No problem RhysMichael ! My note was not directed specifically at your post, which was nicely done BTW, just at the course the discussion was taking.
Paul,
Excellent post and fantastic sabres!!!!!
The subject of the influence of ethnographic swords on European military swords has long been a topic fascinating to me, and I have often been drawn to it in varying research. I have seen Georgian light cavalry sabres that have clearly British made blades with yelman, Georgian cavalry troopers sabres with fully parabolic blades distinctly recalling the shamshir curve although having the pipeback rib the full length etc. Clearly these are blades that reflect the influence of these much admired Eastern sabres.
It is well known that during the campaigns in Egypt led to Western admiration of the sabres of the Mamluks, and the subsequent adoption of not only the distinctive Mamluk Ottoman form hilt by both Great Britian and France, but certainly the fascination with the curved and yelmanned blades.
The development of the use of sabres, as discussed by Rivkin, clearly influenced the swords used by Eastern European armies as evidenced by those of Poland and Hungary and eventually all of Europe.
In the development of the famed M1796 light cavalry sabre for Great Britian, LeMarchant the following excerpt is of interest:
"...the Turkish sword, or kilij, had much impressed LeMarchant. The Ottoman cavalry were regarded as being among the best in Europe, and he felt that their superiority was not entirely due to thier brilliant riding and dash. Their blades, short and strongly curved in fine, watered Damascus steel, were essentially cutting weapons made to suit the natural slashing tendancy of a swordsman in a melee. In direct contrast was the British heavy cavalry broadsword, two edged, designed purely for thrusting, some 35" long and ungovernably heavy. "without a doubt", wrote LeMarchant, "the expertly used scimitar blades of the Turks, Mamelukes, Moors and Hungarians have proved that a light sword, if equally applicable to a cut or thrust. is preferable to any other".
"Scientific Soldier:A Life of General LeMarchant", R.H.Thoumaine, 1968, pp43-44.
LeMarchant worked closely with British sword maker Henry Osborn, to develop what has been called by many one of the finest cutting weapons ever forged, the British M1796 light cavalry sabre. These were used for the next 20 years and were regarded by French commanders in the Peninsula as being 'too effective, and barbarous causing terrible wounds', a rather obtuse compliment.
Ironically, in later years when these sabres were becoming obsolete and being replaced or discarded, it became a concern of British forces in India that the native warriors were incredibly deadly in their use of the sword. The British were stunned when they discovered that the effectiveness of the swords used by the warriors was primarily in the sharpness, and that the warriors were actually using the discarded or captured M1796 blades!
The Indian armourers were rehilting these blades in their own hilts.
In another ironic note, I own a tulwar which carries a M1796 blade which is clearly marked 'Osborne' ! who was of course instrumental in developing the British blades influenced by Eastern sabres.
I think as Paul has noted, these are considerations well placed in the diffusion of ethnographic vs. pattern in the development of swords.
All best regards,
Jim