The 4 letter "B"-word

[Stan S.]

Well, it looks like I scored me a nice Bhuj (a.k.a. axe-knife, a. k. a. elephant knife) on eBay. I ended up spending quite more than expected but as long as the wife does not find out, I think I should be safe

How rare are these exactly? I only see them very occasionally available and while there are some variations, many are identical to the one I got. It is almost as if most were issued to a single regiment or an army at the same point in time and are slowly trickling into the hands of collectors. Also, this a hack and thrust weapon, right? I remember reading somewhere on-line that bhuj could also be hurled at an enemy as a javelin of some sort. This does not make much sense, as the weapon is clearly too head-heavy with nothing to counter balance it at the back. What do you think? I would love to be pointed to some historical references of bhuj (or would a proper plural form be “bhujes”?) being used in battle. All comments are welcome as always.

The pictures below are from the listing:

[Stan S.]

Here is a reference to two other Bhuj which feature an elephanthead identical to the one on my example. How would you explain such similarity other than being made by the same metalsmith?

Link 1
Link 2

[Jim McDougall]

Actually the Bhuj, as its name implies, is most commonly associated with the Kutch district in Gujerat where it seems they are most predominantly produced. The characteristic elephant head typically found at the forte of the haft at the base of the blade is important symbolically, particularly in these regions and with Rajputs who were profoundly associated with the use of these weapons. The elephant represents power and wealth, and their symbolism is also prevalent throughout Rajasthan. The elephant was also an important component of military forces, and the presence of its image would seem well placed in that context. It would appear the weapon type has been around for some time as the bhuj is apparantly illustrated in the ' Nujum al Ulum' (Bishapur, 1570, as noted in Elgood, p.237).

The use of these in combat is both cut and thrust, essentially more a hafted sword, but the haft gave the advantage of being able to cut the wooden hafts of spears and javelins or stabbing lances used against the warrior. These were the cousins of the zaghnal, a form of dagger axe with its blade mounted horozontally and used in a pick type fashion to penetrate thick fabric armor and turbans as well as obviously the same action in any case.
These hafted weapons are collectively termed in the vernacular in Rajasthan as 'dab'.

The bhuj (also known as the gandara, as well as 'elephant knife or sword') is mentioned in most of the standard references on Indian arms (Pant, Paul, Haider, Elgood, Egerton, Rawson etc) with others usually less attainable such as Holstein, Hendley etc. but as much can be found in Stone, Tarussuk & Blair or simply Wikipedia and Google.

It looks like this one has some genuine age, but hard to say from photos. The brass of course suggests these components were made in good number so possibly one shop could have been the source for considerable numbers.
The elephant theme in virtually the same head position etc. seems the basis for the many types including jeweled and precious metals used with them.

Very nice acquisition and an interesting example of these unusual Indian fighting weapons!

All the best,
Jim

[ariel]

I would hesitate attributing all 3 bhujes to the same workshop: the form was highly formalized and, in the absence of markings, could have been manufactured by different masters over many years.

I see why Jim mentions Zaghnal as a potential relative: both come from Sindh and the idea of reorienting the blade might have been appealing to the natives. However, zaghnal was essentially a pick, and an axe would be its closest relative. After all, both axe and zaghnal lack mechanical attributes for slashing or thrusting; only a chopping, penetrating hit was effective.
I have two bhuj-like relatives: what Egerton called Buckie ( Plate X). This is essentially a broad short blade mounted on a long handle, but with no recurving, thickened mail-piercing tip or elephant head. My guess, from the purely engineering point of view, they allowed both powerful slashing ( long lever) and thrusting. Bhuj might have been more effective against a mailed/helmeted opponent due to its mass and reinforcement of the tip.

Nice find.
Still, tell your wife you got it for $10.55 at the most :-)

[Jim McDougall]

I forgot to mention, I am inclined to doubt that the bhuj would have been thrown, at least as a practice, as it would no longer be in hand for its continued use. Naturally, in the heat of battle anything might happen, but I dont think this would have normally been done.
As Ariel points out, it would be doubtful that all of these examples could have been from the same shop or smith, but as I mentioned, if the examples match up accordingly to indicate the same casting mold, then obviously.
It is interesting that these forms had apparant origins in Sind to the north of the Rajasthan and Gujerat areas in which they predominate. The slightly recurved blade of the bhuj is remarkably similar to spearheads on weapons in the south, of forms seen there and in Sinhala. As always it is intriguing to try to interpret directions of diffusion and influence based on these similarities but at this point I thought it simply worthy of note.
As for the zaghnol, I have always found the potential for association to the bronze age dagger axe of China compelling, and considered the trade routes along the Silk Roads likely for diffusion. However, there is an enormous chronological gap and no reliable line of development I am aware of to do other than presume association simply by nature of the form.

[ariel]

I certainly agree with Jim: this is not a throwing spear. It is far too heavy and likely poorly balanced for throwing.
Jim , I never thought of the Chinese Connection:-)
Indeed, zaghnal ( Raven's Beak) looks very similar. Do you think the chain extended further to Europe, through Massagetan examples to Turks ( djokan), Russia ( klevetz or chekan) all the way to medieval Poland ( Nadziak) and Western Europe ravensbeak?

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by ariel

I certainly agree with Jim: this is not a throwing spear. It is far too heavy and likely poorly balanced for throwing.
Jim , I never thought of the Chinese Connection:-)
Indeed, zaghnal ( Raven's Beak) looks very similar. Do you think the chain extended further to Europe, through Massagetan examples to Turks ( djokan), Russia ( klevetz or chekan) all the way to medieval Poland ( Nadziak) and Western Europe ravensbeak?

Thanks very much Ariel
Actually the Chinese connection has been something I had thought of some years ago in my usual escapades in studying arms in it seems erratic directions always on different tangents. I suppose much of the ideas must be admittedly free association, simply noticing similarities in features and form. In recent years the complex web of trade networks has been in degree unraveled to reveal incredibly plausible possibilities in the diffusion of influences over vast distances and long periods of time. All those examples of weapons you have noted I think have likely some degree of connection possible, but in actuality these simply fashioned designs could well have developed convergently. Think of other 'ravens beak' types of war axes in Africa, and far distant in Japan as well, which of course reinforces the idea of convergency....yet the 'Chinese connection' could as well have influenced via trade in both of these directions independantly....definitely food for thought!

All the best,
Jim

[Stan S.]

Sadly the bhuj arrived in far worst condition than I expected. Wobbly blade and all. I will be taking advantage of the sellers return policy and shipping it back to England tomorrow. Oh well

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Salaams Stan. Great pity. You were, however,asking for references and study so ... I typed into Forum Search ....Bhuj ... and Jens Nordlunde has a brilliant thread in there entitled Differences in Indian weapons. It might help with chosing quality weapons therefor possibly save the problem of returning items etc.
Regards Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[Stan S.]

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

Salaams Stan. Great pity. You were, however,asking for references and study so ... I typed into Forum Search ....Bhuj ... and Jens Nordlunde has a brilliant thread in there entitled Differences in Indian weapons. It might help with chosing quality weapons therefor possibly save the problem of returning items etc.
Regards Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Dear sir, I am familiar with the thread you are referring to. And while I agree with your remark on the weapons quality, a collector must also take into account his personal budgetary constraints. Sadly, I am unable to afford many of the gold and jewel encrusted museum pieces that are ocasionally offered for sale, and must resort to obtaining simpler versions designed for fighting rather than display/parade/gift purposes. In doing so, I came across quite a few treasures. Still, I find that the quality of the weapon and its condition are not always one and the same.

The item in question turned out to have damaged rivets both holding the elephant head in place and the one securing the blade. Neither of which was mentioned in the description. Plus, the portion of the haft that fits inside the head appears to have been bent. This could be a sign of neglect while in the hands of the previous owner or genuine damage from the item being used in its day. Such damage is possible even with a weapon of highest quality, such as the downside of buying on-line I was actually quite pleased with the quality of this simple bhuj but chose not to be responsible for repairing the damage, thus it is going back to the seller.

[David]

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

Salaams Stan. Great pity. You were, however,asking for references and study so ... I typed into Forum Search ....Bhuj ... and Jens Nordlunde has a brilliant thread in there entitled Differences in Indian weapons. It might help with chosing quality weapons therefor possibly save the problem of returning items etc.
Regards Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

I presume this is the thread you were referencing. I have placed a link here to make the access a bit easier.
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...highlight=bhuj
I am also attaching the images that Stan linked to above. A good practice since these links my well disappear at any time. I have also added a few more images from other sources, just to add to the collection.

[laEspadaAncha]

Hi Stan,

I don't know if you've already dropped your bhuj in the mail for its return journey, but FWIW, I am of the opinion the design of the weapon is inherently flawed, and in my own lone example, there is a little 'battle rattle' at the join between the blade and the hilt, IMO a natural consequence of securing a short (or virtually no) tang blade to the haft with a single rivet...

[templarnight]

Looking at some of the pictures posted above it seems that they dont have a 'tang' either.

They also seem to be secured by a rivet.

Is this not correct then?

[Jim McDougall]

These are intriguing weapons, and it seems reasonably uncommon as far as collectible arms offerings, and it is disappointing that this example showed up in less than expected condition. I think what Ibrahiim has noted is intended toward the general readership, and like myself I often think of these threads as informational in that respect. The point is not directed in particular but reminding readers that the material in these now archived discussions are often helpful in revealing certain characteristics or things to watch for in acquiring certain item types.
Chris has made an extremely well placed point in this regard, noting that these apparantly are inclined toward certain kinds of wear and defect by thier design and dynamics of thier use.

Personally, in my collecting days even though my budget certainly limited my horizons in what I could attain as far as types of weapons, I actually preferred the worn and often battered examples which the upper hierarchy of collectors termed derisively 'dogs dinner'. To me, these worn and battered old warriors had stories to tell that the 'museum quality' decorated and festooned items usually did not. The great book by Tony Tirri which I consider a goldmine for collectors is just that because it beautifully illustrates and classifies these very kinds of weapons in the types and condition in which they typically are found by collectors.

An arms collectors most important weapon is his knowledge, and that was the point being made. In most cases I think sellers do try to accurately describe thier items (we all of course know of exceptions) however it is important to watch carefully for key elements which may have been omitted in being described. I know I certainly came into some terrible surprises in obtaining some items and soundly learned what to watch for the next time. The members here have offered valuable information in these regards in the profound archives stored in what has become encyclopedic in information.


All the best,
Jim

[laEspadaAncha]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Personally, in my collecting days even though my budget certainly limited my horizons in what I could attain as far as types of weapons, I actually preferred the worn and often battered examples which the upper hierarchy of collectors termed derisively 'dogs dinner'. To me, these worn and battered old warriors had stories to tell that the 'museum quality' decorated and festooned items usually did not. The great book by Tony Tirri which I consider a goldmine for collectors is just that because it beautifully illustrates and classifies these very kinds of weapons in the types and condition in which they typically are found by collectors

Hi Jim...

While I have been fortunate one one or two occasions to acquire a presentation-grade example of a given weapon form, as a "regular guy" who collects on a modest budget, I wholeheartedly appreciate the value attached to these workman's examples by their original owners...

While more flashy, 'blingy' examples may look much, much richer and command a far greater price in the marketplace, the 'average' guy probably appreciated that one 'worker' knife or sword far more than the wealthiest man who could commission or purchase another piece on a whim, as it was likely to be the only one he had...

Best Regards,

Chris

[Stan S.]

Sorry guys, the item was shipped yesterday. I hope to come across another one in the future, hopefully in a better condition

[fearn]

Side point, but I'd like to point out a much cheaper weapon, Cold Steel's "Two-handed kukri machete." Although I don't know how the bhuj balances, the two designs are broadly similar.

If you watch the video, you see that the machete can be thrown like a spear, so I suspect a bhuj could be thrown as well. Personally, I'd suggest that it might be better to experiment with the two-handed kuk than with an antique, if anyone wants to do some experiments....

My 0.002 cents,

F

[Stan S.]

Originally Posted by fearn

Side point, but I'd like to point out a much cheaper weapon, Cold Steel's "Two-handed kukri machete." Although I don't know how the bhuj balances, the two designs are broadly similar.

If you watch the video, you see that the machete can be thrown like a spear, so I suspect a bhuj could be thrown as well. Personally, I'd suggest that it might be better to experiment with the two-handed kuk than with an antique, if anyone wants to do some experiments....

My 0.002 cents,

F

Being that I had a chance to handle this bhuj, I can say that I was quite surprised by how light weight it is. Not super effective as an axe but would be great as a stabbing and slashing weapon. Despite its light weight it is still rather top heavy, so probably wouldn't fly well