The Evolution of the Mak??

CharlesS · 1st April 2008, 03:28 AM

The mak is one of the most unique weapons of southeast Asia. Its appearance is both curious and awkward, but apparently it held some sway as an effective weapon for quite a few centuries(see below the the two pics of a relief from Cambodia's 12th Cent. Angkor Wat with front two mounted figures clearly holding maks).

Like many weapons in the ethnographic fold, the mak almost certainly had its origins as an agricultural tool(not unlike the Egyptian kopesh, the Moro panabas, or the Malay parang jinah). The more primitive the appearance of the mak,the more tool-like they look.

The axe-like tool maks seem almost awkward to handle with a strange swing and balance. One forum member at Timonium even mentioned that it seemed they were made to chop things overhead in trees(see Mak 1).

From their more primitive form they emerged at some point as powerful weapons in a variety of forms, both as battle axes(see Mak 2), and as pole arms(see Mak 3...just over 6ft. in total length).

The backward curve is curious and seems to put a lot of pressure on the wrist unless swinging from a height, as in mounted on a horse. Another advantage of this strange curvature may have been to "catch" an enemy's weapon.

The unique protrusions to the top of the blade are a mystery. Perhaps they were ornamental, or served a more practical purpose.

Regardless of their awkward appearance and some difficulty in handling, the mak made enough of an impact as a weapon to remain in service for centuries.

Suggested reading: Ian Heath's Armies of the 19th Century ASIA: Burma and Indo-China (2003)

*Angkor Wat relief photos courtesy of Mark Boditch's The Dha Research Archive

DhaDha · 1st April 2008, 10:33 PM

Nice pieces! Really like #2. Which side of the blade is the cutting edge on?
Shawn

CharlesS · 1st April 2008, 11:17 PM

The cutting edge of a mak is almost always on the backcurve of the blade, not the forward curve, so in the last pics the edge is always to the right.

Mark · 2nd April 2008, 02:40 PM

Something that occurred to me that might explain the curve is that it provides for a more stable attachment of the blade to the haft. The intent with these clearly is to have a blade in line with the haft, like a sword, rather than at some angle, like an ax. Setting the blade into the end of the haft would require a stable/strong wrapping, and would tend more to split the haft down its length. In contrast, setting the blade perpendicular to the long axis of the haft would reduce splitting (though I expect blow-out of the part toward the end of the pole would happen) and can be done with simple wedges. Bending the end of the pole then puts the blade in line with the haft.

CharlesS · 2nd April 2008, 04:47 PM

Mark, I understand your point, and have even thought about that myself, but in examples #1 and #3 the blade is so far removed from the line of the haft it would still require "extra" movement. The extra/awkward movement diminishes considerably when striking from a height, ie. a horse. Then the swing is consistent with a more "flowing swing", say like with a shamshir.

PUFF · 3rd April 2008, 01:59 AM

Such design, with CG behind the pole, would stabilize the edge orientation during swing. Unlike sword, this tool do not require wrist work to adjust edge orientation. You can just make a wide swing (with relax grip). And the tool will meet its target, edge first.

1st April 2008, 03:28 AM	#1
CharlesS Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Greenville, NC Posts: 1,855	The Evolution of the Mak?? The mak is one of the most unique weapons of southeast Asia. Its appearance is both curious and awkward, but apparently it held some sway as an effective weapon for quite a few centuries(see below the the two pics of a relief from Cambodia's 12th Cent. Angkor Wat with front two mounted figures clearly holding maks). Like many weapons in the ethnographic fold, the *mak* almost certainly had its origins as an agricultural tool(not unlike the Egyptian kopesh, the Moro panabas, or the Malay parang jinah). The more primitive the appearance of the *mak,the more tool-like they look. The axe-like tool maks* seem almost awkward to handle with a strange swing and balance. One forum member at Timonium even mentioned that it seemed they were made to chop things overhead in trees(see Mak 1). From their more primitive form they emerged at some point as powerful weapons in a variety of forms, both as battle axes(see Mak 2), and as pole arms(see Mak 3...just over 6ft. in total length). The backward curve is curious and seems to put a lot of pressure on the wrist unless swinging from a height, as in mounted on a horse. Another advantage of this strange curvature may have been to "catch" an enemy's weapon. The unique protrusions to the top of the blade are a mystery. Perhaps they were ornamental, or served a more practical purpose. Regardless of their awkward appearance and some difficulty in handling, the *mak* made enough of an impact as a weapon to remain in service for centuries. Suggested reading: Ian Heath's Armies of the 19th Century ASIA: Burma and Indo-China (2003) Angkor Wat relief photos courtesy of Mark Boditch's The Dha Research Archive* Attached Images Last edited by CharlesS; 1st April 2008 at 03:42 AM.

1st April 2008, 10:33 PM	#2
DhaDha Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 164	Nice pieces! Really like #2. Which side of the blade is the cutting edge on? Shawn

1st April 2008, 11:17 PM	#3
CharlesS Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Greenville, NC Posts: 1,855	The cutting edge of a mak is almost always on the backcurve of the blade, not the forward curve, so in the last pics the edge is always to the right.

2nd April 2008, 02:40 PM	#4
Mark Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 987	Something that occurred to me that might explain the curve is that it provides for a more stable attachment of the blade to the haft. The intent with these clearly is to have a blade in line with the haft, like a sword, rather than at some angle, like an ax. Setting the blade into the end of the haft would require a stable/strong wrapping, and would tend more to split the haft down its length. In contrast, setting the blade perpendicular to the long axis of the haft would reduce splitting (though I expect blow-out of the part toward the end of the pole would happen) and can be done with simple wedges. Bending the end of the pole then puts the blade in line with the haft.

2nd April 2008, 04:47 PM	#5
CharlesS Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Greenville, NC Posts: 1,855	Mark, I understand your point, and have even thought about that myself, but in examples #1 and #3 the blade is so far removed from the line of the haft it would still require "extra" movement. The extra/awkward movement diminishes considerably when striking from a height, ie. a horse. Then the swing is consistent with a more "flowing swing", say like with a shamshir.

3rd April 2008, 01:59 AM	#6
PUFF Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: 30 miles north of Bangkok, 20 miles south of Ayuthaya, Thailand Posts: 224	Such design, with CG behind the pole, would stabilize the edge orientation during swing. Unlike sword, this tool do not require wrist work to adjust edge orientation. You can just make a wide swing (with relax grip). And the tool will meet its target, edge first.