Судан и Большой Ближний Восток

261 Alexander S. Matveev. A Case of Survival of an Early Medieval Straight Sword... Of course, it would not be that easy to “cut in two” a mailed warrior (most likely, even impossible), but still the picture is telling (viz., a standard expression describing a mighty stroke of a Russian cavalryman or Cossack: “he cut him in two down to the saddle”). However, the sabre is less convenient for thrusting. Nevertheless, unlike a late medieval Persian shamshir , the earlier sabres of the Great Steppe were just slightly curved and never completely abandoned their thrusting function. Besides, early medieval swords with their smoothly rounded tip were not specifically designed for thrusting, either. Secondly, the sabre was easier to operate in the melee of battle. A traditional broadsword was able to generate a more powerful stroke than a sabre simply because of its higher weight, producing “great slow slashing blows with a straight arm and swung from the shoulder using the strength of the back to supplement the weight of the sword... which is centred at a percussion-point”. 1 However, it could not be easily used again in the melee of a battle, as it requires more space and time to rise it high enough for a full-strength blow: it is virtually impossible to parry strokes and swing sword “from the shoulder” simultaneously. The sabre, on the contrary, can be swiftly re-used to strike again, as it was lighter than a sword and due to its form required less efforts to strike. Sword’s trajectory had to be longer and smoother than that of the sabre, which gains higher velocity in a shorter time, and can strike from various angles, as even a moderate slash could be lethal because of its continued “slicing” effect. Note the right warrior’s stroke on Fig. 19: it would be ineffective with a broadsword, as the latter has to be lifted higher to strike — as the left warrior does. As a result, in the melee of a battle, most of straight sword strokes were not actually cutting but rather ‘punching’ the enemy, thus chainmail and shield have been a sufficient defence against the sword. It can be clearly seen from an extremely low level of casualties in the European knightly warfare, of which the knights were fully aware. 2 The latter is evident, e. g., from the Rule of Templars, when 1 Oakeshott E. Records of the Medieval Sword. P. 103. 2 See a typical medieval attitude towards the matter: “Formerly [i. e. in antiquity], many thousands perished in battle, but now, because of increasing calamities the means of protection have also been improved, and new defense