Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > European Armoury

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 6th November 2016, 07:24 PM   #17
Jim McDougall
Arms Historian
 
Jim McDougall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,194
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fernando
But while short grips in Indian swords were a (sort of) standard situation, i believe the majority of cup hilt swords grips had normal lengths, notwithstanding relatively short ones were so because as, the manner to hold the sword with finger/s wraping the front section, would not need them to be made larger. Still you have extreme situations, where pondering on such fashion results in examples like the one attached, where only three fingers could hold the actual grip. The civilian that owned this sword was certainly a short fellow, its blade only measuring 83 cms.

.

Well observed, and good insight toward these situational matters in cuphilts. As you say, the Indian situation was far more 'standardized' as clearly the general size of Indian hands was of course smaller as a rule. This was indeed so much so that even British production of swords for native forces had 'Indian' pattern regulation swords with smaller hilts .
Jim McDougall is offline   Reply With Quote
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:30 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.