![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 | |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 426
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,189
|
![]()
LOL!!!!
![]() Good one Mercenary!!! 'durbars were not theatrical' !!!???? Great photos which illustrate the monumental degree of 'performance' which were intended fully to impress and influence. These were oriented toward British officialdom and often nobility and naturally the highest degree of embellishment could be found on all manner of costume, material cultural items, weapons etc. Indian 'festivals' were far more often and regularly held events with the purpose of traditional and often religious orientation. While the durbars of course brought in colonial populace, officials and occupying military and many associated groups who certainly sought souveniers of these great events.......the festivals would have been far less 'commercial' in my view. The term 'theatrical' in our discussion as I have understood is a metaphoric term to describe something embellished far beyond similar items in regular situations, made to outwardly attract attention. Often this term refers to stage type props which would not be of the quality and durability of the items they portray. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Russia
Posts: 1,042
|
![]()
Jim, monumentality and theatricality - is not the same))))) The greatness and cheap farce - different.
Excellent swords, that we see among the participants durbar in Delhi (in the photo) do not look like the sword that we are discussing ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 426
|
![]() Quote:
Last edited by Mercenary; 29th April 2016 at 08:50 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|