Nomadic swords

ariel · 22nd October 2018, 12:38 PM

Philip,
Thanks for the answer. I am not, and have never been, knowledgeable enough about East Asian weapons ( China, Japan, Korea etc) and am glad for the opportunity to be educated by the “gurus”.

As to your reluctance to rely on images:
History of anything is an in exact science, if it is a science at all. It lacks the cardinal defining scientific instrument: ability to conduct an experiment. Historians have to operate with remaining materials and with testimonials by long-dead witnesses of uncertain veracity. And the further back we wish to dig, the less actual materiel we have at our disposal. Necessarily, we have to engage our personal opinions formed on the basis of very meager data sets. Most of what Khudyakov and other wrote about early nomadic swords is based on a limited number of rock carvings. Artistic imprecision was always a problem , even with Rembrandt and the Orientalists, but we have to take artistic images at their face value if they are reproducible across and along the sources. Of course, actual objects are better, but even they have uncertain provenance and datability. In his chapter on nomadic swords Kirill has acknowledged it time and time again.
I trust Iranian images ( ##626 f and o) because in the same book there are other similar images. As to the sword of St. Nikita, it conforms in all details ( blade, handle, pommel) to actual examples and the entire image is highly realistic. Again, the “ inverted tunkou” is seen on thousands objects from that and later eras. I would view this images as fully confirmatory of the real state of affairs.

ariel · 22nd October 2018, 01:13 PM

Kubur,
I do not know much about Tuaregs, and am not sure whether the decorated area has anything to do with tunkou, but the Ottomans were there for ages.
Even if your assumption is correct, it does not prove much: Tuaregs were recipients of Eastern tradition, not its originators and donors.

Guom’s tunkou is not surprising: Vietnam , just like Korea and Japan got their inspiration from China. And Mongols were there also, 13 century.

TVV · 22nd October 2018, 07:44 PM

I do not see a tunkou/habaki on the wide bladed takouba. It is not unusual for takouba blades to be mounted with a sandwich construction to the hilt, especially older and re-used blades where the tang may have been compromised precluding being pinned. Per Iain's research, the wide bladed takoubas were status symbols, usually carried by Emir's bodyguards and all I personally see is extra decoration at the base of the blade, aimed at enhancing the prestige of the owner.

Jim McDougall · 22nd October 2018, 09:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TVV

I do not see a tunkou/habaki on the wide bladed takouba. It is not unusual for takouba blades to be mounted with a sandwich construction to the hilt, especially older and re-used blades where the tang may have been compromised precluding being pinned. Per Iain's research, the wide bladed takoubas were status symbols, usually carried by Emir's bodyguards and all I personally see is extra decoration at the base of the blade, aimed at enhancing the prestige of the owner.

Totally agree, and that this hilt extension/sleeve on this wide bladed Tuareg sword appears to provide an elaborated panel for decoration.

As noted as well, Briggs (1965, pp.43 and 49, plates X and item T5) says,

"...occasionally blades were joined to the hilt by two plain or engraved plates of iron, sometimes almost as long as what remained of the blade proper.Although in some cases this seems to have been done to make possible use of a broken blade there are others in which there was no apparent use for it".

I believe the term for these sleeves or support plates to be 'adabel'.

While these seem to have some degree of functionality as a bolster, they are not directly related to the tunkou/habaki despite the obvious similarity.

Another instance of similar application are the bolster plates/hilt extensions in India on certain Hindu swords such as khanda and pattisa in the South.

Ren Ren · 23rd October 2018, 01:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ariel

Kubur,
Guom’s tunkou is not surprising: Vietnam , just like Korea and Japan got their inspiration from China. And Mongols were there also, 13 century.

If guards similar in style to Japanese tsuba appear in Vietnam no later than the 13th century, then we can see the sleeves on the blades much later. In my opinion, habaki were borrowed in the first third of the 17th century, when Japanese weapons became incredibly popular in Vietnam, especially in its central part, in the possessions of the chua Trinh.

Philip · 23rd October 2018, 03:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ren Ren

If guards similar in style to Japanese tsuba appear in Vietnam no later than the 13th century, then we can see the sleeves on the blades much later. In my opinion, habaki were borrowed in the first third of the 17th century, when Japanese weapons became incredibly popular in Vietnam, especially in its central part, in the possessions of the chua Trinh.

Agreed. A large number of Japanese swords were exported to not only Vietnam but to Siam as well as early as the 16th cent., when expatriate colonies of Japanese merchants existed in towns such as Hoi An near the coast in central Annam. Their popularity continued into the following century. Stylistic influence in the form of serrated seppa (washers inserted between the habaki and the tsuba , and the apertures known as hitsu-ana cut into the tsuba, remained characteristic of many Vietnamese hilts into the end of the 19th cent. This, despite the lack of a functional rationale on a Vietnamese hilt since they were not made to be readily disassembled, and no provision was made in the scabbard for a by-knife and skewer. Their presence is purely stylistic but speaks to the persistence of a Japanese aesthetic in the arms culture of the region.

Yes, the disc shaped guard appears earlier in mainland SE Asia, you see it widely on the bronze-hilted steel-bladed sabers found in large numbers in Vietnam and Cambodia and thought to date from the 13th to 15th cent. as you propose.

Ren Ren · 24th October 2018, 01:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Philip

Yes, the disc shaped guard appears earlier in mainland SE Asia, you see it widely on the bronze-hilted steel-bladed sabers found in large numbers in Vietnam and Cambodia and thought to date from the 13th to 15th cent. as you propose.

First of all, I have to apologize - of course in central Vietnam, power belonged to the chua Nguyen, the chua Trinh ruled in the north of the country.

I think that the influence of the Japanese arm culture was common to all parts of Vietnam. Chinese influence was also significant in the north part Tonkin. The influence of Cambodia and especially the state Champa is very noticeable in Annam, the central part of the modern territory of Vietnam. Unfortunately, I know only one article by Peter Dekker devoted to the study of the weapon of Champa.

ariel · 24th October 2018, 04:09 AM

You can also look here:
http://www.fightingarts.com/reading/article.php?id=183
Very good introduction: short and to the point ( pun intended).

ariel · 24th October 2018, 05:08 AM

One potential explanation for the ascendance ( not the appearance) of the " inverted tunkou" may be purely artistic.

At some stage of the game ( my guess 14-15 century), in the Islamic areal tunkou lost its engineering meaning and became purely decorative. Inscriptions on the blade became popular. Stamps and cartouches were far too small to accomodate a dedication, a prayer or even a motto. Necessarily, they had to be oriented longitudinally. Also, they had to utilize a " less-working" part of the blade, the lower quarter or so, adjacent to the handle/ handguard. On top of that, placing them along the edge would mean an inevitable loss of the sacral inscription as a result of repeat sharpening. The solution was simple: place them along the spine. And here, cutlers could combine the above practical points with the existing fashion of tunkou: short segment of decoration occupying the entire width of the blade adjacent to the handguard and a long inscription along the spine. A quick example is shown.

This was a homage to the traditional tunkou, that utilized the " upside down" pattern. From that point on the majority of single-edged Islamic blades were decorated in that manner and the "classical" tunkou simply vanished.

Of course, this does not explain the initial appearance of the inverted tunkou, but perhaps it explains the later popularity of it.

Just a thought...

24th October 2018, 05:08 AM	#9
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	One potential explanation for the ascendance ( not the appearance) of the " inverted tunkou" may be purely artistic. At some stage of the game ( my guess 14-15 century), in the Islamic areal tunkou lost its engineering meaning and became purely decorative. Inscriptions on the blade became popular. Stamps and cartouches were far too small to accomodate a dedication, a prayer or even a motto. Necessarily, they had to be oriented longitudinally. Also, they had to utilize a " less-working" part of the blade, the lower quarter or so, adjacent to the handle/ handguard. On top of that, placing them along the edge would mean an inevitable loss of the sacral inscription as a result of repeat sharpening. The solution was simple: place them along the spine. And here, cutlers could combine the above practical points with the existing fashion of tunkou: short segment of decoration occupying the entire width of the blade adjacent to the handguard and a long inscription along the spine. A quick example is shown. This was a homage to the traditional tunkou, that utilized the " upside down" pattern. From that point on the majority of single-edged Islamic blades were decorated in that manner and the "classical" tunkou simply vanished. Of course, this does not explain the initial appearance of the inverted tunkou, but perhaps it explains the later popularity of it. Just a thought... Attached Images

22nd October 2018, 12:38 PM	#1
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Philip, Thanks for the answer. I am not, and have never been, knowledgeable enough about East Asian weapons ( China, Japan, Korea etc) and am glad for the opportunity to be educated by the “gurus”. As to your reluctance to rely on images: History of anything is an in exact science, if it is a science at all. It lacks the cardinal defining scientific instrument: ability to conduct an experiment. Historians have to operate with remaining materials and with testimonials by long-dead witnesses of uncertain veracity. And the further back we wish to dig, the less actual materiel we have at our disposal. Necessarily, we have to engage our personal opinions formed on the basis of very meager data sets. Most of what Khudyakov and other wrote about early nomadic swords is based on a limited number of rock carvings. Artistic imprecision was always a problem , even with Rembrandt and the Orientalists, but we have to take artistic images at their face value if they are reproducible across and along the sources. Of course, actual objects are better, but even they have uncertain provenance and datability. In his chapter on nomadic swords Kirill has acknowledged it time and time again. I trust Iranian images ( ##626 f and o) because in the same book there are other similar images. As to the sword of St. Nikita, it conforms in all details ( blade, handle, pommel) to actual examples and the entire image is highly realistic. Again, the “ inverted tunkou” is seen on thousands objects from that and later eras. I would view this images as fully confirmatory of the real state of affairs.

22nd October 2018, 01:13 PM	#2
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Kubur, I do not know much about Tuaregs, and am not sure whether the decorated area has anything to do with tunkou, but the Ottomans were there for ages. Even if your assumption is correct, it does not prove much: Tuaregs were recipients of Eastern tradition, not its originators and donors. Guom’s tunkou is not surprising: Vietnam , just like Korea and Japan got their inspiration from China. And Mongols were there also, 13 century.

22nd October 2018, 07:44 PM	#3
TVV Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Bay Area Posts: 1,660	I do not see a tunkou/habaki on the wide bladed takouba. It is not unusual for takouba blades to be mounted with a sandwich construction to the hilt, especially older and re-used blades where the tang may have been compromised precluding being pinned. Per Iain's research, the wide bladed takoubas were status symbols, usually carried by Emir's bodyguards and all I personally see is extra decoration at the base of the blade, aimed at enhancing the prestige of the owner.

24th October 2018, 04:09 AM	#8
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	You can also look here: http://www.fightingarts.com/reading/article.php?id=183 Very good introduction: short and to the point ( pun intended).