Tom Nichols. The Death of Expertise:
"All things are knowable and every opinion on any subject is as good as any other".

The non-expert knowledge is constructed fragmentarily and linearly. Separate, fragmentary facts just put on a straight time line and a conclusion is made at the end. For example:
1. The Chinese fleet reached India in the 15th century.
2. There is a sword similar to the Chinese in the Deccan in the 16th century.
3. Local elites with access to the novelties adopt them first and then they trickle down to the lower social strata.
4. So, somewhere after the 16th century, the peasants in the Deccan have been armed with Chinese weapons (we know that the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence).

Another example. In an album with illustrations of Indian weapons, the author in a stenographic style refers to the image of Yogini in a secondary source ("Yoga: The Art of Transformation", very scientific :)) and proves that the Indian axe "bhuj" was existed in India already in the 10th century. Here is the image on the museum website:
https://collections.artsmia.org/art/...th-a-jar-india
Any expert in the field of Indian culture knows that the images of the Yogini always follow the canon and she can only hold a mace or a sword, but not an axe. If you look at the image from a different angle, it becomes clear why the author misled (perhaps he did not have the Internet):
https://images.artsmia.org/wp-conten...a_60074381.jpg

An expert in the field of Deccan culture of the 16th century knows how strong Iranian cultural influence was in this region during this period. Noblemen, scientists, atist and Sufis were invited from Iran and Central Asia. The elite was represented by Shia Muslims, Indians and even Africans. It was the leading cultural center of that time, influencing the whole of India. Rather, the weapons of the Deccan would have got to China than vice versa. But there was the influence of Chinese culture through Iran due to the "porcelain way". But it was a more complex phenomenon and this is not for discussing here.

I am with Jim:
And it will be better to discuss item posted by werecow
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showpo...49&postcount=3
because your item from the auction raises questions.

Just for curiosity. A composite style:

More examples:

Re. Your penultimate post.
In the list on top of it, points 1,2,and 3 are correct.
But to call Qutb Quli Shah a “ peasant” would be a slight exaggeration.
Overall, this list is ‘true, true and not related”. All cultural novelties trickle down to a certain socio-economic level and stop there. There are still countries where significant portions of population have no indoor toilets, would you believe?

As to the example from werecow, wouldn’t you agree that its rudimentary quillons look suspiciously like Chinese “chi”?

The item from the auction I have shown indeed raises questions. That is exactly why I asked one:-)

The intricacies of the rest of your message are well above my level of interest. As they say, “What was the middle part?”
Although i know some “ yoginis” who should not be allowed to carry not only axes, but even manicure tweezers:-)

Interesting discussion gentlemen. I find cross cultural influence and exchange of technology, ideas, and genes to be one of the most fascinating subjects ever.

Ren Ren, the Tibetan swords you show seem to have a Kala on them? Would you say that is a Tibetan addition that fits conveniently into the space or is it an implied motif on the Chinese and Indian examples also? I.e. time and death devouring all. The visors of the Mongolian helmets state this as well or just share a silhouette? Seeing that pattern repeat was a very good catch.

Mercenary, Where is the example in post #41 from?

The State Hermitage Museum (Petersburg, Russia)
Iran, XV-XVI, when Chinese motifs were popular in the art of the Timurid state and the early Safavids. At a later time, the heads of dragons and birds were removed.

inscription: "From the desire to have a sun-like dagger, every bone in my body side became a dagger".

Thank you. I am glad to see my eyes didn't lie. It looked like Chinese motifs on an Iranian or Caucasian blade. decorated with Turkish style turquoises, and eared (or is that an optical illusion?). For some reason it made me think of the sword of Charlemagne". To which other than hybridization this dagger has nothing to do with. I then picked up Rivkin's "History of the Eastern Sword" and skimmed a few a few chapters covering the concept of transmission of styles across Asia and Europe. Which does seem related to our current topic, but I did not find an appropriate quote.

So, do you think it was made for Shiites and then owned by Sunnis who removed the animals heads?

Don’t we exaggerate the anti-iconic customs of Shia and Sunni?

Both Turkish Sultans and Persian Shahs invited European artists to have their portrais painted , Iranians had their khanjars with ivory handles carved with human figures, Sunni Mughals had books with rich collections of miniatures showing multiple personalities, Deccani Sultans had the same , Shia Tipu Sultan had a life-size statue of a tiger devouring a Brit… etc.
And I am not talking miniatures depicting copulating couples in great detail ( talk about modesty):-)

Moreover, any comparison between religious anti-iconic fervor of Sunni vs. Shia doesn’t seem to hold water.

Anti-iconism was and still is very strong only in the Salafi and Wahhabi communities. But streets of Karachi and Teheran are covered in gigantic portraits of their political and religious leaders ( never been in either, thank G-d, just saw Internet photos)

Donald LaRocca uses the Tibetan name "tsi pa ta" in his book, which is exactly the same as the Sanskrit "kirttimukha". I do not know if the kirttimukha mask is used in the decoration of Indian weapons. China has its own symbol - the mask of Tao Tie 饕餮 (you can translate it as "Terrible Glutton"). This is a very ancient symbol, it has been known since at least 1300 BC. Later, it partially united with the kirttimukha symbol, which brought Buddhism from India.
I suppose that if you wish, you can find parallels between the silhouette of the visor of the Mongolian helmets and Buddhist religious objects, such as the headdresses of monks and priests. But this is hardly connected directly with the symbol tsi pa ta/kirttimukha.

Some time ago, I already recommended to one of the participants in this thread to pay attention to this wonderful book. Now my intuition tells me that I will have to do this more than once ;)

Expertise by definition requires full-time involvement, professional education, vast knowledge, experience and stellar track record. Anything less than that defines an amateur.
Neither I nor you ( at least I hope so) would like to be operated by a part-time medical assistant.
I am an expert in neuroendocrinology, but happily refer patients with metabolic bone disease to a bone/calcium expert even though theoretically I am certified to take care of them, and my diabetes colleagues send their patients with pituitary disease to me from all over the US. Family or criminal lawyers would never take a case of medical malpractice or maritime law. As a rule, real professionals take the issue of “expertise” seriously.

I am perfectly happy considering myself a dilettante and listening to the opinions of people like Robert Elgood, Denis Toichkin, David Alexander, Don LaRocca and (regretfully late) Leonid Tarassyuk.

Regretfully, this is not always the case within the antique weapons community. There, as the old Russian saying goes, “[almost] every gofer considers itself an agronomist”.
There are very few examples of people lacking first two qualification of an ‘“expert” ( see above) who nevertheless added a lot to our knowledge of weapons. Ronald Ewart Oakeshott created the established classification of medieval swords, Jens Nordlunde is a world authority on Indian katars, Kirill Rivkin wrote an almost Darwinian book of history and evolution of a saber and , of course, the incredible “ private researcher from Kutaisi ( Georgia)” Levan Dvalishvili who moved the history of shashka back to 17th century and destroyed a myth that it was an ersatz weapon of poor people, meticulously found actual documents of the best known Georgian armourer Geurk Elisarashvili and his sons, immediately proving that many swords proudly exhibited in major museums and private collections were posthumously marked with his spurious signatures, and an astonishing paper about weapons of Southwest Georgia.

I know little to nothing about other ethnic areas such as SE Asia, Indonesia and Philippines, Japan and China, but am sure that there are other “private researchers” whose names were omitted by me out of sheer ignorance. To all of them, my sincere apologies.

Dangerous waters (again...)
 

Gentlemen (you know who you are):

These less than amicable exchanges are getting very tedious to everyone but yourselves! If I need to issue permanent bans to get rid of this constant bickering, then I will. Some of you have been warned already. Nevertheless, my actions will be all encompassing, whether you have been warned previously or not.

Sarcasm is an ugly instrument. By definition, it means to tear the flesh of someone like a wild animal.

I have edited several comments recently to remove offensive materials. The next time I have to edit out argumentative, abusive, or sarcastic comments will earn the author a permaban.

Enough!