ANCIENT Indian Weapons (B.C.)

Joe · 9th September 2007, 12:34 AM

Ah, thanks for the correction Jim. I'd love to see the examples you're talking about in Stone's book, maybe you could send me a pm?

And sorry that I couldn't have been of more help, Stephen. I don't seem to have any references for swords in that half of Asia that were around before 500 BC.

Jim McDougall · 9th September 2007, 03:04 AM

Hi Joe,
Actually the caption was correct and Central India was indeed the region of the weapons you illustrated, I should have clarified that in my post. The same type weapon you posted actually appears in Robert Elgoods "Hindu Arms and Ritual" ( p.94 , 8.51) where he notes that these are actually latter 16th c. to early 17th and from the Deccan in Central India. Perhaps someone who has either of these texts could post illustrations?
Thank you again for posting these, although we have not heard from Steven, I certainly do appreciate your response!
All the best,
Jim

Jim McDougall · 9th September 2007, 04:57 PM

In further examining the descriptions in both Elgood and Stone, it is interesting to note that the swords Joe posted seem closer in form to the mel puttah bemoh (Stone p.444, fig.566) which has a long rapier type blade.
Elgood illustrates one of these swords (p.94, 8.51) and notes a stone image from Virabhadra Temple, Lepakshi (op.cit. p.94, 8.49) that depicts a warrior with a large two handed sword and dating it from the 1530's.

It would seem that these two handed swords were used further back than the example in Stone (dated 18th c.south India attribution ) and the example in Elgood ( shown as Deccani, early 17th c.).

The examples from Hermann Historica appear to be in excavated condition, and the hilt elements quite rudimentary in comparison to the hilts of those shown in Stone and Elgood, which carry a bit more structure. This would suggest that these excavated examples may have been from the earlier period noted by Elgood, and would confirm the use of two handed swords in India into the medieval period.

With these in thier rudimentary form and excavated condition and the examples shown in development in Elgood and Stone, it is interesting to consider not only the use of the two handed sword in India, but the diffusion and development of the form. While that movement seems to be chronologically from the south, into the Deccan and further north with the elaborate Rajput and Mahratta examples more decorative and with the fluted orbs separating the hilts as seen in Stone (p.643 #7) and Elgood (p.95, 8.54), it seems the influence carried into Assam with the Naga two handed dao.

Elgood notes that the two hand form became redundant with the advent of the khanda with basket hilt and projecting spur in the 16th c.

It is always good to have an opportunity to research and discuss the weapons of India and again, I'm glad Joe posted these!

Best regards,
Jim

olikara · 9th September 2007, 05:33 PM

Jim,
Your comments brought a couple of questions to my mind.

What could be the possible advantages of a warrior using a 2 handed sword?

He can use both the hands to grasp the hilt and thus bring more force into his action. This extra force delivered with a heavier weapon may be used to incapacitate/kill the opponent or maybe even damage/destroy the opponent's weapon. This is a POSITIVE.

But when he uses both his hands, he cannot make use of one hand to possibly hold a shield and deflect the opponents blow. He also loses his freedom of movement. The entire body is flexible when one hand is free. I feel this is a NEGATIVE.

How would you balance the two?

Maybe a warrior can use the Khanda or it's similar types for delivering a final blow on an incapacitated opponent, say like beheading him. But would it be practical for him to use a khanda against a lighter armed warrior using a single handed weapon?

Maybe I am missing something...

Jim McDougall · 10th September 2007, 07:12 AM

Hi Olikara,
Im glad to see you in on this!
You bring up a very interesting and quite valid question. It would seem that in most cases, these large two handed swords were most likely used in shock action, that is against attacking cavalry to bring down horses. In the melee these huge weapons would indeed be cumbersome and ineffective, and as you point out, the individual would be open to attack.
It would be interesting to hear the opinions of those well versed in the dynamics of martial arts swordplay on this.

Best regards,
Jim

9th September 2007, 05:33 PM	#4
olikara Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: India Posts: 101	Two Handed Swords Jim, Your comments brought a couple of questions to my mind. What could be the possible advantages of a warrior using a 2 handed sword? He can use both the hands to grasp the hilt and thus bring more force into his action. This extra force delivered with a heavier weapon may be used to incapacitate/kill the opponent or maybe even damage/destroy the opponent's weapon. This is a POSITIVE. But when he uses both his hands, he cannot make use of one hand to possibly hold a shield and deflect the opponents blow. He also loses his freedom of movement. The entire body is flexible when one hand is free. I feel this is a NEGATIVE. How would you balance the two? Maybe a warrior can use the Khanda or it's similar types for delivering a final blow on an incapacitated opponent, say like beheading him. But would it be practical for him to use a khanda against a lighter armed warrior using a single handed weapon? Maybe I am missing something...

9th September 2007, 12:34 AM	#1
Joe Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: McDonough, GA Posts: 48	Ah, thanks for the correction Jim. I'd love to see the examples you're talking about in Stone's book, maybe you could send me a pm? And sorry that I couldn't have been of more help, Stephen. I don't seem to have any references for swords in that half of Asia that were around before 500 BC.

9th September 2007, 03:04 AM	#2
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,281	Hi Joe, Actually the caption was correct and Central India was indeed the region of the weapons you illustrated, I should have clarified that in my post. The same type weapon you posted actually appears in Robert Elgoods "Hindu Arms and Ritual" ( p.94 , 8.51) where he notes that these are actually latter 16th c. to early 17th and from the Deccan in Central India. Perhaps someone who has either of these texts could post illustrations? Thank you again for posting these, although we have not heard from Steven, I certainly do appreciate your response! All the best, Jim

9th September 2007, 04:57 PM	#3
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,281	In further examining the descriptions in both Elgood and Stone, it is interesting to note that the swords Joe posted seem closer in form to the mel puttah bemoh (Stone p.444, fig.566) which has a long rapier type blade. Elgood illustrates one of these swords (p.94, 8.51) and notes a stone image from Virabhadra Temple, Lepakshi (op.cit. p.94, 8.49) that depicts a warrior with a large two handed sword and dating it from the 1530's. It would seem that these two handed swords were used further back than the example in Stone (dated 18th c.south India attribution ) and the example in Elgood ( shown as Deccani, early 17th c.). The examples from Hermann Historica appear to be in excavated condition, and the hilt elements quite rudimentary in comparison to the hilts of those shown in Stone and Elgood, which carry a bit more structure. This would suggest that these excavated examples may have been from the earlier period noted by Elgood, and would confirm the use of two handed swords in India into the medieval period. With these in thier rudimentary form and excavated condition and the examples shown in development in Elgood and Stone, it is interesting to consider not only the use of the two handed sword in India, but the diffusion and development of the form. While that movement seems to be chronologically from the south, into the Deccan and further north with the elaborate Rajput and Mahratta examples more decorative and with the fluted orbs separating the hilts as seen in Stone (p.643 #7) and Elgood (p.95, 8.54), it seems the influence carried into Assam with the Naga two handed dao. Elgood notes that the two hand form became redundant with the advent of the khanda with basket hilt and projecting spur in the 16th c. It is always good to have an opportunity to research and discuss the weapons of India and again, I'm glad Joe posted these! Best regards, Jim

10th September 2007, 07:12 AM	#5
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,281	Hi Olikara, Im glad to see you in on this! You bring up a very interesting and quite valid question. It would seem that in most cases, these large two handed swords were most likely used in shock action, that is against attacking cavalry to bring down horses. In the melee these huge weapons would indeed be cumbersome and ineffective, and as you point out, the individual would be open to attack. It would be interesting to hear the opinions of those well versed in the dynamics of martial arts swordplay on this. Best regards, Jim