Akbar period, weights and measure system varied from region to region, commodity to commodity, and rural to urban areas. The weights were based on the weight of various seeds (specially the wheat berry and Ratti) and lengths were based of the length of arms and width of fingers. Akbar realized a need for a uniform system. He elected the barley corn. Unfortunately, this did not replace the existing system. Instead, it just added another system.

For an utterly confusing view of how this added up please see http://www.indiacurry.com/Miscel/ind...htsmeasure.htm

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Thinking about it more. the easiest measurement to get regarding along a curvature, would be to hold a the base of a blade against the edge of a flat surface (like a table) and roll the blade along it's edge to the tip. Then simply mark where the tip is from the edge of the flat surface. This would trace the curvature of the object along the flat surface perfectly as long as you didn't pull or push the blade. It would be easy to get a distance you could mark and then measure for mean distance between the tip and bade like this as well.

You would only find on issue with this method when getting to measuring the spine. And I have yet to find a way to measure a spine that isn't either involved or prone to errors and inconsistency. It's not an easy measurement to take compared to others. I would think that if you had to say which way of measuring it is least useful and least important. It would be measuring long the spine. Not just because it's a cumbersome and sometime annoying thing to do. But because it gives you the least valuable information. The curvature obviously matters most at the edge. As does the length of cutting edge that there is. And the reach matters. But the curve of the back side? Not really.

I used this method on a sword with quite a bit of curve, the pulwar below has a measurement of 29.25 inches (74.29 cm) when measured across the blade tip to were the cutting edge meets the point of the langet, when using your method of rolling the blade on a flat surface from the point of the langet to the blade tip I got a measurement of 31.25 inches (79.39 cm).