Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post

Jerseyman · 19th August 2016, 09:35 PM

Hi Marius,

Sorry for taking so long to respond - you're absolutely right in your observation, very few strikes will be absolutely perpendicular to the target. Consequently there will always be some flex in the blade - my doubt resides in the assertion that blades were deliberately made very flexible as a positive asset.

It seems to me that a certain amount of flex is to be desired, but too much flex would be extremely detrimental to the power and accuracy of the attack or its follow-up. And I assume that historically, various armourers must have made a study of the compromise between stiffness/flexibility, hardness/strength, edge-holding capability etc.

Quite a few antique blades I've handled of generic 'european' sword length seem to be tempered to a moderate flex where the top half of the blade will bend to roughly 30º then snap back to true. Certainly not all - and I suspect that might be a reflection of function - some blades are obviously designed to be stiffer. Taking the various British cavalry sabres of the 19C as an example - to my very untutored eyes they seem to get stiffer through the century - perhaps adjusting to the changing role of cavalry? Or simply the gradual straightening of the design? I acknowledge that I am speculating about something of which I know little. I have both a parang nabur and a shotel with moderately stiff blades and a full-length flyssa with a blade that I couldn't bend if I tried. Is stiffness v. flex down to function or choice?

I seem to recall seeing a tv series on weapons by Mike Loades in which there was a demonstration of cavalrymen cutting cabbages/melons. The cuts were then shown in extreme slow-motion and the amount of cavitation/flex in what seemed to be very stiff blades was extraordinary. Which seemed to suggest that no matter how stiff the blade the impact of a strike will have a massive impact on it - at a speed too fast for the eye to follow. I cannot now recollect which blades they were using. Unfortunately I can't find that footage anywhere - if anyone else can find it please do post it as it's fascinating.

I'm about to post a single-edged pata on a new thread with a well-tempered blade that bends as I describe above and snaps back to straight.

I guess to finish up, I just don't buy that a very flexible blade is more effective in attack.

Happy to be shown the error of my ways....

19th August 2016, 09:35 PM	#11
Jerseyman Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 97	Hi Marius, Sorry for taking so long to respond - you're absolutely right in your observation, very few strikes will be absolutely perpendicular to the target. Consequently there will always be some flex in the blade - my doubt resides in the assertion that blades were deliberately made very flexible as a positive asset. It seems to me that a certain amount of flex is to be desired, but too much flex would be extremely detrimental to the power and accuracy of the attack or its follow-up. And I assume that historically, various armourers must have made a study of the compromise between stiffness/flexibility, hardness/strength, edge-holding capability etc. Quite a few antique blades I've handled of generic 'european' sword length seem to be tempered to a moderate flex where the top half of the blade will bend to roughly 30º then snap back to true. Certainly not all - and I suspect that might be a reflection of function - some blades are obviously designed to be stiffer. Taking the various British cavalry sabres of the 19C as an example - to my very untutored eyes they seem to get stiffer through the century - perhaps adjusting to the changing role of cavalry? Or simply the gradual straightening of the design? I acknowledge that I am speculating about something of which I know little. I have both a parang nabur and a shotel with moderately stiff blades and a full-length flyssa with a blade that I couldn't bend if I tried. Is stiffness v. flex down to function or choice? I seem to recall seeing a tv series on weapons by Mike Loades in which there was a demonstration of cavalrymen cutting cabbages/melons. The cuts were then shown in extreme slow-motion and the amount of cavitation/flex in what seemed to be very stiff blades was extraordinary. Which seemed to suggest that no matter how stiff the blade the impact of a strike will have a massive impact on it - at a speed too fast for the eye to follow. I cannot now recollect which blades they were using. Unfortunately I can't find that footage anywhere - if anyone else can find it please do post it as it's fascinating. I'm about to post a single-edged pata on a new thread with a well-tempered blade that bends as I describe above and snaps back to straight. I guess to finish up, I just don't buy that a very flexible blade is more effective in attack. Happy to be shown the error of my ways....