Fencing with Sabers

[Zifir]

This is a short part from William Elton, esq., A Survey of the Turkish Empire, London, Printed for T. Cadell, jun. and W. Davies, 1799. on Turkish sabers. It might be for some interest.

The art of tempering their sabers is now lost, and all the blades of great value are ancient; however, their saber is superior to any of ours in its form and lightness. It is a great error in all the cavalry in Europe to have heavy sabers; I have often heard old German soldiers complain of it, and an old soldier is a good judge. It seems preposterous indeed to make all the sabers in a regiment of equal weight, without regard to the strength of the arm to use it; besides, a sharp light saber will make a deeper cut than our heavy sabers now in use. Among the Turks, every soldier chooses his own saber, and takes such a one as he cam manage with ease; thus, if he misses his stroke he can recover his guard, whilst a man with heavy saber is lost. The part grasped by the fingers in European sabers is much too thick, and weakens the hold. Much is talked in Europe of the balance of a saber by making it heavy in hand (The fulcrum is the fore-finger, and the back part of the hand presses down the pommel; but a man in battle does not keep his hand at one height; he lifts up his arm, and consequently has the weight of the handle of his saber to lift up, and the power is in the elbow and shoulder, not in the wrist alone. It cannot be expected that men in action, particularly new troops, will use their sabers in the same manner they do on field days.) ; this cannot be the case in any degree, except the knob or pommel project out of the hand towards the elbow, which will enable him raise up the point quick by the force of the wrist, after he has given a blow; but the weight of the fall of the blow is diminished in both cases. Let any man strike a blow with a saber heavy in the hand, and then take out the blade, and put on it a light small handle, and strike another blow with it, and he will find the difference. Let him strike with each fifty blows as quick as he can, and observe the difference in time, and the fatigue, and he will be convinced. The sharpness of the edge of the Turkish saber, and the velocity which the arm gives to a light weapon, compensates for the weight of the saber. All their attention has been paid to the saber for ages, with it they conquered their empire, and it certainly deserves some attention for cavalry. The edge of our sabers is never sharp enough, and the angle of the edge is too acute. In regard to its crookedness it has advantage, as a blow straight down gives a drawing cut; and it is a good defense, for the arm being held out horizontally with the saber upright in the hand, a small motion of the wrist turning the edge to the right or left, covers the body by the crook of the saber; the shoulder of the edge, not the edge itself, forms the parry. Fencing with crooked saber was formerly taught to the janissaries. The push with the saber only is preferred for cavalry, the lighter and longer the saber is better, and the nearer it is to a spear or lance. The blow upwards is esteemed the most dangerous by the Turks, as it is the most difficult to parry.

[Chris Evans]

Hi Zifir,

Many thanks for that most informative post. I wonder what was the weight of those Turkish sabres. Were they ever used with a shield, or always alone?

Cheers
Chris

[ariel]

Zifir,
Great quote!
I just wonder whether the author referred to Turkish kilijes that are highly esteemed by Mr. Z., to modestly curved sabers ( same) or to highly curved shamshirs. The statement that " ... the nearer it is to spear or lance...the better" is enigmatic: are we talking about length ( cavalry estoc?) or to limited curvature? I have never seen a saber that would be as long as a spear
Also, the author says that "the push with saber only is preferred for cavalry" which supports the idea that it was a primarily " one slash" cavalry weapon rather than an instrument suitable for swordplay.
Not so?

[Zifir]

For the weight of sabers I am not very knowledgeable. As far as I understood there was no standard weight, everyone chose a sabre suitable to its strenght.

The statement about " ... the nearer it is to spear or lance...the better" is also puzzling to me. What does he mean by it is not clear. Same is valid for "crooked". What does it exactly mean in English, I am not sure if the author meant a highly curved kilij or a modestly one.

Here is some more quotes from the same book:

Their best Turkish sabers have one great defect, brittleness; they are apt to fly like glass by a blow given injudiciously, though a person used to cut with them will, without any danger of breaking saber or turning its edge, cut through an iron nail as thick as a man’s finger.

As soldiers, even the best taught to use crooked sabers, are not always so calm in action as to make the best use of it, a blade tempered in the manner of the best blades in Europe is preferable, provided the edge be perfectly sharp, and the angle of it not too acute; and as to the crooked form, it also requires coolness and knowledge to use it, for if the part which bends most forward and the point do not descend in a straight line (i.e. if the edge and the back do not descend in the same line) the point will turn the saber sideways by its weight, as soon as the crooked part strikes, and prevent its cutting; for this reason a straighter blade, in an ignorant or timid hand, is preferable; but a light blade and thin hilt is absolutely necessary for the safety of the soldier. It may be remembered that the Romans, with their short swords, had a great advantage over the Gauls, whose long heavy swords soon tired them. A Turk, with his light short saber proportioned to his strength (for they are not long taking the chord of the segment) will not tire so soon as an European with his long heavy saber. I speak of cavalry, for the saber, after the invention of bayonet, is a bad weapon for infantry.

[Yustas]

Thank's Zifir,
Can i find this book on the web?

[Emanuel]

Wasn't the kilij also used by infantry among the Ottoman/Turkish troups? This would inply a far more complex system of sword-play than simply slashing from horse-back.

Zifir, this quote
"Their best Turkish sabers have one great defect, brittleness; they are apt to fly like glass by a blow given injudiciously, though a person used to cut with them will, without any danger of breaking saber or turning its edge, cut through an iron nail as thick as a man’s finger."
relates well to the True Combat Value of Wootz thread...I assume a perfect draw cut would be needed to cut through the nail rather than a simple edge-on hack as that would shatter the blade?
What I mean is, would the cut nail be a result of a drawing motion or simply due to the impact of the edge?

Emanuel

[Chris Evans]

Hi Zifir,

Again many thanks for your extremely informative quotes from that book.

I believe that this material is highly relevant to another concurrent thread, "True Combat Value of Wootz", and I think that you or the moderators should cross-post it there as well.

Cheers
Chris

[Zifir]

Originally Posted by Yustas

Thank's Zifir,
Can i find this book on the web?

Unfortunately, no. These are the notes that I took when I read that book long time ago. Until I saw this topic, I had completely forgotten about them. I think only places to find it are libraries or some rare book dealers if they have any copy.

Originally Posted by Manolo

Wasn't the kilij also used by infantry among the Ottoman/Turkish troups? This would inply a far more complex system of sword-play than simply slashing from horse-back.

I believe so. We have to be careful not to subscribe to the views of the European traveller/spy? accounts too readily. This guy was writing in a time when the superiority of Western military over Ottomans was already proven. His approach and views inescapably carry that self-confidence and also negligence over what he regarded as backward. But as long as we don't have a manuscript or a manual about such techniques, we can only speculate about it.

Originally Posted by Manolo

Zifir, this quote
"Their best Turkish sabers have one great defect, brittleness; they are apt to fly like glass by a blow given injudiciously, though a person used to cut with them will, without any danger of breaking saber or turning its edge, cut through an iron nail as thick as a man’s finger."
relates well to the True Combat Value of Wootz thread...I assume a perfect draw cut would be needed to cut through the nail rather than a simple edge-on hack as that would shatter the blade?
What I mean is, would the cut nail be a result of a drawing motion or simply due to the impact of the edge?
Emanuel

Originally Posted by Chris Evans

Hi Zifir,

Again many thanks for your extremely informative quotes from that book.

I believe that this material is highly relevant to another concurrent thread, "True Combat Value of Wootz", and I think that you or the moderators should cross-post it there as well.

Cheers
Chris

We cannot be completely sure but I think he refers to wootz blades. I don't know if cutting through an iron nail thick as a man's finger thing is true. We might need mythbusters to prove or disprove such a thing. Maybe there are some members who knows more about this, or came across such references.

[The Double D]

Originally Posted by Yustas

Thank's Zifir,
Can i find this book on the web?

If you need a book the first place to look is www.abebooks.com.

Here is the link to the hit list.A survey of The Turkish Empire by William Eton