|
Post by Sir Thorfinn on Sept 13, 2022 15:47:15 GMT
As it says. I find the form to be very similar. Other than the handles, there's a huge similarity. Thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by Eric Bergeron on Sept 13, 2022 17:02:18 GMT
Besides the obvious, one is a sword that traditionally was made in bronze & later iron and the other is a large knife. They both have recurve single edged blades. The Kopis usually had a 17"-20" blade while the Kukri usually was in the 10"-13" blade length. Kopis was used mostly by the Greeks and the Kukri by the Gorkha's. Although they look very similar there is no evidence that they are linked or copied from one another.
|
|
pgandy
Moderator
Senior Forumite
Posts: 10,296
|
Post by pgandy on Sept 14, 2022 13:58:01 GMT
I have no exact answer for you. As far as I know the kopis was designed as a weapon from the beginning and is thought of as such today. Kukris appear to be more diversified in their use. Today a kukri is considered a tool more than a weapon, but has been successfully used as both with its size expanding over a larger range than any kopis I know of. Mine cover 5” to 15” inclusive. The Brits make several references of 30” (blade or OAL unknown) in their Nepal War. Today they are shorter and used more for utility. Windlass makes a 30” model today with a ⅜” that is used in ceremonial sacrifices. Heck, I have one 13 mm thick. I think 18” or there about isn’t unusual for a villager to use to slaughter stock. But for butchering shorter blades are more common.
|
|
|
Post by AndiTheBarvarian on Sept 15, 2022 5:17:10 GMT
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/KopisAccording to this article the term Kopis was used for a knife we would call a Kukri, but also for bigger swords of this shape. Or as we Germanics say: A curved seax!
|
|
|
Post by Sir Thorfinn on Sept 15, 2022 13:06:30 GMT
I know, right? And there are shorter Kopis, and longer Kukuri...so there's some overlap. I just wonder if there's some cultural crossover. But my thought is probably just noticing a useful shape that developed seperately. We quibble over tiny differences in swords, and give each tiny difference new names. But the form and function of them are pretty similar IMHO. Or...I'm hallucinating
|
|
|
Post by AndiTheBarvarian on Sept 15, 2022 13:37:57 GMT
Different hilts.
|
|
pgandy
Moderator
Senior Forumite
Posts: 10,296
|
Post by pgandy on Sept 15, 2022 14:43:21 GMT
I’ve seen the question before but don’t remember seeing a definitive answer. I think that is something we will never know. My belief is that the two are not related, the designs are similar but were developed separately. The Greeks were sea faring people. Not to underestimate how sailors got around, they surely did. Nepal is land locked some distance inland. This not to say that a kukri didn’t filter down to an area that a Greek came in contact with giving them the idea or vice versa. I’m afraid we will never know the truth.
|
|
|
Post by Eric Bergeron on Sept 15, 2022 20:48:02 GMT
As far as I am aware the Kukri's earliest known example is 17th century according to Matt Easton, so my views on this is that they are very similar but not at all was one copied from the other as one was already lost to time by the time the other came into existence.
|
|
pgandy
Moderator
Senior Forumite
Posts: 10,296
|
Post by pgandy on Sept 15, 2022 21:08:36 GMT
From Wikipedia “its earliest recorded use in the 7th century” Note the word ‘recorded’. They could have been brought in by Alexander the Great as a kopis. I think what Easton was referring is the earliest known physical example. Suggest reading Wikipedia for more complete information. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kukri
|
|
|
Post by Eric Bergeron on Sept 16, 2022 1:45:27 GMT
Thanks Pgandy I will look more at the wiki article and see what that has to say.
|
|
|
Post by randomnobody on Sept 16, 2022 20:19:03 GMT
"Convergent evolution" happens in blades, too.
Ultimately, almost every culture to have bladed implements, have at some point had one with a forward-curving blade. Kopis, falcata, khukuri, yataghan, and others slipping my mind. They don't have to be related, they can just be similar.
|
|
|
Post by treeslicer on Sept 18, 2022 1:34:18 GMT
If the khukri came from the kopis, go dig up 2000 or so years of intermediate forms to show me. Show me ancient and medieval carvings of Hindu gods and kings waving them.
|
|
|
Post by pellius on Sept 18, 2022 10:51:59 GMT
I’m not an historian; not even close. I believe there are a few who are SBG members, though. Anyway, being a non-scholar, I occasionally stoop so low as to read Wikipedia. *shudders* “Researchers trace the origins of the blade back to the domestic sickle and the prehistoric bent stick used for hunting and later in hand-to-hand combat.[8] Similar implements have existed in several forms throughout the Indian subcontinent and were used both as weapons and as tools, such as for sacrificial rituals.[citation needed] It might have derived from the ancient Indian saber called nistrimsa (निस्त्रिंश), itself possibly based on the Greek kopis brought by Alexander the Great's forces to India in the 4th century BC.[9] Burton (1884) writes that the British Museum housed a large kukri-like falchion inscribed with writing in Pali.[10] Among the oldest existing kukri are those belonging to Drabya Shah (c. 1559), housed in the National Museum of Nepal in Kathmandu.” en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kukri9. Duncan Head (1982). Armies of the Macedonian and Punic Wars, 359 BC to 146 BC: Organisation, Tactics, Dress and Weapons. University of Michigan. p. 136. ISBN 9780904417265. Id. I don’t have access to the referenced work, but it at least has the outward appearance of legitimacy. In any event, it seems the geometric similarities between the kopis and the much later kukri have been noticed and considered by scholars, as has the, shall we say, cultural overlap sponsored by the Macedonians. I’m not taking a position regarding whether the former led to the latter. I don’t know. However, the idea does not seem outlandish or easily dismissed.
|
|
|
Post by Eric Bergeron on Sept 19, 2022 0:08:22 GMT
Funny enough I found this video on youtube talking about the Kukri and he has a section of the video that talks about possibly why the Kopis/Kukri look similar. Thought people might want to look at the video. Link to video
|
|
|
Post by treeslicer on Sept 19, 2022 4:09:14 GMT
I’m not an historian; not even close. I believe there are a few who are SBG members, though. Anyway, being a non-scholar, I occasionally stoop so low as to read Wikipedia. *shudders* “Researchers trace the origins of the blade back to the domestic sickle and the prehistoric bent stick used for hunting and later in hand-to-hand combat.[8] Similar implements have existed in several forms throughout the Indian subcontinent and were used both as weapons and as tools, such as for sacrificial rituals.[ citation needed] It might have derived from the ancient Indian saber called nistrimsa (निस्त्रिंश), itself possibly based on the Greek kopis brought by Alexander the Great's forces to India in the 4th century BC.[9] Burton (1884) writes that the British Museum housed a large kukri-like falchion inscribed with writing in Pali.[10] Among the oldest existing kukri are those belonging to Drabya Shah (c. 1559), housed in the National Museum of Nepal in Kathmandu.” en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kukri9. Duncan Head (1982). Armies of the Macedonian and Punic Wars, 359 BC to 146 BC: Organisation, Tactics, Dress and Weapons. University of Michigan. p. 136. ISBN 9780904417265. Id. I don’t have access to the referenced work, but it at least has the outward appearance of legitimacy. In any event, it seems the geometric similarities between the kopis and the much later kukri have been noticed and considered by scholars, as has the, shall we say, cultural overlap sponsored by the Macedonians. I’m not taking a position regarding whether the former led to the latter. I don’t know. However, the idea does not seem outlandish or easily dismissed. I don't dismiss it, but I do view it as an "extraordinary claim". Burton's extremely peculiar and dated scholarship (he was good at presenting opinions as facts), plus a citation of him in Head's 1982 reference written for WRG, IMHO, don't qualify as "extraordinary proof" 1. Head's fine book is a specialized work of military history written for wargamers, rather than an academic reference, and concentrates more on how specific battles were fought and who wore what (necessary for making miniatures) than on speculative questions of weapons development. You can get a feel for it at Google Books . If you read his new introduction for the 2016 reissue, you'll also see that he has changed his mind on a lot of what he wrote originally.
The nistrimsa (the Sanskrit also means "merciless"), though often (and simplistically) translated as "sword", is AFAIK, known mostly from mythological contexts, and nobody really knows what it looked like, or if it really existed as a battlefield weapon. Another valid translation of it, in some contexts, is "sacrificial knife".
The 7th. Century reference in the Wikipedia article, IMHO, is a typo for "17th."
1. Extraordinary proof would be at least a dateable kopis turning up in a construction excavation in Katmandu, or a Nepali "Iceman" melting out of a glacier with one, or something like that. What I'd consider better would be a continuously occupied site with evidence of smith's forges in the different levels with identifiable fragments starting with kopis pieces at around 200 BC and ending with rusty kukuri blades circa 1500 AD, and having nice dateable charcoal for every level.
|
|
pgandy
Moderator
Senior Forumite
Posts: 10,296
|
Post by pgandy on Sept 19, 2022 12:06:39 GMT
As I said early on “I have no exact answer for you.” I should have worded that as nobody knows. Like the cho, aka the notch or kuadi, on the kukri, nobody knows what it represents nor why it’s there. There are many theories and speculations but nobody knows. It’s something lost in history. I too have my theory, but by means am I locked into it and only about 51-60% sure of it. I think to say that nobody knows is more accurate.
|
|
|
Post by Murffy on Sept 22, 2022 17:07:04 GMT
What's the advantage of the forward cant?
In my limited experience, it seems to lend itself to more powerful cuts and chops but it's not clear to me why. Part of it may be that a forward canting weapon is less likely to strike a target at a 90-degree angle. Kind of making it more user-friendly for beginners who tend to strike things square -- a stroke with a straight blade will bounce off, where the same stroke with a kukri will cut.
|
|
|
Post by Eric Bergeron on Sept 22, 2022 17:56:25 GMT
I believe the forward cant helps the blade cut like you say and with the weight following behind it helps it bite into it more as well on heavier targets.
|
|
pgandy
Moderator
Senior Forumite
Posts: 10,296
|
Post by pgandy on Sept 22, 2022 18:02:26 GMT
I don’t know the mechanics but many knives/swords in the Philippines, Malaysia, and elsewhere in that area have that angular blade, some down the blade and many at the junction of the blade and grip. I have a machete as such. All that I’ve had experience with are very good choppers.
|
|
|
Post by kailashblades on Dec 16, 2022 5:26:00 GMT
Hey guys! And a hello again to Eric- been a while. In my view the forward cant achieves the opposite effect of a sweeping blade like a cavalry sabre or tulwar. These sweeping blades help to convert a perpendicular strike into a draw cut/slash. the cant (particularly when paired with a concave section as seen on a ginunting and a lot of khukuris) helps to convert grab and snag what is being cut and deliver a focused hack. Secondary benefits could be fitting more mass into a shorter overall blade length and also providing a less extreme wrist angle at moment of impact. Note that on many khukuris the intended impact point is not in fact the belly, but instead the relatively straight, canted section just behind it, with the belly more or less being a formality in the creation of a desirable tip profile. Look to a kora for a related blade that doesn't bother with such a tip profile. I've historically been of the belief that the kopis/kukri link is a pretty hard one to argue for the reasons listed above and has a whiff of eurocentrism to it. I was recently shown some carved depictions on indian temples of some pretty kopislke recurved swords that definitely help fill some of the chronological gaps. I'm still not on board. It's easy to say that if we ignore the handle a khukuri and kopis are basically the same blade shape- however they need to be taken as a whole. Khukuri handles are very minimal and very light, while kopis handles tend to feature some hand protection and are quite heavy. Another key difference as I understand it is spine thickness, with the kopis tending towards a thinner and broader blade while the khukuri is sometimes extrmely thick at the base of the blade and in its earlier incarnations tended towards a more slender profile. Both of these together add up to blades that handle very differently and serve different purposes effectively. It depends on the purpose of the taxonomy you're setting up. If all you're looking for is a way to classify certain blade profiles then sure maybe they belong in the same category. But when you take balance, function and culture into account then the differences are pretty stark. Matt Easton recently brought to my attention some antique falx/sica that are very khukurilike. The location of the fullering here, overall profile and (not so much on this blade) lighter handle construction make a much stronger potential originator- but there's not a lot of people arguing for this. Take care, Andrew and the team at Kailash
|
|