A 16thC Dha Reference?

B.I · 11th August 2005, 09:27 PM

this is a little loose, but interesting all the same.
my current study has led me to the extensive letters of an english trader in the late 16thC, who spent much time in india and the middle east. ralph fitch's travels were very extensive and impressive, as were the many notes he left behind. mostly related to trade (spices) he does touch on descriptions of places and people now and then, and my choice of his works was one of pure hope, as he hasnt been touched by any noted arms academics.

whilst describing the king of pegu (around 1586), he says -

the chief force of the king is in the elephants, and when they go into the wars they set a frame of wood upon their backs, bound with great cords, wherin sit 4 or 6 men, which fight with guns, bows and arrows, darts and other weapons. and they say that their skins are so thick that a pellet of an harquebus will scarce pierce them, except it be in some tender place. their weapons be very bad. they have guns, but shoot nery badly in them; darts and swords, short without points.

the author (that compiled his letters) offers a footnote to this sword reference -

the dha, the national weapon of burma and all these coasts. the true kachin dha is about 18 inches long, broad and square at the tip, narrow at the haft and sharpened only on one edge. it is a tool-of-all-work as well as a weapon and a symbol; venerated - by all kachins, at all events - as the japanese once venerated their swords, it is central in many ceremonies, is used to stir wine in which an oath is pledged and is buried to mark the conclusion of a feud. everywhere south of bhamo the pointed dha of the shans has become nowadays more fashionable than the square-ended form.

now the 16thc mention is but a 'sword' and the details given was written in the early 20thC. however, the author does cross reference all the early publications of these accounts (1589,1598 and 1625) and he says
' the results of these comparisons will be found in the notes'
from his other notes, it seems that much additional detail was known, other than that given in the actual letter. i believe that finch was alive during these first published accounts, although he seems to have disappeared from history at some point, most likely on another adventure.

interesting stuff.

11th August 2005, 09:27 PM	#1
B.I Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 485	A 16thC Dha Reference? this is a little loose, but interesting all the same. my current study has led me to the extensive letters of an english trader in the late 16thC, who spent much time in india and the middle east. ralph fitch's travels were very extensive and impressive, as were the many notes he left behind. mostly related to trade (spices) he does touch on descriptions of places and people now and then, and my choice of his works was one of pure hope, as he hasnt been touched by any noted arms academics. whilst describing the king of pegu (around 1586), he says - the chief force of the king is in the elephants, and when they go into the wars they set a frame of wood upon their backs, bound with great cords, wherin sit 4 or 6 men, which fight with guns, bows and arrows, darts and other weapons. and they say that their skins are so thick that a pellet of an harquebus will scarce pierce them, except it be in some tender place. their weapons be very bad. they have guns, but shoot nery badly in them; darts and swords, short without points. the author (that compiled his letters) offers a footnote to this sword reference - the dha, the national weapon of burma and all these coasts. the true kachin dha is about 18 inches long, broad and square at the tip, narrow at the haft and sharpened only on one edge. it is a tool-of-all-work as well as a weapon and a symbol; venerated - by all kachins, at all events - as the japanese once venerated their swords, it is central in many ceremonies, is used to stir wine in which an oath is pledged and is buried to mark the conclusion of a feud. everywhere south of bhamo the pointed dha of the shans has become nowadays more fashionable than the square-ended form. now the 16thc mention is but a 'sword' and the details given was written in the early 20thC. however, the author does cross reference all the early publications of these accounts (1589,1598 and 1625) and he says ' the results of these comparisons will be found in the notes' from his other notes, it seems that much additional detail was known, other than that given in the actual letter. i believe that finch was alive during these first published accounts, although he seems to have disappeared from history at some point, most likely on another adventure. interesting stuff.