| Author |
Message |
|
Michael Brudon
Location: South Pacific Joined: 21 Dec 2013
Posts: 107
|
 Posted: Sun 24 Jan, 2016 7:00 am Post subject: Opinions of the Czech Tusk |
 |
|
Gents , what's the opinion of these historically- a famers weapon/self defence implement or more machete type tool?
Also any thoughts on Lutels example for accuracy and build quality?
http://www.lutel-handicraft.com/?p=productsMo...tusk-11016
|
|
  |
 |
|
Mike Ruhala
Location: Stuart, Florida Joined: 24 Jul 2011
Posts: 335
|
| Posted: Sun 24 Jan, 2016 11:30 am Post subject: Re: Opinions of the Czech Tusk |
|
|
| Michael Brudon wrote: | Gents , what's the opinion of these historically- a famers weapon/self defence implement or more machete type tool?
|
There's not necessarily much of a difference between the two options, or to put it another way this stuff tends to be dual-purpose. I've attached an image of someone wielding a beidana(similar sort of blade) and buckler. In my region the cutlass quickly devolved into the machete and then just as quickly the machete was re-weaponized to the extent that they were fitted with sword-like hilts, were used in battles and have preserved saber technique.
No first hand experience with that particular piece but off the cuff I'd say the profile is within the range of surviving originals but may actually be a bit more roughly made than the examples I've seen. Also, the Lutel blades I've handled didn't have much distal taper so they were heavy and sluggish for their type, I expect the same would be true of this piece. There's also the Ritter Steel reproduction but I don't know that it's any better in that regard.
 Attachment: 113.02 KB
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael Brudon
Location: South Pacific Joined: 21 Dec 2013
Posts: 107
|
| Posted: Mon 25 Jan, 2016 12:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for the reply Mike, very interesting. Since posting I have learnt these represent a bit of a grey area. There are some references to similar blades maybe in use by peasants, comparisons to flax knives etc. Also another more extensive debate on whether steel dussacks existed outside of training/competition, and what should be called a dussack anyway. All covered on these forums previously by the looks, I should have done a search.
On another tangent I'd be interested in knowing what you swords users think of the martial characteristics of this blade form.
Similar to a hanger, good for slashing/chopping, straight enough for the thrust still?
Would that handle/tang setup make any difference to balance and grips?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Radovan Geist
|
| Posted: Mon 25 Jan, 2016 3:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Dear Michael,
Indeed these weapons seem to be, from a historical point of view, problematic. These "Czech dussacks" (as they´re generally known) are quite popular among re-enactors (esp. for 16th, and early part of 17th century), but that´s hardly supported by historical sources. As far as I know, only few examples were really found, and you can´t really see them in period artwork (if you exclude those obviously training tools you could find in Meyer, etc.)
As for handling characteristics, when I was using it (in my earlier, less-informed re-enactor times:)), I used it for some messer or dussack techniques. That means both cutting and thrusting. The only difference is that it does not provide a good hand protection, so you cannot really do safely techniques when you´re blocking the opponent´s blade with a flat of your forte.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Radim Vanousek
|
| Posted: Mon 25 Jan, 2016 3:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
I've seen many discussions on Czech forums about these tusacks and it seems that they may have evolved from training weapons. They were used by townsfolk and other classes that could not afford a sword. I've heard that the oldest tusack of this type ever found in CZ is dated to 1st half of the 16th century. Unfortunately, i can't back those words up.
What i can tell with certainty is that the fighting style is much different from the sword school. It focuses on hurting opponent's forearm and slashing his face. Very nasty.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael Brudon
Location: South Pacific Joined: 21 Dec 2013
Posts: 107
|
| Posted: Mon 25 Jan, 2016 6:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for the informative replies gents . So with a somewhat gap in the evidence where did the theories most likely come from for these?- word of mouth/tradition from the regions , 19th century antiquarians, 20th century re-enactors?
Just thinking also about whether one of these 'deserved' to evolve from a non-training background, the peasants machete/sword theory seems to make sense as they would be an easy blacksmithing option. Does an inexpensive one piece short sabre blade with d-guard have merit basically?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Ruhala
Location: Stuart, Florida Joined: 24 Jul 2011
Posts: 335
|
| Posted: Mon 25 Jan, 2016 10:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Radovan Geist wrote: | | so you cannot really do safely techniques when you´re blocking the opponent´s blade with a flat of your forte. |
You shouldn't be doing that very often anyway, in the vast majority of cases you should be using the edge to intercept the opponent's weapon.
| Radim Vanousek wrote: |
What i can tell with certainty is that the fighting style is much different from the sword school. It focuses on hurting opponent's forearm and slashing his face. Very nasty. |
That's exactly like normal swordsmanship, you're supposed to target the nearest opening.
| Michael Brudon wrote: |
On another tangent I'd be interested in knowing what you swords users think of the martial characteristics of this blade form.
Similar to a hanger, good for slashing/chopping, straight enough for the thrust still?
Would that handle/tang setup make any difference to balance and grips? |
In effect its just an ersatz hanger. I'd like a little more attention to detail in the grip shape for finer handling characteristics than what you normally see in these pieces but there's really no reason they wouldn't be serviceable.
| Michael Brudon wrote: | | Thanks for the informative replies gents . So with a somewhat gap in the evidence where did the theories most likely come from for these?- word of mouth/tradition from the regions , 19th century antiquarians, 20th century re-enactors? |
Which myths? If you mean the scutching knife theory AFAIK that's a 21st century obfuscation traceable to Paul McDonald but perpetuated by many due to flawed conceptions of what Meyer's fencing treatises represented.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael Brudon
Location: South Pacific Joined: 21 Dec 2013
Posts: 107
|
| Posted: Mon 25 Jan, 2016 5:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="Mike Ruhala"] | Radovan Geist wrote: |
| Michael Brudon wrote: | | Thanks for the informative replies gents . So with a somewhat gap in the evidence where did the theories most likely come from for these?- word of mouth/tradition from the regions , 19th century antiquarians, 20th century re-enactors? |
Which myths? If you mean the scutching knife theory AFAIK that's a 21st century obfuscation traceable to Paul McDonald but perpetuated by many due to flawed conceptions of what Meyer's fencing treatises represented. |
Who said myths?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Ruhala
Location: Stuart, Florida Joined: 24 Jul 2011
Posts: 335
|
| Posted: Mon 25 Jan, 2016 10:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dunno! My mind must have conflated "theories" and "mouth," was a bit distracted making chili. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Radovan Geist
|
| Posted: Mon 25 Jan, 2016 10:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Hi Mike, you are right about blocking with flat. What I meant was letting your opponent´s blade slide (after the parry) down the flat to the nagel, having it blocked there, and working from there. Sorry for not making myself clearer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Ruhala
Location: Stuart, Florida Joined: 24 Jul 2011
Posts: 335
|
| Posted: Tue 26 Jan, 2016 12:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Ah, okay. Without a nagel you do have to be more careful about keeping your edge turned against your opponent's weapon at all times, it works but I like having the nagel/side ring/etc too.
|
|
|
|
|
Sa'ar Nudel
|
|
 |
|
|
Michael Brudon
Location: South Pacific Joined: 21 Dec 2013
Posts: 107
|
| Posted: Wed 27 Jan, 2016 12:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mike Ruhala wrote: | | Dunno! My mind must have conflated "theories" and "mouth," was a bit distracted making chili. |
no problem, I am just learning here anyway. I'd like to get one of these made not so much for a historical peice but to bash around as a bush sword/heavy machete.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a standard topic