|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
5th December 2007, 01:42 AM | #31 |
(deceased)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal
Posts: 9,694
|
Hi, may i connect the complicometer ?
Although the usual procedure is to give questions an explanation based on indexized patterns, things aren't necessarily only "black or white"; i think we all agree with that. Allright, this piece might have not belonged to an European, with a taste for Indian stuff, but it could have been the other way round; a local person with a sword setup of European style, a phenomenum often observed in antiquity, in the area of weaponry ... at least. This not forcingly an actual fact, but just in thesis. By the same order of ideas, the weapon doesn't have to be perfectly functional, to be a weapon. I bet several specimens developed were not fully efective, at least according to the "catalogue". There must have been lots of atypical pieces, surely more on the civilian side. I guess many a civilian would not dream going to school to learn how to hit someone; he would just imagine that a piece was to strike in an unstudyed single blow, no manouvres involved. No fighting art envolved, just having something to do the job at once. Looking at the "estoc" piece shown by Jens ... decidedly a thrusting weapon, yet with the type of hilt giving the idea of usual conceptual slashing pourpose. Concerning the rapier fencing technique, the fact that, in real practice, it wasn't used the Hollywood way, it doesn't avoid the fact that a specific schooled training was needed to use it ... i mean efectively use it. Am i wrong if i say that you can slash with less training than you can thrust ? Aren't thrusting moves more subtle and subject to the proper moment ? David, you got me lost with the Goa event. This place was taken in 1510, the rapier wasn't yet used ... or do i miss something? Also probably the pata wasn't a sword of unique handling technique. We know it was used by elite cavalry, as well as by monks afoot. If we go by the catalogue, we can imagine the first using it for slashing the infants and the late using it for thrusting the horsemen. Probably the different types of blades gave them the respectve logic; or then again there would be hybrid situations. Definitely long lengthy blades served to create a handicap to the opponent, in terms of reach. This acomodates the idea that such blades would be, or also be, for thrusting. I notice that Daehnhardt hardly puts a blade as being exclusively for cutting or thrusting; he prefers to talk percentages. I must have said such amount of BS that i won't even sign this posting . |
5th December 2007, 02:27 PM | #32 | |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Kent
Posts: 2,653
|
Quote:
I agree that not all weapons created were perfectly functional, by which I mean, an 'all rounder' weapon that can deal with all situations would be impossible. Weapons 'evolve' and some become more 'specialised', suited to a limited number of tasks/situations. This type of weapon tends to become obsolete as battle conditions/situations change and its use no longer 'required'. I believe that the early Rapiers were designed very long bladed so as to be able to keep your assailants at a distance (as most other swords available were shorter) The Rapier (in Europe) became popular, very quickly and as far as I can tell the need for skill training occurred because of the increased likelihood of assailants armed with Rapiers ....in effect the blade 'reach' advantage was lost. The excellent example of the "estoc" sword shown by Jens has a Tulwar hilt and probably fixed by resin. I feel, that it was a matter of convenience, it probably took minutes to fix the blade .... and Tulwar hilts were plentiful. In Stones 'A Glossary.....Arms and Armour...' there are various examples of Indo Persian maces fixed to Tulwar hilts. If the Rapier blade had been Tulwar hilted, I would agree that it probably was 'experimental' for the same reasons. However, this Firangi has a Khanda styled hilt, but is smaller. The hilt is not a modified one, it is constructed for the sole purpose of fixing a narrow blade. The domed pommel area is smaller than the Khanda's I have seen. This allows more wrist movement, essential to a sword of this type. I believe that these hilts were made specifically for Rapier blades, and if I am correct...this sword had gone beyond the 'experimental stage'. As the Firagi 'rapier' blades, (on the ones I have seen) are double edge for their entire length, I am not so certain that the technique used was the same as the Europeans (most Rapiers were not edge 'sharp' full length, some had approx. 1/3 from the tip sharpened......one of the main reasons was to prevent your assailant 'grabbing your blade') Sorry, I didn't explain myself properly, I am not suggesting that the Portuguese had invaded with Rapiers in their arsenal. I meant that the Portuguese were well established in the Region and with constant contact (trade shipping) with mother Portugal, new trends (such as the Rapier) would have been known/adopted quite quickly by the 'colonials'. Military action was needed to 'maintain' the colony and Rapiers would have been available to the Portuguese. No Fernando, nothing you have said could be put in the category of 'Bovine Secretions' Kind Regards David |
|
5th December 2007, 02:54 PM | #33 |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 9,949
|
Fernando and David, you guys are presenting some fabulous discourse here on this most interesting topic! What I enjoy most is this kind of reasoning using known historical data and considering the possibilities and options which may have developed variations in weapons. Every time I think I've just about got this pegged, you guys present completely outstanding observations and support for different possibilities!!! If this kind of analysis and discussion was attended to many weapons more often, I think many of the mysteries that remain unsolved might at least be better understood.
Nicely done guys, thank you!!!! |
10th December 2007, 12:52 AM | #34 |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Kent
Posts: 2,653
|
Hi Jim, thanks
Well, still convinced, that this sword was not just used in the thrust, and encouraged by the banana cutting and Richard's discription of the Pata lime cutting. I thought I would experiment slightly further, using the Firangi with a parallel , 180 degree arcing 'cut' with the fruit target elevated on a large 'wicker' candle stick..... Melon anybody |
10th December 2007, 04:55 AM | #35 |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 9,949
|
Wow! well done David!
I have visions of you wearing a mask and cape in this 'test'!! I guess I've seen Zorro way too many times. You've really proved your point though, this blade can definitely slash as well. All the best, Jim |
10th December 2007, 02:33 PM | #36 |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Kent
Posts: 2,653
|
Hi Jim,
thanks, sorry no cape or mask . My wife had bought the melon a few days ago, sat in the fruit bowl near to where I sit. I was thinking about the rapier blade being fully edged ....then looking at both..... thought .....' I wonder'. The true point of the exercise was to demonstate, although I am not a skilled swordsman, the ease of its use. The blade has not been sharpened for a very long time, yet, it retains a reasonably 'keen' edge (suggests to me the quality of the steel). I think that the amount of training to use such a sword would be relatively easy for the average native swordsman. I have also discovered, several martial arts, that originated in India, involve 'stick fencing'. They are centuries old (one dated to 200 AD) and not only require 'strikes' to your opponent ......but thrusts and jabs as well. It would have been an easy transition from stick to 'rapier' blade. In Gatka, the Sikh martial art, sticks are used to learn the technique of swordplay. Regards David |
4th February 2008, 09:21 PM | #37 |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Kent
Posts: 2,653
|
After a little more research in trying to find this type of sword's function on the battle field ...I discovered another 'rapier' bladed Indian sword, the mel puttah bemoh, interestingly used two-handed. Has anyone any more info on this sword and its use??
http://books.google.com/books?id=J5P...x8I_8TnD8HJ3qQ Thank you Regards David |
5th February 2008, 06:46 PM | #38 |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Kent
Posts: 2,653
|
Because the blade of a 'Mel puttah bemoh' is relatively thin and light, you surely would not need to hold it two handed, yes it would give greater power with the 'cut' but the blade design is not ideal. I am thinking that this may have been used by foot soldiers against cavalry because of the 'long reach'.
I have only seen one example of a 'Mel puttah bemoh' in Stone's and a number of the 'Rapier bladed Firangi' on the net etc. Not one pocesses a scabbard, perhaps none of them had one originally To my mind, this type of sword may have been carried onto the battlefield whilst still carrying a Tulwar/Dhal. After the Cavalry charges ...the sword discarded....and the Tulwar/Dhal used in the melee Anyone ...any thoughts Regards David |
6th February 2008, 12:36 AM | #39 |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 9,949
|
I think you're right David, and without going headlong into research at this point, it does seem I have seen something to that effect mentioned in a discussion on these some time ago. It is not at all unusual to have certain weapon forms that were essentially expendable after initial shock in combat. Firearms were very much in that category into the 19th century, and even pistols were useless (except in some cases as bludgeons) after thier single discharge. Lances were obviously useless after the charge, in the ensuing melee, and swords such as the estoc were used separately from the sabre.
I think that these two handed swords, were probably anti cavalry and likely used in bringing down horses, and as I mentioned, it seems there were groups assigned specifically assigned for this gruesome task. I hope I can find more on this in either notes or reference, so I will leave it as an unsupported suggestion at this point. All best regards, Jim |
|
|