An uncommon polearm for comments

[fernando]

Now with a more appropriate pole, in oak wood, sightly faceted, well embedded in the socket; langets also embedded but now secured with real old handmade nails.


.

[Will M]

Knowing blacksmith techniques and identifying aged pieces is key.
Actually quite difficult to make additions using modern welding without seeing signs of being tinkered with.
Very nice job of adding the shaft.

[fernando]

Thank you for the kind words, Will .

[Helleri]

Not to stir the pot. But the presence of langets doesn't necessarily indicate that the implement is weaponized. Though not the most common of features langets do appear on plenty of tool use only implements. Both historically and modernly.


The good news is that when they are present on pure tools. it's usually easy to distinguish. Langets for tools are often not an integral part of the piece. Take for example this old shingle axe.


(Pictures 1 & 2).


Note that these langets are inserted as tines. Hammers of various types which have langets usually do this. There is often an additional recess in the eye of the hammer to allow for it, and the mouth of the eye is recessed as well so they sit relatively flush.


I've owned a few tools (none presently in my tool collection) that had langets which were fitted in this manner. Modernly this is still done by some brands though by different technique. As shown below.

(Picture 3).

Sometimes in both antiquity and modernity there are tools with langets which are integral, such as this framing hammer.

(Picture 4).

In general langets are more common on weapons than tools I'd say. But this doesn't preclude pure tools from having them and that fact is worth driving home.


Even when langets are present as integral to the piece (as shown above in the very last image). They are almost invariably present on the axis of movement with the tool. Because tools are not typically used defensively.


Whereas with weapons we often see them either on that same axis as with tools or on the flat side. Because a weapon has more axis of movement in use. It doesn't need to just protect the shaft from a missed blow. It can be used to bat away other weapons with side to side motions without changing the offensive orientation of the weapon (necessitating langets on the side to protect the shaft).


Where the langets are located can tell one a lot about how it was used. Another thing to consider is that langets on pure tools tend to be more diminutive. Just long enough and wide enough to protect from the ill effects of a mis-strike or skipping.


Another thing about langets for pure tools is that they are very rarely recessed into the wood. Manufacturers tend to want to do as little removal of wood as possible. So langets often sit on top of the wood and have only as much fastening as is absolutely necessary.


So while it's probably not a good general rule to say that langets = war implement and no langets = tool implement (and I realize no one is saying that explicitly. Just warning against that potential analytical trap). It's still fair to say that it's more common on weapons. It's also fairly easy to distinguish between tool and weapon langets. Because their different purposes are reflected in how they are manifested on the piece.



[Edit: I'd like to add that the piece for discussion here appears to me to be more on the weapon side of things. The langets are long, fairly wide, and recessed.

But more than that the blade shape makes me think weapon. Notice the slight drop point on the spine from midway down to the tip. This brings the tip into alignment with the center-line of the shaft. Meaning this tip was meant to do at least some amount of thrusting. In addition to the what was likely the primary mode of use (cutting/hacking).

Also the blade itself appears to have to have a tapered-concave cross-section, with distal tapering along the spine? So it was made to be rigid on the spin, but also to be made very sharp. While still remaining light.

This doesn't seem all that tool-like. As a swung tool will rely partially on some measure of heft to do the work and bulk to resist damage. Dulling isn't as much of a problem given one has the luxury of stopping to sharpen an edge. Whereas on the battle field you want something to be as sharp as possible and when it dulls still be thin enough to have what sharpness remains carry it through the cut (because you can't just stop any time you like to hone the edge).

A weapon also can't be too heavy or a person won't be able to wield it for long. Unlike with a tool where again one has the luxury oif being able to take breaks. In battle you have to be able to wield a weapon for potentially much long stretches of time without rest.

All-in-all it definitely has more of a weapon feel to me.]

.

[fernando]

Much obliged for the comprehensive input, Helleri .

[Helleri]

Thought this would be an interesting addition to this line of sub-topic. I found these yesterday in some stuff my boss has while helping him sort/organize his lean-to storage

(Pictures 1 & 2)

This pair of loppers has langets that might be at first confusing as to their function. After all shears are not excepted to receive blows. At most they would lightly abrade small branches. And they definitely would receive a blow to the inside of the handles. It's a good example of non-swung-tool langets and having langets for another/additional reason.

Notice they are along the axis on which the shafts would be under fairly extreme pressure when in use. No doubt this is to reinforce the shafts against snapping where they are most prone to do so.

Applying this thinking forward to weapons, how many times can one reasonably swing a long shafted, heavy ended weapon, even successfully landing blows, before it's wooden shaft cracks or snaps from repetitive stress?

It's something I had not considered before. But langets on weapons may very well be partly about reinforcing the strength of the shaft of a weapon against the stresses put on it (in addition to protecting it from blows).

Construction wise it should also be noted that while these might appear integral to the piece, they are not. They are pinned at the top by those bolsters. There is a slot cut into the wood, that the tang of looper's blades plunge down into. Similar to my own pair of loppers below.

(Pictures 3 & 4)

I hope this isn't too... Off into the weeds for most people's tastes. The tool/weapon association is very close. I'd be as bold as to say that most weapons are, at least in their most primitive forms, derived from tools (I consider hunting weapons to be tools as well). And historically a lot of tools would have doubled as makeshift weapons. So there does come a point where it's hard to talk about weapons or certain aspects thereof without discussing the connection between tools and weapons. Also the study of one can tell a person a lot about the other. As they use many of the same techniques and materials in construction,

.

[kronckew]

One difference between English/American boarding axes and the French ones is the alignment of the languets, French ones have them fore and aft, US/UK ones port and starboard.

French naval tactics had them shoot for the rigging to disable the enemy, they expected the same in return, so their axes were designed mostly to damage control, removing broken rigging and spars, only secondarily as weapons.

English, US tactics were to go for the throat by smashing through the hull, disabling the guns and killing the crews, their ones were used for boarding and breaching barriers with hostiles behind, so had the languetes on the sides.

This carried over into their fire axes too.

Guess which is which