![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 2,718
|
![]()
Hmm, yes well Andrew, I think it is a yes and a no. True that farangi refers to Indian swords with a foreign blade – and this blade surely is foreign – but farangis have khanda hilts, not tulwar hilts, and this is, I think a special tulwar hilt on top of it all, we will see when we get more pictures. What makes a farangi a farangi? Is it the blade or the blade and the hilt? I think we can agree on that a khanda hilt with a foreign blade is a farangi, and maybe this one is too, but it is most unusual to see a blade like this with an unusual tulwar hilt – is this a farangi? Maybe you are right, but I am not quite convinced at the moment.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 1,209
|
![]()
Jens,
Here are the pics of the "firangi" to give this one a name. Is this what you mean and good enough to see something? I'd better first ask before i launch the other pics i made. If not I have to try to make better ones but it isn't easy with flashlight and i'm not a prof. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: B.C. Canada
Posts: 473
|
![]()
I am glad I am not the only one confused on the definition of farangi. I have used the term as Andrew has stated, that being a straight bladed broad sword or backsword, usually with the Hindu basket but not necessarily. I think Andy has posted one with a rapier blade on SFI, for lack of any other term I would also call it a Farangi.
Jeff |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 1,725
|
![]()
Jens, I think you've hit on the source of some of my confusion relating to Henk's sword. The illustration from Stone's posted by Henk gives me some consolation: most of those straight-bladed, khanda-hilted swords make a bit more sense to me, as they appear to be more cut and thrust than Henk's example. I would also note that the downward tilt of the pommel would permit better wrist extension than a standard tulwar hilt. Better, but still not something I'd relish.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: B.C. Canada
Posts: 473
|
![]()
Hi Andrew,
I hate to be a stickler but I think you mean wrist abduction. I personally don't think the tulwar pomel affects this but that is just my opinion. ![]() Jeff |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 176
|
![]()
The tulwar's pommel is a pain. It gets in the way of cutting (hurts your wrist veeery bad), and thrusting.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 | |
Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 1,725
|
![]() Quote:
![]() This is largely all my opinion as well. However, I've never held a tulwar that didn't cause discomfort and pain when trying to abduct my wrist. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 | |
Vikingsword Staff
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,339
|
![]() Quote:
![]() I think the disk is meant to encourage the hand to combine a draw cut with a downward cut . The caveat here is that I am no swordsman but I do believe that the disc is there for a purpose rather than a fashion statement and it must have worked or it would have been quickly abandoned . I've been using an old Rajastani wootz tulwar with a 'flattened' knucklebow as my test sword . |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 | |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: B.C. Canada
Posts: 473
|
![]() Quote:
Hi Rick, Your observations are similar to mine. I find the large pommel prevents the saber from being pulled from your hand with the draw. My hands are slightly larger than average for the modern hand. I think the answer lies in the grip. The majority of the grip strength lies in the thumb and the first two fingers, the third finger (ring finger) helps but is not essential. There is no point in completely closing the small finger. Now try cuttting and see if this decreases your grip, as well as still hurts. Again only my personal opinion. Jeff Last edited by Jeff D; 12th June 2005 at 10:48 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|