In many places, there are vicious arguments about ethnicity, cultural heritage, roots of artefacts etc.
For example, there is a trend in modern Russia to define "cossaks' as a separate ethnos ( absurd, if you ask me). But they seriously claim that cossacks had separate ethnic origins, material culture and, of course, weapons. Per that view, war karabela and shashka are not Polish or Caucasian in origin, but rather genuine ancient weapons attributable to the distinct Cossack ethnos.
Not being familiar with the history of Nepal, I am just curious whether there are historical tensions in pinpointing their ethnic origin to Mongoloid or Hindu cultures? If this is the case, it might color the ascertainment of Kukri vs. Kora as the "national" weapon of Nepal.
I am not trying to throw oil on the fire, but unfortunately, far too often, partisan nationalistic views obscure and distort real history.
So, please put my mind to rest, that there is nothing of that nature in the contemporary Nepalese historical research.

Hello Ariel,

Whilst there is within some ethnic groups in Nepal a re-surgance of going back to their original names before they were influenced by Brahmins from India, and who took those names to gain prestige and favour, it doesn't seem to have effected the way they view the National Weapon of Nepal (the kukri/khukuri). Since this debate I have been collating views about the Khunda/Khuda from Nepal, which is proving quite interesting.

Cheers Simon

Actually, lets leave this entirely counterproductive perspective out of this discussion. This type of rheotoric does little to serve the study of the history and development of weapons, while certain people seem to enjoy this kind of emotionally charged 'debate'.....better left for political editorial.

Didn't we just do this?

Great discussion folks!

On pages 83-86 of "Hindu Arms and Ritual, Arms and Armour from India 1400-1865" (2004) Elgood shows a number of south-western Indian swords of the Vijayanagara period, 7th century CE. Some of these are fairly large, their blades looking like precursors to the yataghan or sossoun-pata. Elgood includes pictures of two reliefs (8.13 Gana holding a [khukri-like] sword...Pellava, mid-seventh century; 8.21 Warrior...[holding a khukri-like sword] from the sixteenth century). Unfortuantely I cannot scan them at the moment, maybe someone else can until I can do so.

My point is that there is material to support the development of the khukri on the Indian subcontinent, where the forward recurve edge has precendece. I don't see any problem with both Mediterranean and Indian cultures developing similar blades. If we take the example fo the celtic, northern Europen sax, that same shape exists in Eastern European Thracian knives, and is found again in the Arabic shafra.

The Alexander and trade routes theories seem plausible to me, but sometimes different peoples come up with similar solutions to similar problems. The top-heavy forward recurve makes a good chopper, so it shows up where a compromise between an axe and a long blade was needed. Once martial strategies and arts changed, the shape lost popularity in favour of something longer and with a straight cutting edge, as in Europe.

Just some thoughts.

Just saw your post Simon....nicely put!!! Thank you for this very nicely handled response, and I have very much enjoyed your sound approach to the research you are doing, avoiding such volatile distractions.

All very best regards,
Jim

Hello Simon, about the khuda/khunda/kora debate, I recall Beoram (Nepali linguist, on IKRHS) posting a number of guides to Nepali words.

Among them was

"from Old Indo-Aryan (~Sanskrit) kshura 'razor' (cognate with Greek kshuron 'razor') >
*khura > "

This word may be the root of khukuri, but maybe it's also the root for what we call a "kora" in the West. Furthermore, it seems to me that in Nepali the sound "d" and "r" are, to a certain extent interchangeable (open to correction), as in "kothimora / kothimoda" or "kaudo / kauro". Maybe khuDa is not so farfetched for khuRa > kora?

More thoughts...

Emanuel

Thanks Jim :)

Hello Emanuel,

Beoram is quite correct with the linguistic connection, but how relevent that is, I honestly do not know.

Khuda/Khunda is pronounced Coodah, the c as in coup, I don't know how the Kora pronunciation came about? Unless that is how its spelt or pronounced in India?

With kothimora it tends to be pronounced by Gurkhas kotiemora or kotimora. I must confess to never having seen it written Kothimoda in Nepal, or in England by a Nepali/Gurkha. Once again though Kothimoda could be an Indian or Tibetan interpretation?

Kaudi seems to be the most used term in Nepal from my experience.

I hope that is of some help, cheers Simon

That´s right, Jim. To begin with, we must question the european ethnocentric, ideologically biased and emotionally charged 'theories' from the 19th Century (a real theory must have some logic structure and must be supported in facts showing a causal relation in time and space), to make a more scientific approach. European influences did exist, but they have to be demostrated in every case. I don't think in the future, with more advances in archeological discoveries, we cannot find some of those evidences we need. Alexander presence is a possible, but to me not a probable, cause of the down curved blades in India or Nepal. Is more consistent the probability of a development in the indian subcontinent, as Manolo said, with or without foreign influences of some kind. The roman presence in India is more consistent in any case, since although they did not invaded India, they had a continuos and relatively intense commercial contact with it, not to mention South India, which had intense contacts with the arabian peninsula from the most antique pre-islamic times, and we must remember that Yemen was an important producer of swords from which we do not have much information. This is a more plausible source of influences, and not a transitory passing of an army. Also, we have to take on account that the goorkha seem to have carried in their invassion into Nepal the kora, a down curved blade which seems to have a very different origin that of the indian area. I don't believe this kind of blade can be also attributed to greek influences. The more antique roots of our world culture and the incredible inmense commercial routes in the most remote times are suprising us every day with each new discovery in this direction. This is science.
Regards

Gonzalo

I don't know from where the kukri origins, and it may have taken a long time for it to get the form it has to day, but I have see a picture of a stone relief from a temple in south India. On the relief you see a row of soldiers with kukri like 'swords/daggers'. Sorry I can't show it, as I don't remember where I saw it, probably on Google.

I agree completely, Jim.

Ariel, let's not go there, please.

Ponderous
 

G'day guys,

I have been following this thread with great interest and been doing some reading of my own.
Please view the image attached as another possible theory behind the origins of the Kukri.
It could well have started it's life as a working blade much like the sickle mold found in China that dates from the 4th century BC.
Just some thoughts to further ponder as the moulding does look much like some of the early kukri, that is being long and narrow by profile.
The image came from a book published by the Australian Arts exhibition Corporation that was a reproduction of the same book published in China the year before, being 1976. The book was bought to print when the Archaeological finds of China travelled to Australia in 1977.

Gav

That’s strange, most people we met in Nepal 4 years ago were very aware of aware of differences between kora,tulwar,shamshir , their grips &blade shapes etc.as I recall. They just didn’t bother to define kukri in the sort of detail western collectors & dealers do.

Kora or Khora are acceptable terms to me, as are khuda & khonra as are the 15 or so spellings of khukri there all correct.. After all we are not writing in Sanscrit or Devangari etc.

I would say Its probably Col.Kirkatrik who introduced the spellings khora & indeed Khookeri to the west when his work was published in 1811}.{{By William Miller of London,}
{About his mission to Nepal in 1793} He also pointed out that at that time there were 8 or 9 main languages in Nepal which may explain some people beliving khuda or Khunda to be correct at Khora or Khora incorrect.


Hope that helps a little towards finding about a few more definitive facts about these great swords of the Himalayas & where misunderstandings about British & Nepali history & translations seem to have occurred.

Spiral