Single-edged blades with a ridge

[Bob A]

Originally Posted by GePi

While Most of the examples with t-spines mentioned in this thread I agree are likely derived from Turkic blades (I think they appear on Ottoman Palas in the 17th century) I remembered an interesting much earlier example that I had to dig through my old pictures to find. I found this knife in a museum here in Germany, unfortunately I cannot recall anymore which museum exactly. With a bit of taper at the forte this could pass for a crude Afghan Peshkabz, but it was excavated in a local celtic burial mound dated to 600 to 500 BCE! Doesn't seem that the design really took hold back then, I haven't seen any other examples.

That's breath-takingly surprising!

Thank you for the information, and for your memories!

[bookandswordblog]

The Greek and Anatolian barbarian blades with a T-section seem concentrated in the 6th century BCE too although I have seen them as late as the 4th century. I am trying to avoid general claims until I have actually looked at the hundred or so known examples, because typologies don't always follow all their own rules when you start to look at them. Ewart Oakeshott was not the first or last to define a type then put objects in it which don't meet the definition.

[bookandswordblog]

Now I wonder if there is a book or article on the interrelations between all the Southeast Asian sabres, daggers, and brushcutting/fighting knives. Its hard to write the same study for pre-Roman Europe because the finds are all in different countries published in different languages and you have to measure them and sketch them yourself.

If you ever get a chance to study Early Iron Age weapons, there were a lot of creative cross-sections and blade shapes that show up again much later when they had steelmaking and heat treatment under control. They just are not as well preserved as ethnographic arms and armour. You can buy ancient Roman knives but they are not beautiful and shiny.

[DaveA]

Originally Posted by bookandswordblog

…. I am trying to avoid general claims until I have actually looked at the hundred or so known examples, because typologies don't always follow all their own rules when you start to look at them. ...

I agree. Even with a hundred examples, they will not be uniform.

Rant/ One thing I notice about more than a few collectors of ethnographic edged weapons is a rush to categorize. Strict taxonomic classification only works if there is substantial uniformity in the features of a given class. We forget that each item is unique, made by an artisan, made for a patron. Design patterns may be a starting point, but there is often great variation across artisans and time frame. Artisans try something new occasionally! We also have the cross-cultural influence that occurs at “crossroads” places. That’s where classification really breaks down. Let’s not forget about simultaneous invention or discovery. That happens all the time.

We really want to give names to things, but that can be super hard to pin down. In the end, we can talk about clusters of features that “usually” or “sometimes” or “mostly never” appear together. We give the cluster a name for our convenience of communication, not necessarily because it matches any ground truth. /endRant

[kronckew]

Italians also made sabre with pipe backs.
My 1871 Italian Mounted Artillery Officer's sword (top)


UK Army and Navy in the early 19c tied pipe backs, the navy feathered tip version didn't last long. The cavalry version was found to be too flexible when trying to thrust into opposing Russian cavalry in the Crimean war 1853-1856.
UK 1827 Pipe backed, feathered tip. (Bottom)