How did they measure sword blades?

Ibrahiim al Balooshi · 27th April 2016, 02:37 AM

Salaams All...I wrote an article based on a book that set down the different weights and measures in the Souk in Oman...It is bewildering !! I am not sure if an Indian sword was a standard length or if it had a variety of lengths to chose from .. each sword would be peculiar to its owner would it not?...I note that Nimcha meaning half sword could be long or short..but offer that only in passing. I don't know.

Would a sword not be fitted to the height of the wearer so that it hung at the waist in the proper manner... Did the officer requiring a sword not get fitted at the Military Officers Uniform outfitters for this reason?.... Again I dont know...

Please see http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...t=Muttrah+souk at post 7 for the variation in weights and measures and add to that for India the Barley Corn situation...

"And once you have mastered that lot, you must start on the difference between Muscat maund, which equals 24 kiyas, each kiyas representing the weight of 6 MTD., and an Omani maund which equals 24 kiyas, each kiyas representing the weight of 6 Omani baizas, remembering that 5 Omani baizas are the same weight as 1 MTD. and that in arabic a maund is a mun; 200 Muscat maunds = 1 bahhar, which is the same weight both on the coast and in the interior but varies when applied to different produce, a bahhar of salt or firewood being equivalent to 400 Muscati maunds".

During pre-Akbar period, weights and measure system varied from region to region, commodity to commodity, and rural to urban areas. The weights were based on the weight of various seeds (specially the wheat berry and Ratti) and lengths were based of the length of arms and width of fingers. Akbar realized a need for a uniform system. He elected the barley corn. Unfortunately, this did not replace the existing system. Instead, it just added another system.

For an utterly confusing view of how this added up please see http://www.indiacurry.com/Miscel/ind...htsmeasure.htm

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Helleri · 2nd May 2016, 02:00 AM

Thinking about it more. the easiest measurement to get regarding along a curvature, would be to hold a the base of a blade against the edge of a flat surface (like a table) and roll the blade along it's edge to the tip. Then simply mark where the tip is from the edge of the flat surface. This would trace the curvature of the object along the flat surface perfectly as long as you didn't pull or push the blade. It would be easy to get a distance you could mark and then measure for mean distance between the tip and bade like this as well.

You would only find on issue with this method when getting to measuring the spine. And I have yet to find a way to measure a spine that isn't either involved or prone to errors and inconsistency. It's not an easy measurement to take compared to others. I would think that if you had to say which way of measuring it is least useful and least important. It would be measuring long the spine. Not just because it's a cumbersome and sometime annoying thing to do. But because it gives you the least valuable information. The curvature obviously matters most at the edge. As does the length of cutting edge that there is. And the reach matters. But the curve of the back side? Not really.

estcrh · 3rd May 2016, 05:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Helleri

Thinking about it more. the easiest measurement to get regarding along a curvature, would be to hold a the base of a blade against the edge of a flat surface (like a table) and roll the blade along it's edge to the tip. Then simply mark where the tip is from the edge of the flat surface. This would trace the curvature of the object along the flat surface perfectly as long as you didn't pull or push the blade.

I used this method on a sword with quite a bit of curve, the pulwar below has a measurement of 29.25 inches (74.29 cm) when measured across the blade tip to were the cutting edge meets the point of the langet, when using your method of rolling the blade on a flat surface from the point of the langet to the blade tip I got a measurement of 31.25 inches (79.39 cm).

27th April 2016, 02:37 AM	#1
Ibrahiim al Balooshi Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Buraimi Oman, on the border with the UAE Posts: 4,408	Salaams All...I wrote an article based on a book that set down the different weights and measures in the Souk in Oman...It is bewildering !! I am not sure if an Indian sword was a standard length or if it had a variety of lengths to chose from .. each sword would be peculiar to its owner would it not?...I note that Nimcha meaning half sword could be long or short..but offer that only in passing. I don't know. Would a sword not be fitted to the height of the wearer so that it hung at the waist in the proper manner... Did the officer requiring a sword not get fitted at the Military Officers Uniform outfitters for this reason?.... Again I dont know... Please see http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...t=Muttrah+souk at post 7 for the variation in weights and measures and add to that for India the Barley Corn situation... "And once you have mastered that lot, you must start on the difference between Muscat maund, which equals 24 kiyas, each kiyas representing the weight of 6 MTD., and an Omani maund which equals 24 kiyas, each kiyas representing the weight of 6 Omani baizas, remembering that 5 Omani baizas are the same weight as 1 MTD. and that in arabic a maund is a mun; 200 Muscat maunds = 1 bahhar, which is the same weight both on the coast and in the interior but varies when applied to different produce, a bahhar of salt or firewood being equivalent to 400 Muscati maunds". During pre-Akbar period, weights and measure system varied from region to region, commodity to commodity, and rural to urban areas. The weights were based on the weight of various seeds (specially the wheat berry and Ratti) and lengths were based of the length of arms and width of fingers. Akbar realized a need for a uniform system. He elected the barley corn. Unfortunately, this did not replace the existing system. Instead, it just added another system. For an utterly confusing view of how this added up please see http://www.indiacurry.com/Miscel/ind...htsmeasure.htm Regards, Ibrahiim al Balooshi. Last edited by Ibrahiim al Balooshi; 27th April 2016 at 02:50 AM.

2nd May 2016, 02:00 AM	#2
Helleri Member Join Date: Jan 2016 Location: Chino, CA. Posts: 219	Thinking about it more. the easiest measurement to get regarding along a curvature, would be to hold a the base of a blade against the edge of a flat surface (like a table) and roll the blade along it's edge to the tip. Then simply mark where the tip is from the edge of the flat surface. This would trace the curvature of the object along the flat surface perfectly as long as you didn't pull or push the blade. It would be easy to get a distance you could mark and then measure for mean distance between the tip and bade like this as well. You would only find on issue with this method when getting to measuring the spine. And I have yet to find a way to measure a spine that isn't either involved or prone to errors and inconsistency. It's not an easy measurement to take compared to others. I would think that if you had to say which way of measuring it is least useful and least important. It would be measuring long the spine. Not just because it's a cumbersome and sometime annoying thing to do. But because it gives you the least valuable information. The curvature obviously matters most at the edge. As does the length of cutting edge that there is. And the reach matters. But the curve of the back side? Not really.