Saber and Scimitar
Chrysis
What is the difference between sabers and scimitars?
Joshua Smith
>What is the difference between sabers and scimitars?
Sabers are bigger and nasty looking... while scimitars are more
"Crescent Moon" shaped, which is why druids can use them.
verkuilen john v
smit...@nbnet.nb.ca (Joshua Smith) writes:
Um, not exactly. They're both curved blades designed for use from
horseback with a chopping stroke. A saber usually has a narrower blade and
a point while a scimitar is has more mass in the forward part of the blade
for a better chop and no real point. I'd say they were variations on a
theme and probably should have the same basic stats: d8/d10, Type S,
Speed 5, Size M. I can't recall what the book stats are but these are
what I use for all medium swords--long swords, scimitars, sabers, broadswords,
etc., although I don't use speed factors and longswords can also stab
effectively, so they are S/P weapons.
I couldn't tell you why druids are considered to be able to use them--IMO
most of the weapon restriction rules are ill-thought-out at best. Presumably
the scimitar is used because of its vague resemblance to a scythe (never mind
the fact that the blade is on the wrong side and comes from Persia).
Oh, trivia question on swords: The last regular issue sword in the US
arsenal was discontinued in what year?
Answer: 1947, when the Cavalry was disbanded as a service branch of the
Army. Standard kit for a cavalryman included a saber as well as polo gear(!).
(Few horse cavalry units actually served in combat mounted during WWII,
though, under US flag or otherwise.)
Trivia question 2: Who was the US Army Master of the Sword?
Answer: General George Patton, who was an internationally known Olympic-
level fencer.
--
J. Verkuilen ja...@uiuc.edu
"Paradise is like where you are right now, only much, much better."
--Laurie Anderson, "Home of the Brave"
Bryan J. Maloney
In article <5n50n3$l...@mtinsc03.worldnet.att.net>,
"wdrussell"@[REMOVETHIS]worldnet.att.net wrote:
> What is the difference between sabers and scimitars?
Sabres and scimitars probably descended from the same steppes curved
sword. Two variations on the same theme.
--
To respond via email, remove non-licit characters to change my site to "cornell.edu".
"By US Code Title 47, Sec.227(a)(2)(B), a computer/modem/printer meets the definition of a telephone fax machine. By Sec.227(b)(1)(C), it is unlawful to send any unsolicited advertisement to such equipment. By Sec.227(b)(3)(C), a violation of the aforementioned Section is punishable by action to recover actual monetary loss, or $500, whichever is greater, for each violation."
Bryan J. Maloney
In article <5n7788$b...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>, ja...@ux6.cso.uiuc.edu
(verkuilen john v) wrote:
> horseback with a chopping stroke. A saber usually has a narrower blade and
> a point while a scimitar is has more mass in the forward part of the blade
> for a better chop and no real point. I'd say they were variations on a
Right, except for those sabres with the heavier centers of percussion and
the narrow-bladed scimitars. Like he said--variations on a theme.
> etc., although I don't use speed factors and longswords can also stab
> effectively, so they are S/P weapons.
Cavalry sabres, duelling sabres, and similar weapons can stab
effectively. I'm not speculating, I'm speaking from experience. The
technique is different, but it is effective.
> I couldn't tell you why druids are considered to be able to use them--IMO
> most of the weapon restriction rules are ill-thought-out at best. Presumably
> the scimitar is used because of its vague resemblance to a scythe (never mind
> the fact that the blade is on the wrong side and comes from Persia).
Scimitars are curved. That's why.
> Answer: General George Patton, who was an internationally known Olympic-
> level fencer.
Furthermore he wrote a manual of sabre (1914) for the US Cavalry, and even
as a lieutenant, he was Blood 'n Guts. "In combat, the parry is
useless."--a direct quote from the manual. Can't you just see George C.
Scott growling that out in staccato?
Jeff Olson
Joshua Smith wrote:
>
> On Wed, 04 Jun 1997 20:23:39 -0400, Chrysis
>
> >What is the difference between sabers and scimitars?
>
> "Crescent Moon" shaped, which is why druids can use them.
What about the difference between a saber and a cutlass?
Jeff Olson
Patrick M. Berry
In article <5n50n3$l...@mtinsc03.worldnet.att.net>, Chrysis <"wdrussell"@[REMOVETHIS]worldnet.att.net> writes:
> What is the difference between sabers and scimitars?
A scimitar is typically a broad, deeply curved sword, sometimes with a
concave scallop on the back of the point. You usually see scimitars
associated with the Middle East in things like Arabian Nights and
movies about the Crusades. I haven't checked, but I'll bet all the
swords shown in Disney's "Aladdin" are scimitars. To see some examples,
look at
http://www.joust.com/LaForge/custom/img/scimitar.jpg
and the left-hand sword in
http://www.inet-images.com/brubakers/iberia28.htm
A saber is typically a slim, gently curved sword. Many ceremonial swords
are sabers, like the Marine Corps Mameluke
http://www.swords-n-stuff.com/i-121bm.html
or cavalry sabers from the U.S. Civil War period.
http://www.knifecenter.com/knifecenter/swords/union.html
The cutlasses carried by pirates and swashbucklers in Errol Flynn movies
are a type of saber.
http://www.swords-n-stuff.com/i-017pp.html
http://www.swords-n-stuff.com/363.html
I would say the Japanese katana is also a saber, although some might
disagree with me.
http://www.tachi.com/shinken.htm
verkuilen john v
Jeff Olson <jeffrey...@SPAMFREElmco.com> writes:
>What about the difference between a saber and a cutlass?
>Jeff Olson
It is my understanding that the cutlass has a very different origin from
the saber. The cutlass was, IIRC, originally a flaying tool used by
fishermen and whalers to cut up their catch. The catch being large cod,
seals, whales, and the like, I can believe that a large heavy blade was
necessary to get things cut up in a reasonable amount of time. Of course, if
annoying pirate types or annoying official types showed up, the cutlass was
quite useful to flay them, too. :)
The saber was a weapon from the start, designed for cavalry use. Actually
it was probably more an issue of evolution from straight blades to curved
blades over time than someone sitting down one day and making a saber.
Patrick M. Berry
In article <339835...@SPAMFREElmco.com>, Jeff Olson <jeffrey...@SPAMFREElmco.com> writes:
> What about the difference between a saber and a cutlass?
Is there one? I've always thought of the cutlass as a subset
of the saber. Was I mistaken?
Kevin A Barton
Chrysis ("wdrussell"@[REMOVETHIS]worldnet.att.net) wrote:
: What is the difference between sabers and scimitars?
a sabre has a much narrower (and comparitively straighter) blade. A saber
usually has some sort of hand covering, like a basket hilt or whatever,
while i scimitar rarely has such a thing... the scimitar packs a little
more punch than the sabre but lacks the ability to parry as effectively
(due to thw way a typical scimitar is weighted, and the lack of a basket
hilt (whatever)...
-mordraith
Skywalker
Jeff Olson wrote:
>
> Joshua Smith wrote:
> >
> > <"wdrussell"@[REMOVETHIS]worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> >
> > >What is the difference between sabers and scimitars?
> >
> > "Crescent Moon" shaped, which is why druids can use them.
>
A cutlass is one of those long knife pirates uses and ,a sabre is a full
fledged one sided sword, a scimatar is well ... pick up and book with
drizzt on the cover and see for your self.
Bryan J. Maloney
> A scimitar is typically a broad, deeply curved sword, sometimes with a
Except when it isn't. The USMC "Mameluke" is a direct copy of scimitars
used by the Mameluke horsemen in North Africa. However, since it's
wielded by a Western military, it becomes a sabre.
> A saber is typically a slim, gently curved sword. Many ceremonial swords
> are sabers, like the Marine Corps Mameluke
It may be ceremonial now, but the blade has a fully functional shape,
regardless of its material construction.
> The cutlasses carried by pirates and swashbucklers in Errol Flynn movies
> are a type of saber.
However, actual cutlasses tended to be shorter, about the length of an
artillery sword.
> I would say the Japanese katana is also a saber, although some might
> disagree with me.
Sabres have never had chisel points.
Kevin Churchill
Chrysis <"wdrussell"@[REMOVETHIS]worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>What is the difference between sabers and scimitars?
A sabre is a light slashing weapon used by horsemen, while a scimitar
is a heavy slashing weapon often seen in Arabian-type settings.
In AD&D a sabre does 1d6+1/1d8+1, WS:4
a Scimitar does 1d8/1d8, WS:5
Just off the top of my head - hope it helps!
Kevin, si...@ptbo.igs.net
Yonman
Chrysis wrote:
> What is the difference between sabers and scimitars?
hi !
sabres are a slashing/piercing fencing sword used in europe since the
sixteenth century to nowadays (in fencing as sports ...)
scimitars are a much older weapon of the mediterenian area, used mostly
by the beduins and later the arabic empires and later, the turks.
the scimitar is slightly shorter but much more heavy and robust than the
sabre, used mainly to slash, leaving big ugly gushing wound and
sometimes might lodge themselves deeply in a bone (in my party double
damage are considered as such ... but the fighter has to spend a round
dislodging the sword - grab manuever with a -8 to hit - causing allotta'
more damage...). sabres are much more delicate and lighter. they require
a very strong wrist (if you've ever tried fencing - it's really alot of
fun - you'll see what i mean) and finger muscles. as nearly all control
on a sabre is made by the paw itself and not by the entire arm /
shoulder in the case of a scimitar. also they have a large "baskin" - a
round metal piece that covers the hand (i belive it gives a +1 with a
sap manuever... not sure). sabres were mostly used by the fighting
royalty, elite guards, officers and the like in europe as opposed to a
rapier that was used mainly by merchants and "soft royalty", the nobles.
one dire exception are the french musketteers who were known in their
control of a rapier.
both scimitars and sabres are curved, both in different ways. the
scimitar is either curved at the end (like a macheti) which is the
original beduin style, or ghastly curved in the middle to form a 70
degrees, very sharp arch (makes the sword look like a boomerang). this
was the turkish style.
i hope all of what i said is correct, as it is all from memory (books i
have read). if you find any mistakes (grammer or spelling too !) please
correct me.
Good luck and Shalome from Israel
Yonman
Tim Breen
> A cutlass is one of those long knife pirates uses and ,a sabre is a full
> fledged one sided sword, a scimatar is well ... pick up and book with
> drizzt on the cover and see for your self.
A sabre is _not_ merely single-sided. The 1/3 closest to the point on
the back side of the blade is sharpened, too. And a cutlass is a lot
bigger than a knife -- even that the knife Crocodile Dundee uses. <g>
-- Tim
Personal: http://personalweb.lightside.com/Pfiles/breen1.html
Gaming: http://www.rpga.org/Home.html
To subscribe to the RPGA-Talk mailing list, send a blank message to
requ...@lists.consultantalliance.com with a subject of "subscribe
RPGA-Talk" (no quotes).
Bryan J. Maloney
In article <33992627...@netvision.net.il>, Yonman
<yo...@netvision.net.il> wrote:
> sabres are a slashing/piercing fencing sword used in europe since the
> sixteenth century to nowadays (in fencing as sports ...)
Really? I think that the Poles might argue with you about that.
Furthermore, they had a LOT of use outside of sporting, I can tell you.
verkuilen john v
bjm10@c$or$ne!ll#.e&du (Bryan J. Maloney) writes:
>In article <5n7788$b...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>, ja...@ux6.cso.uiuc.edu
>(verkuilen john v) wrote:
>> horseback with a chopping stroke. A saber usually has a narrower blade and
>> a point while a scimitar is has more mass in the forward part of the blade
>> for a better chop and no real point. I'd say they were variations on a
>Right, except for those sabres with the heavier centers of percussion and
>the narrow-bladed scimitars. Like he said--variations on a theme.
That's one of the problems with the weapons lists--real weapons were all
variations on a theme. Sabers and scimitars are more or less the same
thing as far as game mechanics go, at least in my world. Slight tweakings,
d6+1 as opposed to d8, are pretty silly in my view, but as one likes.
>> etc., although I don't use speed factors and longswords can also stab
>> effectively, so they are S/P weapons.
>Cavalry sabres, duelling sabres, and similar weapons can stab
>effectively. I'm not speculating, I'm speaking from experience. The
>technique is different, but it is effective.
True and I didn't mean to imply they couldn't (the comment referred to
scimitars). I guess the cavalry saber was probably a lot better at stabbing
than the longsword, doubtless being made of better steel and also not made for
attacking someone in heavy armor. One of the things we need to remember is
that the cavalry saber was not made at the same time as the longsword--the
longsword predates the cavalry saber by several centuries, I would guess
(correct me if I'm wrong). Thus, the swordcraft that made them as well as the
targets that they were designed to attack differ substantially.
>> Answer: General George Patton, who was an internationally known Olympic-
>> level fencer.
>Furthermore he wrote a manual of sabre (1914) for the US Cavalry, and even
>as a lieutenant, he was Blood 'n Guts. "In combat, the parry is
>useless."--a direct quote from the manual.
Yep. He also studied at the French cavalry school. Even in his 50's
the man was known as a demon of a rider, polo player, and fencer.
>Can't you just see George C. Scott growling that out in staccato?
The funny thing is that while Scott physically resembled Patton, his
voice was very much unlike Patton's. There used to be a voice clip of
Patton's at, uh, West Point's web site, but it's been gone for a bit.
His biography (d'Este's) stated and the voice clip confirmed that Patton's
voice was rather high and not exactly the manly bellow of Scott.
But we remember Scott's voice, not the real one.
Take a look at Carlo d'Este's book if you get the chance. It's quite good
--Patton turned out to be a far more interesting person than I thought he
would be.
--
J. Verkuilen ja...@uiuc.edu
"No one can make you feel inferior without your consent."
--Eleanor Roosevelt
Rhett Moeller (CAS)
Scimitars are a blade of slender construction, usually bowed
outwards. They are light and quick, and, in the right hands, deadly.
Scimitars are made for skill and finesse.
Sabres, on the other hand, are heavier in construction, with a
heavy hilt. In the American Civil War, sabres were the weapon of choice
amongst the cavalry. The favorite tactic was to bring the heavy handle
down on another's shoulder while in the thick of battle, either numbing or
breaking the victim's shoulder. (That's where the shoulder boards, or
epaulettes, came from!) Hardly as beautiful in action as the scimitar. .
.
Hope that helps some.
****************************************************************
* Rhett A. Moeller \I/ *
* Life in the Lands of Light -@- *
* /I\ *
* *
* "I know half of you half as well as I should like, *
* and I like less than half of you half as well as you *
* deserve." *
* -Bilbo Baggins *
* *
* -rmoe...@brill.acomp.usf.edu *
****************************************************************
Malick of Strong Hold
Jeff Olson wrote:
> What about the difference between a saber and a cutlass?
> Jeff Olson
A saber is typically a thin bladed weapon (primarily for fencing now a
days), really light weight whereas a cutlass (Pirate Sword) is a
heavier, slashing weapon. If I remember correctly, a cutlass also has a
fully covering basket hilt to protect the hand. Not sure 'bout the
saber.
-mariner
AKA
-davesword
Bryan J. Maloney
In article <339ff092...@news.netscope.net>, ma...@netscope.net wrote:
> SPAM HATEROn Wed, 04 Jun 1997 20:23:39 -0400, Chrysis
> <"wdrussell"@[REMOVETHIS]worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
> >What is the difference between sabers and scimitars?
> Scimitars have wider blades than sabers.
Except when they don't.
Mike (Leszek Karlik)
On Mon, 09 Jun 1997 10:42:05 -0500, bjm10@c$or$ne!ll#.e&du (Bryan J.
Maloney) wrote:
>> sabres are a slashing/piercing fencing sword used in europe since the
>> sixteenth century to nowadays (in fencing as sports ...)
>
>Really? I think that the Poles might argue with you about that.
Yup. Actually, when the western countries (like France) used rapiers,
Poles used sabers (this was mainly due to the heavy Eastern influence
in Poland...).
>Furthermore, they had a LOT of use outside of sporting, I can tell you.
The sabers were the traditional weapons of Polish nobles and army. And
they were used pretty heavily, both in normal combat with the invaders
from Turkey or Sweden and in duels (though it has to be noted that the
saber, esp. one made for duels, was not a very lethal weapon. Though
it would kill, the first one or two slashes were - usually - not
fatal. After all - some of the Polish nobles had scars from 16+ saber
cuts, and it would be pretty hard to find somebody with 16+ scars from
a heavy rapier, 2H sword or a claymore... :> Still, a slash through
the head... Well.. No comments. ).
One should also note that though the sabers could be used for
piercing, they were not very effective as a piercing weapon... Also,
the sabers used in the nowadays fencing are something entirely
different (since all weapons used in sport fencing are basically
straight pieces of metal wire, and various types of weapon differ only
in what areas are legitimate targets)...
Also, BTW, that is what irks me off in Star Wars - that should be
Light SWORDS, not Light SABERS. Sabers are curved.
(Fortunately, in Polish, this is Lightsword, not Lightsaber. Good
translation.)
--
Mike (Leszek Karlik) - tr...@polbox.com; http://www.polbox.com/t/trrkt
FL/GN Leszek/Raptor II/ISD Vanguard, GRD(Sith) {IWATS-IIC} (Emperor's Hammer)
Star Wars junkie and Amber fan.
but...@allegheny.edu
Finally, a good run down on the saber... Good reply, nothing I REALLY want
to add except that the saber is generally considered a horse weapon, and
is weighted as such, for a downward slash... hurts like a bitch when
charging on a horse, I'm sure... High ground + forward momentum = severe
pain. It WAS used by the Polish nobility in hand-to-hand as well... take
it from one who is Polish if not nobility (at least I THINK I'm not Polish
nobility...) Never can be too sure... heh.
- BUTCH
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability
of the human mind to correlate all its contents.We live on a placid
island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was
not meant that we should voyage far. The sciences, each straining in its
own direction, have hitherto harmed us little; but some day the piecing
together of dissociated knowledge will open up such terrifying vistas of
reality, and of our frightful position therein, that we shall either go
mad with the revelation, or flee from the deadly night into the peace and
safety of a new dark age."
excerpt from "The Call of Cthulhu"
by Howard Phillip Lovecraft
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bryan J. Maloney
In article <339dacbd...@news.man.torun.pl>, tr...@polbox.com (Mike
(Leszek Karlik)) wrote:
> the sabers used in the nowadays fencing are something entirely
> different (since all weapons used in sport fencing are basically
> straight pieces of metal wire, and various types of weapon differ only
> in what areas are legitimate targets)...
Absolutely--and what is most bizarre is that the "cutting" fencing sabre
is the lightest of the three. My Maitre, on the other hand, insists upon
practice duelling sabres instead of modern fencing sabres. Curved, no
whip at all, actually look like blades...
but...@allegheny.edu
Check previous posts about this on Deja News... there are a few
really good ones... The saber is NOT a "really light" weapon... it was
HEAVY... it was originally a cavalry weapon, designed for slashing and
chopping from HORSEBACK... a light weapon would snap in about two swings
in those conditions... it was also used by Polish nobility (see DejaNews)
for dueling. Call it Central to Eastern Europe for convenience.
Please don't let loose with your opinion if you really don't know
what you're talking about... current dueling sabers are NOT real sabers...
they're basically wire attached to a handle.
>
> -mariner
> AKA
> -davesword
Bryan J. Maloney
In article
<Pine.PMDF.3.95.9706151...@venus.allegheny.edu>,
<but...@allegheny.edu> wrote:
> Please don't let loose with your opinion if you really don't know
> what you're talking about... current dueling sabers are NOT real sabers...
> they're basically wire attached to a handle.
Well, current fencing sabres (the wires attached to a handle) are not
duelling sabres, either. Duelling sabres had proper blades. Lighter than
cavalry sabres, but still respectable.
Dave Harper
Following the agenda of the New World Order, <but...@allegheny.edu>
wrote:
> Check previous posts about this on Deja News... there are a few
>really good ones... The saber is NOT a "really light" weapon... it was
>HEAVY... it was originally a cavalry weapon, designed for slashing and
>chopping from HORSEBACK... a light weapon would snap in about two swings
>in those conditions... it was also used by Polish nobility (see DejaNews)
>for dueling. Call it Central to Eastern Europe for convenience.
Funnily enough, this is why I renamed sabers "heavy sabers" in my
campaign world. Also because that let me bring in another sword (a
Japanese blade called the kusinokugi somethingortheother) and call it
a "light sabre."
<big grin> Now I just need to think of a non-copyright-infringing
name for Jedi Knights...
Dave
"What's for dessert?" -Me
"AAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!" -My mother
"YOU *NEVER* ASK FOR DESSERT!!" -My father
"Space aliens have taken my child!" -My mother
"So, is there any pie left?" -Me
Bryan J. Maloney
I was looking through random sources last night, just to kill some time,
and I came across a page in one of them where a photograph of a Turkish
scimitar was next to a photo of a Polish sabre. The labels could have
been reversed and nobody would have known.
As I've said many times--the "sabre" is the same weapon as the
scimitar--merely used by a different culture.
DuaneVP
From: bjm10@c$or$ne!ll#.e&du (Bryan J. Maloney)
>>I was looking through random sources last night, just to kill some time,
and I came across a page in one of them where a photograph of a Turkish
scimitar was next to a photo of a Polish sabre. The labels could have
been reversed and nobody would have known.
As I've said many times--the "sabre" is the same weapon as the
scimitar--merely used by a different culture.<<
I've always made the distinction (though this may not be technically
accurate) that a sabre has a blade that maintains mostly the same width
along the length of the blade whereas a scimitars' width will increase
noticeably. Another way to put it would be to say that if you
straightened out the curve of a sabre you'd have something that looked
like a longsword but a straightened scimitar would still have a broader
area towards the tip than at the hilts.
Duane VanderPol
"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers" - Thomas Watson, IBM Chairman, 1943
Bryan J. Maloney
In article <19970627021...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
dua...@aol.com (DuaneVP) wrote:
> From: bjm10@c$or$ne!ll#.e&du (Bryan J. Maloney)
> >>I was looking through random sources last night, just to kill some time,
> and I came across a page in one of them where a photograph of a Turkish
> scimitar was next to a photo of a Polish sabre. The labels could have
> been reversed and nobody would have known.
>
> As I've said many times--the "sabre" is the same weapon as the
> scimitar--merely used by a different culture.<<
>
> I've always made the distinction (though this may not be technically
> accurate) that a sabre has a blade that maintains mostly the same width
> along the length of the blade whereas a scimitars' width will increase
However, these two weapons did not have that difference. So are you going
to tell the Poles or the Turks that they are wrong?
DuaneVP
From: bjm10@c$or$ne!ll#.e&du (Bryan J. Maloney)
>In article <19970627021...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
>dua...@aol.com (DuaneVP) wrote:
>
>> From: bjm10@c$or$ne!ll#.e&du (Bryan J. Maloney)
>> >>I was looking through random sources last night, just to kill some
time,
>> and I came across a page in one of them where a photograph of a Turkish
>> scimitar was next to a photo of a Polish sabre. The labels could have
>> been reversed and nobody would have known.
>>
>> As I've said many times--the "sabre" is the same weapon as the
>> scimitar--merely used by a different culture.<<
>>
>> I've always made the distinction (though this may not be
technically
>> accurate) that a sabre has a blade that maintains mostly the same width
>> along the length of the blade whereas a scimitars' width will increase
>
>However, these two weapons did not have that difference. So are you
going
>to tell the Poles or the Turks that they are wrong?
Sure! Hey! You Poles and Turks are just WAY screwed up about how you
guys have been describing your weapons. I think you ought to just knock
it off and get with the program. You're really causing a lot of
unnecessary confusion in the nomenclature of weaponry and I insist that
you cut it out immediately. Even I can tell the difference between a
sabre and a scimitar and I've never used either one! You guys have used
them in ACTUAL combat and can't get it right. Jeez.
Well I really threw down the gauntlet with that one but I don't think
the Polish cavalry is going to come riding down on me (especially since
the last of them probably got mopped up in the initial stages of WWII).
As I suggested I'm not exactly an expert here just voicing my opinion of
what I _thought_ was supposed to be the difference between the two. Of
course, there IS the possibility that they WERE wrong. It wouldn't be the
first time that weapons were mis-named and sometimes the "definitions" of
weapon types gets awfully fuzzy anyway. Polearms were especially good for
that as I understand.
Jason Hatter
Bryan J. Maloney (bjm10@c$or$ne!ll#.e&du) wrote:
: > I've always made the distinction (though this may not be technically
: > accurate) that a sabre has a blade that maintains mostly the same width
:
: However, these two weapons did not have that difference. So are you going
: to tell the Poles or the Turks that they are wrong?
I take it you didn't see the above portion of his message?
--
Jason
http://www.cris.com/~towonder/
RPG stuff at http://www.cris.com/~towonder/rpg.html
featuring Sailor Moon V at http://www.cris.com/~towonder/fanfic.html