English made Kacchin Dha...

[Gavin Nugent]

Originally Posted by spiral

Fascinatingly The "Burma dah" from the initial catalogue I posted interestingly looks very like the "Burma cleaver" posted by Andrew from the Oldman catalogue.

As Dha,Dah etc. means knife Id guess, It was a correct after all?

spiral

Indeed Spiral, it is a known type throughout the region...I had a nice old one a while back and have seen many others in all styles and levels of quality...I think I listed mine as Thai but for all good intents and purposes it fits Burma too with its simple iron fittings...I have an even smaller example of kitchen size in silver and timber hilt dress, one that I traded back and Nathaniel was good enough to translate for me as it has text on the blade...dated 1910...

[spiral]

Originally Posted by SwordsAntiqueWeapons

Indeed Spiral, it is a known type throughout the region...I had a nice old one a while back and have seen many others in all styles and levels of quality...

Ahh that's great then Gav. it seems the Hunt & Brades designs are not so far fetched as Ian first thought perhaps then. {I am sure other Brit. companies & possible German ones, would also compete in the market.}

Id guess as in that era as England ruled half of of Africa, the Caribbean & Asia as well & exports as well as imports were key {as always..} many were probably sold, particularly to the major oil,teak,rubber,opium,sugar,corn,coffee, ruby, gold silver diamond & safari type companies Id guess. {ETC.etc.]

Id also surmise the published prices were for anyone that daft to pay them..... If you wanted a few hundred , every couple of yearsI bet you could get them for peanuts... {Particularly if you went to the same school or belonged to the same club.}

They would cost more than the local produce for sure, but of a consistent style & steel. {And good for business. }

Spiral

[Ian]

Spiral:

I think we need to look at the Oldman's catalog with a critical eye as to the attributions of the items shown as Burmese. While it is possible that these may have been found and brought back to England from Rangoon or Mandalay, a number of them are not typical of Burmese work (and by Burmese I mean produced in Burma for the indigenous population). While it was common practice that conquering armies would bring back craftsmen from their conquered territories to continue their fine crafts in a new home, it takes some time for the new arts and crafts to be assimilated into a new culture. For example, when the Thai conquered Laos and brought back Lao craftsmen, it took some time to assimilate the longer hilted Lao daab into an accepted Thai form. So there has been a long history of diffusion of styles over time. That said, there appear to be some inaccuracies in the Oldman catalog.

Looking at the image below, and starting from the top, number 10 has an unusually long hilt for a Burmese dha and is more likely Thai. Numbers 2 and 3 are Shan/Thai work and either from the Shan States (partly in Burma) or southern Yunnan. Number 5 could also be Thai. Number 4 we can probably say with some confidence is not Burmese, but more likely northern Thai/Lao in origin and perhaps coming from one of the hill tribes (Montagnard) of that region given the unusual shape of the tip.

Which brings us to number 12, the one that resembles the item labeled Burmese dha in the Hunt & Sons catalog. As Gavin rightly points out, this resembles a common tool used in Thailand. I don't know if it is used in Burma these days, but I did not see it there 25 years ago. It is not used as a knife but is more like a short handled axe, primarily for chopping bamboo and even not-so-small trees. Some of the modern versions come with a hollow handle to mount the blade on a pole. One name for this tool is e-toh and there is a version made by the Aranyik company. These show up regularly on eBay. I don't believe that the locals would classify this tool as a dha, and I have never heard it referred to as a "knife."

My last word on the William Hyde and Sons products in SE Asia. In my 50+ years of traveling in various parts of mainland SE Asia, Indonesia and the Philippines, I have not come across any of these items. I have seen other brands of European-made machetes and tools, just none from this particular company. That's not to say they weren't there at some time.

Ian.

[spiral]

Originally Posted by Ian

Spiral:

I think we need to look at the Oldman's catalog with a critical eye as to the attributions of the items shown as Burmese. While it is possible that these may have been found and brought back to England from Rangoon or Mandalay,.

Fair enough Ian, lets cast a critical eye...

Why Rangoon & Mandalay Ian? England ruled India at that time, & Burma was classed as part of India at that time. It could have been collected anywhere in Burma, after we had spent many years conquering them it was all British. The weapons, the teak, the opium, the oil the rubies, the tigers etc.etc. {Shades of the King & I!}

Originally Posted by Ian

a number of them are not typical of Burmese work (and by Burmese I mean produced in Burma for the indigenous population). While it was common practice that conquering armies would bring back craftsmen from their conquered territories to continue their fine crafts in a new home, it takes some time for the new arts and crafts to be assimilated into a new culture. For example, when the Thai conquered Laos and brought back Lao craftsmen, it took some time to assimilate the longer hilted Lao daab into an accepted Thai form.,.

mmm Indigenous population of Burma is an interesting statement.... Who was indigenous when? Same as the USA, Australia or even the UK. Not many country's where humans truly originated,, history isn't like that, it appears we all spread out across the world from Africa according to modern research. So in modern parlance I think the word indigenous, does need a dating factor added.

I would say Burma has a complex history of wars & indeed used to rule Thailand/Siam , at one point for a couple of hundred years I think? It has 135 recognised ethnic groups of people living there {According to the Burmese government.} & that not even including domiciled Gurkhas of 4 & 5 generations born there & very other groups , such as Anglo Burmese who have probably lived there even longer! & Numerous others not counted as indigenous.

Originally Posted by Ian

So there has been a long history of diffusion of styles over time. ..,.

Exactly! Amalgamation of style not separation. That's the point you seem to be missing in your approach.

Originally Posted by Ian

That said, there appear to be some inaccuracies in the Oldman catalog..,.

I am sure, not many works or even authority's are always correct, let alone sale catalogues!


So lets break down your step by step opinions on these inaccuracies you describe. Ive added past quotes by Mark Bowditch {Auther of Dha Research Index} about the exact same weapons from the Oldman catalogue..
.................................................. .................................................. ......

Originally Posted by Ian

Looking at the image below, and starting from the top, number 10 has an unusually long hilt for a Burmese dha and is more likely Thai....

Or Another's view....

Originally Posted by Mark

7)-10) Burman, based on the relatively straight blades and square tips of the scabbards could possibly be Shan, based on the somewhat longer grip, but I am sticking with Burman ]; .

.................................................. .................................................. .....

Originally Posted by Ian

Numbers 2 and 3 are Shan/Thai work and either from the Shan States (partly in Burma) or southern Yunnan. .

Shan states "partly" in Burma? Realy! Its the second largest population in Burma covering large territory's.

See tribal map attached. Turquoise areas are shan...

Originally Posted by Mark

It is not unlikely that all of these swords were collected in Burma, since the Shan items likely come from the Shan States in Eastern Burma. .

I agree with Mark here, its highly likely to be Burmese shan, As I showed in pictures early in this thread shan style weapons were in common use even among the Kachin & Burma rifles units.

.................................................. .................................................. ......

Originally Posted by Ian

Number 5 could also be Thai. Number 4 we can probably say with some confidence is not Burmese, but more likely northern Thai/Lao in origin and perhaps coming from one of the hill tribes (Montagnard) of that region given the unusual shape of the tip.

Or Another's view....

Originally Posted by Mark

4)&5) I believe this to be a Burman style might possible be a Ratankosin era Thai dha, based on the unadorned silver covered scabbard, the pommel and flared ferrule, but overall the handle looks wrong – the pommel is a touch too big and it looks to have either wood or rattan wrapping in the middle; .

.................................................. .................................................. ......

Originally Posted by Ian

Which brings us to number 12, the one that resembles the item labeled Burmese dha in the Hunt & Sons catalog. As Gavin rightly points out, this resembles a common tool used in Thailand. .,.

Or Another's view....

Originally Posted by Mark

12) dha-ma chopper that could be from just about anywhere in Burma or northern Thailand; .

Or as Gavin also put it.

Originally Posted by SwordsAntiqueWeapons

Indeed Spiral, it is a known type throughout the region.

.................................................. .................................................. ..

Originally Posted by Ian

I don't know if it is used in Burma these days, but I did not see it there 25 years ago. It is not used as a knife but is more like a short handled axe, primarily for chopping bamboo and even not-so-small trees. Some of the modern versions come with a hollow handle to mount the blade on a pole. One name for this tool is e-toh and there is a version made by the Aranyik company. These show up regularly on eBay. I don't believe that the locals would classify this tool as a dha, and I have never heard it referred to as a "knife.".,.

Ahh yes me bad... I should have said Dha-ma, apparently that's how the locals classify it.


They also come in much smaller sizes. Not all large things for chopping bamboo. I recall Gavin had a very small one.

.

Originally Posted by Ian

My last word on the William Hyde and Sons products in SE Asia. In my 50+ years of traveling in various parts of mainland SE Asia, Indonesia and the Philippines, I have not come across any of these items.

Your last word? OK.

I hope you at least found the pictures of Kachin troops with shan Dah & the video of the Burma rifles using, issue "Chindit" dha, as well as more ethnographic looking arms of both Kachin & Shan styles in use, making punji stakes. Interesting at least?

I am sure there must be many more pics out there. I have an Anglo Burmese friend {Also a kukri collector.} from a long line of very senior Burma military police ,I ve not even asked about this yet.


You were very lucky to spend 50 years traveling the Orient... for many people that's the stuff dream lives are made off.


As for the fact you didn't see them there 25 years ago guess most 50 or 100 year old Dha-ma in Burma would have long since been battered to bits by the locals?


As an addendum.

Here another example shared on this forum in the past by. dennee

These are in the Pitt-Rivers Museum in Oxford. The label reads "Varieties of the Burmese da for various uses. Pres[ente]d by Capt. R.C. Temple R.E., 1889."

Photo of display attached below.

Your reply to dennee was...

Originally Posted by Ian

Like many museum collections, mislabeling is quite common. In the photo you show from the Pitt-Rivers, the bottom one on the right is a form of tool, similar to a heavy knife still used for splitting coconuts. The bottom one on the right is also a heavy utility knife.

The second from bottom on the left is a pisau raut (rattan knife), used for splitting rattan into strips. This style is common today in northern Thailand/Cambodia -- the long hilt is rested against the chest and the blade lies on a flat surface, with the rattan being drawn along the cutting edge towards the cutter who is seated. The second from bottom on the left appears to be a heavier bladed variant of the same.

The rest are knives and short swords, some of which are probably Burmese, but a couple of the longer hilted ones could be Thai. Hard to make out the detail of the hilts. Interesting collection of blades.
.

4 are clearly of this style, 2 of them only have the exact hilt you described at the start of this thread re. my posting of the William Hyde and Sons {Better of course known as Brades.{& about 20 other names}} as....

Originally Posted by Ian

Apart from the Kachin dha, the other examples don't really resemble the indigenous forms very closely.The Burmese dha, for example, is a short curved chopper with a three part hilt that sort of resembles a Burmese dha hilt.

So lets see, We have 5 historical collected examples of these choppers from Burma., {local name Dha-ma.} 4 with sheeps foot blades & Two with hilts like the Brades catalogue examples, {One of which also has the sheeps foot blade.}


I realise not all collectors & researcher's agree with one another, But It seem such tools/weapons as the Burmese Dha ma were in usage in Burma a C.100 years ago.

Which is probably why British companies made & no doubt exported them.


spiral


2nd. addendum.


Ian ,you missed out the one on that page of Oldmans that Mark, says defintly is not Burman. Dha No1.

Originally Posted by Mark

It is not unlikely that all of these swords (not considering the ones in the picture of the shop itself) were collected in Burma, since the Shan items likely come from the Shan States in Eastern Burma. The odd man out is #1, which I am pretty sure is a Lanna style, which would make it from the region further east, around Chiang Mai or Luang Prabang. However, given the constant warfare between Burma and Thailand, it is not unreasonable to assume this one made its way into Burma as a spoil of war.

The last sentence I particularly like.

"However, given the constant warfare between Burma and Thailand, it is not unreasonable to assume this one made its way into Burma as a spoil of war"


I would have to agree with Marks reasoning there, even if any of the 5 listed as historical Burma brings backs listed in this thread, from old "at time" collections originated in Thailand, they were taken back & used there by "indigenous peoples!, who recognised & were familiar with them particlarily in the case of Dha-ma, as apart from a little handle styling {possibly? }there are identical to those regularly made & used in Burma by some of the 135 indigenous groups of people, 100 years ago.


Spiral

PS.

Ian your posted picture of the Kachin rangers appears deleted from the outside host you listed it from. Can you re.list it please, so people can follow the thread properly.

[spiral]

Originally Posted by spiral

Ian your posted picture of the Kachin rangers appears deleted from the outside host you listed it from. Can you re.list it please, so people can follow the thread properly.

No worry's here's a few copys... Kachin rangers in US service not UK service. {As Aiontay pointed out quite rightly.}

Spiral

[Ian]

Spiral:

Work is keeping me very busy at the moment and I have not been able to spend as much time here as I would like.

Your detailed responses to some of my comments would suggest that you are bothered by them, and I apologize if I have offended you in any way.

I do not have the time to give your detailed replies the necessary attention they deserve right now, so I shall get back to you later this week. BTW, the photo link to which you refer seems to be working OK on my screen, so I'm not sure what the problem is.

Ian.

[spiral]

Originally Posted by Ian

Spiral:

Work is keeping me very busy at the moment and I have not been able to spend as much time here as I would like.

Your detailed responses to some of my comments would suggest that you are bothered by them, and I apologize if I have offended you in any way.

I do not have the time to give your detailed replies the necessary attention they deserve right now, so I shall get back to you later this week. BTW, the photo link to which you refer seems to be working OK on my screen, so I'm not sure what the problem is.

Ian.

Hi Ian I am not offended. Quite understand your busy. No problem.No apologies needed & sorry if my step by step approach caused you any concern. Alls fine & its just chatting about bits of stuff on a forum after all.

Its just you drew so many points into your reason to distrust Oldman to enhance you stance & reinforce your statement that no such tool resembling the Burma Dha made by Brades was traditionally used in Burma.

So I thought I would deal with each point as best I could.

That's not an unusual thing for me to do....Ive done it before.

So I was just trying to point out it seems from other evidence on the forum that the Brades style is a "traditional Burma dha"

Although obviously should it be called the Dha-ma. It seems to me , it certainly existed in Burma long ago.

So what with Marks comments & with your past comments re. the Dennee examples from the Pitt rivers collection which at least for the shorter handled "Burma dha handled" ones you accepted as Burmese rather than Thai. I thought that presented a good case? So I presented it..

Sorry if the detailed response to the numerous aside points you had drawn together, came across rude. I would have much rather just discussed the Kachin & Burma style designs , but as you drew others in to add weight to your argument I thought I should reply in full to each of those points.

Re. your pic, it is just a red x for me.

spiral