[Emanuel]

Hi Jim,

Desjardins offers too accounts from French officers regarding the use of the flyssa. I translated that particular passage...

“The majority of Kabyles were foot-soldiers (infantry). The rich men, Cheikhs and Maraboots, however, were mounted in battle. Berthelon describes an interesting maneuvre using the two types of troops. 'The cavalrymen take on horseback the foot-soldiers and drop them off at a chosen point. The foot-soldiers hide while the horsemen ride away in a simulated flight, drawing the attention of the enemy in an ambush by the foot-soldiers.' For such an ambush, the flyssa seems well suited. In this case, its thrust must be particularly fearsome. In the opinion of Colonel Lapene, 'This weapon is dangerous in estoc...The Kabyles rarely use it to slash unless it is for beheading. In that case they apply the in-curving part of the blade and pull strongly backwards in a drawcut.'” (Desjardins, 134)

Desjardins is reserved about the last bit, arguing that such a maneuvre is too complex and time-consuming to execute in battle. She concludes that the flyssa was used by foot-soldiers equally well against infrantry and cavalry. In the case of the latter point, a footnote relates an account in which foot-soldiers used the flyssa to attack the horses and take them out of combat. I can picture such an action but I would also consider a half-swording maneuvre. The flyssa-wielder could grasp the spine of the blade for support and swipe at the legs of the horses...pure speculation of course.

I do not understand why thrusting swords must necessarily have guards. Spears do not have guards and they are the ultimate thrusting weapon. If the weapon is furthermore used against unarmoured soft targets, I don't think there would be any slippage. The flare at the base of the flyssa blade could conceivably hold the hand on the grip well enough. Someone should sharpen their flyssa and thrust through a quarter of beef or porc, and report the result.

Now if the flyssa is a predominantly thrusting weapon, why have the recurved edge? The ogive is perfect for hacking and slashing, and it seems like too much of a bother if its purpose was merely for cutting heads. Now the seconf flyssa posted by Tatyana has practically no recurve...I therefore think that the accounts given by this officer or that generalize too much. One may have seen a kabyle using a straight variety, while another might have seen one with a curved piece. Their conclusions would thus be conflicting.

I'm sure that the grunts of the French troops knew quite well how Kabyles faught...too bad the low ranks never get their stories published.

If Kabyles were essentially Guerilla fighters ambushing their opponents, perhaps the use of cavalry (horse or camel) was not needed. I ran accross some paintings and prints of the various French battles against the Kabyles and Algerians, and although they showed infantry troops bearing flyssa's I haven't seen any mounted ones. I'll keep looking and I will try to scan the good bits.

Best regards,
Emanuel