saudi executioners sword

Bill · 11th June 2007, 07:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LOUIEBLADES

I have one problem with the sword. After cutting off so many heads the blade would show signs of wear such as nicks or the the blade itself would be worn down from constant resharpening. I remember reading that in Europe the swords used in beheadings were a big hassle to maintain due to the fact that they had to be resharpened after every use.

Lew

Would a well made blade nick on bone? I don't think the Saudi's have a perfect history of one cut. The proper technique may be more important then a razor sharp blade. Don't forget that there were a number of headhunting groups that didn't use swords but used sharpened shell & split bamboo. There was a PBS show on Romans executed by Romans in England; the remains showed some had several whacks while others showed one clean cut. Bad executions or ordered that way?

Lew · 11th June 2007, 07:39 PM

[QUOTE=Bill]Would a well made blade nick on bone?

Yes it would.

Lew

spiral · 11th June 2007, 09:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill

Would a well made blade nick on bone?

Sometimes, but not always. Skill helps but nature of blade is critical.

Human heads come off easily to a skilled heads man.

At Nanking Japanese officers held competitions to see who could behead the most people without stopping for rest. These were published in Japanese papers.

It was usual to get over 100 beheadings done.

Some of the contempary Japanese reports mention bent or nicked blades, but many katana {both old & new.} came through unscathed.

I have a kukri used for beheading buffalo in a Nepali village every year since 1918 or 1919 at Dashien in Nepal up untill 2 years ago.

No nicks on it.

Thats because The idea is to hit between the vertebrae, not smack in the middle of one!

thats whats seperates the experts from the amatuers.

Spiral

S.Al-Anizi · 12th June 2007, 07:10 PM

Hi,

I actually got hold of some real footage of an execution in a public square in Saudi Arabia. It is in .3gp format, so it must have been taken using a phone camera. Anyway, what you see is this headsman, taking a couple of practice swings on the neck, before delivering the cut, using a slightly curved blade. The head is not severed, but clearly he cut most of the neck, from the back, and the victim, who was sitting on his knees, lumps to the ground, motionless, a few seconds later, a pool of blood is clearly visible by his head.

I was really surprised, I thought they would always sever the head entirely.

Lew · 12th June 2007, 08:04 PM

The right tool for the job these swords are not. The blades IMO are too narrow and too light to be effective. Not being able to cleanly sever the head is considered a botched job in many cultures causing the condemned more pain and suffering. I think this thread is also not a very pleasant one so this will be my last reply on this subject.

Lew

Steven C. · 19th June 2007, 11:53 AM

Hm, about the not fully-severing the head, that doesnt suprise me. I remember reading awhile back , that contrary to popular belief during samurai seppuku, the kaishakunin did NOT fully sever the head as a rule. The idea was to make a clean cut through but to stop, leaving a good strip of flesh. This was to make the ritual much more.. civilised I geuss you could say, seeing as how a head flying off across the room spraying blood everywhere is not pleasant. The beheading during seppuku is meant to be an act of mercy for an otherwise agonising death, NOT a display.

I'm fairly sure that for the same practical reasons, the same is done with the Saudi's, as our friend above has said he's seen in a video.

ariel · 19th June 2007, 02:38 PM

We are veering into morbid seas....
Just my 5 cents:
The quest for instantaneous and complete decapitation is centuries old.
Because even highly trained men could not always do the job right with an ax or a sword, did Mr. Guilloten invent his machine. It was advertised precisely from the humanistic point of view: no pain, instant death etc. Mr. Guilloten was himself beheaded by his invention later on, but his personal impression is yet to be published....

Bill · 19th June 2007, 04:31 PM

I agree this is a unplesant subject but I think there is value in how some swords did develope for this matter. The subject can be broken into 2 classes; ritualistic & definitive. Executions would be definitive. While some swords may have developed specifically for execution, I tend to think most must have had battlefield use as primary function. Both ritualistic & definitive would seek the same result. Either on the battle field or traveling to hostile territory to secure the trophy, it has to be assumed that development of some swords were to efficiently do this task. The mountain tribes of Luzon either developed the head axe or adapted it. I would agree with Cato that the Moro adapted the panabas (most likely a tool) for definitive reasons. Most other head-removal groups, must have relied on weapons they took to battle. While speculation, I think the Kris developing from the keris is a good example, especially if the primary battle weapon was blowgun or spear.

11th June 2007, 07:39 PM	#2
Lew (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: East Coast USA Posts: 3,191	[QUOTE=Bill]Would a well made blade nick on bone? Yes it would. Lew

12th June 2007, 07:10 PM	#4
S.Al-Anizi Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Arabia Posts: 278	Hi, I actually got hold of some real footage of an execution in a public square in Saudi Arabia. It is in .3gp format, so it must have been taken using a phone camera. Anyway, what you see is this headsman, taking a couple of practice swings on the neck, before delivering the cut, using a slightly curved blade. The head is not severed, but clearly he cut most of the neck, from the back, and the victim, who was sitting on his knees, lumps to the ground, motionless, a few seconds later, a pool of blood is clearly visible by his head. I was really surprised, I thought they would always sever the head entirely.

12th June 2007, 08:04 PM	#5
Lew (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: East Coast USA Posts: 3,191	The right tool for the job these swords are not. The blades IMO are too narrow and too light to be effective. Not being able to cleanly sever the head is considered a botched job in many cultures causing the condemned more pain and suffering. I think this thread is also not a very pleasant one so this will be my last reply on this subject. Lew

19th June 2007, 11:53 AM	#6
Steven C. Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Port Richey, Florida Posts: 20	Hm, about the not fully-severing the head, that doesnt suprise me. I remember reading awhile back , that contrary to popular belief during samurai seppuku, the kaishakunin did NOT fully sever the head as a rule. The idea was to make a clean cut through but to stop, leaving a good strip of flesh. This was to make the ritual much more.. civilised I geuss you could say, seeing as how a head flying off across the room spraying blood everywhere is not pleasant. The beheading during seppuku is meant to be an act of mercy for an otherwise agonising death, NOT a display. I'm fairly sure that for the same practical reasons, the same is done with the Saudi's, as our friend above has said he's seen in a video.

19th June 2007, 02:38 PM	#7
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	We are veering into morbid seas.... Just my 5 cents: The quest for instantaneous and complete decapitation is centuries old. Because even highly trained men could not always do the job right with an ax or a sword, did Mr. Guilloten invent his machine. It was advertised precisely from the humanistic point of view: no pain, instant death etc. Mr. Guilloten was himself beheaded by his invention later on, but his personal impression is yet to be published....

19th June 2007, 04:31 PM	#8
Bill Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Chicago area Posts: 327	I agree this is a unplesant subject but I think there is value in how some swords did develope for this matter. The subject can be broken into 2 classes; ritualistic & definitive. Executions would be definitive. While some swords may have developed specifically for execution, I tend to think most must have had battlefield use as primary function. Both ritualistic & definitive would seek the same result. Either on the battle field or traveling to hostile territory to secure the trophy, it has to be assumed that development of some swords were to efficiently do this task. The mountain tribes of Luzon either developed the head axe or adapted it. I would agree with Cato that the Moro adapted the panabas (most likely a tool) for definitive reasons. Most other head-removal groups, must have relied on weapons they took to battle. While speculation, I think the Kris developing from the keris is a good example, especially if the primary battle weapon was blowgun or spear.