Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Ethnographic Weapons
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 27th May 2020, 10:56 PM   #1
ariel
Member
 
ariel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kubur
There is no infantry as such in tribal zones
IMHO
Of course, there was:
Third Battle of Panipat , 1761: 32,000 Rohilla infantry
Second Anglo-Afghani War, 1878: 62 infantry, 16 cavalry regiments
ariel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th May 2020, 12:46 PM   #2
Kubur
Member
 
Kubur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 2,145
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ariel
Of course, there was:
Third Battle of Panipat , 1761: 32,000 Rohilla infantry
Second Anglo-Afghani War, 1878: 62 infantry, 16 cavalry regiments

Mmmm it depends if this word "infantry" was used by Europeans/British or in local sources...
Then the swords that you posted are not infantry swords, forgive my classic vision of an infantry but to me me the swords should be standardized like the late khyber knives for example.
So in fact it depends of your personal definition or opinion about infantry.

Kubur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th May 2020, 03:01 PM   #3
ariel
Member
 
ariel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
Default

Infantry: foot soldiers, organized in defined units. Like ( see above) “regiments”:-)

Question: if there were so many foot soldiers in the 18-19 century Afghan armies, why are Afghani “ cutlases” so rare?

Last edited by ariel; 28th May 2020 at 03:14 PM.
ariel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th May 2020, 07:41 PM   #4
Jim McDougall
Arms Historian
 
Jim McDougall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,193
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ariel
Infantry: foot soldiers, organized in defined units. Like ( see above) “regiments”:-)

Question: if there were so many foot soldiers in the 18-19 century Afghan armies, why are Afghani “ cutlases” so rare?
I'm curious about what qualifies as an 'Afghan cutlass'. If the reference to to quite heavy bladed and often relatively short blade length swords, in post #1 the 3rd and 4th swords (tulwar with khanda type stem and paluoar hilts respectively) these would seem to fit the bill.

It seems to me that foot soldiers were far more available than cavalry, which obviously required a horse, and like much of the arms etc. were at the expense of the individual so at a premium. Perhaps that is too simplistic a notion?

I guess it depends on which Afghan region or demographic, as I know parts of Afghanistan the horsemen are outstanding as well known from the sport of Buzkhashi (cf.polo).
Jim McDougall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th May 2020, 07:23 PM   #5
ariel
Member
 
ariel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kubur
.....swords should be standardized like the late khyber knives for example.


OK, how "standard" are these Khybers, all 19 century, except for two potentially earlier?
Attached Images
 
ariel is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.