Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 17th January 2018, 01:01 PM   #1
Madnumforce
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 28
Default

The word "machaira"/"machaera" is indeed Greek in origin (μάχαιρα), and as far as I know it's still unclear what it referred to. From what I had read, it meant different things in different contexts in different periods, though it was always something edged. The Romans borrowed it from the Greeks, and though it seems also unclear what it referred to, it apparently was only used in a military context, so to refer to a weapon. I can't be absolutely certain the word "machete" derives from "machaira"/"machaera", but it's the best contestant so far. First, I literally found this etymology in a customs collection of South-West of France from the 17th century (it was used in a context where the machete was used as a weapon), and there basically is no other plausible etymology possible (I had looked in a Spanish etymology dictionary, and it was bullcrap: they claimed it was the contraction of "macho" (man/macho) and "hacheta" (hatchet)). If the English language recorded it as spelled "matchete", it's because in the South of France, the "ch" sound was often hard, and actually sounded "tch". It's not rare to find old French spelling "matchette", widely used in the 19th century.

As for the falc* radical, indeed it had a great linguistic productivity in romance languages. The word for scythe is falce in Italian and faux (old spelling faulx) in French. In France, there is a kind of stout scythe used to cut brambles and such called fauchon. Sickle it falciole in Italian and faucille in French. In Portuguese, the word for billhook is foice. There is also faca that you mention, and fação just came to mean "(large) knife", and thus is used to refer to machetes. Fação is the Portuguese sibling of the falchion/fauchon/falcione familly. So in Brazil today, machetes are called falchions. No wonder really: words and meanings used to be much more fluid even just centuries ago, since there was no centrally-organized mandatory schooling that could normalize and standardize language, and common language (not literary) was basically a juxtaposition of dialects that had evolved in a very complex fashion from what was left after the fall of the roman empire of the lingua franca that roman occupation, trade and administration, and christian religion, had gave rise to.

I'm not familiar with the book you mention, but I'm with the concept and fact. The scythe is the worst possible tool to make a weapon from, though. A scythe is really, really thin. Like, really. I've recently found a picture of a 3th century roman scythe excavated in the South of France, and though it isn't the same fixation method as modern scythes, it's the same kind of blade: not at all fit for military use. It is known and documented that scythes were converted into makeshift weapons but... eurk... they probably didn't last long. The agricultural pole billhook on the other hand is almost a ready to use weapon. Actually the spike on the back is a very common feature on pole billhooks.

The problem is that even I, as a billhook fanatic, have extreme trouble finding any archeological documentation about medieval billhooks of any kind. Archeologists regard them as almost worthless, and they are practically treated like scrap metal. For example, in the excavation I mentioned, two billhooks and three axe heads were found, we see them on the picture, but the INRAP, the institution that did the excavation, didn't even bother to publish detailed shots, while they took and published detailed shots of actual worthless crap like metal bands for reinforcing furniture and doors. This lack of interest archeologists have towards tools is crippling research in that field, because these simple everyday objects get zero attention from authors and chroniclers, and their depiction in art (miniatures and tapestry) is extremely rare, and most of the time only pertaining with vine-growing.

So while extreme care is taken in preserving polearms, and they're displayed in museums, etc, none is taken in preserving/promoting the tools from which they come from, and there is a lack of data. Well, Italians seem to do a poor job in general at international promotion, but that machete-billhook-falchion thing is extremely interesting, rare and noticeable, and should be much better known. I don't exactly know what it is, it may or it may not be a "missing link" between billhooks and falchions, but it certainly is something worth studying.
Madnumforce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th January 2018, 04:21 PM   #2
Philip
Member
 
Philip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: California
Posts: 1,036
Default functionality of scythes

Quote:
Originally Posted by Madnumforce

I'm not familiar with the book you mention, but I'm with the concept and fact. The scythe is the worst possible tool to make a weapon from, though. A scythe is really, really thin. Like, really. I've recently found a picture of a 3th century roman scythe excavated in the South of France, and though it isn't the same fixation method as modern scythes, it's the same kind of blade: not at all fit for military use. It is known and documented that scythes were converted into makeshift weapons but... eurk... they probably didn't last long.

A scythe blade has to be thin to be able to mow hay and grass efficiently; I've used them on occasion for this job and light weight is a virtue when you have to swing it for hours on end. The L-shaped reinforce at the spine also limits the depth of a cut into anything more substantial than the vegetation it was designed to cut. As you say, this doesn't translate into great utility as a military weapon. But consider for a moment who the likely users of scythe-cum-polearms were during the Middle Ages -- peasant levies who were conscripted into feudal armies as ad hoc auxiliaries. They were in large part not equipped by their masters and had to provide whatever they could use in battle. Admittedly, scythes had their shortcomings but mounted on a longish pole they had more reach than a shovel. And as far as durability goes, yes, the thin edge gets chewed up, but perhaps that wasn't a big deal considering that the men served on a short-term basis (they had to get back to the farm eventually to feed their families) and their survival rate in battle was not all that favorable anyway. And who might these guys face in the field with their scythes, forks, and billhooks? Probably the peasant levies and lowly foot-soldiers in the ranks of the other side, who wore little or nothing in the way of real armor.

Once the inherent thinness of an agricultural scythe is designed away, it becomes a quite effective thing. It's easy to see how a more robust version effective against human or equine opponents could be made by blacksmiths and from there began its evolution into something a regular soldier or a mercenary would find usable: the glaive. By the same process the pruning-hook morphed into the roncone or the bill.
Philip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th January 2018, 05:41 PM   #3
fernando
(deceased)
 
fernando's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal
Posts: 9,694
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Philip
... As you say, this doesn't translate into great utility as a military weapon. But consider for a moment who the likely users of scythe-cum-polearms were during the Middle Ages -- peasant levies who were conscripted into feudal armies as ad hoc auxiliaries. They were in large part not equipped by their masters and had to provide whatever they could use in battle... the men served on a short-term basis (they had to get back to the farm eventually to feed their families) and their survival rate in battle was not all that favorable anyway. And who might these guys face in the field with their scythes, forks, and billhooks? Probably the peasant levies and lowly foot-soldiers in the ranks of the other side, who wore little or nothing in the way of real armor ...
So true Philip, so true. As so described and illustrated, for one, by Jorge Tavares, in his work GUERREIROS MEDIEVAIS PORTUGUESES (Peonagem).

.
Attached Images
    
fernando is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th January 2018, 07:26 PM   #4
fernando
(deceased)
 
fernando's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal
Posts: 9,694
Red face May i digress a bit, Geoffroy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Madnumforce
...I can't be absolutely certain the word "machete" derives from "machaira"/"machaera", but it's the best contestant so far... (I had looked in a Spanish etymology dictionary, and it was bullcrap: they claimed it was the contraction of "macho" (man/macho) and "hacheta" (hatchet))...
It seems as, in a more serious Spanish theory (Corominas) a different acceptation of the term "macho" is given, as not being "male" (not man), but a large "mazzo" (mallet), thus with a distinct approach. If you find the time or disposition to have this article translated, you will most probably find it interesting:
http://armasyarmadurasenespaa.blogsp...l-machete.html

Quote:
Originally Posted by Madnumforce
... In Portuguese, the word for billhook is foice...
Well it depends from which end you pick it from; a foice is at first the highly curved one to cut grass and wheat; a billhook is more like a hafted hook version for pruning, usually called podão or podoa.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Madnumforce
...There is also faca that you mention, and fação just came to mean "(large) knife", and thus is used to refer to machetes...
The large knife is facão, not fação; a hell of a difference .


Quote:
Originally Posted by Madnumforce
... So in Brazil today, machetes are called falchions...
Is that so ?
fernando is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 04:37 AM.


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.