Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post

Jerseyman · 22nd June 2016, 01:35 PM

Hi Nkante,

My apologies if I'm misunderstanding something here, but your description states that the cutting edge of a shotel or gurade is on the inside (concave) edge of the curve rather than the outside (convex) edge. I have two gurades and they are both double-edged - so in theory they could be used either way round. But I've always assumed they were used like a cavalry sabre with the primary focus on attacking with the convex edge.

I'm in complete agreement with you that the logical draw from that position is as you describe - which would present the sharp convex edge to the opponent in a very efficient rising, attacking draw.

I suppose if it's sharp on both edges then either edge could be used by choice in combat.

The style of hilt seems to indicate a machete-style grip where the blade and forearm remain at roughly 90 degrees to each other - if that is the case it seems more logical to me to attack with the convex edge in a series of drawing cuts. Rather than the concave edge which would become a chopping action with the risk that the forwards-facing point would stick/jam into the shield or body of the opponent. This could be a serious disadvantage in a fight.

I've often been told that in un-armoured fights a sickle-style sword is useful for reaching over/past a shield to an exposed shoulder or head. I've also heard that meeting such a style of sword/attack in Dacia (?) led to changes in the Roman army's armour. I don't have references to support these assertions I'm afraid.

I also have a couple of Zande blades which are very clearly sharpened only on the concave edge. So I'm very aware that this style of blade does exist.

The development of practical weapons was almost always in reference to the context they developed in - indeed in response to the need to overcome some new obstacle/design. Nobody designs a fighting weapon that doesn't work and then continues to produce it. (I accept it is a different matter for ceremonial/ritual weapons) So of course there must have been cultural contexts where a convex-edge blade was the best fighting choice.

I guess what it boils down to is that I think shotel/gurades were used one way and Nkante has the opposite belief (if I'm reading right - apologies if not).

I'd be very interested if anyone has any historical references (written/visual) that would throw light onto the subject.

I'm also happy to be corrected on any of my historical assertions!

22nd June 2016, 01:35 PM	#6
Jerseyman Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 97	Hi Nkante, My apologies if I'm misunderstanding something here, but your description states that the cutting edge of a shotel or gurade is on the inside (concave) edge of the curve rather than the outside (convex) edge. I have two gurades and they are both double-edged - so in theory they could be used either way round. But I've always assumed they were used like a cavalry sabre with the primary focus on attacking with the convex edge. I'm in complete agreement with you that the logical draw from that position is as you describe - which would present the sharp convex edge to the opponent in a very efficient rising, attacking draw. I suppose if it's sharp on both edges then either edge could be used by choice in combat. The style of hilt seems to indicate a machete-style grip where the blade and forearm remain at roughly 90 degrees to each other - if that is the case it seems more logical to me to attack with the convex edge in a series of drawing cuts. Rather than the concave edge which would become a chopping action with the risk that the forwards-facing point would stick/jam into the shield or body of the opponent. This could be a serious disadvantage in a fight. I've often been told that in un-armoured fights a sickle-style sword is useful for reaching over/past a shield to an exposed shoulder or head. I've also heard that meeting such a style of sword/attack in Dacia (?) led to changes in the Roman army's armour. I don't have references to support these assertions I'm afraid. I also have a couple of Zande blades which are very clearly sharpened only on the concave edge. So I'm very aware that this style of blade does exist. The development of practical weapons was almost always in reference to the context they developed in - indeed in response to the need to overcome some new obstacle/design. Nobody designs a fighting weapon that doesn't work and then continues to produce it. (I accept it is a different matter for ceremonial/ritual weapons) So of course there must have been cultural contexts where a convex-edge blade was the best fighting choice. I guess what it boils down to is that I think shotel/gurades were used one way and Nkante has the opposite belief (if I'm reading right - apologies if not). I'd be very interested if anyone has any historical references (written/visual) that would throw light onto the subject. I'm also happy to be corrected on any of my historical assertions!