Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post

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.

22nd January 2009, 03:23 PM	#14
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.