A couple of observations on throwing hawks

Sylvrfalcn

Sylvrfalcn

Joined
Jun 4, 2002
Messages
3,930
Don't claim to be an expert by any means, but I'm satisfied with the progress I've made with throwing knives, tomahawks, and spears. Learned a couple of things about hawks that others might find useful.

1. Heavier is better: As long as it's not so heavy that you have to strain yourself to get it downrange, a heavier hawk will throw more consistently, more accurately, and stick more dependably than a lighter hawk that has to be thrown harder. No revelation, Ragnar points this fact out on his webpage, but I'm here to tell you I've tested this theory with half a dozen different size/weight hawks now, and it's the real deal, heavier is noticeably better.

2. The ideal edge for a chopping tool is lousy for a throwing hawk: Think about it, one of the strong points of a convex edge is that it doesn't stick or bind up in wood. When you're asking it to fly through the air and bury itself in the end grain of a large hunk of old log, it responds by bouncing, or hesitantly sticking then falling out. If you have a tomahawk that'll be used primarily for throwing, take a look at it's edge. If it's thick and heavily convexed, you can get significantly better performance from it by flattening the bevels and thinning the edge until it "bites" (I know, pure heresy, the convex edge police will surely come take me away).

Attended our local monthly medieval tournaments yesterday, "broke their hearts and took their toys" in archery, knife throwing, and spear throwing (skewered a 12" tall, stuffed toy "reindeer" at 15 yards, great fun). Got edged out by one throw in the axe throwing, oh well, practice, practice, practice. ;)

Sarge
 
I've thrown a 14 oz. Allan octagon hawk for about eight years. This year my Christmas wishlist has a 20 oz. French hawk on it for me, and I've ordered a 16 oz. British belt axe for my youngest son (who recently completed his throwing apprenticeship at elk camp in October). I've also found that I throw a heavier hawk more reliably under a greater variety conditions, but I just never quite got around to getting that heavier hawk.

I never use my throwing hawk for chopping chores; that's what the Estwing is for. Although I have on occasion used the poll to drive tent stakes. :rolleyes:
 
In terms of war, then, what are hawks?
Would a soldier carry a throwing hawk? Was the throwing hawk used also for wood craft?

I'm thinking a hunter gatherer society would not specialize the weapon to the point where it was poor at wood craft, or at throwing, but acceptable at both. These modern throwers, do they have any resemblance to historical tools?
Yeah, I know- here's a guy who oughta get out more and read.



munk
 
In terms of war, a hawk was probably intended for hooking shields away from your adversaries and hewing them into individual component pieces in close quarter combat. I don't think hawks were traditionally carried to be thrown, except maybe by Mel Gibson or Daniel Day Lewis.
 
I think the secret in a heavy hawk lies in the arm of the thrower . While it is true a heavier hawk will stick better it will also throw better because the thrower can feel eccentricities he has put into the throw . He can therefor correct these errors before the hawk leaves the hand . As for that thick and or convex edge ? It could be put down to a lack of experience , a compromise between woodcraft and throwing or to make up for inferior or the wrong kind of metal used in the edge . I think a hawk would be a good survival tool that would be worn on the belt when the big heavy axe was left back at camp . I would much rather have a 14 inch 1 1/4 pound tool on my belt than a 2 - 2 1/2 pound axe . To me a hawk is superior to an axe in one other regard . The more you chop the tighter the head handle join becomes . Unlike axes which come loose over time .
 
What is the normal distance for throwing the hawks and knives?

Is there a standard uniform distance in the competitions?
 
What is the normal distance for throwing the hawks and knives?

Is there a standard uniform distance in the competitions?
Click to expand...

It all has to do with 'spin' distances, that is, the distance it takes for a knife to flip end over end one time. The spin distance has to do with the length of your arm, length of the knife, and how you hold the knife. I think usually single spin distance is 6 paces or so. I dont know about others, but I think the one my dad went to had you throw at single, one and a half, and two spin distances.
 
Munk,
Axes have been used as tools, and, weapons, since the stone age. Thrown axes as weapons are fairly well documented all the way back to the Dark Ages/Migration Period, and were particularly favored by Germanic tribes like the Franks.

Tomahawks, as carried and used during the early periods of this country's history, would most certainly have served as tools to gather firewood, construct shelter, butcher game, etc.. But, they were (are) also viciously effective close quarter weapons. Considering small arms technology at the time consisted of single shot muzzleloaders, in the early days flintlocks no less, it was prudent to carry back up weapons like tomahawks and the large so called "rifleman's knife" (most being similar to big butcher knives). The utility of throwing one's hawk, or knife for that matter, at an opponent, would largely depend on the tactical situation, but it's safe to assume that a vigorously thrown tomahawk, even if it doesn't hit you edge first, is definitely going to get your attention.

Besides, throwing tomahawks is just plain fun :D

Sarge
 
CI-XH2120.jpg


GREAT WEAPONS OF THE ANCIENT WORLD NUMBER 52:

THE FRANCISCA

The francisca is a throwing-axe used, as the name suggests, by the Franks. The head is a distinctive shape, which makes it distinguishable from a battle-axe. Although I had heard many times of this weapon, I had never felt that I understood it. The problem was this: why would anyone use one instead of a javelin? If it was a battle axe which could also be thrown then this might be an explanation, but if it was a throwing weapon only, then the advantages of javelins recommended themselves so strongly that it was difficult to believe that a people such as the Franks could adopt such an apparently ineffective weapon, even if they had some tribal pride in it.

Javelins are lighter and easier to carry than franciscas. A man might carry a bundle of javelins, whereas he is unlikely to carry more than one francisca. Javelins can be thrown from horseback, can be thrown quickly, can be thrown well even with no run-up, have decent range, good accuracy, good penetration and will always land point-first. By contrast, a francisca can't be thrown very quickly, gains a lot from a run-up, and spins around in flight, making the whole process rather approximate, and will seldom hit the target point-first.

My view of the francisca changed rapidly when I went on a dark-age re-enactment weekend in the Lake District. A few of us had made franciscas, and were trying them out for the first time. The first thing we learned is that the head is so heavy (being chunkier than a battle-axe) that the thing is pretty useless in melee - it is just too unwieldy. The next was to confirm near enough everything I said in the last paragraph. The big revelation came when we started throwing them into an empty space of ground. Franciscas bounce.

If a javelin is parried with a shield, and does not come through, the danger to the target is over. Similarly, if a javelin is seen in flight, it can easily be side-stepped by anyone with enough room to do so, and it will hit the ground and stop. Not so, the francisca. When a francisca hits the ground, it bounces randomly like a rugby ball. The heavy head and long curving haft combine to make this weapon hurl about unpredictably for a few seconds, sometimes leaping over a man's height into the air. If ever one did hit a shield point-first, then it might behave as a javelin, but a more likely strike would bounce off the shield alarmingly. The weight of the whole weapon would ensure that it made a frightening noise against the shield first.

Imagine, then, a large group of Franks attacking a formed-up group of foes. If they all threw at once, shortly before contact, then charged in with swords, then they might well find themselves charging into a formation which has be broken up by many whirling unbalanced sharp implements. Few of the enemy would be badly injured by the volley, but whereas a disciplined soldier could well stand in firm formation against a volley of javelins, I strongly suspect that it would take much more nerve to stand steady with half a dozen bouncing franciscas crashing into him and his neighbours.

Our experiments then showed us that the francisca might well be a very effective weapon, to be used a bit like the pilum: thrown as a volley at fairly close range, during a charge against formed-up foes. Whereas the pilum is a weapon which specialises in depriving the enemy of the full use of his shield, the francisca seems better at depriving him of his formation, which would suit a troop type which hopes to charge straight into the enemy formation, and hack it up from inside, such as a barbarian warband. Warbands, one imagines, also used ferocity and terror as a weapon to put their opponents to flight, and franciscas seem well suited to this.
Click to expand...
 
And then there's these things called "hurlbats", kind of medieval "ninja stars" if you will. A volley of hurlbats thrown in concert with a volley of stones from the slingers, would cause considerable disruption among organized ranks of men.

ax001a.jpg



"I can see throwing spears since there isn't much else you can do with them but what practical point is there in throwing your hatchet out into the brush like that? Granted, any way you hit someone with a thrown tomahawk/hatchet/axe will get their attention, but wouldn't it be smarter to just pick up a rock and throw that instead?"
Cliff, unless you specifically carried rocks around with you, you might not have time to locate one and throw it. Let me give you a tactical scenario in which throwing your tomahawk would be a good thing. The time is early 18th century, French and Indian Wars, you're in a battle in the forest and have just fired your flintlock rifle bringing down one enemy. Across a small creek about seven yards from you is another enemy raising his rifle towards you. You snatch your tomahawk from your belt and throw it. You most likely won't have killed him, but you just may have bought yourself enough time to move to cover while he's dealing with the distraction of that tomahawk coming at him.

Here's another, you're part of a raid on an enemy camp and need to take out a sentry. Discharging your rifle will alert the enemy of your presence, but you are confident you can sneak up behind him to within 'hawk throwing range (around 15 to 20 feet for precision work). A well thrown hawk buried in a man's skull, or just about anywhere along the spine, will kill him instantly, and with relatively little noise. If that sounds far fetched, consider this, my own practice has progressed to the point that I can consistently hit a playing card at 16 feet with a polled tomahawk similar to the English Infantry axe from that period.
hammer21.JPG

Someone with years of practice could make that throw handily.

Sarge
 
I have never had any thrown weapon training. I was suprised to learn below that its calculated on how many spins vs distance. I can wrap my mind around that. Sweet concept too the bouncing disaray caused by the thrown axes. Neat. Good thread.
 
I love to throw hawks and knives. I can remember many a summer spending my entire days throwing any old knife or axe into the surrounding tree stumps. Over hand, under hand, by blade, by grip, 6 paces to 15 paces. I wrecked so many good quality knives growing up because my first notion was to see how well they threw. Even though they stuck most of the time, they would be rattled loose by the shock.
One day I would like to get one of the more expensive hawks. However, as much as I have learned the value of quality, I also know what works for me. I have one of those 2lb cold steel rifelman's hawks. What a powerhouse hitter. While not the greatest hawk around, it has held up really well. I also have a CS trailhawk as well. A even better camping tool (lighter), but it doesn't have the umph of the RH.

Jake
 
I was of some age before I got my first real 'Hawk but in addition to throwing all sorts of different balanced knives when I was young I also threw a hatchet, wish I knew what brand it was and what happened to it but it is lost in the labrinth somewhere in my mind.:(
What I do know is that I could split a 2"X4" 9 times out of 10 at 30 feet with it time after time after time.:thumbup: :D
But then I practiced a lot and every day for a mighty long time.
It's amazing what you can do when you have the time a child has/had, don't know if in this day and age if kids have the time that we did when I was just a youngen. It seems that in today's world there is much more demands put on our children than there was in my day.:(
The nice thing is that when we're able to retire with an income that can support us comfortably we can have that kind of time again in our lives.:D
I've actually started doing some minor work on my Foxy Folly's that I've long wanted to do.
It's wonderful not too have constant debilitating pain.:thumbup: :D :cool:
Maybe it won't be too long before I can start enjoying throwing my 'Hawks once again but I doubt that I'll ever be as good as I was when I was younger, but then one never knows what can be achieved until one tries ainnit? ;)
Maybe I'll try to find a hatchet like I used to have.:D
 
shane justice said:
Throwing hawks is cool...

BUt the really tough thing is catching them!:D

Shane
Click to expand...

Yup.:( I was a big ol' dumb kid that mostly did things without thinking of the consequences. I could've killed one of my best friends brother one day.
Butch was younger than Ron and me and like all younger brothers was a PITA. One day Butch decided he would stop us from throwing our knives and hatchets and he placed himself right smack dab in the middle of our target, a huge ol' cottonwood tree about 3-1/2 feet in diameter and started jeering at us.
Suddenly there was a solid thunk where my hatchet stuck in the tree a scant six inches from Butch's ear.
Needless to say he moved and moved quickly. Only later did I think about what could've happened.:eek: :( :grumpy:
Scared the crap out of me then and I didn't do anything like that again.
 
Quote .
Needless to say he moved and moved quickly. Only later did I think about what could've happened.

REPLY: I was taught at an early age to never throw an edged weapon at an opponent . The salt in the blood makes them rust up quick ! L:O:L
 
My older brother accidentally shot me in the face with a target-tipped arrow. I told my mother I tripped and fell on a stick.
 
Spectre said:
My older brother accidentally shot me in the face with a target-tipped arrow. I told my mother I tripped and fell on a stick.
Click to expand...

There's an unspoken code between brothers, similar to "what happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas". Growing up, my three brothers and I had our share of scrapes, but we pretty much settled disputes "at the lowest level of authority". :D

Sarge
 
Munk, you're thoughts on useful tool vs useful weapon are correct.
Heres the thing that many people forget:
People dont throw hawks at wooden targets in combat.
A sharp convexed edge works great when you throw the weapon at a meat and bone target like a man.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top