Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post - Afghani pulwar: old and ( perhaps) revealing

ariel · 30th December 2019, 02:37 PM

Ibrahiim,

Easton discusses handles from purely technical point of view: in his lecture the handles of Tulwar , pulwar and of “basket” type are presented as consciously constructed creations to adjust fencing techniques and that required changes in their appearance.

I suspect the reverse was true: these handles were products of fashion, imitation of foreign patterns, esthetics etc. The final results necessarily dictated a range of technical moves ( wrist involvement etc)

He looks at them as an European : objective goals dictated engineering decisions. Stabbing is more effective: therefore we need a straight sword optimized for stabbing; slashing is better when the distal part of the blade is wider and heavier, thus the British 1796 pattern; evolution of European sword from heavy and massive Northmen type, to more slender one to adjust to the introduction of a sectional mail, to “dress” sword and to status symbol one when swords outlived their purpose etc.

But Eastern weapons by and large were created as objects of art or religious symbols and many of them were of bizarre form, barely fulfilling the requirements for practical use. Then, in a hindsight we try to find alleged purposes of their engineering designs, potential advantages ( or, more often, defects), but the best we can come up with is veneration of one god or another.

There were exceptions, of course, but rather few and far between. Chaka’s conscious modification of the local spear marked a whole new concept of a conduct of war. On the other hand, cinquedea was a purely esthetic creature, but as a result of its technical awkwardness it did not survive long:-)

It is a “ cart and horse” question. Europe virtually always put the horse first, but Easterners ( Indians and Indonesians first and foremost) were happy to show their carts.

P.S.
Ian,
We crossed our posts. Your lotus example perfectly illustrates my point.
BTW, the open cup of early Afghan and NW Indian pommels likely mirrored Hindu urulis (Durga’s cooking vessel), or a bowl of plenty.

30th December 2019, 02:37 PM	#35
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Ibrahiim, Easton discusses handles from purely technical point of view: in his lecture the handles of Tulwar , pulwar and of “basket” type are presented as consciously constructed creations to adjust fencing techniques and that required changes in their appearance. I suspect the reverse was true: these handles were products of fashion, imitation of foreign patterns, esthetics etc. The final results necessarily dictated a range of technical moves ( wrist involvement etc) He looks at them as an European : objective goals dictated engineering decisions. Stabbing is more effective: therefore we need a straight sword optimized for stabbing; slashing is better when the distal part of the blade is wider and heavier, thus the British 1796 pattern; evolution of European sword from heavy and massive Northmen type, to more slender one to adjust to the introduction of a sectional mail, to “dress” sword and to status symbol one when swords outlived their purpose etc. But Eastern weapons by and large were created as objects of art or religious symbols and many of them were of bizarre form, barely fulfilling the requirements for practical use. Then, in a hindsight we try to find alleged purposes of their engineering designs, potential advantages ( or, more often, defects), but the best we can come up with is veneration of one god or another. There were exceptions, of course, but rather few and far between. Chaka’s conscious modification of the local spear marked a whole new concept of a conduct of war. On the other hand, cinquedea was a purely esthetic creature, but as a result of its technical awkwardness it did not survive long:-) It is a “ cart and horse” question. Europe virtually always put the horse first, but Easterners ( Indians and Indonesians first and foremost) were happy to show their carts. P.S. Ian, We crossed our posts. Your lotus example perfectly illustrates my point. BTW, the open cup of early Afghan and NW Indian pommels likely mirrored Hindu urulis (Durga’s cooking vessel), or a bowl of plenty. Last edited by ariel; 30th December 2019 at 03:00 PM.