Quote:
Originally Posted by kronckew
Thanks, Jim. I would think it is of Historical value, if not 'Scientific'. Just knowing these were in use in the period is of historic importance. A titbit, not a full meal, but tasty in any case.
|
Exactly! In studying weapons from the historic perspective, which is of course what is my own affliction, there is a lot of speculation and theory based on what is usually pretty circumstantial evidence. This is a thing that is highly verboten in the academic world, as there everything must be empirically proven.
The rugged and often crude nature of these kinds of ersatz weapons which often evolved in times of conflict, insurrection and outright war are often of course variations of known forms of the time and place. In many cases they are comprised of components of numbers of weapons and made in imitation of others. The goal is naturally to assemble weapons which are viable for combat use, which this example, as noted, seems to fit the bill. In the early stages of the Mahdiyya, tribesmen were carrying wooden swords until they were replaced with actual swords either captured or from the fallen.
The value of this kind of a weapon of course does not fit well in the categoric ajenda of arms collecting of specific forms by the number, but does deserve a place in the realm of potentially historic arms . These kinds of conundrums I personally find the most fascinating, and the possibilities exciting despite being outside the parameters of empirical analysis.