![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 | |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Nothern Mexico
Posts: 458
|
![]() Quote:
http://www.catalogacionarmas.com/public/34-Ultramar.pdf Anyway, the history and details related with this weapon are not really known. Checking the manofacture of the blades, since I wrotte from memory my first post, shows the presence of Toledo blades on this machetes from the beginning. They could be used as blade of opportunity, or manofactured purposedly for this model, we donīt know. You have to take on account, also, that this machetes were not developed as weapons, but mainly as tools due to the dense vegetation on the island of Cuba. Maybe this is another factor to take on account in order to explain the absence of a guard. But I think this is not the case of the berber sabres, which clearly are a cavalry weapon used mainly fight. Still, the absence of a guard is not a common feature in the spanish swords and this machete is precisely a proof of the validity of my arguments, though I can be mistaken. I believe this kind of weapon-tool was developed for the units called "Pardos" (because of their brown color, as they were blacks and half breed), but not exclusively, though the type of decoration which can be found in some blades seems very...un-spanish. As it can be understood, this machetes were originally designed and developed in Cuba, and apoved by the local authorities in the 1850īs decade, and latter adopted officially by the spanish army overseas in the 1890īs decade. I think the design originally has a strong african flavor, and at some point a guard was added in some variants. So, the construction of the handle and the absence of guard are not characteristically spanish. Please check the spanish military weapons, and hardly you will find a machete (or any other sword) without guard and with this construction (if any). If you donīt understand spanish, there are plenty of illustrations in the articles from José Luis Calvó. You can save them and study the models of spanish military weapons which appear in this articles in PDF. At least, you will understand the name of the models and the dates. On the other side, I am not expert in anything related with swords, just a student. But I studied history, and I like to relate swords, technology and history (including economic history or history of the economy) as different faces of the same phenomenon. Please excuse my mistakes, but I am always is a hurry due lack of time online. Regards Gonzalo |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 1,664
|
![]()
Gonzalo,
All excellent points, as usual. I agree that the term "colonial" may have been used too freely here, something of which I am certainly guilty of. I still do not see how a Balkan yataghan could be a colonial weapon though, because a colony implies a settlement or territory divided from the mother state by an obstacle, natural or other. The Ottoman Empire was contiguous, and its Balkan possessions under imemdiate control and access from the capital of Istanbul. I really do not see any similarities to the Spanish Empire here - maybe Tunis would have been a better analogy. Another thing I need to point out is that in my opinion, the short length of these sabers, similar to that of a cutlass, would not make them great cavalry weapons. To me they seem much better suited for fighting on foot, or maybe even intended for a naval use. I agree with the rest of your points. However, after re-reading your posts, I am still not sure what is your take on the origins of these sabres. I am sure you must have a hypothesis of your own, but to me it remains unclear. Best regards and thank you for your participation, Teodor |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|