Flissa.
Yataghan, circa 1800, 33 inches overall length. HRC32.
The sword is quite long, with a straight single-edged blade that is about 36–39 inches in length. The sword does not have any form of crossguard, is frequently octagonal in shape, and has a small rear projection to secure the hand. Although the blade is straight, the edge undulates slightly, and ends in a very long point. The point is so long that it almost forbids the use of this sword for cutting and it appears that this sword is much more suited to thrusting. Whether it was actually used in this fashion I can't say. I've only handled two of them, and both were originals and I was unable to actually play and cut with them. But from this brief association I left with the opinion that the sword was ill balanced for thrusting, and not very efficient as a cutting weapon, with a great likelihood of usage bending the point. I would also advise the reader that I could be mistaken in this, and that it is an opinion formed by only a brief association.
The time span of this sword in North Africa is simply not known. There is no mention of it until quite late, sometime in the 19th century. It is obvious that the sword was in use before this, but there are no other references that I have been able to find.
Nimcha.
Another sword, the nimcha, is believed to be of Arabic origin, but was very popular in North Africa. This sword is best described by the hilt rather than the blade. The hilt is wood, with a rear projection that is large and offers firm support for the hand. The guard is composed of two forward projecting quillons, top and bottom of the blade, and another quillon that turns back into a knuckle bow. The blade is always single-edged, and usually slightly curved. However, I have seen these swords with straight blades. As is to be expected, many of these swords are made with European blades.
These swords appear to be quite effective whether used on horseback, camelback or afoot. Although not having a counterweight in the pommel, these swords are not quite as heavy as many European cavalry swords and the few I've handled gave a favorable impression.
THE KUKRI
The western world learned of the Gurkhas in the late 18th-early 19th century. Some fifty-odd years previous, the tiny state of Gorkha, located in the Kathmandu valley, had started on a war of conquest that eventually led to the formation of the nation of Nepal. The first king, Prithwi Narayan, was a fierce and brutal ruler, and his descendents were not much different.
Nepalese kukri, 16 inches overall length. HRC545.
Smaller tribes, towns and villages were assimilated, and inevitably that brought the Gurkhas in contact with the British East India Company. War was declared in 1814, and there were two years of bitter conflict before the British were able to enforce a peace on the warlike Gurkhas.
By this time the main battle sword of the Gurkhas had been replaced by firearms. Granted that those who could not afford them used spears and swords, but the majority used firearms, and with a telling effect. But they also carried another weapon that inspired fear in all who faced it: the kukri.
Basically a jungle work knife, the kukri also made a superb fighting weapon. The forward angled blade gave it great cutting power; in combat the edge could be used for thrusting merely by turning the wrist and allowing the blade to enter sideways. The single edge allowed the blade to be gripped and used as a drawknife and with the back of the blade being held rather than the grip, a surprising amount of fine work could be done with the knife. The Gurkhas, being inventive, also kept a very small knife, a file, and a bit of fire-starting punk on the sheath.
Of course the fighting ability of the Gurkhas was the main contributing factor to the awe in which the kukri was held. A fighting race, they have maintained their ability and reputation even today, as witness the wave of fear generated when they embarked for the Falkland Islands to battle Argentina. And they still carry the kukri. . . .
But where did the kukri come from, and why is it such an effective cutting instrument?
The origin of the forward-angled blade (for such is the technical term for the kukri) has been lost in dim recesses of prehistory. The first of these blades show up in Greece as early as 500 BC. Some are found in the Caucasus only slightly later, about 400 BC. The Iberian Celts were using them at least by 400 BC if not before.
The term most used for the forward-angled blade is "kopis," which is used to describe the Greek sword, and is derived from the Egyptian word "kopesh." It is not clear if this relationship is purely linguistic, or if there was a real relationship between the actual swords.
Kopesh.
Many describe the Egyptian kopesh as the original of these blades. However, this is one opinion that I totally disagree with, for several reasons. The term "kopesh" is used for several blades with different shapes, not just the forward-angled one. The most common shape for a kopesh is that of a sickle, with the blade sharpened on the inside edge. However, there are others where the edge is on the outside curve, and several where the sword is double-edged! One version is simply a wide-curved blade, handle offset, and sharpened on the belly of the curve. Most telling, though, is that the cutting action of all of these swords is completely different from the cutting action of the kukri-shaped blade. (We will examine that cutting action below.)
So, if not derived from the Egyptian curved swords, where does the kukri come from? Now this is pure conjecture, but here is one suggestion as to how this very effective shape was discovered. Once, while studying some bronze swords, I ran across a leaf-shaped blade that had been badly battered in use. One edge was heavily dented and broken, and the whole blade had been bent near the waist of the sword. The other edge, although not nearly as damaged, had definitely seen service. Consider a blade badly damaged on one edge, but the other still in good shape. The sword was turned in the hand, and suddenly it cuts even better! Perhaps this was how some undocumented warrior created this short, effective fighting knife.
We do have archeological evidence that the forward-angled blade, called variously the kopis, the falcata, and the machera, was used quite successfully in Europe for several hundred years between about 300 BC to about 200 AD. It is very probably the weapon that caused the reinforcement of the brow on the Roman helmet.
Reproduction falcata. HRC360.
Reproduction gladius. HRC198.
The Romans were impressed by the Iberian Celts, and quickly adopted one of their swords, a waisted short sword with a long point that was then known as the gladius Hispanicus. They did not adopt the falcata, as it was used in a fashion that was not suitable for the Roman soldier. The falcata was mainly a chopping weapon, although it could be used for thrusting. The shorter gladius was a stabbing weapon that could be used for cutting. This was much more in keeping with the Roman idea of tactics. However, it is believed that Scipio Africanus armed his cavalry with the falcata, and this weapon was used extensively by the Roman cavalry until replaced by the longer spatha around 200 AD.
Both the kopis and the falcata were much bigger than the average kukri. The kukri is basically a 10–13 inch knife, while both of these are swords, with an average blade length of about 20–23 inches.
It is easy to assume that the kukri shape arrived in India via Alexander the Great, and his conquest, which stopped at the Indus River. While this is a reasonable conjecture, it may not be the case at all. There is no evidence to support a direct Greek influence, and it had been used in Western Europe many hundreds of years before the shape shows up in India.
Information on early Indian swords is not readily available, but there are rock carvings, drawings, paintings, writings, and a very few archeological finds. None of these show a forward-angled blade until about 400 AD. After this period they appear quite frequently, and indeed, seem to actually proliferate, driving out many of the older, straight-bladed swords that were previously used. We do know that there was a lot of contact between Rome and the Deccan area of India, and it seems logical that the Romans introduced it there.
Once introduced to the subcontinent, the Indians adopted it as their own, and did so with
a great deal of imagination. The forward-angled shape was tried for so many swords that we don't have room to show all of them. Indeed, many of them were not practical fighting tools, but they sure did look mean.
The forward-angled blade made its way throughout India as one warlike tribe after another adopted the shape, and through conquest spread it farther and farther afield. We do not know the early history of Nepal, nor do we know the weapons they used. Early art plus a few archeological finds indicate that they used the leaf-shaped short sword a great deal, plus the Chinese straight sword. There is no evidence that the Nepalese used the curved sword. Sometime well after the 10th century AD, the forward-angled blade appears. The primary weapon of the early Gurkhas and the other warlike tribes in the area was the kora. This was a sword, length ranging from 18 to 28 inches, with the blade sharpened on the inside edge. The tip curved forward and flared out and down. Although completely useless for a thrust, the power in the cut was awesome! However, technology invaded and the firearm assumed the place of principal weapon. The kukri, which had many uses, was kept as the kora was discarded.
Kora.
The kukri has since become the national weapon of Nepal, and particularly the Gurkhas. But the Indians were the first to use the kukri and in the Royal Nepali Museum, almost all of the old kukris are of Indian workmanship. Actually there are very few old kukris in the museum, and the oldest only dates to about 1750 AD. It is identical to the kukri shown in the photo here which, judging from the design and manufacture, I feel dates from about 1750–1800 AD.
Nepalese kukri, 18.5 inches overall length. HRC42.
One of the more interesting, and amusing, aspects of the kukri is the notch at the base of the blade. It's amusing, because even the Gurkhas don't know for sure its exact meaning. The notch is of two cut out semicircles side by side, leaving a small projection. It has been described as intended to catch the opponent's blade (a sure way to lose a hand should it be attempted), a symbol of the female sex organ designed to give the blade power, a representation of a cow's udder (Gorkha—old spelling—means "Protector of Cows"), or the Trident of Shiva the Destroyer. No one really knows, so feel free to choose whichever you like. I know which I prefer.
But what makes this blade so effective?
All chopping weapons have an optimal striking point, the area where the greatest force is generated with the least amount of vibration. The sweet spot on a kukri is extremely large, in fact just about the entire blade is the sweet spot. The same depth of cut will result if the blade hits close to the front of the knife or close to the back. Only at the extreme front is there a noticeable difference. The forward-angled blade helps dampen the vibration, so that there is no energy lost in the blow, but it also arrives quicker, so that you get the effect of "cutting through" without much effort. With a wrist snap just as the blade hits, much more force can be generated than most realize, enough to lop off the limb of a small tree or a small man.
All warriors and soldiers need to be familiar with their weapons before they are effective with them. The same is true with the kukri. In the mountains of Nepal, the Gurkha grows up using the kukri, and he also grows up with a warrior tradition. His weapon becomes part of himself.
The old kukris were handmade. There were several styles that were popular. The Limbu tribe favored the Sirupate kukri that has a blade somewhat long in relation to its width. The Rais prefer the Bhujpore style, which has a wider blade, while the Gurungs, Thapas and Magars prefer what could be called the standard kukri.
But no two old kukris are alike. (The only kukris that are identical are those issued by the various countries that employ Gurkhas: Great Britain, India and Nepal.) Original kukris are as individual as the kami (the village kukri maker/blacksmith) who made them, and many of them are works of art. The knives were frequently given as gifts to officers and high-ranking people who happen to please one of the ruling classes of Gurkhas. These can be very elaborate, with ivory or silver grips and mounts, and beautiful, highly polished blades.
One of the more interesting tales about the kukri is the trouble the British ran into once they had established a presence, and then a railroad in Nepal. All too frequently the track was stolen. The English couldn't figure why, until it was realized that this is an excellent source of steel, and the kami did not have to worry about purifying the iron.
The history of the kukri is very long, and in this chapter I could only cover the basics. I wish it were only possible to go back in time and see its development. Since this is not possible, I will have to be content with speculation. I've been playing with the kukri for over fifty years, and I still am fascinated with it. And it's still my knife of choice on a lengthy trip in the wilds.
Suggestions for further reading from the editors:
Burton, Richard F., The Book of the Sword, originally published 1884, reprinted by Dover Publications, New York, 1987. For his discussion of the kopesh.
Farwell, Byron, The Gurkhas, W.W. Norton & Co., New York, 1984. A good popular history of the Gurkhas.
Haider, Syed Zafar, Islamic Arms and Armour of Muslim India. Bahadur Publishers, Lahore, 1991.
Rawson, P.S., The Indian Sword, Arco Publishing Company, New York, 1968.
Reid, William, A History of Arms, Barnes & Noble Books, New York, 1997, first published in Sweden 1976.
13: Basics of Cutting
The cutting power and the mystique of swords has been a much misunderstood subject for quite some time. The desire of the warrior, from whatever culture, for a sword that will not break, bend, nick, or get dull and that will cut steel, is easily understandable. Alas, such a blade only exists in myth and legend. Charlemagne had Joyuese, Roland had Durandel, there was the Viking sword Tyrfing, that could do all of the above, and the sword Quernbiter, that cut a millstone in half with one blow.
I confess that I would also like such a blade. But steel is still steel, and is subject to the same strains and stresses of any other piece of metal. Some of the strains can be lessened by the addition of various trace elements, but they all have limits. Some will be better than others, but none will be magic.
It should be noted that knowing how to cut with a sword does not mean you know how to fight with one. Knowing how to fight with one does not mean you know how to cut. Cutting with the sword is not nearly as easy as it looks. But it certainly isn't as hard as many would have you think. We live in a world of Hype. Everything is made out to be much greater than it is, much harder than it is, more important than it is. In short, just about everything in this society is hyped a great deal. I can't change that, but what I can do is give you the facts about cutting with the sword.
Although cutting with a sword, and doing it well, requires some basic skills, the main part of any cutting is the sword itself, and the working part of the sword is the edge. The basic geometry of the blade is also important, as curved blades have different cutting potential than straight blades.
I don't wish to be particularly bloody, but it should be noted that the purpose of the sword was to cut flesh and bone. Now, most people are rather reluctant to be cut, so they immediately started to try to protect themselves with armor. Thus was begun an arms race, as sword makers tried to make swords that would cut through the armor, while people continued to be stubborn and made thicker and better armor.
The edge of a sword must have support, and it must also have mass to give force to the blow. This mass is achieved by the width or the thickness of the sword blade. A thin, flat sword blade will cut quite well, but there are other things that have to be taken into consideration.
Anyone can swing a sword, and anything struck with a sharp edge is going to be damaged. How much damage depends on the sharpness of the steel, the mass of the sword, the speed and precision of the blow, and the ability of the man swinging the sword.
Let me switch over to something that is much closer to swinging a sword than you might think: carpentry. No, I'm not talking of building a house, but of driving a nail. I have known and seen
carpenters who could set a nail with one tap, and then drive it home with two more. That was something that I couldn't do. I was able a few times to drive it home in three, but not often.[1]
Now these carpenters were not big brutes. Most were not as big as I am, or was at the time. Nor were they stronger—but they knew how to hit. The force of the blow was concentrated to gain maximum force on the head of the nail. This concentration of force can also be done with the sword.
How well can a sword cut? How do you practice? Is it necessary?
I will attempt to answer all of these questions in this chapter.
HOW DIFFERENT SWORDS CUT
Curved swords, particularly those with deep curves, are very effective in the drawcut. The drawcut is essentially a slice, with the blade being drawn across the material. This will produce a long and deep cut in flesh, but is not very effective against many forms of armor.
Swords with more shallow curves, such as the katana, are still quite effective in the drawcut, but are also effective in a slash or chop. One of the most effective cutting strokes with the katana is the hard cut with a slight drawing motion. This is the motion generally used in cutting through people as well as tatami mats.
Straight swords can be quite effective in slashing and hacking cuts. They do not do drawcuts very well. However, they do have the added advantage of being capable of effective stabbing or thrusting.
The rapier is primarily a thrusting weapon. Although there were attempts to make the point and the cut equally effective, none worked very well. When attempts were made to increase the cutting power, either the point or the weight was changed, which also changed the characteristics of the sword.
Hank Reinhardt's The Book of the Sword Page 19
