| Author |
Message |
Eric Meulemans
Industry Professional
|
 Posted: Wed 14 Sep, 2005 2:41 pm Post subject: A Ghastly Grip |
 |
|
Last fall, while cutting up the rapidly decaying pumpkin crop, I noted the distinct slipperiness caused by the "guts" of them upon my grip of the sword. A rather obvious (though previously unconsidered) thought occurred to me: Historically, was loss, or reduction of one's grip on a weapon problematic due to the presence of blood or other gore associated with the dismemberment of living tissue?
Are there any references to this occurring or specifically being an issue? Or was the presence of blood/etc. not sufficient enough to create problems? Or, if it were, was the use of gloves/gauntlets/grip materials significantly advantageous in retaining hold, and control of, the blade?
I have read of lanyards being used to retain a knight's wayward blade, but it never occurred to me (nor have I ever seen or heard mentioned) that perhaps such a thing might have contributed to its loss. Any thoughts or documentation on this matter?
-Eric
|
|
   |
 |
|
Sam Barris
|
| Posted: Wed 14 Sep, 2005 3:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I’m going to go with a yes on that question. And I’ll add that many of the various textured hilt forms, as well as the leather and cord wrappings that accompanied them, were probably direct attempts to counter that very problem. Note also the cloth ito that adorns the tsuka of a Japanese sword. I’m sure that it could absorb quite a lot of blood before it became difficult to hold securely. And don’t forget the value of a pair of sturdy leather gauntlets in battle. I’m sure they came in handy when a sword's hilt became smeared with pieces of your last enemy.
Pax,
Sam Barris
"Any nation that draws too great a distinction between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards, and its fighting done by fools." —Thucydides
|
|
 |
|
Gavin Kisebach
|
| Posted: Wed 14 Sep, 2005 3:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Wow. Mordbid topic. Blood is only slippery for a brief period, then it gets sticky, unless theres a constant flow of it. This is especially true if something is absorbing the blood, like say leather gloves. I suspect by the end of a battle you'd be peeling your gauntlets off of your sword, due to the dried blood. Ick.
|
|
 |
|
Alexander Ren
|
| Posted: Wed 14 Sep, 2005 5:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forgive me for not having the exact page reference since I do not yet own a copy of Oakshot's "Records of the Medieval Sword" however, I read in a friend's copy towards the end of the book when Oakshot discusses the Morgarten Sword (pardon the spelling if I got it wrong) and qoutes a source where the author describes having to grip his sword all the tighter because of the blood running down the blade to the grip.
Again sorry I don't have the exact page or quote but if you own a copy of "Records..." you should be able to look it up there.
Hope that helps a little... Alex
"The more you sweat in practice, the less you bleed in battle."
|
|
 |
|
Eric Meulemans
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Thu 15 Sep, 2005 6:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, this is a bit of a morbid topic, I suppose, and perhaps that is why it doesn't seem to come up as a question much, given that (one hopes) none of us are actually hacking one another to bits. Of course, the efficient cutting of flesh was generally the intended purpose of most blades, so the inevitable mess thusly created must raise some questions.
| Alexander Ren wrote: | Oakshot discusses the Morgarten Sword (pardon the spelling if I got it wrong) and qoutes a source where the author describes having to grip his sword all the tighter because of the blood running down the blade to the grip.
|
I don't have a copy of this either, although I've just ordered one, so I will check the reference when I get it and thank you for its mention. I think when dealing with what is (literally) visceral imagery writers often tend to embellish a bit, but in the case of blood, a little goes a long way - anyone who has gotten a decent cut to the head or hand knows even a small wound can generate quite a bit of blood, and even a small amount seems like it gets "everywhere".
I just find it interesting that I've read quite a number of accounts which describe body parts lost (ears/noses/etc.) or wounds taken, but not usually of the blood spilt, except in instances where it might (seemingly) serve as a literary device, rather than a statement of fact. But then, I haven't done a lot of reading on the matter lately.
-Eric
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Padgett
Location: In a comfy chair Joined: 17 Nov 2003
Posts: 137
|
| Posted: Thu 15 Sep, 2005 8:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
I have a copy of Records, and there is a quote in the section mentioned from an officer who was at Balaclava in 1855.
| Quote: | | "Twice I was unhorsed, and more than once had to grip my sword tighter, the blood streaming down over the hilt, and running up my very sleeve!" |
There is apparently a stain on the grip of the Mortgarten sword that is most likely blood, which is what led Oakeshott to mention the letter.
"The truth shall make ye fret."
|
|
|
|
|
|
Robert B. Allison
Location: NW Montana Joined: 21 Apr 2005
Posts: 50
|
| Posted: Thu 15 Sep, 2005 9:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Too bad we couldn't get some first-hand feedback on this topic from OJ Simpson. 
|
|
|
|
|
Chad Arnow
myArmoury Team
|
| Posted: Thu 15 Sep, 2005 9:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Robert B. Allison wrote: | | Too bad we couldn't get some first-hand feedback on this topic from OJ Simpson. |
Robert,
Comments like these are not conducive or relevant to discussing arms and armour and are likely to create lines of discussion we don't want or need. On top of that, I urge people to show respect for the two people that were brutally murdered in the incident you mention. Please don't turn their tragic deaths into a punchline.
"Humor" of this type is not welcome here.
Let's get back on topic, and quickly.
ChadA
http://chadarnow.com/
|
|
 |
|
Shawn Mulock
|
| Posted: Fri 16 Sep, 2005 6:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
In regards to gore on the grip (the alliteration was unintentional, honest ) I would expect that we would not see a lot of it on swords, being that they were primarily secondary weapons. It does however raise an interesting point. I feel that this may be one of many reasons why we see an evolution of grips and hilt styles through the ages as well as the often applied "finger over the cross" and the natural evolution of the finger ring and eventually the advent of complex hilt forms. Not to mention the texturing of grips and the experimentation with different materials. All are in an effort to keep the bloody sword in hand and in control during conflict. As mentioned by Gavin Kisebach above, blood is only slippery for a short time, but from what I have experienced with swordmanship, a mere minute can feel like eternity when you are fighting.
Now a disclaimer. I believe that the gore issue may have contributed to the evolution of these things, but is not by any stretch of the imagination the sole or even a major cause.
"It is not what you have, but what you have done".
|
|
|
|
|
Gavin Kisebach
|
| Posted: Fri 16 Sep, 2005 4:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | a mere minute can feel like eternity when you are fighting. |
Amen brother, Amen.
I might also point out, though, that blood doesn't always gout out immediatly upon wounding. A good friend of mine once gashed his leg to the bone on some sheet metal, down to the bone and at least four inches by one inch. It didnt actually start bleeding for several seconds. Is there a doctor in the house who can explain why? 
I've seen this a few times come to think of it - a large fleshwound that doesn't bleed right away, then starts bleeding profusely. Could it be that the impact of the cutting object pushes blood away from the point of impact? It's really an odd phenomenon. Has anyone else witnessed what i'm talking about?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aaron Schnatterly
|
| Posted: Fri 16 Sep, 2005 5:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gavin Kisebach wrote: | | I might also point out, though, that blood doesn't always gout out immediatly upon wounding. A good friend of mine once gashed his leg to the bone on some sheet metal, down to the bone and at least four inches by one inch. It didnt actually start bleeding for several seconds. Is there a doctor in the house who can explain why? |
How about an old street medic?
| Gavin Kisenbach wrote: | | I've seen this a few times come to think of it - a large fleshwound that doesn't bleed right away, then starts bleeding profusely. Could it be that the impact of the cutting object pushes blood away from the point of impact? It's really an odd phenomenon. Has anyone else witnessed what i'm talking about? |
It isn't uncommon when large arteries are cut cleanly and relatively straight across for them to spasm shut. Arteries have muscles in the walls - unlike capillaries and veins. Attempted suicide by slashing the wrists commonly fails due to this phenomenon - cutting straight across the wrist and cleanly through. Arteries are the only vessels that have pump pressure. The capillaries are small enough that they buffer the bulk of the pulses, leaving static pressure and muscle action to return blood to the heart. Veins have one-way valves to help prevent backflow of blood. Spasming arteries and muscle tissue reduce the flow, until things do ooze out of veins... probably explains the phenomenon.
Someone above mentioned scalp, facial, and hand injuries... they bleed a lot. So do necks and groins... High vasculature, and generally superficial, too. Not a ton of muscle to clamp and restrict.
So... how'd I do? 
-Aaron Schnatterly
_______________
Fortior Qui Se Vincit
(He is stronger who conquers himself.)
|
|
|
|
|
Gavin Kisebach
|
| Posted: Fri 16 Sep, 2005 5:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That was an outstinkinstanding answer, and it explains a lot of wierd things that I've always wondered about. I always seem to get wounded in the head (just read my posts, you'll understand) and the blood is just explosive. I guess I just expected wounds to bleed that way. Your muscle clamp explaination jives with my experience.
I had a buddy take RPG schrapnel in his backside, he told me later it hardly bled, though it cauterized somewhat, so maybe its a different animal altogether.
So what areas would we expect to see copious amounts of blood from a spear or sword wound? are those parts usually armored anyway? Head, of course, groin, ok. I read on one of the threads that something like 70 or 80% of the bodies at some battle had leg wounds. Legs dont seem to bleed right away.
How much of the "mad clansman covered in gore ala braveheart" is just hollywood hype is plausible? obviously a battlefield would get bloody, but i'm beginning to wonder... Sorry if I'm hijacking this thread.
|
|
|
|
|
Alexander Ren
|
| Posted: Fri 16 Sep, 2005 5:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aaron Schnatterly wrote: | | Gavin Kisebach wrote: | | I might also point out, though, that blood doesn't always gout out immediatly upon wounding. A good friend of mine once gashed his leg to the bone on some sheet metal, down to the bone and at least four inches by one inch. It didnt actually start bleeding for several seconds. Is there a doctor in the house who can explain why? |
How about an old street medic?
| Gavin Kisenbach wrote: | | I've seen this a few times come to think of it - a large fleshwound that doesn't bleed right away, then starts bleeding profusely. Could it be that the impact of the cutting object pushes blood away from the point of impact? It's really an odd phenomenon. Has anyone else witnessed what i'm talking about? |
It isn't uncommon when large arteries are cut cleanly and relatively straight across for them to spasm shut. Arteries have muscles in the walls - unlike capillaries and veins. Attempted suicide by slashing the wrists commonly fails due to this phenomenon - cutting straight across the wrist and cleanly through. Arteries are the only vessels that have pump pressure. The capillaries are small enough that they buffer the bulk of the pulses, leaving static pressure and muscle action to return blood to the heart. Veins have one-way valves to help prevent backflow of blood. Spasming arteries and muscle tissue reduce the flow, until things do ooze out of veins... probably explains the phenomenon.
Someone above mentioned scalp, facial, and hand injuries... they bleed a lot. So do necks and groins... High vasculature, and generally superficial, too. Not a ton of muscle to clamp and restrict.
So... how'd I do? |
Next time you give this kind of description please give a disclaimer not to have eaten anything for the past hour before reading.
I just got a copy of Records of the Medieval Sword today. On the bottom of page 263 and page 266 it talkes about the stain on the grip and the qoute for anyone who wants to take a look... Alex
"The more you sweat in practice, the less you bleed in battle."
|
|
|
|
|
Gavin Kisebach
|
| Posted: Fri 16 Sep, 2005 5:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sorry Alexander, I'm used to guys who could stand around a trainwreck and eat a ham sandwich, I'll give fair warning next time 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aaron Schnatterly
|
| Posted: Fri 16 Sep, 2005 6:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gavin Kisebach wrote: | | That was an outstinkinstanding answer, and it explains a lot of wierd things that I've always wondered about. |
No prob... glad to help, even if it was at the expense of Alex's supper. (Sorry, Alex... ) So... here's your disclaimer... more blood and guts to follow...
| Gavin wrote: | | I had a buddy take RPG schrapnel in his backside, he told me later it hardly bled, though it cauterized somewhat, so maybe its a different animal altogether. |
Yeah... fire/heat has a habit. They actually use lasers or hot knives for surgery sometimes for this reason.
| Gavin wrote: | | So what areas would we expect to see copious amounts of blood from a spear or sword wound? are those parts usually armored anyway? Head, of course, groin, ok. I read on one of the threads that something like 70 or 80% of the bodies at some battle had leg wounds. Legs dont seem to bleed right away. |
The ones that bleed are those that are high in vasculature like the head/neck, hands/feet, groin. Think about your combat medic stuff and your survival stuff... anywhere that you would lose heat quickly or would pack with ice to cool down a heat stroke victim are the ones that are high-potential areas. Obviously, the heart and massive arteries/veins are keys, so insides of joints are also likely - elbows, knees, groin/leg junction. Furthermore, the arterial shunting effect I mentioned only works with more or less perpendicular wounds, and cleanly cut through. Horizontal or logitudinal or tearing or incomplete cuts... those suck. Crushing wounds are also nasty, as a larger area is affected. Anything that enters the core of the body (chest, gut) or the head/neck can hit organs and lungs... lots of space in places like the chest cavity, pelvis, neck/head for blood to pool internally. A femur fracture can lead to a loss of a pint into the tissue...
Another issue with leg wounds... once you can't move, you're dead pretty much at my whim. It may not have been a fatal leg wound, but lying there, I can poke you in the eye... and that hurts more... especially with a rondel.
| Gavin wrote: | | How much of the "mad clansman covered in gore ala braveheart" is just hollywood hype is plausible? obviously a battlefield would get bloody, but i'm beginning to wonder... Sorry if I'm hijacking this thread. |
I think the thread is actually pretty interesting, in a morbid sense... but I've seen a lot of modern gore in my line of work, and I've thought about how things may have been in war through the ages from a "combat medic" role...
Is the battlefield likely to look like a bloodfest? Not so sure that it's going to cover someone head to toe... but I bet it wasn't exactly pretty, either. Still isn't today, but big wounds don't always bleed gallons and spray across the room. Anatomy hasn't changed THAT drastically over the last 2000 years...
Hope this helped... or at least was interesting.
You can go back to dinner now...
-Aaron Schnatterly
_______________
Fortior Qui Se Vincit
(He is stronger who conquers himself.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Patrick Kelly
|
| Posted: Fri 16 Sep, 2005 7:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gavin Kisebach wrote: | | Sorry Alexander, I'm used to guys who could stand around a trainwreck and eat a ham sandwich, I'll give fair warning next time |
You should try sitting near a table full of Troopers in a restaraunt after an incident, and watch the reactions of the general public when they listen in. We tend to forget that the public doesn't share our sense of gallows humor.
"In valor there is hope.".................. Tacitus
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ryan A. C.
|
| Posted: Fri 16 Sep, 2005 7:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I often wonder about this myself, so thanks for bringing it up. I have noticed that deep wounds seem to take a fair amount of time to bleed, at least they take enough time for me to think to myself "maybe it didn't cut / go in" then be shocked when it gets on everything. I'm only talking superficial stuff ala skateboarding, dirtbike, rolling into pointy things. I haven't seen to many graphic things. Still I wonder when I'm running through Hende Drucken how bad that would be or what absolutely any strike that lands would look like from Vom Tach.
About the whole Braveheart thing? I try not to think when I watch movies. It just gets me flustered!
|
|
|
|
|
Eric Meulemans
Industry Professional
|
| Posted: Sat 17 Sep, 2005 7:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ryan A. C. wrote: | | I have noticed that deep wounds seem to take a fair amount of time to bleed, at least they take enough time for me to think to myself "maybe it didn't cut / go in" then be shocked when it gets on everything. |
I have received numerous injuries of this type and yes, there is sufficient time to wonder if perhaps one wasn't cut at all. This points to another important fact - that there is (in my experience) no pain in this type of wound, or at least so little as to be unnoticed in all the "excitement."
A number of years ago I drove a slick - a large type of chisel used, in this case, for timberframing, and having a 2 1/2" wide edge - into the top of my thigh, just above the knee. It cut as cleanly through my pants as any razor blade would, leaving about a 3" slice, and since I didn't feel anything I thought I might have gotten lucky and just caught the pant leg. I had enough time look at the opening stupidly, put down my tools, and shift the newly made slit around over my skin to see if I had indeed hit myself. It was then that it started bleeding. I saw it start and then immediately tore the pant leg open to tend to my stupidly self-inflicted injury.
As I recall, that took seven stitches, and was fairly deep - enough so that the Dr. said I was lucky not to have caught anything important around the knee (tendon, etc.). That incident was the first I came to realize how a truly sharp weapon could inflict devastating wounds, and yet the wounded might not be incapacitated (or even notice) until they lost enough blood or got hit with something with "stopping power" (i.e. decapitation). There can be no doubt that even riddled with holes and covered with gashes, the human body can endure quite enough for a seemingly "down and out" opponent to take you with them.
-Eric
|
|
|
|
|
Alexander Ren
|
| Posted: Sat 17 Sep, 2005 10:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Eric Meulemans wrote: |
I have received numerous injuries of this type and yes, there is sufficient time to wonder if perhaps one wasn't cut at all. This points to another important fact - that there is (in my experience) no pain in this type of wound, or at least so little as to be unnoticed in all the "excitement." |
This morning I was sparring in my Dojo and got hit a few times and didn't even notice until now that I am at home relaxing and sore in those areas. I have also been given supeficial cuts from finger/toe-nails while sparring and not even noticed until my sparring partner pointed them out to me.
That also makes me think about how much damage a relitively dull object can do if it hits with the right angle because we keep our finger/toe-nails pretty trimmed down and we still have minor cuts every now and then. And those cuts have been kind of messy and we still don't notice until after the fact.
Alex
"The more you sweat in practice, the less you bleed in battle."
|
|
|
|
|
|
George Hill
Location: Atlanta Ga Joined: 16 May 2005
Posts: 614
|
| Posted: Sat 17 Sep, 2005 1:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I am informed the samurai had a tendancy to tie a peice of cloth around the blade to prevent the blood from reaching the hands. This wouldn't be an every day thing, but it was known.
Has anyone considered that cross guards might have acted as drainage spouts?
To abandon your shield is the basest of crimes. - --Tacitus on Germania
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
All contents © Copyright 2003-2024 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum
|
This is a standard topic