weaponrys uses.......

[ausjulius]

ive noticed some odd things about much weaponry of the past.. after handling quite many various sorts of weapon you start to notice some odd things that people did back in the day.,. and it make you wounder just how much of these were created to be used as weaponry and how much were made mostly for looks,....

one thing that bugs me is... tulwary.......!!!! the handles on these are tiny...
some are so small its hard to get your hand in the grip,,,, but most show heavy signs of use....
indians hands ar enot drasticly smaller than europeans hands , so the only thing with this i can think of it that all the indian soliders had tiny hands??
i think with a mail glove on it would be imposserable to properly use many tulwars..
also many have very uncomfortable grips,, some causing a good deal of jarring in you hand,,

the kris knives are another one that bothers me, most are in my opinion far to weak to be actualy used as a weapon.??

many other things that pop into mind,, like the giant qumams from iran. i recently saw several with blades well over 1 meter ,,, the sheaths were made to be stuck into the blet as a normal qama,, but im pretty shure there was no way to put it in ones belt.. the blades all were massive,, and lacked any balance,,,, ,

the intrecare blades of many african swords also makes me suspect that some of them were never intened to be used.. sort of like some of the stone axes from new gunea.... mostly for looking..

well only my observations,, i wanted to know what other odd things anyone has noticed in weaponry.. and their opnions on it

[Rivkin]

Tiny handles of tulwars have been a recurrent topic here for I guess years - I think any search for "tulwar" shall reveal many threads.

Concerning mega-qamas, we had some discussed in the forum, we agreed that while some of them are very well made, their purpose is mostly theatrical (tazieh plays and such).

[ausjulius]

yeah ,, had a look, but the question still seems not fully answered.......

my gess is that it was held with a finger on the guard.......
india hasnt realy changed much as far as nutrition goes.. and the indians havent ,, i think got much bigger,,,.

one thing with the shashka grips,, why they are so tiny......
the central asian and afgan and russian shashkas are with a large handle,,,
as they are used differently,, the caucascian shashka was used mor elike a machete,,
in the factory some of the workers were puzzeled by the shashkas small handles the guys were all dagestan nationals,, and most were rather short,, but ingeneral it seems rather thick stout hands are normal here..
guys height is mostly 5 foot 4 or so,, not tall atall...... there is however many tall guys aswell. but the short fellows seem mostly to have the same size hands.. you notice this after some time , as here hand shaking is very popular,

anyway they were puzzeled as to why their ansestors would make such small handles on there swords..we were making some swords.. anyway when they make swords they always put massive handles on the shashkas.. we make mostly the russian style.. sell to government ,and cossak groups and such,,but when they make a caucascian shashka they do this also.. unless it its ordered specificaly,,
to them it seems to make it wiht a good solid grip makes sence........

seems that the shashka was held alittle like the south americans hold a machete, and was never used to stab with.......



ive handled many northen european medieavil weaponry and most has large handles that fit well..

from what i recall the average height of people in northen europe was somewhat the same as it is now.....
the reduction in size occured in the 17th and 18th centuary with city living,,

i remember i was visiting a castle in germany ,the tour guide , pointed to a bed and said see the small bed , in the old days folks were much smaller... i looked at te bed and clearly it was a childs bead from the 17 centuary...,, and even in the 17th centuary there was not a good supply of 3 foot adults

good museam in solingen ,, you can handle many of the swords.... well atleast i did anyway , dont know if you were allowed to but nobody told me not to

[Rick]

Suggest you visit the Keris Warung Kopi forum ; there is some discussion on fighting with the Indo/Malay keris . Mostly it is/was used as a last resort dagger for stabbing to the body rather than for slashing; for this purpose it is well suited; now it is more a cultural icon.

The large kris of the Moros is a formidable weapon .

[ausjulius]

yeah the moro kris is rather solid.. i dont see any failings with this,

but all the indonesian kris knives ive seen ,, one could snap the blade form the handle without a problem,, they are not stronger than a butter knife .. or one of those small german nicker knives form barvaria...... the very thin stick tang glued into a off set handle with a wavy blade , it all makes alot of stress on that little tang, aspecialy the un supported join od the tang ot the blade where the little furrel is, i wouldnt trus it for stabbing to save my life....

id sepculate they were purely for costume?? as in reality a big peice of wood or a stick would make a better weapon :P
now , that said , they shure look great.......


..as a side note about the kris knives,,,,, how old are they???imguessing they appeared in the last 200-300 years , as we know them today?? and spread into indonesia from the moros??
as i see the percursor of the indonesian kris seems to have been stright bladed and more as a long slightly leaf shaped blade???
dont realy no a massive amount about this topic.. so im only guessing

[David]

Originally Posted by ausjulius

yeah the moro kris is rather solid.. i dont see any failings with this,

but all the indonesian kris knives ive seen ,, one could snap the blade form the handle without a problem,, they are not stronger than a butter knife .. or one of those small german nicker knives form barvaria...... the very thin stick tang glued into a off set handle with a wavy blade , it all makes alot of stress on that little tang, aspecialy the un supported join od the tang ot the blade where the little furrel is, i wouldnt trus it for stabbing to save my life....

id sepculate they were purely for costume?? as in reality a big peice of wood or a stick would make a better weapon :P
now , that said , they shure look great.......


..as a side note about the kris knives,,,,, how old are they???imguessing they appeared in the last 200-300 years , as we know them today?? and spread into indonesia from the moros??
as i see the percursor of the indonesian kris seems to have been stright bladed and more as a long slightly leaf shaped blade???
dont realy no a massive amount about this topic.. so im only guessing

Well, you obviously haven't seen all that many keris blades.
I don't want to get too far into the conversation here because i would love to lure you over to the keris forum for further discussion, but keris were made for many diferent purposes. Some were indeed never meant to be put to physical use, but i also have quite a few that i could easily punch a hole in a car hood with. When used properly it can be a very effective and deadly weapon.
The keris as it appears today first appeared in Jawa in the 14th century by conservative estimates. That would make the form at least 700 years old.
BTW, only about a third of all keris blades are the wavy type. Straight ones have always been much more common.

[tom hyle]

I agree with David on the kris, and one thing that seems clear about the kris (in my opinion a not merely effective but very nasty weapon) is that its origins and early uses are shrouded in mystery and controversy. Most you see today are either old and suffering (IMHO it's damage to be suffered) from over"wash"ing or made in imitation of such, while, since the current use is purely ceremonial (or nearly so), types and forms ineffectual in combat are modernly promulgated.
This is a worldwide phenomenon; edged weapons are often (though incorrectly IMHO) viewed as obsolete, and not made to using standards; a 20th C. USMC sabre, while nothing to want stabbed with, is a smallswordish and arguably ineffective weapon; this in no way argues against the deadliness or strenght of "real" sabres meant for cutting.
Certainly there have always been ceremonial/display/etc. weapons, but my estimate is maybe 1/4 of those modernly so accused. One cannot properly answer this issue on a broad scale, but only type-by-type or even piece-by-piece, and some understanding of the culture, religion, and combat of the piece's native culture is very beneficial in such analyses.
For whatever it's worth, I'm considered a reasonably large man (5'8" 200+ lb.) and having worked as a laborer and craftsman have reasonably well-developed hands (I call the left one "the clamp"). I find most tulwars quite possible to hold and use, and others nearly so. Some are even quite comfortable to me, and I think that men of my size are not common among populations with low protein intake in youth (maybe a larger factor than genetyics in the size varience across history, so it's said.). I think the factor is largely that Europeans (etc.) do not understand how a tulwar is used; if you snap/extend your wrist the disc is most uncomfortable, but if instead of chopping you slash, no problem. Many peoples seem to have favoured hilts that tightly gripped the hand, presumeably to improve the hold.

[David]

Hi Tom! Nice to see you are still around.
I completely agree with your thought that most Westerners just don't understand the proper why to both hold and use some of these weapons. This is especially true of the keris.