The Evolution of the Mak??

[CharlesS]

The cutting edge of a mak is almost always on the backcurve of the blade, not the forward curve, so in the last pics the edge is always to the right.

[Mark]

Something that occurred to me that might explain the curve is that it provides for a more stable attachment of the blade to the haft. The intent with these clearly is to have a blade in line with the haft, like a sword, rather than at some angle, like an ax. Setting the blade into the end of the haft would require a stable/strong wrapping, and would tend more to split the haft down its length. In contrast, setting the blade perpendicular to the long axis of the haft would reduce splitting (though I expect blow-out of the part toward the end of the pole would happen) and can be done with simple wedges. Bending the end of the pole then puts the blade in line with the haft.

[CharlesS]

Mark, I understand your point, and have even thought about that myself, but in examples #1 and #3 the blade is so far removed from the line of the haft it would still require "extra" movement. The extra/awkward movement diminishes considerably when striking from a height, ie. a horse. Then the swing is consistent with a more "flowing swing", say like with a shamshir.

[PUFF]

Such design, with CG behind the pole, would stabilize the edge orientation during swing. Unlike sword, this tool do not require wrist work to adjust edge orientation. You can just make a wide swing (with relax grip). And the tool will meet its target, edge first.

[Andrew]

Charles, where would this weapon fit into your analysis? This is a copper-bladed mak I've shown before. Sharpened on the convex edge.

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ghlight=copper

[CharlesS]

Andrew, I remember this one and like you was perplexed by the copper blade, not to mention the rather unique method of mounting it to the haft.

As far as efficient use goes, I see it as easier to use than my bamboo mounted example because the blade is more in line with the haft.

PUFF makes a good point too in that a wide swing negates much of the problem, but there are some times in combat where this is not possible, that's why I think these were best used by mounted troops as they often had a greater range of motion....much like some Indo Persian maces are clearly made for mounted warriors based on their length and weight...they would need that same range of motion.

If you look at the panel from Angkor Wat and the two fellas clearly holding maks, you can almost imagine the range of motion and the downward swing of the weapon and can see how under those circumstances it would deliver a powerful blow.

[Mark]

I am thinking that there was an original rational reason for the odd mounting, e.g., absorbing some of the shock of implact (at the certain expense of cutting power, I am sure), or stability, which was then perpetuated in later weapons out of adherence to tradition. I think this is what is going on in the later versions, with have a pretty variable amount of off-set between haft and blade. Andrew's copper version I think is strong evidence that these weapons were undeed used militarily, and at some point adopted a ceremonial or display function in addition to the practical one, like the European HLOs (halberk-like objects ) of the 18th, 19th and even 20th C. (you still see the Vatican's Swiss Guards carrying them).