The exhibition oriental weapons "The Mortal Beauty" of private collections in Russia,

mahratt · 19th January 2016, 07:34 PM

The exhibition oriental weapons "The Mortal Beauty" of private collections in Russia, in Moscow in The State Museum of Oriental Art.

I'll gradually add photos.

The exhibition catalog was published (about it kindly informs Ariel in Swap Forum)

Articles in the catalog - interesting. But I must say a few words:

About articles of catalog.
First of them "On the Military Culture in India" popular paper. It is a set of abstracts from J.Tod, R.Elgood and more. Most of us have read this already )). Of course there are a lot of clishes:
1. "Muslims were assigned to cavalry units whereas members of lower castes (pariahs) and tribal groups went to sapper units as this speciality seemed unacceptable to others - the Kshatriyas may under no circumstances "crawl on the ground", which would rob them of their status. Moreover real Kshatriyas Kshatriyas do not tread the ground at all, they only ride horses, so infantry was composed of soldiers coming from agricultural castes".
Very nice. It means that rajputs, gujarats, sinds and mahratts get to the sailors or aviators? ))
2. "These ascetic warriors ... (used weapon which) ... tipes conform to the principle of non-committing evil by means of violence. The priority is given to various types of throwing weapons and to close combat weapons that are used in defence. An indirect impact by a flying spear, a dart or a chakra was of particular importance from the philosophical point of view. Their use of such weapons might have been regarded as non-personal (spray and pray) or as self-defence. Whether someone was injured by it (caught it themselves), the degree og their injuries - all of this had everything to do to the karmic destiny og the afflicted".
Despite the fact that throughout their history, the ascetic warriors prized as shock infantry and excellent swordsmen.
3. "Naga sadhu ascetics who armed themselves with tridents... spears..."
Trident was not a weapon. Only in poems and songs. It was symbol. As a fully metal spear of naked ascetics was symbol of their akhara.
4. "Rajputs were nomads from arid plains who came to India as conquerors and settlers across Afghanistan and Sind".
It is point of view by J.Tod from 19th century. The most part of researchers claims that rajputs raised from local substrate.

Second article "Indian Arms and Armour in the Collection of the Museum of Oriental Art"
Here we have the distortion of the quote, changing its meaning to the opposite. Such little thing ))
1. "Prince Aleksey Saltykov describes an event of the kind, which took place in Lahore: The King took Mr. Clark's hand and our eyes had the view of an infinite row of tables covered with royal arms: hundred of swords, daggers, shields, mail armour and helmets .............. I would be in a great difficulty if I were allowed to get out of this pile of weapon something for yuor arsenal".
You know that collection of Saltykov now keep in Hermitage. I think that in Museum of Oriental Art should have know that "King" was Ranjit Singh ))). But the most funny - you know what is missing where the dots? "...hundred of swords, daggers, shields, mail armour and helmets; all this is very-very rich, but not soundly. Nothing to be surprised strongly. I would be in a great difficulty if I were allowed to get out of this pile of weapon something for yuor arsenal. Incidentally, there was armor with helmet and some theatrical weapons without style and taste. However, the British really marveled at the weapons probably out of sympathy for everything that is coming from Europe" ))))))))))

Third article "On the Typological Diversity in Indian Weapons".

It is enough to say about the article just to show picture from it "Warrior with a mace". Who is really interested in Indian weapon will be able to understand what I'm talking about )))))))

mahratt · 19th January 2016, 07:34 PM

Photo exhibitions:

mahratt · 19th January 2016, 07:38 PM

Photo

mahratt · 19th January 2016, 08:29 PM

Photo

mahratt · 19th January 2016, 09:54 PM

More photos

ariel · 20th January 2016, 02:47 AM

Just a couple of comments:

First chapter:

1. The issue of Kshatriyas, lower castes, and service of ancient Rajputs, Mahrattas, Gujaratis etc in the navy and airforce. I enjoyed the joke. A very good one!

However, the author mixes two totally unrelated categories. Kshatriyas are members of a religious stratum whereas Rajputs, Gujaratis, Sindhis etc. have nothing to do with belonging to a particular caste: they are members of ethnic/national/ kingdom entities.
Contrasting Kshatriyas and, say, Rajputs is equivalent to stating that medieval European Princes wore armour, but the French, English and Italians did not. Apples and oranges, kind of....

2. Suggest careful re-reading of Elgood's book.

Chakra belonged to the class of weapons called " mukta": released freely.

Chakra was a weapon and abode of Vishnu and was divine by itself. Thus, released, it had freedom of action and choice. When a man was killed by Chakra, it was not a victory or a lucky shot of his enemy, but a will and action of Vishnu, the karma of the victim. We may ruefully shake our heads at that logic, but the Indian metaphysics differs dramatically from the Western one, and judging one by another's criteria guarantees confusion and misunderstanding.

3.The author should kindly consult " "Kauthiliya Arthasastra", transl. by R.P. Kangles ( Motilal Banasidass, Delhi, 2003. ISBN: 81-208-0040-0) Vol 2, p. 132:
Hataka, a spear-like weapon with 3 blades.

Second chapter:

The author states that E. Karlova willfully ".... distorted the quote, changing its meaning to the opposite. Such little thing ))"
I humbly disagree. Her point was to mention that local Rajas proudly showed their weapon collections to visitors and NOT to present personal opinion of Prince Saltykov on the quality of Lahore collection. Thus, a simple description of the event sufficed beautifully.

Personally, I think that Prince S. was exercising the well-known trick of suppressed envy: sour grapes. He wrote that Royal Lahore collection was ".. pile of weapons ( and).... some theatrical weapons without style and taste." At the same time, he was buying a lot of stuff at local bazaars ( same article , p.50). See also book by R. Hales, p. 374, Prince Saltykov buying weapons from a long line of suspiciously-looking denizens of the night.

Perhaps he was just a cheapie, but certainly an awfully bad sport. One does not badmouth the host who graciously invited one to his home and showed him his treasures.

Third chapter:

I am looking at the drawing and still see a mace. Sorry. Can the author elaborate why it is not?

19th January 2016, 07:34 PM	#1
mahratt Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Russia Posts: 1,042	The exhibition oriental weapons "The Mortal Beauty" of private collections in Russia, The exhibition oriental weapons "The Mortal Beauty" of private collections in Russia, in Moscow in The State Museum of Oriental Art. I'll gradually add photos. The exhibition catalog was published (about it kindly informs Ariel in Swap Forum) Articles in the catalog - interesting. But I must say a few words: About articles of catalog. First of them "On the Military Culture in India" popular paper. It is a set of abstracts from J.Tod, R.Elgood and more. Most of us have read this already )). Of course there are a lot of clishes: 1. "Muslims were assigned to cavalry units whereas members of lower castes (pariahs) and tribal groups went to sapper units as this speciality seemed unacceptable to others - the Kshatriyas may under no circumstances "crawl on the ground", which would rob them of their status. Moreover real Kshatriyas Kshatriyas do not tread the ground at all, they only ride horses, so infantry was composed of soldiers coming from agricultural castes". Very nice. It means that rajputs, gujarats, sinds and mahratts get to the sailors or aviators? )) 2. "These ascetic warriors ... (used weapon which) ... tipes conform to the principle of non-committing evil by means of violence. The priority is given to various types of throwing weapons and to close combat weapons that are used in defence. An indirect impact by a flying spear, a dart or a chakra was of particular importance from the philosophical point of view. Their use of such weapons might have been regarded as non-personal (spray and pray) or as self-defence. Whether someone was injured by it (caught it themselves), the degree og their injuries - all of this had everything to do to the karmic destiny og the afflicted". Despite the fact that throughout their history, the ascetic warriors prized as shock infantry and excellent swordsmen. 3. "Naga sadhu ascetics who armed themselves with tridents... spears..." Trident was not a weapon. Only in poems and songs. It was symbol. As a fully metal spear of naked ascetics was symbol of their akhara. 4. "Rajputs were nomads from arid plains who came to India as conquerors and settlers across Afghanistan and Sind". It is point of view by J.Tod from 19th century. The most part of researchers claims that rajputs raised from local substrate. Second article "Indian Arms and Armour in the Collection of the Museum of Oriental Art" Here we have the distortion of the quote, changing its meaning to the opposite. Such little thing )) 1. "Prince Aleksey Saltykov describes an event of the kind, which took place in Lahore: The King took Mr. Clark's hand and our eyes had the view of an infinite row of tables covered with royal arms: hundred of swords, daggers, shields, mail armour and helmets .............. I would be in a great difficulty if I were allowed to get out of this pile of weapon something for yuor arsenal". You know that collection of Saltykov now keep in Hermitage. I think that in Museum of Oriental Art should have know that "King" was Ranjit Singh ))). But the most funny - you know what is missing where the dots? "...hundred of swords, daggers, shields, mail armour and helmets; all this is very-very rich, but not soundly. Nothing to be surprised strongly. I would be in a great difficulty if I were allowed to get out of this pile of weapon something for yuor arsenal. Incidentally, there was armor with helmet and some theatrical weapons without style and taste. However, the British really marveled at the weapons probably out of sympathy for everything that is coming from Europe" )))))))))) Third article "On the Typological Diversity in Indian Weapons". It is enough to say about the article just to show picture from it "Warrior with a mace". Who is really interested in Indian weapon will be able to understand what I'm talking about ))))))) Attached Images

19th January 2016, 07:34 PM	#2
mahratt Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Russia Posts: 1,042	Photo exhibitions: Attached Images

19th January 2016, 07:38 PM	#3
mahratt Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Russia Posts: 1,042	Photo Attached Images Last edited by mahratt; 19th January 2016 at 08:26 PM.

19th January 2016, 08:29 PM	#4
mahratt Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Russia Posts: 1,042	Photo Attached Images

19th January 2016, 09:54 PM	#5
mahratt Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Russia Posts: 1,042	More photos Attached Images

20th January 2016, 02:47 AM	#6
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Just a couple of comments: First chapter: 1. The issue of Kshatriyas, lower castes, and service of ancient Rajputs, Mahrattas, Gujaratis etc in the navy and airforce. I enjoyed the joke. A very good one! However, the author mixes two totally unrelated categories. Kshatriyas are members of a religious stratum whereas Rajputs, Gujaratis, Sindhis etc. have nothing to do with belonging to a particular caste: they are members of ethnic/national/ kingdom entities. Contrasting Kshatriyas and, say, Rajputs is equivalent to stating that medieval European Princes wore armour, but the French, English and Italians did not. Apples and oranges, kind of.... 2. Suggest careful re-reading of Elgood's book. Chakra belonged to the class of weapons called " mukta": released freely. Chakra was a weapon and abode of Vishnu and was divine by itself. Thus, released, it had freedom of action and choice. When a man was killed by Chakra, it was not a victory or a lucky shot of his enemy, but a will and action of Vishnu, the karma of the victim. We may ruefully shake our heads at that logic, but the Indian metaphysics differs dramatically from the Western one, and judging one by another's criteria guarantees confusion and misunderstanding. 3.The author should kindly consult " "Kauthiliya Arthasastra", transl. by R.P. Kangles ( Motilal Banasidass, Delhi, 2003. ISBN: 81-208-0040-0) Vol 2, p. 132: Hataka, a spear-like weapon with 3 blades. Second chapter: The author states that E. Karlova willfully ".... distorted the quote, changing its meaning to the opposite. Such little thing ))" I humbly disagree. Her point was to mention that local Rajas proudly showed their weapon collections to visitors and NOT to present personal opinion of Prince Saltykov on the quality of Lahore collection. Thus, a simple description of the event sufficed beautifully. Personally, I think that Prince S. was exercising the well-known trick of suppressed envy: sour grapes. He wrote that Royal Lahore collection was ".. pile of weapons ( and).... some theatrical weapons without style and taste." At the same time, he was buying a lot of stuff at local bazaars ( same article , p.50). See also book by R. Hales, p. 374, Prince Saltykov buying weapons from a long line of suspiciously-looking denizens of the night. Perhaps he was just a cheapie, but certainly an awfully bad sport. One does not badmouth the host who graciously invited one to his home and showed him his treasures. Third chapter: I am looking at the drawing and still see a mace. Sorry. Can the author elaborate why it is not?