Flyssa - I finally got one!!

Emanuel · 13th August 2007, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Another interesting thing regarding 19th century Algeria and the young men returning from gaining thier fortunes, notes that they would then get a sword either yataghan or flyssa, but the Ottoman yataghan was more highly esteemed. This seems interesting since many earlier discussions refuted the idea that the yataghan could have had influence on the development of the flyssa since Ottomans never conquered the Kabyles.

Hi Jim!

I recall arguing that point a good bit

and the mention of young Kabyles buying yataghans seems to throw a wrench in it. From all I could find, Kabylia never fell under Ottoman rule and yeniceri troops did not occupy the region. Now you and others did argue that this would not be an obstacle to direct trade, and the above mention seems to confirm this point. So Kabyles definitely had access to yataghans...now I question whether this means that the flyssa necessarily developed from the yataghan. Why would Kabyles produce a new weapon form if they had ready access to a more desirable one?
Kronckew made a point that I had been thinking about, namely the use of camels. The pommel of the flyssa itself looks like a camel head to me. But then I wonder whether camels were actually used along the coast, where the Ifflissen were located. Furthermore, Kabylia is a mountainous region.

Tatyana, the curved flyssa you showed has been discussed here before. Some may remember my panicked rants in the "curved flyssa in the St-Petersburg museum" thread

Lew, there is a flyssa on Oriental-Arms with a laminated blade (http://www.oriental-arms.com/item.php?id=2694) an interesting development which leads me to wonder how rare or common this is. Maybe we should start etching our flyssa's.

Jim, my belief that the flyssa developed independently of the yataghan is slowly falling appart. Here is a yataghan with decorations incredibly similar to those on flyssa's - http://www.oriental-arms.com/item.php?id=2703 identified as East European.

I'll keep playing the Devil's advocate as long as I can, and I will certainly continue the research.

All the best,
Emanuel

Jim McDougall · 14th August 2007, 05:17 AM

Hi Emanuel,
Thank you so much for responding!!! It is great that you take such interest in research and discussion on these, and you have shown a great deal of perspective and compelling observations. I do recall your comments in discussions noting that Ottomans never took power in Kabylia, but it seems that such powerful influence would eventually infuse into the culture as has been noted. It seems that locally produced interpretations of the weapons of the Ottomans would in many cases not reach the status of the original examples, in using an extreme analogy for example, comparing a Corvette to a Ferrari (please guys, while there are certain basic elements that may suggest similarity....there is a key separation...$$$, and I love Corvettes anyway!!!...cant even afford one of those though).
The only puzzle here with the favor of the Ottoman yataghan over the flyssa would be, if the talismanic and symbolically charged decoration of the locally produced flyssa was so important, then why would the weapons of thier 'enemy' without such key symbolism be so sought after?

I too have considered the zoomorphic mystery of what in the world creature must be represented on the pommel of the flyssa, and as you have noted, the camel seems plausible. But then again, why camels when these do not seem likely in such mountainous regions? The flyssa is suggested to be a cavalry weapon, but how could cavalry be effective in mountainous areas of the Atlas which was home to the Iflissen. In previous efforts to discuss the actual manner of use for the flyssa, no translated narratives have ever appeared with descriptions revealing such information. If it was indeed used as seems most likely, for the thrust, why no guard to prevent slipping of the hand. If it was a slashing weapon, it seems awkward and ill balanced, at least in my own martially limited opinion.

If these questions have been specifically addressed by anyone over many years of discussions, I apologize for not having found such comments in the archives and would be grateful for correction.

Emanuel I really appreciate your willingness to discuss the flyssa further, and these comparisons of information available and answers to these many puzzling questions, we sort of all have to be devils advocates

Lets keep looking!!

All the best,
Jim

Emanuel · 14th August 2007, 10:56 PM

Hi Jim,

Desjardins offers too accounts from French officers regarding the use of the flyssa. I translated that particular passage...

“The majority of Kabyles were foot-soldiers (infantry). The rich men, Cheikhs and Maraboots, however, were mounted in battle. Berthelon describes an interesting maneuvre using the two types of troops. 'The cavalrymen take on horseback the foot-soldiers and drop them off at a chosen point. The foot-soldiers hide while the horsemen ride away in a simulated flight, drawing the attention of the enemy in an ambush by the foot-soldiers.' For such an ambush, the flyssa seems well suited. In this case, its thrust must be particularly fearsome. In the opinion of Colonel Lapene, 'This weapon is dangerous in estoc...The Kabyles rarely use it to slash unless it is for beheading. In that case they apply the in-curving part of the blade and pull strongly backwards in a drawcut.'” (Desjardins, 134)

Desjardins is reserved about the last bit, arguing that such a maneuvre is too complex and time-consuming to execute in battle. She concludes that the flyssa was used by foot-soldiers equally well against infrantry and cavalry. In the case of the latter point, a footnote relates an account in which foot-soldiers used the flyssa to attack the horses and take them out of combat. I can picture such an action but I would also consider a half-swording maneuvre. The flyssa-wielder could grasp the spine of the blade for support and swipe at the legs of the horses...pure speculation of course.

I do not understand why thrusting swords must necessarily have guards. Spears do not have guards and they are the ultimate thrusting weapon. If the weapon is furthermore used against unarmoured soft targets, I don't think there would be any slippage. The flare at the base of the flyssa blade could conceivably hold the hand on the grip well enough. Someone should sharpen their flyssa and thrust through a quarter of beef or porc, and report the result.

Now if the flyssa is a predominantly thrusting weapon, why have the recurved edge? The ogive is perfect for hacking and slashing, and it seems like too much of a bother if its purpose was merely for cutting heads. Now the seconf flyssa posted by Tatyana has practically no recurve...I therefore think that the accounts given by this officer or that generalize too much. One may have seen a kabyle using a straight variety, while another might have seen one with a curved piece. Their conclusions would thus be conflicting.

I'm sure that the grunts of the French troops knew quite well how Kabyles faught...too bad the low ranks never get their stories published.

If Kabyles were essentially Guerilla fighters ambushing their opponents, perhaps the use of cavalry (horse or camel) was not needed. I ran accross some paintings and prints of the various French battles against the Kabyles and Algerians, and although they showed infantry troops bearing flyssa's I haven't seen any mounted ones. I'll keep looking and I will try to scan the good bits.

Best regards,
Emanuel

Emanuel · 14th August 2007, 11:38 PM

I agree with Krockew about the weight and musculature. As an example I have this large, heavy tulwar with a thick blade. I found it very heavy when I got it some months ago, but since then I have been rootinely doing drills with it. It now feels much more wieldy in hand and I imagine that doing gatka for a couple of years would make it feel light as a feather.

Jim McDougall · 15th August 2007, 08:32 PM

Hi Emanuel,
Thank you so much for your well thought out responses and specifically answered observations to the questions I had posted.
I would also like to thank you for sharing the information and translated passage from the very important Desjardins work. That data gives us some provenanced detail on the manner of use of these swords as well as the combat strategy used, which does seem as if guerrilla style warfare was most likely for these warriors.
You have made some very valid points in speculating on the use of these swords and as you have indicated, possibly the guard was not essential if these were used as you suggested. Naturally more contemporary narratives would be helpful in evaluating probable manners of use, and I completely agree, the letters or comments of the front line troops would be the final word. Unfortunately, the stories these men carried were seldom ever published and did not survive for posterity, at least as far as we know at this point.

I very much appreciate the way you engage in discussion on various weapons and for your contributions in sharing translationed material from the Desjardines reference. We all benefit from such sharing of material as well as well placed observations suggesting plausible answers to questions concerning these weapons. Over the years many members have also presented perspective on known material in varying degree and made similar suggestions, and your compiling these threads on the other thread on these discussions really helps in comprehensive evaluation as we consider the status of research to date.

It is great to see such constructive discussion inspired by such efforts, as can be seen by the keen participation with contributions from Lew, Tatyana, Jeff , Kronckew and Teodor.

I know that I sense a much better perspective on the flyssa at this point and again, thanks very much everybody!!!

All very best regards,
Jim

Emanuel · 15th August 2007, 08:51 PM

Always a pleasure Jim!
I'll keep the translations coming whenever I get the time.
And besides, the flyssa is my obsession

Cheers,
Emanuel

kronckew · 19th August 2007, 06:52 AM

just found this web page while looking for something else. in french, but nice illustrations!

Linky

note: for those of us, like me, who are not conversant with the french language, running the page thru the bablefish web page translator at this Linky is most enlightening. info on construction, patterning and tribal connections as well as derevation of the name and connections to yataghans.....

The Flissa term was given by French by deformation of Iflissen. Kabyles, as for them, seem to have used Sekkim or Iskin (knife), and, according to Carette (Study on Kabylie), the Arab term Khedama.

Jim McDougall · 23rd August 2007, 05:06 AM

Emanuel, your obsession is our very good fortune! please keep up the good work! and Kronckew, thank you again for your attention to details and sharing the links. The notes on the applicable terms are most helpful.
Thanks very much guys

All best regards,
Jim

14th August 2007, 10:56 PM	#3
Emanuel Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 1,242	Hi Jim, Desjardins offers too accounts from French officers regarding the use of the flyssa. I translated that particular passage... “The majority of Kabyles were foot-soldiers (infantry). The rich men, Cheikhs and Maraboots, however, were mounted in battle. Berthelon describes an interesting maneuvre using the two types of troops. 'The cavalrymen take on horseback the foot-soldiers and drop them off at a chosen point. The foot-soldiers hide while the horsemen ride away in a simulated flight, drawing the attention of the enemy in an ambush by the foot-soldiers.' For such an ambush, the flyssa seems well suited. In this case, its thrust must be particularly fearsome. In the opinion of Colonel Lapene, 'This weapon is dangerous in estoc...The Kabyles rarely use it to slash unless it is for beheading. In that case they apply the in-curving part of the blade and pull strongly backwards in a drawcut.'” (Desjardins, 134) Desjardins is reserved about the last bit, arguing that such a maneuvre is too complex and time-consuming to execute in battle. She concludes that the flyssa was used by foot-soldiers equally well against infrantry and cavalry. In the case of the latter point, a footnote relates an account in which foot-soldiers used the flyssa to attack the horses and take them out of combat. I can picture such an action but I would also consider a half-swording maneuvre. The flyssa-wielder could grasp the spine of the blade for support and swipe at the legs of the horses...pure speculation of course. I do not understand why thrusting swords must necessarily have guards. Spears do not have guards and they are the ultimate thrusting weapon. If the weapon is furthermore used against unarmoured soft targets, I don't think there would be any slippage. The flare at the base of the flyssa blade could conceivably hold the hand on the grip well enough. Someone should sharpen their flyssa and thrust through a quarter of beef or porc, and report the result. Now if the flyssa is a predominantly thrusting weapon, why have the recurved edge? The ogive is perfect for hacking and slashing, and it seems like too much of a bother if its purpose was merely for cutting heads. Now the seconf flyssa posted by Tatyana has practically no recurve...I therefore think that the accounts given by this officer or that generalize too much. One may have seen a kabyle using a straight variety, while another might have seen one with a curved piece. Their conclusions would thus be conflicting. I'm sure that the grunts of the French troops knew quite well how Kabyles faught...too bad the low ranks never get their stories published. If Kabyles were essentially Guerilla fighters ambushing their opponents, perhaps the use of cavalry (horse or camel) was not needed. I ran accross some paintings and prints of the various French battles against the Kabyles and Algerians, and although they showed infantry troops bearing flyssa's I haven't seen any mounted ones. I'll keep looking and I will try to scan the good bits. Best regards, Emanuel Last edited by Manolo; 14th August 2007 at 11:34 PM.

19th August 2007, 06:52 AM	#7
kronckew Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Room 101, Glos. UK Posts: 4,239	just found this web page while looking for something else. in french, but nice illustrations! Linky note: for those of us, like me, who are not conversant with the french language, running the page thru the bablefish web page translator at this Linky is most enlightening. info on construction, patterning and tribal connections as well as derevation of the name and connections to yataghans..... The Flissa term was given by French by deformation of Iflissen. Kabyles, as for them, seem to have used Sekkim or Iskin (knife), and, according to Carette (Study on Kabylie), the Arab term Khedama. Last edited by kronckew; 19th August 2007 at 07:58 AM.

14th August 2007, 05:17 AM	#2
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,464	Hi Emanuel, Thank you so much for responding!!! It is great that you take such interest in research and discussion on these, and you have shown a great deal of perspective and compelling observations. I do recall your comments in discussions noting that Ottomans never took power in Kabylia, but it seems that such powerful influence would eventually infuse into the culture as has been noted. It seems that locally produced interpretations of the weapons of the Ottomans would in many cases not reach the status of the original examples, in using an extreme analogy for example, comparing a Corvette to a Ferrari (please guys, while there are certain basic elements that may suggest similarity....there is a key separation...$$$, and I love Corvettes anyway!!!...cant even afford one of those though). The only puzzle here with the favor of the Ottoman yataghan over the flyssa would be, if the talismanic and symbolically charged decoration of the locally produced flyssa was so important, then why would the weapons of thier 'enemy' without such key symbolism be so sought after? I too have considered the zoomorphic mystery of what in the world creature must be represented on the pommel of the flyssa, and as you have noted, the camel seems plausible. But then again, why camels when these do not seem likely in such mountainous regions? The flyssa is suggested to be a cavalry weapon, but how could cavalry be effective in mountainous areas of the Atlas which was home to the Iflissen. In previous efforts to discuss the actual manner of use for the flyssa, no translated narratives have ever appeared with descriptions revealing such information. If it was indeed used as seems most likely, for the thrust, why no guard to prevent slipping of the hand. If it was a slashing weapon, it seems awkward and ill balanced, at least in my own martially limited opinion. If these questions have been specifically addressed by anyone over many years of discussions, I apologize for not having found such comments in the archives and would be grateful for correction. Emanuel I really appreciate your willingness to discuss the flyssa further, and these comparisons of information available and answers to these many puzzling questions, we sort of all have to be devils advocates Lets keep looking!! All the best, Jim

14th August 2007, 11:38 PM	#4
Emanuel Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 1,242	I agree with Krockew about the weight and musculature. As an example I have this large, heavy tulwar with a thick blade. I found it very heavy when I got it some months ago, but since then I have been rootinely doing drills with it. It now feels much more wieldy in hand and I imagine that doing gatka for a couple of years would make it feel light as a feather.

15th August 2007, 08:32 PM	#5
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,464	Hi Emanuel, Thank you so much for your well thought out responses and specifically answered observations to the questions I had posted. I would also like to thank you for sharing the information and translated passage from the very important Desjardins work. That data gives us some provenanced detail on the manner of use of these swords as well as the combat strategy used, which does seem as if guerrilla style warfare was most likely for these warriors. You have made some very valid points in speculating on the use of these swords and as you have indicated, possibly the guard was not essential if these were used as you suggested. Naturally more contemporary narratives would be helpful in evaluating probable manners of use, and I completely agree, the letters or comments of the front line troops would be the final word. Unfortunately, the stories these men carried were seldom ever published and did not survive for posterity, at least as far as we know at this point. I very much appreciate the way you engage in discussion on various weapons and for your contributions in sharing translationed material from the Desjardines reference. We all benefit from such sharing of material as well as well placed observations suggesting plausible answers to questions concerning these weapons. Over the years many members have also presented perspective on known material in varying degree and made similar suggestions, and your compiling these threads on the other thread on these discussions really helps in comprehensive evaluation as we consider the status of research to date. It is great to see such constructive discussion inspired by such efforts, as can be seen by the keen participation with contributions from Lew, Tatyana, Jeff , Kronckew and Teodor. I know that I sense a much better perspective on the flyssa at this point and again, thanks very much everybody!!! All very best regards, Jim

15th August 2007, 08:51 PM	#6
Emanuel Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 1,242	Always a pleasure Jim! I'll keep the translations coming whenever I get the time. And besides, the flyssa is my obsession Cheers, Emanuel

23rd August 2007, 05:06 AM	#8
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,464	Emanuel, your obsession is our very good fortune! please keep up the good work! and Kronckew, thank you again for your attention to details and sharing the links. The notes on the applicable terms are most helpful. Thanks very much guys All best regards, Jim