![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 | |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,818
|
![]() Quote:
I see no error in your historical notation about these Kampilan being a heavy pointed cutlass, they may well have been in the day, much more so than later times...I say this because I own a curved cutlass sized Kampilan. Gavin Last edited by Gavin Nugent; 5th September 2015 at 11:41 AM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 422
|
![]()
Plenty of straight cutlasses out there, too. Curved isn't necessary.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,281
|
![]() Quote:
Well noted Timo! The term 'cutlass' seems often rather collectively applied in many references and contemporary narratives. I think it is much in the same way as many military swords and others are referred to as 'sabres' though their blades are virtually straight. Then there is the term 'scimitar', which is more of a notion than a sword 'type', characteristically an embellished reference to an 'Oriental' curved sabre. As we discuss many of these sword forms and look to early accounts and descriptions of these by 'term', it can of course be confounding as we cannot be certain the semantics correspond to our modern perceptions. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|