On the Use of Indian Terms for Identification of Weapon Types

A. G. Maisey · 16th October 2015, 02:07 PM

I agree wholeheartedly with you Ariel:- names are important.

In fact, I'll go further than this:- words are important.

Words are used to transfer ideas from one person's mind into the mind of another, if our use of words is imprecise all sorts of errors can occur.

Because of this, I can assure you that I will never bristle at an incorrect use, or knowledge of, keris terminology, in fact, I actively encourage the use of English words when we are using the English language as a medium of communication.

The truly important thing is that we understand one another, not that we all understand every minor usage of language.

But I must admit, I do find the pointless use of misunderstood words to be just slightly annoying, most especially so when a good English word will transfer an idea more effectively.

Perhaps the second paragraph of my post #49 may give some indication of my position in this matter of names.

Jim McDougall · 16th October 2015, 04:31 PM

This thread gets better and better!!!
Not only is it fascinating to see the perspectives on linguistics and terminology concerning references to these weapons. It is amazing to see these old references as shown by Mercenary...I had no idea of this early type of wooden weapon in India in this manner, and that certainly is interesting to see this explanation of the 'pata' term.

Also, thank you Fernando for showing these pata examples, are these from Daehnhardt's book ?
The 'pata' conundrum is yet another of India's edged weapon mysteries which remains elusively intriguing, and these images and these mentions of it very much rekindle the flame.

As has been shown, the importance of broadening our understanding of the various terms and names used for these arms is essential as we look to early narratives and works describing them. Having some sort of cross reference to align these would be ideal, but a daunting undertaking. Still, once through the philosophy of all this, any advance toward compiling this material will be useful in my opinion.

Mercenary, you seem to have a considerable acumen toward the weapons of India as well as the linguistics and etymology of the languages. I hope you will keep us advised of the article you are working on and its progress. I always am delighted to see attention to the weapons of India, and encourage any work toward better understanding the inherent complexities surrounding them.

fernando · 16th October 2015, 06:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Also, thank you Fernando for showing these pata examples, are these from Daehnhardt's book ? ..

Yes Jim, from his collection, as mentioned, and also from his books. I don't recall having seen patas when i had the previlege to visit his collection; which is no surprise, due to the myriad ot items that my eyes had to look at, in so little time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

... The 'pata' conundrum is yet another of India's edged weapon mysteries which remains elusively intriguing, and these images and these mentions of it very much rekindle the flame...

Yes, things are not yet clear. But that would be another deal.

A. G. Maisey · 16th October 2015, 09:33 PM

Yes Fernando, trying to represent the spoken word as the written word is very complex indeed. Look at the "international language" of English. Its a nightmare. There is no way you can read English phonetically, it just doesn't work. I'm truly glad I was born into an English speaking society, because I sincerely doubt that I would ever have been able to learn it as a second language.

But even though I am a native English speaker, I have encountered people from other places, notably parts of the UK, who are also native speakers of English and whom I simply cannot understand.

Then there are the historical conventions.

The whole thing sometimes becomes too confusing altogether.

Ian · 17th October 2015, 05:52 AM

Alan, you are so correct.

I had the good fortune to have been born and educated in the same English-speaking environment as you. For the last 35 years I have lived in the US, and had to learn a number of different English dialects and idiom. While UK and US English are close in many respects, there are obvious and not so obvious spelling and grammatical differences that must confuse the heck out of people for whom English is a second language. And then there is Ebonics, or African-American English, that has some substantial differences from Standard American English. I remember too growing up in Australia and hearing "Pidgin English", a condescending colonial form that was taught to Australian indigenous people, and those in Papua New Guinea and neighboring islands.

And these are just some of the major dialects. Within the UK there are many dialects also--Hiberno-English, West Country English, Scottish English, etc.

Like you, I would hate to try to master English as a second language. Idiomatic use must be very challenging to the newcomer. It must confuse folks enormously when confronted with phrases such as: to "take two bites at the cherry" [and no, this is not a sexual reference]; to "be down in the dumps;" to "take a "butcher's [hook]" at something; to "cut the ground from under your feet;" to "take the bull by the horns;" something that "does the trick;" someone is "mutton dressed up as lamb;" someone is "no spring chicken;" "to argue the toss;" "to blow the whistle;" and so on...

Ian.

Quote:

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

Yes Fernando, trying to represent the spoken word as the written word is very complex indeed. Look at the "international language" of English. Its a nightmare. There is no way you can read English phonetically, it just doesn't work. I'm truly glad I was born into an English speaking society, because I sincerely doubt that I would ever have been able to learn it as a second language.

But even though I am a native English speaker, I have encountered people from other places, notably parts of the UK, who are also native speakers of English and whom I simply cannot understand.

Then there are the historical conventions.

The whole thing sometimes becomes too confusing altogether.

A. G. Maisey · 17th October 2015, 08:53 AM

Yes Ian, very true, and then we have Cockney rhyming slang --- your 'butchers hook' is an example --- that was very much in use amongst people of two generations before my own. I can remember my grandfather and couple of his mates having running conversations in this art form, that nobody had a hope of understanding except the participants.

ariel · 17th October 2015, 11:29 AM

The vocabulary of old swordmakers all over the world was largely metaphoric. All those Sossun Pattas , Kirk Nardubans, Pesh Kabzes, Bichwas, Jamadhar Kataris etc., did not describe particular weapons in their dry engineering terms, but rather as esthetic/religious/poetic entities.

Without thorough immersion into their contemporary atmospheres ( further complicated by linguistic problems), one cannot fully understand the multilayered depth of meaning of the peculiar names given to old elongated and sharpened pieces of steel.

Even the names of such simple daggers as janbiya and shibriya do not signify "just a knife" :-)

The "name game" is not a useless exercise as some of us think: it is a window into the mind of old masters and warriors.

Through a glass, darkly.....

fernando · 17th October 2015, 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ian

... I would hate to try to master English as a second language...

Specially if you have to deal with British english and later struggle to converse in American english, "aggravated" by the diverse levels of education; this starting from a native language that has little or nothing to do with it. Still is fascinating when you learn all those by ear from the beginning, no school involved, just trying to express yourself with what you have at hand. Needless to say that the range of self learning resources is nowadays so much larger with the Internet.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ian

...Idiomatic use must be very challenging to the newcomer. It must confuse folks enormously when confronted with phrases such as: "take the bull by the horns" ...

Ah, we also use that one over here

A. G. Maisey · 17th October 2015, 01:32 PM

Ariel, I believe I can accept the blame for first coining the term "name game".

At least, I had never heard it before I myself used it, and I first used it perhaps 40 odd years ago.

The intent encaptioned in the term was not to denigrate the diligent research of those scholars who seek to interpret and understand the terminologies applied to weaponry --- and for that matter, other examples of the material culture of foreign places, but rather to illuminate the total and absolute futility of attempting to identify the "correct" terminology applied to any item in the absence of a good working knowledge of the culture, society, history and language of the place concerned.

Further, any terminology that may be perceived as being a probable "correct" terminology must be fixed in terms of time and place, for the very obvious reason that time distorts perception, and that which is accepted as accurate today has only about a 45% possibility of still being accepted as accurate in 50 years time --- at least this appears to be so in the field of medicine, and by extrapolation can probably be considered to be so to a greater or lesser degree in other fields.

The meanings of words change over time, as does the way in which constant meanings are understood, thus if it can be shown that a particular name is correct for any object, that correctness must at the very least be fixed within a framework of time and place.

For example, if it can be shown that the accepted name for a particular object was "Whatsit", that accepted name must be qualified in terms of time and place by the affixation of historical and geographic parameters. To do less than this is not simply sloppy, it is close to rabid stupidity.

Thus, our Whatsit becomes "an object known as a Whatsit during the 13th century in Shaftsbury, Dorset, England". Of course supporting references and/or evidence are provided.

As an example of the way in which meanings can become lost or can change I would like to use the case of the keris, variant spellings of creese, kris, cris, and a few more that do not readily come to mind. At the present time we have a number of other words that can be used to refer to the keris:- dhuwung, kadgo, curigo, wangkingan, cundrik, pusaka, and that is only in Javanese.

However in this same language of Javanese, prior to about 1600, it is probable that none of those names would have referred to a keris as we know it now. Good candidates for the "correct" name for the Modern Keris, and other keris-like objects , in pre-1600 Jawa were "tewek" and "tuhuk", but we do not really know with any certainty whether this presumption is correct or not.

So, I put it to you:- the "name game", when understood as I intended the phrase to be understood, is something worse than useless, however, diligent research into terminology by dedicated scholars is not the "name game", and must never be thought of as such.

Mercenary · 17th October 2015, 01:57 PM

You know if you study ethnic weaponry seriously than you have to join to one of serious disciplines: or history of art or ethnography. If you don't do it then you will be able to publish only beautiful pictures. There is nothing wrong but for what?

Quote:

Without thorough immersion into their contemporary atmospheres ( further complicated by linguistic problems), one cannot fully understand the multilayered depth of meaning of the peculiar names given to old elongated and sharpened pieces of steel.

Many thanks Ariel again. This is what I consulted before with some serious ethnographers about. They advised me: you should not to make new "right" classification. It will also be bad as other ones. Just show how Indians looked at their weapons, what they felt and how they explained it. It is what I am working on.
The article we discussed here (thank you all, I saw how it was hard for some of you) is an article about military (warriors) practices of North India of 1600-1800. This article was reported (and published) at 5th International Science-practical conference, May 2014 in the Military-Historical Museum of Artillery, Engineer and Signal Corps (Russia, St.Petersburg). The second part of the article (about kinds and names of weapons) was reported at 6th conference, May, 2015. You know when you are researching in the fields such as of the using weapons it is very important to know what kind of weapons was used (while you have for it only the mix of names and languages).
Some of this information was published in "On the Use of Indian Terms for Identification of Weapon Types" in "Historical Weaponology" #1, 2015.

ariel · 16th October 2015, 05:55 PM

Thanks, Alan!
I am glad we are on the same page.
And this is the reason why I strongly insist on any interpretation of any foreign name to be done by a native speaker or, at least, by a foreigner fluent in the native language and immersed in local culture.

The thread on "Tilang Kemarau" amusingly illustrates the point :-)

16th October 2015, 02:07 PM	#1
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,044	I agree wholeheartedly with you Ariel:- names are important. In fact, I'll go further than this:- words are important. Words are used to transfer ideas from one person's mind into the mind of another, if our use of words is imprecise all sorts of errors can occur. Because of this, I can assure you that I will never bristle at an incorrect use, or knowledge of, keris terminology, in fact, I actively encourage the use of English words when we are using the English language as a medium of communication. The truly important thing is that we understand one another, not that we all understand every minor usage of language. But I must admit, I do find the pointless use of misunderstood words to be just slightly annoying, most especially so when a good English word will transfer an idea more effectively. Perhaps the second paragraph of my post #49 may give some indication of my position in this matter of names.

16th October 2015, 04:31 PM	#2
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,453	This thread gets better and better!!! Not only is it fascinating to see the perspectives on linguistics and terminology concerning references to these weapons. It is amazing to see these old references as shown by Mercenary...I had no idea of this early type of wooden weapon in India in this manner, and that certainly is interesting to see this explanation of the 'pata' term. Also, thank you Fernando for showing these pata examples, are these from Daehnhardt's book ? The 'pata' conundrum is yet another of India's edged weapon mysteries which remains elusively intriguing, and these images and these mentions of it very much rekindle the flame. As has been shown, the importance of broadening our understanding of the various terms and names used for these arms is essential as we look to early narratives and works describing them. Having some sort of cross reference to align these would be ideal, but a daunting undertaking. Still, once through the philosophy of all this, any advance toward compiling this material will be useful in my opinion. Mercenary, you seem to have a considerable acumen toward the weapons of India as well as the linguistics and etymology of the languages. I hope you will keep us advised of the article you are working on and its progress. I always am delighted to see attention to the weapons of India, and encourage any work toward better understanding the inherent complexities surrounding them.

16th October 2015, 09:33 PM	#4
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,044	Yes Fernando, trying to represent the spoken word as the written word is very complex indeed. Look at the "international language" of English. Its a nightmare. There is no way you can read English phonetically, it just doesn't work. I'm truly glad I was born into an English speaking society, because I sincerely doubt that I would ever have been able to learn it as a second language. But even though I am a native English speaker, I have encountered people from other places, notably parts of the UK, who are also native speakers of English and whom I simply cannot understand. Then there are the historical conventions. The whole thing sometimes becomes too confusing altogether.

17th October 2015, 08:53 AM	#6
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,044	Yes Ian, very true, and then we have Cockney rhyming slang --- your 'butchers hook' is an example --- that was very much in use amongst people of two generations before my own. I can remember my grandfather and couple of his mates having running conversations in this art form, that nobody had a hope of understanding except the participants.

17th October 2015, 11:29 AM	#7
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	The vocabulary of old swordmakers all over the world was largely metaphoric. All those Sossun Pattas , Kirk Nardubans, Pesh Kabzes, Bichwas, Jamadhar Kataris etc., did not describe particular weapons in their dry engineering terms, but rather as esthetic/religious/poetic entities. Without thorough immersion into their contemporary atmospheres ( further complicated by linguistic problems), one cannot fully understand the multilayered depth of meaning of the peculiar names given to old elongated and sharpened pieces of steel. Even the names of such simple daggers as janbiya and shibriya do not signify "just a knife" :-) The "name game" is not a useless exercise as some of us think: it is a window into the mind of old masters and warriors. Through a glass, darkly.....

17th October 2015, 01:32 PM	#9
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,044	Ariel, I believe I can accept the blame for first coining the term "name game". At least, I had never heard it before I myself used it, and I first used it perhaps 40 odd years ago. The intent encaptioned in the term was not to denigrate the diligent research of those scholars who seek to interpret and understand the terminologies applied to weaponry --- and for that matter, other examples of the material culture of foreign places, but rather to illuminate the total and absolute futility of attempting to identify the "correct" terminology applied to any item in the absence of a good working knowledge of the culture, society, history and language of the place concerned. Further, any terminology that may be perceived as being a probable "correct" terminology must be fixed in terms of time and place, for the very obvious reason that time distorts perception, and that which is accepted as accurate today has only about a 45% possibility of still being accepted as accurate in 50 years time --- at least this appears to be so in the field of medicine, and by extrapolation can probably be considered to be so to a greater or lesser degree in other fields. The meanings of words change over time, as does the way in which constant meanings are understood, thus if it can be shown that a particular name is correct for any object, that correctness must at the very least be fixed within a framework of time and place. For example, if it can be shown that the accepted name for a particular object was "Whatsit", that accepted name must be qualified in terms of time and place by the affixation of historical and geographic parameters. To do less than this is not simply sloppy, it is close to rabid stupidity. Thus, our Whatsit becomes "an object known as a Whatsit during the 13th century in Shaftsbury, Dorset, England". Of course supporting references and/or evidence are provided. As an example of the way in which meanings can become lost or can change I would like to use the case of the keris, variant spellings of creese, kris, cris, and a few more that do not readily come to mind. At the present time we have a number of other words that can be used to refer to the keris:- dhuwung, kadgo, curigo, wangkingan, cundrik, pusaka, and that is only in Javanese. However in this same language of Javanese, prior to about 1600, it is probable that none of those names would have referred to a keris as we know it now. Good candidates for the "correct" name for the Modern Keris, and other keris-like objects , in pre-1600 Jawa were "tewek" and "tuhuk", but we do not really know with any certainty whether this presumption is correct or not. So, I put it to you:- the "name game", when understood as I intended the phrase to be understood, is something worse than useless, however, diligent research into terminology by dedicated scholars is not the "name game", and must never be thought of as such.

16th October 2015, 05:55 PM	#11
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Thanks, Alan! I am glad we are on the same page. And this is the reason why I strongly insist on any interpretation of any foreign name to be done by a native speaker or, at least, by a foreigner fluent in the native language and immersed in local culture. The thread on "Tilang Kemarau" amusingly illustrates the point :-)