Battle damage

[Timo Nieminen]

Lots of old weapons have damage to the edge - chips, nicks, rolls, etc. Sometimes these are from use or misuse of the weapon as a tool, from children (including adult children) playing with it, and so on. But sometimes I see something that looks like real battle damage.

Here is one example: a kukri with a deep nick between kaudi/cho and hilt. If I put a piece of paper into the nick down to the bottom, it rests against my fingers when I hold the kukri. (Just for completeness, also a photo of the inscription on the spine; it's an armoury kukri, weight of 690g. It's also pretty dirty; I haven't cleaned it yet.)

[Timo Nieminen]

Another example: a Japanese military tsuba. Either shrapnel/shell fragment or it's been run over by a heavy vehicle. If shrapnel, it went through either the hilt or blade before hitting the tsuba.

Brass tsuba, 78mm by 67mm, 170g.

[VANDOO]

THIS SORT OF DAMMAGE IS PART OF THE WEAPONS HISTORY AND ADDS A DIMENSION OF ACTUAL USE FOR CONSIDERATION. IT MAKES US WONDER WHO WON AND WHO LOST OR IF THEY SURVIVED. THERE IS NO REASON FOR ANYONE TO FAKE THESE TYPES OF DAMMAGE AS IT REDUCES THE VALUE RATHER THAN INCREASES IT.
I LIKE IT IN MOST CASES IF IT HAS NOT DESTROYED THE ITEM. ON THE OTHER HAND SEEING AN ITEM THAT IS DAMMAGED USING A GRINDER OR TRYING TO HACK A GUN BARREL IN HALF IS PART OF ITS HISTORY BUT ONLY MAKES ME SAD.

[spiral]

That's some serious hit Timo!

I have no idea how damage on any individual piece was caused, but here's something I put on IKRHS after a similar discussion. {Relevant Photo was added by administrator.}

spiral

[Ian]

This thread reminds me of one on the old UBB forum concerning edged weapons struck by bullets. There was a very interesting discussion of Moro weapons struck in this way: http://www.vikingsword.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/000872.html

[Sancar]

I know almost nothing about Nepalese history, though this quote reminded me of a Japanese historian acquaintance of mine, who once told me that "other than some duel or two, and some minor local skirmishes, Tokugawa shogunate samurai katanas are used mostly to cut down armless poor peasents for even tiniest hints of perceived insolance."

Originally Posted by spiral

That's some serious hit Timo!

I have no idea how damage on any individual piece was caused, but here's something I put on IKRHS after a similar discussion. {Relevant Photo was added by administrator.}

spiral

[spiral]

Originally Posted by Sancar

I know almost nothing about Nepalese history, though this quote reminded me of a Japanese historian acquaintance of mine, who once told me that "other than some duel or two, and some minor local skirmishes, Tokugawa shogunate samurai katanas are used mostly to cut down armless poor peasents for even tiniest hints of perceived insolance."

I believe that's correct, its not realy my subject , but I have the impression the koto era swords were the battle pieces, after 1600 it was as you say & the swords developed a more showy blade construction often more for looks rather than the koto looks of the hada & hamon mostly being more a side effect of the construction for strength using the limited materials available that came about.

Of course some ww2 era Gunto pieces like the koa isshin etc. went back to placing strength before beauty.

I believe he post ww2 pieces have degraded {IMHO}more often than not to placing beauty before function.

spiral

[Roland_M]

Originally Posted by Sancar

Tokugawa shogunate samurai katanas are used mostly to cut down armless poor peasents for even tiniest hints of perceived insolance."

Yes, Samurai had the right to do this. But in reality it was an exceptional case if this happened. First, Samurai were also just human beings and secondly, a katana is much too valuable to risk its sharpness in the body of a peasant.
In the Edo-Period Samurai katana were used mostly for duels and wakizashi for seppuku.
It is similar to a european knight, a proud knight only fight against another knight.

Roland