QUOTE
m707 Posted Yesterday, 09:43 PM ;
I'm very interested in this curved aspect of the sword . What was the function of introducing the curve ?
When you say the curve style were adopted from central aisa , which current day countries are we talking about. Also who are the steppes horseman , are they the descendants of any modern race ?
A curved blade in a cutting action is improved over a straight blade since the blade naturally drags at the cut even with a simple swing. The mechanics of this can be felt but handling sabres and katana (and cutting with them). The curved blade is also suited to a horseman since it can thrust and not be stuck in the body the same way as a straight sword if used from a mounted position. In this way it has been associated with steppes horsemen originally although Turkic origins are possible. Thomas Chen (who isnt often here much anymore it seems) could give more specifics or a final answer. The development of weapons after the Han dynasty is not an area I have put much attention on and these curved swords I tend to associate more with comparitively 'late' dynasties. By the Song times most of the types of 'modern' style Chinese swords and weapons that are used have already appeared but naming them and identifying each is more for a modern martial artist or broader sword historians area.
QUOTE(TMPikachu @ Aug 31 2006, 12:16 AM) [snapback]4843786[/snapback]
Kenneth, on the curved swords. I've always heard they were probably a steppe nomad invention, but I thought the nature of being a nomad would make ironworking difficult.
Hmmm, actually I don't know much about nomad life. It would seem illogical to think that they did not produce their own metal weapons and had to rely on sedentary civilizations in trade, but how portable is a smithy?
The life of a nomad was not as backwards as might be thought. Although Sima Qian has been praised for being the 'first' anthropological account of another peoples by his writings on the Xiongnu it seems aspects of what he wrote must rely on hearsay and bias of the times. On specific aspects he has been found to be actually wrong. It just goes to show that such ancient histories are no more credible than many modern histories (if not more so) and should not be taken alone as a final word or complete. Even sites in East Zhou and Han times included true settlements. Settlements as focuses of production existed even in ancient China so the later steppes people would also have centres to produce weapons if need be.
http://xiongnu.boom.ru/review.htmQUOTE
ART AND ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE XIONGNU: NEW DISCOVERIES IN RUSSIA
Dr. Sergey Minyaev
Institute of the History of Material Culture, Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg, Russian Federation.
The Xiongnu (Huns of Asia) headed a powerful alliance of cattle-breeding tribes during the late 3rd-early 2nd century B.C., and dominated the eastern part of Central Asia for two centuries, laying the foundations for the emergence of tribal alliances there in the Middle Ages. The military and political history of the Xiongnu has been well documented in Chinese texts, but their civilization, culture, and art have remained relatively obscure. Chinese written sources testified: "The Xiongnu had no towns, no settlements, no agriculture, they could not sow, and they were only hunters." The first Xiongnu sites were discovered in 1896 by the anthropologist J. D. Talko-Grinzevich in the area around Kyachta, now in the Buryatia Republic, Russian Federation. A subsequent expedition led by P. K. Kozlov excavated several barrows in the Noin-Ula area of Outer Mongolia between 1924 and 1925. These tombs held a rich hoard of silver vessels, carpets and jade objects. Repeatedly studied and published, these finds have until recently defined the typical forms of Xiongnu art. Only in recent years have some Xiongnu sites in the Trans-Baikal area been thoroughly excavated.
The most detailed information comes from the lvolga complex, composed of a large fortress, a small fortification and a cemetery, all excavated by Prof. A. Davydova. The complex is situated 16 km from Ulan-Ude, in the Selenga Valley. The size of the large fortress is 350 m. from north to south and 200 m. from east to west. The fortress was surrounded by defence ramparts, which were between 35 and 38 m. in width. In the southern part of the space enclosed by the ramparts, an area of 7.000 sq. m. was revealed, yielding 51 dwellings, mostly semi-subterranean, and 600 pits. Each house featured a fireplace of stone slabs in the north-eastern corner. Trie only surface building ("a house of a chief') was situated in the centre of the site. The site was built according to a plan, with dwellings arranged in rows, organized in blocks and separated by long ditch-like pits. Several finds from dwellings and pits suggested that the inhabitants of the site were engaged in agriculture, cattle-breeding, minting and fishing, and that their occupations included metalwork in iron, bronze, and precious metals. Various art objects with animal patterns and geometrical designs were found in the fortress. At the lvolga burial ground, 216 graves were excavated. Remains of clothing were preserved, and bronze plates made in the so-called "Ordos style" and unique types or beads were found.
Large-scale excavations have also been conducted on the Dureny-1 settlement (led by Prof. A. Davydova), where Ivolga-type dwellings and artefacts were found, demonstrating that their inhabitants were agriculturists, herdsmen, and craftsmen. This extended settlement spreads for II km along the Chikoy River. About 5 000 sq. m. were excavated. Besides ornaments of various types, a unique bronze seal with a representation of a mountain goat was found.
&
QUOTE
The discovery of fortresses and settlements of the Xiongnu reveals a complex economic structure. The Ivolga fortress, the Dureny settlement and the other fortresses and settlements of the Xiongnu constitute incipient forms of town, or "proto-towns", whose inhabitants were engaged for the first time in agriculture and metallurgy. Chinese written sources also refer to these Xiongnu towns. Sima Qian refers to tnem in passing as, "Xiongnu constructed a town for keeping the grain". But Ban Gu describes in more detail. In the Han shu, chapter 70, there is the description of the capital of the Zizi shanyu (chief). This description matches the construction of the lvolga fortress.
Here lie two contradictions: first, between the archaeological evidence and the written sources, i.e., between the existence of the Ivolga fortress and the sentence, "the Xiongnu had no towns"; and second, between the written sources themselves wherein the the same phrase reads, "the Xiongnu had no towns" from the Shi Ji and the description of the capital of Zizi shanyu in the Han Shu. The archaeological evidence obviously demands a re-examination of the written source. The 110th chapter of Shi Ji by Sima Qian entitled Xiongnu Liezhuan is the main source for Xiongnu history. This chapter could be divided into two parts. The first part focuses on the nomads, predecessors (not ancestors) of the Xiongnu in Central Asia, from ancient times until the end of the third century B.C, who "had no the towns". The second part of chapter 110 is the history of the Xiongnu tribes themselves. It is in this part that Sima Qian comments: "Xiongnu constructed a town for keeping the grain."
As such, the period when the Xiongnu empire existed in Central Asia represented the first step of the urbanization of areas previously characterized by nomadism............The causes for the urbanization of the Xiongnu were complex but apart from military strategy, the principal cause might have been economic necessity. The great nomadic empire in fact occupied a vast territory and cattle breeding alone, the principal nomadic economic mainstay, could not provide the empire with the necessary products. The empire needed the balance of several kinds of production.