Another theoretical question: what are those Central African swords used for anyway?

[fearn]

Hi All,

Currently, there are some droolingly gorgeous African weapons coming out of hiding. Since I didn't know much about them before (aside from that "swords" picture in Stone's Glossary), I'm finding this fascinating.

I'm going to pitch a question to the list: why are the Central African swords and knives so diverse in shape, and so frequently of marginal functionality?

Here's my guess: basically, the swords were generally side-arms, with something else, such as a spear or bow, being the main arm. Flavio's picture of the armed tribesman on Louie's Kuba thread is a case in point. As side arms, the swords and knives primarily play a symbolic role, and their use as weapons is secondary. In this way, they're more like a keris than like, say, a European sword.

What do all you experts think? Feel free to post more pics too, while you're at it!

Cheers,

Fearn

[tom hyle]

I'm no wiz with the pictures, but I'll give it a shot without any. Of course the swords are side arms, with lances, javelins, bows, throwing weapons, and guns to keep the enemy dying further from you before you have to resort to a sword or dagger or club or axe, etc. Frankly, I think the African swords are way under-studied, and it may be way too late to study most of them as weapons and/or tools within their native cultures, as they often are not much used anymore as weapons (because of the modern army abolishing the self arming militia system, and because spring tempered machetes offer an often superior using value to forged iron, or even steel, as many of the African smiths, if they are forging springs as I'm told, are not tempering them to a spring temper; I don't know that this means they don't know how, but on the other hand, the popularity of foreign made machetes says something, dunnit? ), so much about their use and making is lost, but IMHO a lot of them are a lot more effective than modern "westerners" (ie. Northerners ) typically think. The sickle/mambele sword of the 'Zande, 'Gombe, etc. is a nasty nasty fighting piece, for instance, and while I've encountered pieces that seemed like clearly effigy/symbolic/money/etc. pieces, by no means all the odd seeming African arms are at all impractical. I also think that, just because an ancestor worshipper uses great grand dad's sword as a "dance wand" in religious ceremonies now, is not any reason to think that's what it was back in the day, and I think this ideation occurs a lot in the "fine art scene" where African swords are as popular as they are to ethno collectors, and usually moreso than with modern N American martial artists, and where there is often an exaggerated horror of violence......

[Tim Simmons]

I think all of Toms points are valid but here is my 2pence worth.
Take the Congo,the size of western europe and mostly jungle and transport by foot,isolation and distinction from your neighbor/enemy could foster variation.Many non functional forms may indicate how close a person was to the seat of power.In a world of limited material wealth these items were the pinnacle of technical/spiritual achievment, bling in other words.Tim

[fearn]

Hi Tim and Tom,

I agree, especially with Tim's remarks about the isolation. I'm having issues with non-functional "bling" masquerading as a weapon. In some cases, those swords would be great weapons--not something to fence with, but more than adequate against an unarmored opponent. In other cases, they simply make me scratch my head.

Personally, I'd first figured that the Congo was actually pretty peaceful, given that they hadn't spent a lot of time optimizing their swords for war This is with the Europeans, Japanese, Chinese, Thais, Burmese, Indonesians, Phillipinos, etc for examples of blades optimized primarily for war and secondarily for decoration.

Finally, it occurred to me to look at what else the Congo men might have been carrying, and their spears and bows (two other understudied areas) are pretty functional. Personally, I'm beginning to suspect that the groups that depended most on their bows and spears might have had the weirder swords.

I'm thinking in almost evolutionary terms--if you rarely draw your sword as a weapon, it can be a great thing for flaunting your identity and status. If you have to use the thing on anything like a regular basis, functionality might win out. I'd suggest that this might be a good way of understanding the martial culture of the Congo and west African tribes. It might be more broadly applicable, come to think of it. Indonesia has all those gorgeous Keris, after all, and I'd hate to depend on one in the middle of a battle.

In general, I think there's something interesting about resource-poor cultures that make their weapons (at least to my eyes) over-decorative, in the sense that the shape might interfere with function to some extent. To me, this says that the makers of that weapon actually lived in a relatively peaceful place. Either that, or they weren't as resource poor as we think, and they could afford the "bling." However, if these blades are "bling," what were they fighting with?

Fun to think about, anyway.

Fearn

[Flavio]

Hello guys.

The problem that regards the use of the African weapons is very complex.
The fact that the Westerns call "weapons" some objects only because there are resemblances to the western white weapons it's a great mistake.
The object that for us are weapons for the owenrs have a turmoil of meanings (status symbol, ritual and cultual meaning, social meaning, economic meaning etc...).

I think that we can consider, with an high degree of certainty, non functional the object with copper or brass blade, but again we don'yt know the true meaning (ritual, cultual, social...).
For the "weapons" with an iron blade the true sense is a mystery. We can make hypothesis observing the general shape (more or less functional), the decoration (a functional object perhaps is less decorated, but also this is not sure), the presence of an handled (in order to understand if the blade were used like currency). The presence of one or more of these elements maybe could tell us the use of the object that we have for the hands.

In last it is not to forget that often the "weapons" have not had a single meaning and use!

[fearn]

Hi Flavio,

With a great deal of respect, I have to disagree with your mystification of african swords. After all, many cultures use swords and sword-like objects for dancing and other ceremonial uses, trade blades have been common for centuries (which is what these money knives are), and we're certainly now talking about swords as status symbols (see current-running threads), decorative objects (what most collectors do), and economic symbols (something I understand all too well as a postdoc). If you know any pagans, you're also aware that a knife or sword can be a religious object (athame or boline), even if it's razor sharp. We also have a whole fantasy knife industry (such as Gil Hibben's yearly productions) that produces objects are definitely knives and blur the boundaries between weapon and art piece.

Given all that, are African blades weird? Every explanation that's been put forward has a parallel in modern American culture, and certainly in other cultures. I have to wonder if we're making a mystery out of these blades because they often do look different (just as they often look like Ancient Greek, Roman, and Egyptian designs). Perhaps we're also making a mystery out of them because we can't now go live in the Congo or Angola and find out what these people believe. In any case, I suspect that these wonderful pieces are understandable, but that perhaps we need to see them differently.

It's a fun question, though, and I'm certainly enjoying the seeing people's collections.

Fearn

[tom hyle]

I do not believe there is any foundation for thinking of copper/brass blades as inrinsically nonfunctional. AFAIK they are used by some ethnic groups or cults who must not touch iron, some of them only at certain times. Of course, as has been said here, and as Conogre pointed out on another thread, there may be many features and powers of African swords that have much meaning and utility from the viewpoint of the African (religious/magical comes to mind), while seeming pointless or useless to an unknowing foreigner.

[Tim Simmons]

There does not seem to be much use of armour in tropical Africa except shields of organic materials,so perhaps weapons could be on the light side.I think it is wrong to assume because you can not see how to fight with a certain weapon that did not as well.They most have been skilled in the use of thier weapons and trianed in there use like any other fighter.Tim

[tom hyle]

The original question, read carefully, and as further explained, seems to me to refer to a lesser, tighter defined, group of weapons, BTW, than what we've all proceeded to address, which is fine and dandy by me, but just pointing it out. There are edged weapons that are purely ceremonial (etc.); some of us just feel that many get improperly lumped into this category. There are two common reasons for this mislumping that I'm aware of: 1/ the lightness and thin-ness of many blades seems unfightingly flimsy to the modern N American, including most modern N American martial artists. But it seems to me that the fact of the matter is the African of the past often preferred a fast, unwearying, light blade, whose thin-ness will cut right to the bone on a good, well-made cut. 2/ Some have features that may seem useless, etc. when you think of modern European style academic sword ("sword"?) fighting ("fighting"?) where there is no sheild, and the sword is used for parrying (I believe the real existance of this style outside sport/training and formal duels is highly questionable; all I read points to Europeans ceasing to make sheilds, but continuing to use them, and even deliberately carry them, in the form of other objects; gloves, lanterns, capes, and hats have all been designed specifically as sheilds, but I digress; imagine!). But in traditional Africa (as with old Europe; the rest of the old, "true" if you will, "West") you fight with shields, and some shapes are especially designed for that. The 'Zande mambele I've mentioned (which is much larger and more curved than the Fang/Koto rank marker [?] one we've been shown) are such a sword. They are for reaching around shields with. I rarely meet an American who can grasp their proper use, so foreign to the fighting styles popular/respected in N America, and in a way that's a good thing, which brings me to another point I've wanted to make about having odd weapons; the enemy can't grab them from you and instantly competently use them against you. Sure, if he takes them home and has time to study them, he'll likely either figure them out or make something else from the metal, but I mean, actually in the fight (and this has to do with some sheath designs, too; ask a N Plains American Indian why their traditional knife sheath takes in most of the handle; that's the reason they cite; it makes it hard for your enemy to grab your knife and use it against you; it keeps it in place when you're climbing, riding, etc. too, but that's not what they go right to to explain it....).
Just to complicate matters though, I've seen a fair bit of armour in traditional African settings. Ashante soldiers in chainmail (ditto Somali soldiers), Sudannic cavalry in quilted armour (much more effective than one might think, especially when you remember they used fibres that were especially hard to cut on purpose), an Akan-seeming soldier fetish wearing similar quilted armour. The existance of armour that will stop sword X though in no way implies sword X was not for fighting within that same culture at that same time; the PURPOSE of armour is to protect you; it does its job, and by no means every weapon is designed to deal with it, and it's a tough nut to crack, even with a weapon made to pierce it.
A .32 gun in the pocket ("for fun; he keep a razor in his shoe....") will not pierce any decent body armour (or a 'phone book); it's certainly still a weapon; a very viable, and even common, weapon in modern N American culture.

[Tim Simmons]

As I have already post the scorpion I might as well do the snake or often called a hunga munga among other names.I prefer the snake this from the same extensive areas as the scorpion.Tim

[Freddy]

Ariel,

Permit me to disagree with your statement that African weapons are only ornamental. It's not because they have a shape we (Westerners) don't recognize as functional, that these weapons won't do the job.

Some African weapons are indeed ceremonial or ornamental, I agree. But, like Tom said, others were made for a specific purpose. Maybe strange to us, be even so...

Tom, when talking about the Zande sabre, you probably meant this one :



Just for the record : this sabre knife is not called 'mambele' but 'MAMBELI'. The 'mambele' is the sickle knife of the Mangbetu (as I showed earlier) also known as 'trumbash'.

To be correct the big knife, I'm showing above, was used by the Bandia- or Boa-tribes in Congo.

The big sabre knife measures 83 cm, in a straight line from the tip of the blade to the bottom of the handle. The inner curve is very sharp, as is the broader top of the blade (both edges). These were used, as Tom stated correctly, to hit an opponent using a shield. I wouldn't advise anyone to try to grab it by the point. The outer edge of the blade is 5 mm thick, giving the blade its strength. The crescent-shaped piece near the handle had a leather strap tied to it, which was fastened a the loop on the bottom of the handle. In this way, the weapon was secured in the user's hand. This is functional, no ?
The warriors using these knives carried big, woven shield. No body armor was used. I don't think these warriors bothered with fencing. They just tried to hit each other above and round the shield.

The smaller knife, on the other hand, with a similar shape and of a much smaller dimension (41 cm) was used by elder men. This is a ceremonial type of weapon. Still, one can use it hit someone with it. But I don't think is was made for that purpose. It's more an emblem of seniority.
I'm not sure this one is from the same tribe, as this type of weapon was used by a number of tribes in a vast area.

And for all those 'African freaks' (like me ), here's the site to look :

www.mambele.be

[Freddy]

Flavio, Tim,

What do you think of this one :





This is a throwing knife from the Zulgo-tribe living in East-Sudan.

It's 53,5 cm long.

[fearn]

Originally Posted by Freddy

[snip]

Just for the record : this sabre knife is not called 'mambele' but 'MAMBELI'. The 'mambele' is the sickle knife of the Mangbetu (as I showed earlier) also known as 'trumbash'.

To be correct the big knife, I'm showing above, was used by the Bandia- or Boa-tribes in Congo.

The big sabre knife measures 83 cm, in a straight line from the tip of the blade to the bottom of the handle. The inner curve is very sharp, as is the broader top of the blade (both edges). These were used, as Tom stated correctly, to hit an opponent using a shield. I wouldn't advise anyone to try to grab it by the point. The outer edge of the blade is 5 mm thick, giving the blade its strength. The crescent-shaped piece near the handle had a leather strap tied to it, which was fastened a the loop on the bottom of the handle. In this way, the weapon was secured in the user's hand. This is functional, no ?
The warriors using these knives carried big, woven shield. No body armor was used. I don't think these warriors bothered with fencing. They just tried to hit each other above and round the shield.

Hi Freddy,

These mambeles are neat weapons, but I do have to disagree with the idea that they're totally unique to central Africa. Even ignoring the Ethiopian (etc) shotels, they look like they're functionally quite similar to Japanese and Indonesian sickles (kama and arit respectively). Unless the mambele is so front-heavy that you have to swing it like a pick-axe, there's probably quite a bit that you can do with it. For instance, you can swing it like a pick (stab with the tip), hook and slice with it (cut with the inner and outer edges), and use the outer hook to hook things out of the way to make an opening (basically, use a backstroke with the hook to move a blade or shield out of the way, then, slam the tip down through the opening). If that hook is sharpened on the short edge, it would make a decent gut hook.

Also, the fact that these blades have knuckle guards suggests that they're worried about getting their fingers lopped. To me, that suggests some basic "fencing" was going on. In other words, these may be more sophisticated than they look.

Anyway, there's a lot of diversity in the shape of kamas and arits, and it might be worth investigating karate or silat books for ideas about other possible strokes.

Thanks for showing them, and thanks for the website.

Fearn

[fearn]

I'd also post this image of what I regard as the epitome of the "weird Central African knife"--this knife from the Yanzi, and 30 cm long. The image is from www.mambele.be.

Comments about functionality?

Fearn

[ariel]

RE: FEARN'S EXAMPLE.
I can hear a uniform "No comment....." followed by a long, long silence.This thingie is something New York decorators try to hang on your wall to give the apartment a " casual and funky ambience".
If this is a weapon, then an Art Deco vase is one too: both can cut accidentally..
I had a mambeli; it is a most awkward sword money can buy. It is heavy, grossly unbalanced, impossible to hold and the metal is of the poorest quality. But the blade decorations were quite fun, if one likes primitive art.
The idea of the "around the shield' attack had been floating around for quite some time and discredited time after time after time. I would advise the proponents to actually try it using a garbage bin cover in place of a shield.
I did: it was totally useles from the functional point of view but my wife almost died laughing.
Central African swords are great pieces of primitive art, on a par with Benin bronze and kente cloth.But as weapons they are grossly inferior to virually everything coming from Europe and Asia

[Rivkin]

Originally Posted by fearn

Comments about functionality?
Fearn

Well, this photo illustrates why we all heard about machete massacres in Africa, but never about "the night of fat mambeles"...

[Tim Simmons]

Hello Freddy,According to C.Spring African Arms And Armour.British museum publication.The snake is called a 'sai' serpent and the scorpion a 'muder' by the Ingessana of the Blue Nile province,Sudan.I should imagine your last post is a snake.Tim

[tom hyle]

Of the ones that really are cermonial, some are rank markers for traditional government officials (ie "chiefs" etc.) and are borne by them or their sword bearers for civil (or now usually tribal, the traditional governments having mostly given way to "Western" style federal beaurocracies in at least some degree) occasions and ceremonies. Many are used as "fetishes"; conduits/summoning devices for devine/supernatural/dead beings/persons. I hadn't heard of them being used to attack such beings before, but it makes sense in terms of the customs of other cultures and my own interactions with such beings; they can be frightened of a sword. Some may be used for animal sacrifice, though I've seen that done ordinary knives/swords. Others may be used in scarification ceremonies, though now days one hears of those being done with broken bottles or whatever other blades; I imagine that traditionally there'd've been particular blades.