Explain this?

This is one of the dumbest weapons I’ve ever seen. Does anyone know what it is, and how it would be used?

  1. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Throw it and see.

  2. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    It's an African throwing knife. It was invented and made by morons. That should explain everything.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      It's a throwing axe. It's hooked like that to catch an enemy's shield and pull itself over it. West African I think.

      >Explain this
      morons
      >Does anyone know what it is, and how it would be used?
      It's a mambele or hunga munga and it's a shitty throwing weapon.

      No wonder why Africa was so easy to conquer

      >designed by morons

      >Metal weapons being expensive,
      >let's throw em away
      Smart.
      Genius.
      Clever, even.

      Some enterprising African gentleman should weld on AK sights and claim it increases throwing and penetrating powah.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        But on the other hand, ARs and AKs come with bayonet mountings.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        paint it red too so you can throw it fasta

  3. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    It's a throwing axe. It's hooked like that to catch an enemy's shield and pull itself over it. West African I think.

  4. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    curves around sheilds

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      It is used like a Roman pillum and imbeds in the shield at any angle it hits and makes the shield to unwieldy to recover.

      It actually works for breaking formations

      Is that Tribe A's way of saying to their enemies Tribe B "ur gay" or what?

      Das a rim spinner n’sheeeiit
      >yo yo yo Fumbukae check out deez raaymz

  5. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Makes the orc swords from the LOTR movies look a lot more realistic.

  6. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Explain this
    morons
    >Does anyone know what it is, and how it would be used?
    It's a mambele or hunga munga and it's a shitty throwing weapon.

  7. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Africa
    >Not ceremonial or a novelty
    >Throwing weapon
    >Using so much steel or iron
    You what?
    Could have made 10 spear points instead.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      It is used like a Roman pillum and imbeds in the shield at any angle it hits and makes the shield to unwieldy to recover.

      It actually works for breaking formations

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >It is used like a Roman pillum and imbeds in the shield at any angle it hits and makes the shield to unwieldy to recover.
        Doubt.

        All the other anons are saying it climbs over enemy shields rather than embeds into them and even if it did it wouldn't be anywhere near as unwieldy as a pilum.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          wtf you mean "doubt" this was a real, battle-tested weapon used for hundreds of years lol sorry it doesn't fit with your preconceived notions of design or aesthetics

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            he just hates africans, think nothing of it

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              >not hating Africans
              NGMI

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >designed by morons

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Muh iron is rare
      They can afford the iron, they can't afford to have 10x more dudes on the battlefield. Humans aren't free.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Africans might not be free but they're not expensive either

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Troops need food and a leader.
          Besides you're not going to win with numbers if your opponent has the same numbers and better equipment and logistics. Every peasant in Europe had an EDC 10in iron knife since 0AD.

  8. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    No wonder why Africa was so easy to conquer

  9. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    You'll look at these different when you realize the lower spike near the grip is supposed to be a penis. Not even "coincidentally looks like one" it's supposed to.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Is that Tribe A's way of saying to their enemies Tribe B "ur gay" or what?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Muh dik
        >Quote: every African, ever.

        Most contemporary scholars and African natives seem to think it's literally just "Knife am me, me big pee pee, me big pee pee kill u because big pee pee." But they put it in more flavorful meaningless terms like a scholar might say "it has totemic significance representing the weilder's power". A native might just point at it and go "eet ees da powah, da powah off da man"

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Europeans made daggers with dick handles
          everyone was muh dik for most of history

  10. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    That particular one is oversized and ceremonial, intended to convey status, battle weapons were smaller and simpler in design.
    They are an airfoil as well as sharp all around, and could go surprising distances. Generally the warrior would have 2-3 hooked over the back of his shield and throw them into the oncoming lines, usually at the feet and legs. At close range they would switch to knobkerries or assegai.

  11. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    A warrior would carry several of these heavy weapons on the inside of his shield, then throw it with devastating effect in the same manner as a viking's throwing axe. If it hit the typically light African shield it would weigh it down. If it hit the typically unarmed body of the opponent it would skewer him. Metal weapons being expensive, they were a high status weapon.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Metal weapons being expensive,
      >let's throw em away
      Smart.
      Genius.
      Clever, even.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Well, it worked for the Greeks, Romans, Vikings, Native Americans, Japanese, and technically single-shot AT and AA weapons are also throwaways.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          A spear requires a lot less steel/iron and none of them were poor africans who haven't managed to create a working society in their entire history

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Define working society? Large peaceful kingdoms were created with lots of agriculture. Including Egypt. They were just overrun by more aggressive ones with less interest in peace and agriculture. But I do believe we were discussing weapons and not cultural history.

            African metal weapons were made in village smithies, same as European medieval weapons. They had inferior ore to work with, compared to Europe where the best ore was imported from Turkey and Iran until logistics were disturbed by increasing warfare, and were less affected by the melting pot of information available to European smiths. Also the lack of armor made it less important to make steel capable of piercing. Finally the less developed combat techniques made more consideration placed on hacking than on fencing and parrying.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              >Define working society
              The bares minimum would be one in which the majority of men work instead of just buying a couple of girls, letting them and their children do all the work and sitting on their porch. Bantu culture is pretty universal in that regard.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                The women do the everyday work in that society for sure. While the men guard the living stock and do the warfare. Kinda like being enlisted. Also the hunting is done by men, and work in mines and other out-of-village paying activities. Your grandmoms and the women before that probably worked full time at home, and a few generations before that had fields to till all day as well. Do you think less of your female ancestors for that? Are your fellow men worthless for sitting in an army base all year?

                I loathe Africa. But hate should be built on knowledge, not on ignorance.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >The women do the everyday work in that society for sure.
                True.
                >While the men guard the living stock and do the warfare.
                Tending to livestock is mostly done by children and women. Warfare doesn't happen most of the time and most men don't participate in it.
                >Also the hunting is done by men,
                Yes but you seem to think hunting cultures in Africa are universal. Cattle is much, much more common.
                >and work in mines
                Done by women.
                >and other out-of-village paying activities.
                Often also done by women, not like they have much of that though.
                >Your grandmoms and the women before that probably worked full time at home, and a few generations before that had fields to till all day as well.
                Cope + untrue
                >Do you think less of your female ancestors for that?
                I think less of morons for being unable to build a working society at any point in their history and you for trying and lying to defend it.
                >Are your fellow men worthless for sitting in an army base all year?
                Comparing morons to western soldiers is pretty brazen even for you.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >unable to build a working society at any point
                Lol. Go look up Lobengula and Cetiswayo and get back to us when you're less retarded

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >look at these slightly less retarded morons
                Changes absolutely nothing, cuck.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Meanwhile in reality:
                Field work is for women, tending cattle is for children.
                Member that story about the cattle killing cult? The young girl who received the vision that caused the nogs to kill hundreds of thousands of their cows was tending to them with other kids at the time.
                Some male nogs work but only if they're young and their father tells them to or if they're too poor to do literally anything else and survive.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Do you have any idea of how many countries, cultures and tribes you are putting under the same hat now? You might as well say that because some guys in Spain are killing oxes for fun, all westerners do.

                I believe we were talking about weapons. Like this throwing weapon. Imagine how well it must have been forged to withstand a direct hit against something hard.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Do you have any idea of how many countries, cultures and tribes you are putting under the same hat now? You might as well say that because some guys in Spain are killing oxes for fun, all westerners do.
                Look up the bantu expansion, ignorant young redditor.
                The reason for the surprising similarity of subsaharan african cultures is that about 3000 years ago there were actually many different cultures (and races) there.
                But the Bantu thought: "Hey, those bush people, San and various other ethnicities look kinda weak, let's kill them all."
                So they did and after genociding millions of them most of "black" Africa ended up with bantu ancestors which then turned into the "vibrant diversity of cultures" we know today.
                The reason why most nogs have the typical nog look is because they come from Bantu stock, Khoisan actually look a lot more like darkskinned asians and that breed used to hold huge swathes of africa before getting genocided into a tiny minority.
                >I believe we were talking about weapons.
                Weapons and their usage are hugely dependent on the surrounding cultures and you made the mistake of asking for more information in that regard.
                >Like this throwing weapon. Imagine how well it must have been forged to withstand a direct hit against something hard.
                Kek, idiot

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >das right
                >we wuz kangz too
                >bantu kangz

                Exactly right. And the bantz boyz divide out on every conceivable point of difference, and use that as an excuse to keep killing each other.

                >sunnis be muh enemy
                >hutu be muh enemy
                >shia be muh enemy
                >tutsi be muh enemy
                >christians be muh enemy
                >zulu be muh enemy
                >color red be muh enemy
                >west coast rap be muh enemy
                >soccer fan not muh team be muh enemy

                Many such cases. A scourge on all civilization.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Are you saying that the rest of africa white-flighted away from bantus 3000 years ago? That makes so much sense actually

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Most just got genocided, really. Luckily Bantus were too retarded to be able to cross the Sahara.
                Then again, if the Sahara wouldn't be there arabs probably would've genocided nogs.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Imagine how well it must have been forged to withstand a direct hit against something hard
                Wow it has all the strength of wood.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              >Including Egypt
              We're talking about morons here you disingenuous cunt. You think the pic in the OP came from egypt?
              >African metal weapons were made in village smithies, same as European medieval weapons
              Plenty of large cities known for their metallurgy out there, retard.
              >They had inferior ore to work with, compared to Europe where the best ore was imported from Turkey and Iran until logistics were disturbed by increasing warfare
              That's an old and retarded myth, ore quality matters a lot less once you figure out how to manipulate carbon content with coal.
              > Also the lack of armor made it less important to make steel capable of piercing.
              How does that change that you could have 6 spears instead of 1 knife for the same amount of steel?
              >Finally the less developed combat techniques made more consideration placed on hacking than on fencing and parrying.
              THat's irrelevant too.
              What kind of weird moroncope is this?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >That's an old and retarded myth, ore quality matters a lot less once you figure out how to manipulate carbon content with coal.
                >once you figure out how to manipulate carbon content with coal.
                >once you manage to do something that one out of the four major metalworking traditions figured out
                >once you can do that, the hardest part, it's all easy

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Celts figured it out over 2000 years ago, vikings could still do it later.
                Retard-anon was just wrong.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              >medieval weapons. They had inferior ore to work with
              >Itstimetostopposting.jpg
              Central Frican had very high quality iron ore and well developed iron and steel production, to the point that they would not accept the inferior European pig iron the Portoguese brought to trade with

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              here we GO

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        If you win, you get to pick them up again, plus the other guy's. If you lose, they were going to take it away from you anyway.
        You're not very good at this whole war thing, are you?

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          If it's a draw you probably still lose them.
          Could just use more effective weapons that require less steel, moronbrain.

  12. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    This looks like they started with a relatively straight "spoon" shape and cut fronds then folded them to the side.
    I don't know enough about metallurgy to tell whether the stresses in the metal indicate that. But I have difficulty imagining that this was poured in a mould. This is exactly what I would expect from blacks, and their mentality hasn't changed.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Only the most primitive weapons are made from a mold, like arrow tips and spear points. Casting makes for a weaker weapon. I invite you to mention a single molded weapon since pre-iron times.

  13. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Heavy to carry, heavy to throw, the soldier could only carry a couple of them, surely a primitive weapon wasting valuable metal. Made of soft metal. Only a backward culture bad at warfare would utilize the pilum in scale. Right?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      The pilum actuay proved itself.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        And OP's throwing axe didn't? There were massive numbers of them manufactured so clearly they were found useful. We don't know their scores chiefly because of the lack of written records. We do know there were constant wars where they would have proven or disproven their value. They are even in occasional use today still.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          There were massive numbers of sheet metal Katanas manufactured but they were still shit weapons.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            An incredible number of Imperial NCOs and officers went to war with crap katanas their families had bought them as symbols of their rank, indeed. They however also had pistols which were their actual weapons. I hope you refer to them and not to about 70 postwar years of tourist trinket and online nerdorama production.

  14. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Those were show pieces.
    A way for a blacksmith to prove his skill by forging such a complex design, and for a wealthy aristocrat to display his wealth by being able to afford it.
    The more basic practical versions of the design were mostly just curved short sickle swords with short spikes on the front and back sides for guarding purposes. With these short spikes being exaggerated in every direction.

    Another base were small throwing axes widely used on the continent that tended to have exaggerated profiles.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Elaborate throwing axes from the same cultures as the OP.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/oygRcS9.jpg

      Elaborate throwing axes from the same cultures as the OP.

      Even these have the dick lol

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Weapons are often very phallic.

  15. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Fuckin weird OP. Its the weapon version of , the unicode character nobody knows the background of

  16. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Throwing axe. You huck it and have a few more tucked into your shield then switch to spear.

  17. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    The weird lobes are unironically meant to represent penises.
    Yes. "Muh dick" actually goes back this far for these embarrassing attempts at civilization

  18. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Wild crackpot theory of mine is that they started out as relatively sane swastikas like pic related then got weirder, less practical and focused on looks over time.

  19. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    You throw it fool. Go watch Deadliest warrior. The Show is retarded garbage but the episode this shows up in displays it's lethality. Also it's funny to imagine killing a guy with a cock.

  20. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Ah a thread where PrepHole displays their racism making them incapable of appreciating exotic weapons that were proven. Like every other board this place is a joke.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      It is a massive waste of metal for a throwing weapon, which leads to the conclusion that either the users were stupid or it wasn't intended to be practical.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        since it was found to be a deadly weapon, it was reasonably practical. thus the users were too stupid to think of a more efficient design.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Back to redd*t

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      and yet day after day you come here to be offended

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      How new are you that you have just discovered this?

  21. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Get dicked cracka

  22. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >muh sword has biggest dik
    I keked so hard wben I saw these in the British Museum.

  23. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Honestly it's not that bad it's just an African parallel evolution of the hurlbat

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      You mean a completely retarded version of it.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Hurlbats are already retarded wdym
        Captcha: YPPAX

  24. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Wouldn't it be easier to attach a heavy metal ball to the end of a stick and use that to kill things?
    morons make things so much harder than they have to be.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Yeah, can't imagine why Europeans bothered with edged weapons when the ball is so superior.

  25. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Would you want to be on the business of that? No thanks

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      You could make a lot of objectively shitty weapons that would still be awful to be hit with.

  26. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    If you have one dedicated item in your house/hut for throwing at an invader, makes sense to want it as big and sharp as possible.
    People then probably argued about these things the same way people do now about bullet caliber.

  27. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    is there any historical documentation to prove/disprove the effectiveness of these throwing weapons?
    i would love to learn more about these things
    the iklwa seemed to be much more effective

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      deadliest warrior (on the history channel) actually tested the weapon. it looks really stupid, but it was surprisingly deadly.

      there are far better choices, but it will still keel.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        i'm gonna go check to see if forged in fire did an episode on this weapon

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          They did. It is a good one.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      The mambele (the weapon we are discussing) is for throwing, same as a viking throwing axe which also was pretty heavy. The iklwa is a short spear intended mainly for close combat. A modern soldier has a rifle but also a bayonet or a combat knife. It is a weapon for a specific purpose and you can have more than one of those. Now the assegai is a different story; it is a throwing spear used in the fashion of the pillum. But where the pillum and the assegai is thrown by the hundreds at mid range, the mambele is a close up and highly personal weapon. Not unlike the japanese throwing star except this boy was born to kill not distract.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        very insightful, i need to learn nore about african weapons
        i feel like my knowlededge is incomplete, considering how i only really know about european & east asian arms
        thank you for the information

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          The most interesting thing about African weapons and combat through the ages is the overall lack of armor and cavalry which has led to different combat styles. Also the vast distances and difficult traveling has fostered more local inventions and variations. Bantus are mentioned; my three picks for study would be the bushmen, the zulus and the masaai. Bushmen were true survivalists, the zulus the prussians of their time, and the masaai are to this day the warrior tribe. Also the touareg are very much still warriors of today who embrace modern weapons for their causes. The touaregs are different from the others in being of arab heritage which makes them a bunch of bloodthirsty noblemen. They all have distinctive and effective weapons and in their homelands you will not survive a hostile encounter with them unless you bring CAS.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Don’t forget the long tradition of armed combat in east and west Africa. Ethiopia and the Nigerian states are rather interesting historical powers that people don’t look into too much.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              Ethiopia is perhaps different, being exposed to western imperialism early on and fighting it fairly effectively by eagerly embracing gun technology and modern tactics. Frankly they have been in combat up to and including today.

  28. 2 months ago
    Anonymous
  29. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Childlike blacksmithing
    >mine have more points, mine is better

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Don't blame the blacksmith, these things probably sold like hot cakes, with everybody wanting a bigger pointier one than their neighbor just got.
      It's legitimate cultural expression really.

  30. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >explain this
    It’s one of those stable diffusion AI generated merchant images

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *