Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Weapons From The 1600 and 1700s

  1. #1
    Senior Member Sayeret's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    The Frozen North
    Posts
    3,903

    Default Weapons From The 1600 and 1700s

    Pole-Axe

    A heavy battle axe, something between an axe and a halberd. It was used by marksmen as a support for a musket in the process of shooting or in hand-to-hand combat. It was carried behind the belt on a soldier's back. To decrease this weapon's weight, holes were made in its blade.

    Mace

    A cold steel weapon, the prototype of which was a simple club - a typical infantry weapon of the past. But in the 14th century, it gained greater acknowledgement in the cavalry. The reason was that it could cast a deadly blow to a well armoured opponent, though it gained a rather symbolic meaning with time.

    Pole-Hammer

    The pole-hammer (German: Streithammer) was one of the most ancient Teutonic weapons. According to legend, their supreme deity wielded such a weapon. From the 13th century, pole-hammers were used all over Europe. A pole-hammer blow could pierce not only chain mail, but also a helm or plate mail. A pole-hammer is used much like a mace, but is better balanced, and thus always more effective than a mace.

    Spontoon

    The name is derived from the Latin espietus, spedus (spear). This weapon was a smaller version of the partisan and was used as an officer's weapon. In the 18th century, German officers were armed with spontoons. This weapon was abolished around 1770.

    Partisan

    An officer's weapon. The difference between a partisan and a pike was a crescent of two short metal spikes between the shaft and the spear-head. Wielding a partisan was much like using a halberd. A partisan was widely used as an officer's weapon in the 16th century by squads of knights with lances. A partisan remained a regular part of the armory until the 19th century. Early versions of this weapon possessed a broad and long spear-head, which was later made smaller. A partisan was an attribute of power rather than a weapon, so the spear-head was often decorated with engravings, gilding and etching.

    Dagger

    A cold steel weapon with a short blade. This weapon is intended mainly for stabbing rather than cutting. Daggers were used as far back as the Stone Age, and numerous kinds and varieties of daggers have been invented since then. This blade is intended for hand-to-hand combat. In the Middle Ages, daggers were used as left-hand weapons in addition to swords or rapiers

    Lance

    In the 17th and 18th centuries, lances were used not only by infantrymen, but also by cavalry. A cavalry lance was 2.8-2.9 m (9-10 ft) long with a 12-cm (4") spear-head. Troopers fastened small flags - oriflammes - to their lances. When charging, these flags emitted a buzzing sound that suppressed an enemy psychically. A thrust from a cavalry lance was very strong because it used the kinetic energy of the spanking horse. In the Middle Ages, a heavy spear - the ancestor of the cavalry lance - was a knight's main weapon. A champion could deliver a strong collision blow that no armour could withstand. With the development of firearms and with knights becoming regular cavalry, the lance gave way to the broadsword and pistol. By the 18th century, mainly the light cavalry was armed with lances.

    Pike

    A thrust weapon. In 17th century battles, this weapon took on a special significance in fighting back cavalry charges, thus it was a defensive rather than an offensive weapon. When an enemy approached, fighters in the front lines held pikes which rested against the ground with one hand and wielded swords in the other. Soldiers inside formations could hold their pikes with both hands. An infantry pike was usually longer than a cavalry lance. At the beginning of the 17th century, the French and Germans changed the average length of pikes from 3 m (10 ft) to 5.2-5.8 m (17-19 ft). Spaniards used short pikes for a long time, because they allowed good mobility in close combat.

    Bow

    A projectile weapon. Bows varied in shape and length. Thus, an Arabian bow differed from a Turkish one in that the former was longer. Bows were made from wood, bone or a mountain goat's horn (for short bows). They could cover a distance of 100 - 150 metres with a rate of 10 to 12 shots per minute. But these parameters meant nothing, since the shooter's physical condition influenced them significantly; a tired soldier would draw a bow-string much more slowly. Arrows with armour-piercing tips could pierce chain mail. Eastern warriors usually kept their bows in special cases and their arrows in quivers.

    Musket

    Initially a heavy shotgun with a fuse or wheel lock. A wheel rubbed against a flint to create a spark. But due to the high cost and low reliability of this mechanism, it wasn't particularly widely used. Towards the end of the 17th century, the flintlock was introduced (where the flint was struck by a bolt). Together with the paper cartridge, it significantly increased the weapons' rate of fire.

    Blunderbuss

    A short large-calibre gun with a funnel-shaped muzzle. It was intended for firing buckshot at close range and was used mainly by cavalry. Blunderbusses were very popular among seamen: in a boarding skirmish, blunderbusses were very effective, because they could flatten several enemies with a single shot from a short distance.

    Broadsword

    A straight sword with a one-sided blade. The broadsword was primarily a heavy cavalry weapon. Length: about one metre. Weight: 2.1 kilos

    Pistol

    The pistol derived from the slingshot. Around 1530, pistols were introduced and proved useful in close combat. They employed first a wheel lock, then a flintlock. A long pistol could hit a target from a distance of 50 steps, yet it could hit through cuirasses at 2 - 3 steps' distance. It was widely used by the cavalry. Riders would fire a pistol salvo before breaking into infantry arrays.

    Sabre

    A sword with a curved blade. While a straight-bladed weapon efficiently cuts solids, its penetration through soft substances is low. A curved blade does not split solids but carves through them, penetrating deep within. A sabre is designed for slicing strikes, primarily aimed at undefended parts of the body. A light and handy weapon, it was used mainly for light cavalry. A European sabre was about a metre long and weighed about 1.9 kilos.

    Scimitar

    Scimitars differed from European sabres mainly in their finish, hilt and sheath (the sheath top, intended to prevent the sheath from hitting the stirrup, was longer at the front; the sheath itself gave when drawing out the scimitar, and was often finished with fish or shagreen leather). There were many oriental craftsmen who made perfect scimitar blades. This weapon was valued all over the world. The craftsmen of Damascus were never surpassed by their European colleagues. They kept the secrets of steel making, which were imported from India, and handed them down from father to son only. Their product "Damascus steel" became a synonym for "blade" in many languages. Like European sabres, scimitars were intended for cutting, not thrusting. Unlike a sword, a scimitar had a curved blade. Weapons with straight blades can chop solids, but their capability for penetrating tissues is low. A curved blade cuts tissue rather than chops it, and penetrates deeply. Scimitars were prevalent in the East, where not only cavalry but also officers and irregular forces were armed with them.

    Sword

    This weapon differed from its initial form in that it had a narrower blade. Designed primarily for thrusting hits. It had a variety of possible kinds of hilts. Average length: less than a metre. Weight: about 1.3 kilos.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    European Wars: Cossacks Encyclopedia

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    433

    Default

    The best sabres were polish husars sabres (also called black/sliver/gold sabres - black were poorest versions and gold were ornamented with gold and gems). Far better than japanese Katana (but not so popular).
    That kind of sabre is believed to be the best cold weapon ever made.
    http://www.muzeumkielce.net/zbiory/f...itar/husar.gif
    http://www.muzeumkielce.net/zbiory/foto/militar/80.jpg
    http://www.platnerstwo.pl/nowosci/19.jpg
    Original husars sabres cost about 50000 PLN - about 12000 Euro - but biding prices are greater.

  3. #3
    Senior Member perdurabo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    EU, Poland, Lublin/Wroclaw/JeleniaGora
    Age
    32
    Posts
    4,955

    Default

    he hey my fav times! i'm reenacting this times 9well now i'm making my outfit)

    Pole-Hammer
    one of the favourite weapons of Poles banned meany times by parliment and land parliments, allowed only for military but still used our gentry didn't obey rules too much-deadly wepon pirces skull like hot knife cuts butter and simple use just bang in the head or cheast...




    Spontoon
    well it was used often as wepon of cannon meintance also combined with fuse/match

    Pike

    "..An infantry pike was usually longer than a cavalry lance. At the beginning of the 17th century, the French and Germans changed the average length of pikes from 3 m (10 ft) to 5.2-5.8 m (17-19 ft). Spaniards used short pikes for a long time, because they allowed good mobility in close combat. "

    errmmm
    Polish pike used by cavalery-husaria in XVIth century (battle of Orsza for egzample) had already above 5m long aso they where lighter because they where drilled inside.



    Bow
    very litle used in western europe but with large useage in central and estern

    guns
    first you have to say about locks

    http://www.silcom.com/~vikman/isles/...m/firearm.html
    then about difrent sized weapon
    pistols:

    long pistols (in poland caled half-hook)

    bandolet (dono its english name but it was short carabine for riders)

    then arkebuse was longer but shorter than musket

    and then musket


    Blunderbuss
    its funnel shaped muzzle wasnt intended for firing buckshot it was made for easier loding, short barrel and load of broken glass, nails or small balls did the job of someking of hand claymore mine



    Sabre

    whoo 1.9 kg of weight?? wtf? my weight around 0.7-1.2 kg, my friend has saber witch weights less than 0.5kg but it was inteded for dueling and it is pure art of bladesmith

    "its penetration through soft substances is low." ?? i would say it is the other way it cuts soft material but it would have problems with armour

    "it was used mainly for light cavalry" hmm husaria had them and they wherent light, also all polish, hungarian, cossacs and russian foot regiments used sabers
    Polish-hungarian type:

    Hussar type:

    and Karabela type:

    all the secret of saber is in proper balance and handle type (for swords it is allways blade look at oekshott typology) and there is thousands of types Mameluk, Karabela, Ordynka, Chechuga, Hungarian, Polish-Hungarian, Multanka, Pulowar, Talwar....

    few weapons are missing
    for egzample koncerz

    up to 2,2 m long not sharp in crossection rectangular but pointy(sharp piercing end only without edges) used as secondary pike

  4. #4
    Senior Member ViktorNavorski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    On Red Tape
    Posts
    1,534

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LeMat
    The best sabres were polish husars sabres (also called black/sliver/gold sabres - black were poorest versions and gold were ornamented with gold and gems). Far better than japanese Katana (but not so popular).
    That kind of sabre is believed to be the best cold weapon ever made.
    http://www.muzeumkielce.net/zbiory/f...itar/husar.gif
    http://www.muzeumkielce.net/zbiory/foto/militar/80.jpg
    http://www.platnerstwo.pl/nowosci/19.jpg
    Original husars sabres cost about 50000 PLN - about 12000 Euro - but biding prices are greater.
    That is an opinion and debatable, not fact.

  5. #5

    Default Re: Weapons From The 1600 and 1700s

    Quote Originally Posted by Sayeret
    Bow

    A projectile weapon. Bows varied in shape and length. Thus, an Arabian bow differed from a Turkish one in that the former was longer. Bows were made from wood, bone or a mountain goat's horn (for short bows). They could cover a distance of 100 - 150 metres with a rate of 10 to 12 shots per minute. But these parameters meant nothing, since the shooter's physical condition influenced them significantly; a tired soldier would draw a bow-string much more slowly. Arrows with armour-piercing tips could pierce chain mail. Eastern warriors usually kept their bows in special cases and their arrows in quivers.
    I've read sources that state English longbowmen could reach distances of 220m+. Since they were among the best bowmen historically, I think it's safe to say that others could comfortably reach 150-200m.
    http://www.stortford-archers.org.uk/medieval.htm

  6. #6
    Senior Member Para's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    That Green And Pleasant Land
    Posts
    1,454

    Default

    The main weapon amongst all those listed is the Musket, for with mass formation firing volleys into massed ranks of Pike men or cavalry could have a devastating effect. Once the bayonet had been perfected then this added another dimension to infantry mans armoury.

  7. #7
    Senior Member perdurabo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    EU, Poland, Lublin/Wroclaw/JeleniaGora
    Age
    32
    Posts
    4,955

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ViktorNavorski
    Quote Originally Posted by LeMat
    The best sabres were polish husars sabres (also called black/sliver/gold sabres - black were poorest versions and gold were ornamented with gold and gems). Far better than japanese Katana (but not so popular).
    That kind of sabre is believed to be the best cold weapon ever made.
    http://www.muzeumkielce.net/zbiory/f...itar/husar.gif
    http://www.muzeumkielce.net/zbiory/foto/militar/80.jpg
    http://www.platnerstwo.pl/nowosci/19.jpg
    Original husars sabres cost about 50000 PLN - about 12000 Euro - but biding prices are greater.
    That is an opinion and debatable, not fact.
    it is but there where few meetings beatwin Poles and Japanese i remember one test they made witch wepon is more uniwersal first one had to make some action (strike or defence) and then other one had to do the same you can do all actions from katana with hussar saber but you can do less than 40-50% of saber actions with katana. Katana is very beautifull wepon like it very much but it has this TV opinion of magical wepon that can cut car doors like butter but in real it is only piece of metal and skilz of swordsman count you can put newbie with repier catana or hussar saber aginst master with bronze age kopis who will win?
    (and don't say samurai trained whole life cause same did medival knight same Polish hussar...even methods of training where the same as kid with wooden stick, bowmen training, pike training, firearm training, horseriding, reading, writing, other languages, philozophy, religion, poetry...)

    The main weapon amongst all those listed is the Musket, for with mass formation firing volleys into massed ranks of Pike men or cavalry could have a devastating effect. Once the bayonet had been perfected then this added another dimension to infantry mans armoury.
    for west of europe yes it was for east main firearm was arkebuse, but until times of rifled bore and scaled ammo cavalery could easly defeat much bigger formation of musketeers (check Kirholm battle or Somosierra) imagine standing infront of 100 horses running fast on you with long pikes and you have only 1- 2 shoots if you shoot too erly you will miss if too late hey will crush you...

    I've read sources that state English longbowmen could reach distances of 220m+. Since they were among the best bowmen historically, I think it's safe to say that others could comfortably reach 150-200m.
    http://www.stortford-archers.org.uk/medieval.htm
    first please differ long bow and composite reflex bow
    secondary maximum distace of single bowmen isnt kill range of whole formation
    third longbowmens where foot soldiers estern bowmen where cavalery like mongols

  8. #8
    Senior Member Seiyuuki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Water Curtain Cave on Flower Fruit Mountain
    Posts
    3,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by perdurabo
    it is but there where few meetings beatwin Poles and Japanese i remember one test they made witch wepon is more uniwersal first one had to make some action (strike or defence) and then other one had to do the same you can do all actions from katana with hussar saber but you can do less than 40-50% of saber actions with katana. Katana is very beautifull wepon like it very much but it has this TV opinion of magical wepon that can cut car doors like butter but in real it is only piece of metal and skilz of swordsman count you can put newbie with repier catana or hussar saber aginst master with bronze age kopis who will win?
    (and don't say samurai trained whole life cause same did medival knight same Polish hussar...even methods of training where the same as kid with wooden stick, bowmen training, pike training, firearm training, horseriding, reading, writing, other languages, philozophy, religion, poetry...)
    That is all nice and entertaining, but I saw on television too that the M1 was the God of all tanks too, though we know that is not to be true.

  9. #9
    Senior Member perdurabo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    EU, Poland, Lublin/Wroclaw/JeleniaGora
    Age
    32
    Posts
    4,955

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Seiyuuki

    That is all nice and entertaining, but I saw on television too that the M1 was the God of all tanks too, though we know that is not to be true.
    witch of my statements isn't true?

  10. #10
    Senior Member bloddyaxe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Iceland, glorious empire of
    Posts
    2,302

    Default

    Beautiful weapons!

    The Katana worship cult has however been becoming a little bit to loud these days. There are more types of japanese swords than them. 11 century tachi are really nice IMHO.
    The fact is though that Japan didn't have good sources of iron, as in the massive amount of Iron that was found in Europe and was extracted in the late middle ages. They made incredible pieces of swords considering how difficult it is with this kind of iron. Still the majority of ancient japanese swords break without much effort.
    This is of course the same with Pre late middle ages European weapons.
    In my country we have no well preserved swords from these times. There are a few very rusted ones. They are made of layered iron and steel, same as "damascus steel."
    Lots of modern hype about certain ancient weapons comes from the types that are still preserved, and still have master swordsmiths capable of making them. The Japanese have done well in that matter, thus they still make very good swords, in contrast most reproductions of western swords are junk, too heavy and badly balanced and made of substandard material etc...

  11. #11
    Senior Member perdurabo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    EU, Poland, Lublin/Wroclaw/JeleniaGora
    Age
    32
    Posts
    4,955

    Default

    agreed i also agree that katana is sexy i never meet saber with fittings as beautifull as some of katana have
    look at this tsuba:

    work of Patric Hastings http://bladefittings.com/
    or this one:


    while sabers:


    not so beautifull IMO

    but one point damascus steel or w00tz(had to change oo to 00 cause it was putting ) isnt patern welded
    about real damascus from india ask herrmanek it is quite complicated process but it uses only one type of steel and in patern welding (like romans and in erly midle ages) you need two types of steel

    also japanese swords are difrent heat threated (clay is used so sides are less hardened than edge and side efect is curvature-in saber curve is done by hammer)
    and btw

    clay was put on this darker area

    Beautiful weapons!
    thank you 80% of my pics are oryginal Polish pieces

  12. #12
    Senior Member Seiyuuki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Water Curtain Cave on Flower Fruit Mountain
    Posts
    3,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bloddyaxe
    Beautiful weapons!

    The Katana worship cult has however been becoming a little bit to loud these days. There are more types of japanese swords than them. 11 century tachi are really nice IMHO.
    The fact is though that Japan didn't have good sources of iron, as in the massive amount of Iron that was found in Europe and was extracted in the late middle ages. They made incredible pieces of swords considering how difficult it is with this kind of iron. Still the majority of ancient japanese swords break without much effort.
    This is of course the same with Pre late middle ages European weapons.
    In my country we have no well preserved swords from these times. There are a few very rusted ones. They are made of layered iron and steel, same as "damascus steel."
    Lots of modern hype about certain ancient weapons comes from the types that are still preserved, and still have master swordsmiths capable of making them. The Japanese have done well in that matter, thus they still make very good swords, in contrast most reproductions of western swords are junk, too heavy and badly balanced and made of substandard material etc...
    Tachi used to be a weapon from horseback, but overtime, that changed. It become more and more a specialized blade worn in court or for formal occassions as a status of wealth and power. Eventually, the beauty of the sword became a more important priority than the durability of the blade.

    It is true that today, when the word "katana" is mention, people tend to have the misconception that every sword is equal. In reality, very few blades in existence today meet the standard of a true katana. Through lack of resources and the need to equipped ashigaru with a sword, most "katana" were cheap, less than average quality mass production. Even during World War II, most katana were machine made.

    Several things to know what about a real traditional excellent katana. First, obviously, a true blade take a long time to make, sometimes up to several months (statistically, every sixth blade made by a master swordsmith is suppose to be of supreme quality, one of a kind deal of thing). The blade should be constructed by the laminating of different types of steel together to forge the blade. The value of a sword is in part determined by the complexity of its construction. Lamination together with the differential hardening of the blade to give a hard edge (hamon) while maintaining a softer blade spine make the sword very durable. The poorest construction method is the "maru" or non-laminated. The "kobuse" was and is still used. One of the best method was used by the famous swordsmith Masamune, "Soshu" seven layer construction method. The tempered edge, where the sword has been quenched to provide a high carbon steel area which will hold a sharpened edge should appears milky white colour on a properly polished blade.

    Different type of steel





    Quote Originally Posted by perdurabo

    clay was put on this darker area
    I believe that is a tanto.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •