![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Denmark
Posts: 157
|
![]()
Guys, thats really fantastic information. Thank you. I'm not more confused, but I guess I'm beginning to see just how much there is to know that I don't know
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 227
|
![]()
...a very interesting discussion.
One key difference between the kaskara and the takouba is the tang: Kaskaras have a shorter, blunt tang which has a hole for an iron peg to hold the hilt assembly together. Like a mamluk sword. Takoubas have a longer tang which is peened at the pommel. Like a European sword. While I was researching my talk on the Kaskara for the Arms and Armour Society I found that it had been around for a long time: this 1821 image of a King of Sennar is the earliest depiction of which I am aware, although I know of earlier descriptions. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Olomouc
Posts: 1,717
|
![]()
Great illustration Stephen and nice to have a date attached as well. Very much appreciated that you posted it.
The hilting is one of the main aspects I was getting at which differentiate the two types. As Ed was noting kaskara mounting could took place in a rough form for later finishing. That's simply not possible with takouba. The use of substantial, balance oriented pommels is another aspect where the two types are very different. As you note the kaskara method seems directly related to Mamluk weaponry. So, as much as blade sources may overlap the relationship between the two weapons seems to start and end with blades and that's about all they have in common. By the way I sent you a PM, not sure if you go it as I hadn't heard back yet. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|