On the Use of Indian Terms for Identification of Weapon Types

[Mercenary]

I should not make excuses for my researches. I believe that only professional linguist can to prove something through the manipulation of languages and words.
But I am sure if someone is interesting in Indian culture and weapons he should be interested in something more than staring at the colorful albums. That is why I started my researches in Indian weaponry instead of talking on forums like "I am very pessimistic about my ... abilities".

Dear Jens
Only just for "a little bit to see":
phul = پھل = fruit, flower, blade, razor and so
फौल = Phūla = flower
फौलादा = Phaulādī = fulad (steel)

It is only one of the possible translations. But very interesting one ))

[Emanuel]

Hi Mercenary,

Difficult not to fall in the trap of phonetically similar words.

Have a look at Dr. Ann Feuerbach's summary on the research done to date on the word pulad:
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=502

Emanuel

[Mercenary]

Originally Posted by Emanuel

Hi Mercenary,
Difficult not to fall in the trap of phonetically similar words.
Emanuel

Hi Emanuel
Why did you decide that it is any "phonetically similar words"?
It was said that the term Phaulādī is directly related with the word "flower". As well as the term "Phul" in "Phul-katara". What else? "Phul" means "fulad". It's obvious. Isn't it?

but years ago Robert Elgood showed me a manuscript, and if I remember correctly it was a glossery over the Indian weapon names.

You mean a table with lines of weapons from the Jaipur museum? I translated it. I specifically went there from time to time in three years. Nothing particularly interesting. All daggers are "choree", all sabres are "tulwar". But there are some interesting moments. I will work on it.

You all are right to say that the terms that we now have in respected books in the main are the confusion of the languages. This is what I write in my article about. But it is not just confusion of nouns and names. It is also mix of verbs)))

[Mercenary]

Originally Posted by Emanuel

Have a look at Dr. Ann Feuerbach's summary on the research done to date on the word pulad:

O! I have realized what the problem is. I am sorry. It is not your fault. In India a lot of curators of museums and sekligarhs consider that pulad is फौलादा (Phaulādī). That is fact.

[Jens Nordlunde]

Mercenary,
I think you have got it all wrong.
You dont know what Robert showed me. It was a manuscript of about 500 pages, and it had nothing top do with his new book on the Jaipur collection.
Maybe I am not too bright, but wait to say so till you can prove it.
Jens

[Mercenary]

Jens
I am sorry I was thinking about pictures from Jaipur museum where depicted all of types of weapons that were in Jaipur armory. With their names.
It is a pity that we know nothing about a manuscript with over names of weapons. Science requires openness. I am sorry.

[Emanuel]

Hi Mercenary,

My comment was concerning the similarity between the sound of the words. You presented a dissection of phauladi (fulad, pulad) as originating from "phul"-flower. Other researchers dissected it to the roots "pu" "lauha" - purified iron, which is a close description of crucible steel.

On the phul-katara, Elgood includes a few lovely examples in his catalogue of the Jaipur Court. They all have floral hilts. This fits the definition of "phul"-flower.
So phul-katara just refers to a dagger with floral hilt.

Cheers!
Emanuel

[Mercenary]

Originally Posted by Emanuel

Hi Mercenary,
Other researchers dissected it to the roots "pu" "lauha" - purified iron, which is a close description of crucible steel.

There is a problem. Neither Jahangir nor Abdul Aziz nor present-day sekligarhs whose grandfathers and great-grandfathers (who worked in the court armories still) never read the articles of "other researchers" or some researchers else or any Internet forums )). They just say "fauladi". That is all.
You know what Indians added to the crucibles with the iron? What was considered as a secret? If you know, then you will understand why a crucible steel was called "flower steel", "fruit steel". It was magic for Indians then.

[ariel]

AFAIK, pulad or pulad is just steel ( see al Kindi). Damascus steel ( wootz) is pulad-e johardar, or just Johar in Arabic ( see the Saudi Arabian book).
For some reasons, northern consumers of Indian/Persian wootz adopted an abbreviated version of the full definition and wootz became bulat etc.

Thus, IMHO, Indo-Persian terms Fulad/ pulad /phulad have nothing to do with wootz ( they may, in Russia or the Caucasus), and your Phul-katara is just a blade ( wootz or not), but with a flower for a pommel. As noted by Emanuel, see Elgood's book.
Phonetic and spelling similarities can play dirty games with non-specialists :
" a thief stole my wife's stole", " You might unleash your might" etc.

Anyone wants to correct me?

[Jens Nordlunde]

To my opinion the forum members interest in the subject is admirable, but I do find the criticism of Marcenary's idea a bit overdone.

Mercenary has come up with an idea. So let him work on it, and when it is done, and you still want to criticize it, you can do so – but I find it is a bit early to do so now.

Jens

[Helleri]

I think something important to keep in mind along these lines is that derivation is not necessarily tied to definition. As definitions are descriptive and not prescriptive; Whatever the common lexical understanding of a word is at any given time and place, is essentially that words definition for a given time and place.

So even though Gladius is just what a roman may have said to refer to a sword generically. Today the words association with a distinctly roman sword in common lexical understanding sort of overrides the need to delineate with words like mainz or pompie. At least in casual conversation wherein 'I know, that you know, what I mean'. And these modernized gross-generalizations and misnomers are actually helpful for expedient communication.

Even so delving a little deeper is always good to do for those interested in order to better inform deeper discussion. Just saying...'Even if it was so doesn't mean it is so' as definitions can and do change over time (given that they are just descriptions of the common and current usage of a word).

[ariel]

Dear Mercenary:
I would just humbly suggest to read the first paragraph of the page 9 from Elgood's book on Jaipur collection. One may learn why in Rajastan the khanjar is chhurri and the Kard is Chaqu.
Also , his book about Hindu weapons informs us that Bichwa is Bichwa in Mysore and Hyderabad , but Baku in Kannada and Vinchu in Marathi.

And, BTW, Portugese version of the origin of Indian Pata traces it to the ( surprise, surprise!) Portugese word for paw:-)

Studying origin of words and names is a province of linguistics. This, by definition, requires fluent ( or, at the very least, working ) knowledge of the languages in question.

In the absense thereof, one is doomed to compile the already known bits and pieces from older publications. Rather boring, isn't it? Staring at colorful albums is more productive and original in comparison: at least one may have a chance to see something new and heretofore unappreciated:-)

But if that what tickles your fancy, good luck to you!

[Jim McDougall]

Actually, as one whose 'fancy is tickled' by virtually all aspects of the study of not just the arms and armour of India, but all, I must say that I am always delighted to see serious interest in pursuing topics such as this.
I wholeheartedly encourage these endeavors, and am always optimistic in active and constructive research and discussion in hopes that previously unknown facts might unfold.

As can be seen, the 'name game' (as we often affectionately refer to this aspect of arms research) has been an often approached subject, with the excellent comments and examples as well as positive perspective in the entries of most here.

Very much looking forward to development of this topic, and as always, to learning more on these things together here.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by ariel

And, BTW, Portugese version of the origin of Indian Pata traces it to the ( surprise, surprise!) Portugese word for paw:-)...

Let me also vote for surprise that not for probability. Indeed paw in portuguese is pata; with accentuation on the first 'a'.
I don't know how wide this attribution is spread out there; i find it, for one, in the (bilingual) work Rites of Power by Dr. Caravana, a phisician and collector. However he cares to write that the term will possibly be connected to such Portuguese terminology. Even so, a surprising assumption from his part, once one of his menthors and supplier, Rainer Raehnhardt, pretends that the term Pata ( quote: ) comes from the Patãs (Pathan), one of several divisions of the Xátria (Kchatrya) cast.

[David]

Well, old Willy Shakespeare probably said it best.
"What's in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet."
...or cut as deep, eh?
Honestly, i do enjoy linguistics to some extent and find it a rather interesting field. However, in the end, how we name a weapon tells us very little about it in the long run. I am far more interested in it's cultural significance, how it was used and maintained, what symbolism might be connected to it aside from its functional use, how in might fit into the sociological hierarchy, etc. than with the actual naming of the thing. In the end names only serve to allow us as collectors to understand what thing we are actually discussing. This can lead to confusion at times as even "correct" names for the same thing can vary from region to region. Often enough the "proper" name for a weapon literally translates into something like "sword" or "knife" anyway. Perhaps we put too much focus on the name game and not enough on the meat of the matter.

[fernando]

A rather eloquent entry, David .

[Miguel]

Originally Posted by David

Well, old Willy Shakespeare probably said it best.
"What's in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet."
...or cut as deep, eh?
Honestly, i do enjoy linguistics to some extent and find it a rather interesting field. However, in the end, how we name a weapon tells us very little about it in the long run. I am far more interested in it's cultural significance, how it was used and maintained, what symbolism might be connected to it aside from its functional use, how in might fit into the sociological hierarchy, etc. than with the actual naming of the thing. In the end names only serve to allow us as collectors to understand what thing we are actually discussing. This can lead to confusion at times as even "correct" names for the same thing can vary from region to region. Often enough the "proper" name for a weapon literally translates into something like "sword" or "knife" anyway. Perhaps we put too much focus on the name game and not enough on the meat of the matter.

Well said David my feelings entirely
Miguel

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by David

Well, old Willy Shakespeare probably said it best.
"What's in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet."
...or cut as deep, eh?
Honestly, i do enjoy linguistics to some extent and find it a rather interesting field. However, in the end, how we name a weapon tells us very little about it in the long run. I am far more interested in it's cultural significance, how it was used and maintained, what symbolism might be connected to it aside from its functional use, how in might fit into the sociological hierarchy, etc. than with the actual naming of the thing. In the end names only serve to allow us as collectors to understand what thing we are actually discussing. This can lead to confusion at times as even "correct" names for the same thing can vary from region to region. Often enough the "proper" name for a weapon literally translates into something like "sword" or "knife" anyway. Perhaps we put too much focus on the name game and not enough on the meat of the matter.

This quote and these views are probably the most essential and pertinent words that have been posted in this thread, which as I have said, is on a most intriguing, if not vexing, topic.

In these kinds of discussions I think it is key to exchange ideas as well as supportive data in a very courteous and objective manner. It is good to see discourse like this which prompts contemplation and often better understanding of a very complex topic.
Keep it going and avoid taking anything personally......its actually a pretty phun and phascinating discussion!!!

[Jens Nordlunde]

David,
I find what you wrote very interesting, and very valid, but at the same time I find that the names, like the ones Robert Elgood has given of the same dagger types are important.
One collector concentrates on weapons from one area, and others on weapons from another area. If we know the names used in the different areas we will also know it is the same weapon they are writing about, even without a picture of the weapon.

To the other participating members.
Some collectors are interested in the way the weapons look/where used, while others are interested in the names and the origin of the names, and to my oppinion everyone should be given free hand to follow his interest, and not from the start be met with mistrust - maybe some of us could learn a bit here and there along the road.
Jens

[David]

Originally Posted by Jens Nordlunde

One collector concentrates on weapons from one area, and others on weapons from another area. If we know the names used in the different areas we will also know it is the same weapon they are writing about, even without a picture of the weapon.

Well i'm not really sure why this would be particularly important since we all pretty much have the capacity to share images of our weapons from any place in the world in an instant. What we most likely discover in this exercise is that people from one area call that weapon a "sharp pointy piece of metal" in their own dialect while people in another area call it pretty much the same thing in their own dialect.
That said, i was clear that i do find this game of names interesting and their linguistic roots can indeed be fascinating and sometimes even enlightening. However, i am not a linguist and do not pretend be capable of tackling the intricacies of the field enough to be able to distinguish between true root word connections, sound alike only similarities and outright coincidences of arrangements of letters. My ears are always open, however, to those who have a better grasp on this study though i remain skeptical that anyone can make irrefutable connections to most of these word roots we encounter. Even the true experts tend to disagree on their theories. And even if they are absolutely correct, knowing the root words are meaningless if you don't understand the original intent of the culture that used that word when naming that weapon. Usually that can only be met with assumption or speculation. Names and categories seem to have become far too important to many collectors here at the sacrifice of what i personally feel are much more important aspects of the weapons we collect. But as is always the case, to each their own in their direction of study. I just don't believe that naming the thing is the key to understanding it.

[Mercenary]

Let's continue

Originally Posted by ariel

Dear Mercenary:
book about Hindu weapons informs us that Bichwa is Bichwa in Mysore and Hyderabad , but Baku in Kannada and Vinchu in Marathi.
But if that what tickles your fancy, good luck to you!

Very nice. But they are just various names of arachnids. The name of the dagger was written and sounded some different as "Bichū'ā" not as "Bichū" (for example in Panjabi) and ment the verb "to sting", "to damage". So "Bichū'ā" could be any dagger. For example:

[Mercenary]

Originally Posted by ariel

Dear Mercenary:
And, BTW, Portugese version of the origin of Indian Pata traces it to the ( surprise, surprise!) Portugese word for paw:-)
But if that what tickles your fancy, good luck to you!

Again very interesting!
But pata without any surprises first of all meant "wooden rapier". And there are a lot of information about pata-khilana and so )))

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Mercenary

Again very interesting!
But pata without any surprises first of all meant "wooden rapier". And there are a lot of information about pata-khilana and so )))

May i ask which illustrated dictionary you took this picture from ?
Is this the entire image in the book, or did you cut the lower part of the fencer's body with his 'weapon' for posting. It would be interesting to date this drawing. There could be a connection between this so called Pút-a and the appearing of the pata as an actual weapon; minding that the first examples that are recorded and available, first quarter XVI century, had a turned and carved wooden guard (gauntlet).
It would be pertinent to consider such evolution, as we may see in such earliest examples the presence of European blades, those from navigators of the XV-XVI centuries transiction.
On the other hand, if the drawing in the illustration is posterior, we may then consider that had either device had its own course.
Below two pata examples: one considered by its owner as the oldest and most primitive example known, with its gauntlet in wood, reinforced with iron straps and a later one with a 'basket' guard, in which a leather reinforcement was applied, now disappeared. The first one with an early European blade and the second with a weak one, of local production.
(Collection Rainer Daehnhardt).

.

[Mercenary]

Dear fernando
These are unrelated things: dictionary of Urdu of 1838, and picture from book about Khonds of 1864. Both references and picture are in the article. I am sorry I can not put it all here. May be some later all of the articles in "Historical Weaponology" will be free.
In sources (not illustrated books about weapons) there are a lot messes about pata. Some times it is a wooden sword, some times a steel one, some times a rapier and some times a staff. I wrote about it and tried to explain but it is still not very clear. Very weak spot. This requires further research.

[Mercenary]

Originally Posted by ariel

But if that what tickles your fancy, good luck to you!

Ariel, thank you a lots! Good luck!