|
8th January 2021, 05:31 PM | #1 |
Vikingsword Staff
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,268
|
This thickening that you speak of Detlef is not present in the blade of my example which is almost identical to yours but a bit shorter at 27 inches overall.
Nice find; we don't see many of this form. |
8th January 2021, 05:44 PM | #2 | |
Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Germany, Dortmund
Posts: 8,569
|
Quote:
That we don't see many of them is the reason that they are so expensive! This are rare swords, we can be happy to own such a sword! Regards, Detlef |
|
8th January 2021, 07:06 PM | #3 |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2018
Posts: 598
|
Hi Detlef, I think we have similar pieces. Mine has a blade length of 51.5cm, and 78cm overall. The tip is also thickened at the tip. Spine thickness at the base is 0.8cm. I'm not sure what the ferrule material is, but it has engravings. Posting a pic comparing it with a younger pira.
|
8th January 2021, 07:56 PM | #4 | |
Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Germany, Dortmund
Posts: 8,569
|
Quote:
Regards, Detlef |
|
8th January 2021, 08:36 PM | #5 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,223
|
Hello Detlef,
Congrats, that certainly is a nice example! I'd be very interested to see how this blade looks after etching (that will also help to analyze those 2 areas that you think may be repairs). I don't think the pitting distracts very much - it's certainly a good blade! I have a really similar piece (with suasa ferrule) that is also thinner where the blade is wider and again thicker where narrowing towards the tip. I believe this is mainly due to forging a billet of relatively even thickness to different widths, something that can be seen with many SEA blades. I'm not convinced the thinness of the wide part has any important functional reason; one possibility would be to increase cutting ability near the sweet spot. We certainly need more details from a wide variety of this traditional gasah/pira style. Since dating is difficult to begin with, establishing a reliable timeline might prove very tough. Could you add more dimensions for your blade, please? Will also try this weekend. Regards, Kai Last edited by kai; 9th January 2021 at 05:06 PM. |
8th January 2021, 09:42 PM | #6 | ||||
Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Germany, Dortmund
Posts: 8,569
|
Quote:
Thank you! I'll work a little bit more at the blade before I try an etch. Will post some pics where the two areas are better visible. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Regards, Detlef |
||||
8th January 2021, 09:46 PM | #7 |
Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Germany, Dortmund
Posts: 8,569
|
Here the picture.
|
9th January 2021, 08:21 AM | #8 | |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Room 101, Glos. UK
Posts: 4,152
|
Quote:
|
|
9th January 2021, 11:08 AM | #9 | |
Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Germany, Dortmund
Posts: 8,569
|
Quote:
Yes, this will be the reason, it's logically. Second point will be the strengthing of a weak point IMVHO. Regards, Detlef |
|
9th January 2021, 04:55 PM | #10 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,223
|
Hello all,
Is there anyone truly qualified to give some details on the actual use of the traditional gasah, especially moves commonly utilized during fighting? IMNSHO, we need to get some genuine input before being able to reasonably discuss form & function. As a guesstimate from handling, I'd suggest that the blade is optimized for cutting; poking with the tip is feasible though. In a way, it kinda resembles a barung with extended reach - possibly leaning more towards slashing than chopping compared to typical barung (however, the vast diversity of barung blades does not really allow for sweeping generalisations either). Regards, Kai |
9th January 2021, 05:35 PM | #11 | |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,223
|
Hello Wayne,
Quote:
Consider the bladesmith starting the final forging work with a billet of even width and thickness - probably quite close to the intended proportions at the future base of the blade. Then one starts to widen the blade by gradually forging out the edge: The wider the blade is forged, the thinner it gets; after the widest section, the back of the blade gets/stays thicker because the width is decreasing again. Only after the thickness is finally decreasing towards the very tip (and the width also being reduced towards the point, is there considerably less metal behind the edge... If one were to (transversally) cut the blade into even slices (say, 10mm), each of them would weight (almost) the same if my observations are correct. It is possible that there is a bit of distal taper (actually quite inevitable if the bladesmith progresses from base towards the tip during forging) - often this seems to get overestimated though, especially when concentrating on the thickness along the back of a blade. The side profile can lead one astray as well. It really is important to see any blade as 3-dimensional object! Regards, Kai Last edited by kai; 10th January 2021 at 11:48 AM. |
|
9th January 2021, 09:34 PM | #12 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,223
|
dimensions
Here some data for my example:
weight 634 g 707 mm total length 450 mm blade length 264 mm hilt length (89.2 mm grip length including 33.75 mm ferrule) 102 mm point of balance (from ferrule) 303 mm from upper base to bump at back of blade 154 mm from bump to tip thickness at base of blade back: 9.8 mm "edge": 8.0 mm width: 20.1 mm thickness - 151.5 mm from base back: 3.75 mm 39mm from edge: 3.4 mm 30mm from edge: 3.1 mm 20mm from edge: 2.5 mm 10mm from edge: 2.0 mm width: 47.3 mm thickness - 303 mm from base (bump at back of blade) back: 1.9 mm 10mm from back: 2.1 mm 20mm from back: 2.3 mm [concave surface] 39mm from edge: 2.2 mm 30mm from edge: 2.0 mm 20mm from edge: 1.85 mm 10mm from edge: 1.5 mm width: 68.5 mm thickness - 77 mm from tip back: 2.75 mm max near back: 3.15 mm 30mm from edge: 3.1 mm 20mm from edge: 2.9 mm 10mm from edge: 2.1 mm width: 38.8 mm blade thickness - 44 mm from tip (local maximum) back: 3.2 mm max near back: 3.45 mm 20mm from edge: 3.4 mm 10mm from edge: 2.4 mm blade width: 25.3 mm |
|
|