Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jim McDougall
Naturally with this 'interpretive' example the spike at the rear is in my opinion added for effect in that sense, as most of these axes for combat had blunt or hammer type features which were indeed for compromising armor. The spike would probably become lodged in mail or armor, and the smashing of armor in the case of plate would render its occupant unable to move effectively etc.
The exception would be the bhuj, essentially a dagger axe which was indeed for penetration, particularly through textile armor or turbans. These were primarily Rajput though used by other groups.
|
While images of spiked axe are rare there are a few, also I think that zaghnal and war hammers often had more of a spiked, penetrating form than the bhuj.
Here are a couple of spiked axe, tabar-zaghnal, double spiked zaghnal, Ottoman war hammer and bhuj for comparison.
#1. Ottoman axe with rear spike.
#2. Indian axe with rear spike.
#3. Indian antelope axe with rear spike, Furusiyya Art Collection.
#4. Zaghnal, double bladed, The Wallace Collection.
#5. Ottoman war hammer.
#6. Indian bhuj.
#7. Indian tabar / zaghnal.