West African sword for I.D. & comment

colin henshaw · 1st March 2016, 09:34 AM

Thanks for the further comments on this sword, glad to see its of interest.

Jim, you've made an astute observation on those "vestigial langets", they had not really registered with me. The possible cross-cultural European influence concept seems quite plausible. It should be borne in mind that Europeans first came into contact with these West African coastal areas as far back as the 15th century... Its quite a long heavy sword with a short grip, I wonder if the "sandwich" area was meant for gripping with the other hand ?

A puzzlement to me is the lack of a protection for the hand on the sword hilt, not even a cross-guard... Does anyone have ideas why this is so ?

kronckew · 1st March 2016, 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by colin henshaw

...

A puzzlement to me is the lack of a protection for the hand on the sword hilt, not even a cross-guard... Does anyone have ideas why this is so ?

was the sword used with a shield or buckler? using the blade to block cuts from an opponents blade was a no-no in earlier times when steel was not terribly good & crossguards etc. became more necessary when the steel was better and you could be assured the blade would not bend or shatter & thus could be used to parry. some weapons like russian shashka were also not normally used to parry and thus did not need guards which would have interfered with the whirling tornado style they developed for it. it also is unnecessary if you are using it against unarmed opponents, like slaves.

Jim McDougall · 1st March 2016, 04:44 PM

Thank you Colin, and I think one of the most fascinating things about ethnographic arms are the cross cultural dynamics and vestigial features and symbolism.
Just as with the adoption by native cultures of the various markings and sometimes inscriptions from variously acquired European arms, typically this has been construed as perhaps somewhat talismanic. This seems particularly the case with the cosmologically themed groupings, which seem to have lent to the well known 'dukari' moons which may likely have begin with Hausa made blades.

While hard features such as a langet as seen here, which obviously could not have had practical application in this particular context, it does seem to carry compelling similarity. Clearly European features such as knuckleguard may have been seen as having the intended use and advantage, but in something like this we can only wonder what the intent might have been.
It is tempting to think of bringing such features into the concept that perhaps they might carry the imbuement of the European quality that seems so often sought after, but such thoughts are almost impossibly subjective ideas

Very good point Kronckew, and while guards seem to have been characteristic of the majority of sword types such as takouba and kaskara, these from West Africa, Camaroon, Manding from Mali and others seem to typically have no guard.
Just as with shashka and of course, the Omani cylindrical hilted sa'if (often termed kattara) there does seem to be the situation where the blade was not used to parry. This is typical of virtually most native swordplay technique, and indeed, the shield or bucker was used in defensive parry.

Good return on the note concerning the slaving topic, and as this unfortunate commerce was prevalent not only obviously in West Africa, but in the East via Zanzibar, and throughout African interior with the trade networks, clearly such 'combat' features would not be required on swords.

mrcjgscott · 1st March 2016, 08:33 PM

Dear Colin,

I can contribute absolutely nothing of worth to your original query, but I have found the sword, and the resulting discourse of great interest.

Many thanks for posting it up, and to everybody else for the enlightening discussion.

Kind regards,

Chris

Iain · 1st March 2016, 08:54 PM

With regards to guards... Swords on the western side of the Sahel and into West Africa don't seem to typically have much of a large guard.

True, older takouba have sturdy box like guards, but these are still relatively narrow and certainly don't afford the hand protection of a kaskara style guard.

Perhaps with these broadswords with the cylindrical hilts, it was simply not a concern. These have always appeared to me in a way to be a natural progression from turned knife handles simply fitted with a bigger blade once those became available.

In any case, I am sure had the users felt a particular need for one there was more than enough exposure to both takouba and European swords on the coast for a native cutler to create one. The only conclusion I can draw is that the lack of a guard indicates the users were not interested in having one, or the tradition of the form was more important. After all the spear and the trade musket dominated warfare.

Jim McDougall · 1st March 2016, 10:49 PM

Iain, first of all I neglected to thank you for the comments on the character of the blade and thoughts toward galvanized steel. Your astute analysis on these blades is always outstanding in truly understanding the differences we should be looking for.

Also, excellent thoughts on the guard situation. It does seem that these open hilts would be simpler to produce and in most cases the guard would be unnecessary of course. I have seen some examples of West African/Sahelian swords with European style guards, but they seem far more an anomaly.

Chris, thank you for the very kind comments on the discussion here, and it is nice to have that kind of courteous entry supporting the participants in open examination of a weapon. Much appreciated!

colin henshaw · 5th March 2016, 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrcjgscott

Dear Colin,

I can contribute absolutely nothing of worth to your original query, but I have found the sword, and the resulting discourse of great interest.

Many thanks for posting it up, and to everybody else for the enlightening discussion.

Kind regards,

Chris

Hi Chris

Thanks for your courteous comment, glad you find the sword and the post to be of interest.

Timo Nieminen · 2nd March 2016, 10:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by colin henshaw

A puzzlement to me is the lack of a protection for the hand on the sword hilt, not even a cross-guard... Does anyone have ideas why this is so ?

Guards don't come without cost. They can make the sword less convenient to carry, which matters if you wear it every day, but fight with it every few years. Guards can snag on clothing when drawing the sword, snag on your own or your opponent's clothes when fighting, get caught on shields, and offer handles for an opponent to disarm you.

If you fight without a shield, with your weapon arm forward (so your weapon is both your offence and defence), then a guard becomes useful. Even if you don't plan to block with your guard, an opponent's blade can slide down yours into your hand, and stopping that is useful. If you plan to keep your weapon hand behind your shield, block blows with your shield while counter-cutting with your sword to their sword arm, you don't need a guard. (And you don't want a long/bulky guard, since you'd have to move further to get past your own shield.)

Jim McDougall · 3rd March 2016, 05:43 AM

Excellent insight Timo, thank you !
There are certainly advantages and disadvantages to guards on swords.
I recall the matter of the Royal Scots Greys huge disc hilt swords (M1796) in the British cavalry. The disc caused horrible chafing of the uniform and discomfort, so it was ordered that the inside of the discs be ground off.

kronckew · 3rd March 2016, 09:44 AM

...and why a lot of UK army and naval swords had/have a folding guard on the inner side, with a spring loaded catch to hold it in place after drawing, that is frequently missing.

Jim McDougall · 3rd March 2016, 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kronckew

...and why a lot of UK army and naval swords had/have a folding guard on the inner side, with a spring loaded catch to hold it in place after drawing, that is frequently missing.

Well noted!! It seems those hilts were brought in around mid 19th c.

1st March 2016, 08:33 PM	#4
mrcjgscott Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 189	Wonderful thread Dear Colin, I can contribute absolutely nothing of worth to your original query, but I have found the sword, and the resulting discourse of great interest. Many thanks for posting it up, and to everybody else for the enlightening discussion. Kind regards, Chris

1st March 2016, 09:34 AM	#1
colin henshaw Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 1,429	Thanks for the further comments on this sword, glad to see its of interest. Jim, you've made an astute observation on those "vestigial langets", they had not really registered with me. The possible cross-cultural European influence concept seems quite plausible. It should be borne in mind that Europeans first came into contact with these West African coastal areas as far back as the 15th century... Its quite a long heavy sword with a short grip, I wonder if the "sandwich" area was meant for gripping with the other hand ? A puzzlement to me is the lack of a protection for the hand on the sword hilt, not even a cross-guard... Does anyone have ideas why this is so ?

1st March 2016, 04:44 PM	#3
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,286	Thank you Colin, and I think one of the most fascinating things about ethnographic arms are the cross cultural dynamics and vestigial features and symbolism. Just as with the adoption by native cultures of the various markings and sometimes inscriptions from variously acquired European arms, typically this has been construed as perhaps somewhat talismanic. This seems particularly the case with the cosmologically themed groupings, which seem to have lent to the well known 'dukari' moons which may likely have begin with Hausa made blades. While hard features such as a langet as seen here, which obviously could not have had practical application in this particular context, it does seem to carry compelling similarity. Clearly European features such as knuckleguard may have been seen as having the intended use and advantage, but in something like this we can only wonder what the intent might have been. It is tempting to think of bringing such features into the concept that perhaps they might carry the imbuement of the European quality that seems so often sought after, but such thoughts are almost impossibly subjective ideas Very good point Kronckew, and while guards seem to have been characteristic of the majority of sword types such as takouba and kaskara, these from West Africa, Camaroon, Manding from Mali and others seem to typically have no guard. Just as with shashka and of course, the Omani cylindrical hilted sa'if (often termed kattara) there does seem to be the situation where the blade was not used to parry. This is typical of virtually most native swordplay technique, and indeed, the shield or bucker was used in defensive parry. Good return on the note concerning the slaving topic, and as this unfortunate commerce was prevalent not only obviously in West Africa, but in the East via Zanzibar, and throughout African interior with the trade networks, clearly such 'combat' features would not be required on swords.

1st March 2016, 08:54 PM	#5
Iain Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Olomouc Posts: 1,717	With regards to guards... Swords on the western side of the Sahel and into West Africa don't seem to typically have much of a large guard. True, older takouba have sturdy box like guards, but these are still relatively narrow and certainly don't afford the hand protection of a kaskara style guard. Perhaps with these broadswords with the cylindrical hilts, it was simply not a concern. These have always appeared to me in a way to be a natural progression from turned knife handles simply fitted with a bigger blade once those became available. In any case, I am sure had the users felt a particular need for one there was more than enough exposure to both takouba and European swords on the coast for a native cutler to create one. The only conclusion I can draw is that the lack of a guard indicates the users were not interested in having one, or the tradition of the form was more important. After all the spear and the trade musket dominated warfare.

1st March 2016, 10:49 PM	#6
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,286	Iain, first of all I neglected to thank you for the comments on the character of the blade and thoughts toward galvanized steel. Your astute analysis on these blades is always outstanding in truly understanding the differences we should be looking for. Also, excellent thoughts on the guard situation. It does seem that these open hilts would be simpler to produce and in most cases the guard would be unnecessary of course. I have seen some examples of West African/Sahelian swords with European style guards, but they seem far more an anomaly. Chris, thank you for the very kind comments on the discussion here, and it is nice to have that kind of courteous entry supporting the participants in open examination of a weapon. Much appreciated!

3rd March 2016, 05:43 AM	#9
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,286	Excellent insight Timo, thank you ! There are certainly advantages and disadvantages to guards on swords. I recall the matter of the Royal Scots Greys huge disc hilt swords (M1796) in the British cavalry. The disc caused horrible chafing of the uniform and discomfort, so it was ordered that the inside of the discs be ground off.

3rd March 2016, 09:44 AM	#10
kronckew Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Room 101, Glos. UK Posts: 4,224	...and why a lot of UK army and naval swords had/have a folding guard on the inner side, with a spring loaded catch to hold it in place after drawing, that is frequently missing.