I agree this is a unplesant subject but I think there is value in how some swords did develope for this matter. The subject can be broken into 2 classes; ritualistic & definitive. Executions would be definitive. While some swords may have developed specifically for execution, I tend to think most must have had battlefield use as primary function. Both ritualistic & definitive would seek the same result. Either on the battle field or traveling to hostile territory to secure the trophy, it has to be assumed that development of some swords were to efficiently do this task. The mountain tribes of Luzon either developed the head axe or adapted it. I would agree with Cato that the Moro adapted the panabas (most likely a tool) for definitive reasons. Most other head-removal groups, must have relied on weapons they took to battle. While speculation, I think the Kris developing from the keris is a good example, especially if the primary battle weapon was blowgun or spear.
|