Karud: the weapon that did not exist:-)

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Oliver Pinchot

Interesting topic, Ariel. I applaud and support your work here.
And you are correct, I didn't use that term in Arms of the Paladins because it did not exist as a distinct word in its period of use. Like a number of other inaccurate names applied to weapons, it was recorded by early European and American students of arms and armor who were seeking to establish a viable taxonomy, as they heard it in situ.

Oliver, I have wondered why you would not use "karud" even in your auction descriptions, and I understand your intent but what about other similar words...take "pulowar" "pulwar" "pulouar"...I do not know of any text from the 1800s or early 1900s that uses any of these terms except for Egerton and later Stone, but numerous examples of "Afghan tulwar" exist. Why stop at "karud", why not examine each and every term and delete from our collective memories what is not absolutely historically or linguistically correct???

[Mercenary]

Originally Posted by estcrh

Oliver, I have wondered why you would not use "karud" even in your auction descriptions, and I understand your intent but what about other similar words...take "pulowar" "pulwar" "pulouar"...I do not know of any text from the 1800s or early 1900s that uses any of these terms except for Egerton and later Stone, but numerous examples of "Afghan tulwar" exist. Why stop at "karud", why not examine each and every term and delete from our collective memories what is not absolutely historically or linguistically correct???

You are absolutely right! Word "tulwar" is just "a sword". That is way in India there are "khanda tulwar", "sukhela tulwar", "kirach tulwar" and so. Most of the "Indian" terms that we use now are conditional and pseudo-scientific but we have no other.

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Mercenary

You are absolutely right! Word "tulwar" is just "a sword". That is way in India there are "khanda tulwar", "sukhela tulwar", "kirach tulwar" and so. Most of the "Indian" terms that we use now are conditional and pseudo-scientific but we have no other.

And there is also "talwar"??? Which one was first, did the original users call a certain sword "tulwar / talwar", if not then this particular word should not be used in any "academic publications" etc.

If it were not for the Europeans and others that first took the time to collect, name, research and preserve these weapons were would we be today, and they did it without the internet, I think its wrong to try and erase their contribution to the history of these weapons, even if not always linguistically correct, we owe a debt to these people.

[Mercenary]

Originally Posted by estcrh

And there is also "talwar"??? Which one was first, did the original users call a certain sword "tulwar / talwar", if not then this particular word should not be used in any "academic publications" etc.

Someone asked Indian: "What is this?" - "This is tulwar (a sword)". "And what is this?" - "This is kar(u)d (a knife)". Not a single specific type of weapon, but a common name.
You know in ancient India there were not specific names for flowers, fruits or some other similar group of things, only for very important things for Indians: "What is THIS?" - "It is a flower". "What is THAT one?" - "That is a flower too". "But what is the third one?" - "O! This is LOTUS!"

[kai]

Wow, there seems to be a huge amount of emotional attachment here!

If it were not for the Europeans and others that first took the time to collect, name, research and preserve these weapons were would we be today, and they did it without the internet, I think its wrong to try and erase their contribution to the history of these weapons, even if not always linguistically correct, we owe a debt to these people.

We're all standing on the shoulders of giants. (Well, rather lots of shoulders from along the normal distribution with only a minority of intellectual giants thrown in... )

While the longstanding collecting interest of rulers as well as lots of well-of folks worldwide certainly helped to rescue examples of material culture from the vagaries of conflicts, social change, climate, etc., we should not forget that the colonial/postcolonial times were (and still often are) not fair - not all "acquisitions" either...

However, knowledge is not carved in stone but evolves continually. There will always be changes and it doesn't help to cling to mere words, especially if current usage is shown to be based on misunderstandings or errors.

Discussions rarely lead to universally accepted results, even in an academic setting. A wise human being once remarked that outdated ideas often die with their long-time proponents...

Here we rarely deal with rigorously established scientific facts that lead to clear results; we rather have a vast pool of diverse experiences and knowledge and its free sharing by active forumites yields very valuable insights. I'm sure we can live with some diversity including divergent point of views!

Regards,
Kai

[kronckew]

languages are not static, they are living things, constantly learning and evolving.