Karud: the weapon that did not exist:-)

estcrh · 6th September 2017, 07:06 AM

Egerton seemed to label just about any type of dagger as "pesh kabz". I give credit to the people who tried to sort out the distinct types by applying individual names. Some people seem to have just gone along with Egerton while others did not, which eventually led us to the current discussion. You can see what is clearly a pesh kabz #717, with two kards #721 and #722 and what looks to be a choora / karud #624

An Illustrated Handbook of Indian Arms: Being a Classified and Descriptive Catalogue of the Arms Exhibited at the India Museum: with an Introductory Sketch of the Military History of India, Earl Wilbraham Egerton Egerton
W.H. Allen, 1880.

estcrh · 6th September 2017, 09:32 AM

George Stone basically followed Egerton. As noted earlier he also separately mentions the "karud" as being a straight bladed pesh kabz, referencing Moser, but in his illustration he has karud and pesh kabz lumped together and states that "as a rule the blade is straight" so are we to assume that the curved bladed pesh kabz were not well represented in that time period leading Stone to think that the straight blade was the most common construction? In our time, with the benefit of the internet, we have access to many images of karud and pesh kabz.

estcrh · 6th September 2017, 10:10 AM

P.Holstein, "Contribution A L’Etude des Armes Orientales", 1931. Vol. II, plate XX, the author shows both pesh kabz and karud daggers.

Mercenary · 6th September 2017, 10:44 AM

Estcrh,

Very clearly. Million thanks.
Even if "karud" emerged as "kangaroo", as "kangaroo" it has the right to exist. #historydidit.

Kubur · 6th September 2017, 08:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by estcrh

P.Holstein, "Contribution A L’Etude des Armes Orientales", 1931. Vol. II, plate XX, the author shows both pesh kabz and karud daggers.

Well Eric
Holstein speaks only of pesh kabz...
The text under the picture is not from Holstein...
Nevertheless I share your general opinion.
Best,
Kubur

ariel · 6th September 2017, 10:23 PM

Eric,

Forgive me for saying it, but time after time you appear to believe that nobody here ( and me in particular) had ever seen books by Egerton, Stone and Baden-Powell. Well, allow me to disabuse you of that notion: we had. Bringing Stone as a final authority is not a great idea if you want to convince anybody here. Even Stone himself ( whom I admire deeply) openly admitted that his book needed to be updated with " more accurate information". Nothing is " carved in Stone":-)

Second, as Kubur has already mentioned, Holstein's book was written in French. Your illustration is Plate XX from Volume 2. The legend, however, is in English, translated by somebody who had his own ( or, likely, Stone's) ideas about the examples, and is completely fabricated: Holstein never had a legend to this plate or labeled any of the objects as "Karud". All of them were described in the text as Peshkabz. Where did you get this mistranslated source from? Are you trying to use this " false fact" as an argument in favor of your position?

And lastly, you seem to concentrate on my personal recommendation to use a correct term for a straight-bladed Peshkabz. You may not like it, and this is your right. Just as it is my right, as an author of the original post, to have my own opinion. " And the twain shall never meet".

Moreover, you have already agreed that the use of correct term is appropriate in academic publications, i.e. exactly what I have been saying from the beginning and what was clearly stated in the text of my original post. So, what are you arguing with?

estcrh · 7th September 2017, 03:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ariel

Eric,

Forgive me for saying it, but time after time you appear to believe that nobody here ( and me in particular) had ever seen books by Egerton, Stone and Baden-Powell. Well, allow me to disabuse you of that notion: we had. Bringing Stone as a final authority is not a great idea if you want to convince anybody here. Even Stone himself ( whom I admire deeply) openly admitted that his book needed to be updated with " more accurate information". Nothing is " carved in Stone":-)

Ariel, please stop trying to speak for everyone here, I am not trying to convince anyone here of anything, I am showing examples from a variety of sources where the different terms came from, who said what and when. If you have seen it all then just dont look, other people now and in the future may not have seen them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ariel

Second, as Kubur has already mentioned, Holstein's book was written in French. Your illustration is Plate XX from Volume 2. The legend, however, is in English, translated by somebody who had his own ( or, likely, Stone's) ideas about the examples, and is completely fabricated: Holstein never had a legend to this plate or labeled any of the objects as "Karud". All of them were described in the text as Peshkabz. Where did you get this mistranslated source from? Are you trying to use this " false fact" as an argument in favor of your position?

Ariel, that is my PERSONAL interpretation, no more fabricated than any other, including your suggestions that we fabricate a completely new history by pretending that the work "karud" does not exist. In my opinion it is you that is recommending the use of false facts.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ariel

And lastly, you seem to concentrate on my personal recommendation to use a correct term for a straight-bladed Peshkabz. You may not like it, and this is your right. Just as it is my right, as an author of the original post, to have my own opinion. " And the twain shall never meet".

In fact Ariel, we already have an accepted term for the "straight bladed pesh-kabz"....it is "karud". It is my right to disagree with you, and what exactly is your new correct term???

Quote:

Originally Posted by ariel

Moreover, you have already agreed that the use of correct term is appropriate in academic publications, i.e. exactly what I have been saying from the beginning and what was clearly stated in the text of my original post. So, what are you arguing with?

Ariel what I have agreed with is that the known history of these terms absolutely should be brought up in academic publications and but that they should still be used.....you have and still do insist that the word "karud" should be stricken from academic publications.....two completely different and opposed thoughts.

estcrh · 6th September 2017, 10:27 AM

So, is the kerala dagger a form of the pesh kabz?

6th September 2017, 07:06 AM	#1
estcrh Member Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: USA Posts: 1,492	Egerton seemed to label just about any type of dagger as "pesh kabz". I give credit to the people who tried to sort out the distinct types by applying individual names. Some people seem to have just gone along with Egerton while others did not, which eventually led us to the current discussion. You can see what is clearly a pesh kabz #717, with two kards #721 and #722 and what looks to be a choora / karud #624 An Illustrated Handbook of Indian Arms: Being a Classified and Descriptive Catalogue of the Arms Exhibited at the India Museum: with an Introductory Sketch of the Military History of India, Earl Wilbraham Egerton Egerton W.H. Allen, 1880. Attached Images

6th September 2017, 09:32 AM	#2
estcrh Member Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: USA Posts: 1,492	George Stone basically followed Egerton. As noted earlier he also separately mentions the "karud" as being a straight bladed pesh kabz, referencing Moser, but in his illustration he has karud and pesh kabz lumped together and states that "as a rule the blade is straight" so are we to assume that the curved bladed pesh kabz were not well represented in that time period leading Stone to think that the straight blade was the most common construction? In our time, with the benefit of the internet, we have access to many images of karud and pesh kabz. Attached Images Last edited by estcrh; 6th September 2017 at 09:46 AM.

6th September 2017, 10:10 AM	#3
estcrh Member Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: USA Posts: 1,492	P.Holstein, "Contribution A L’Etude des Armes Orientales", 1931. Vol. II, plate XX, the author shows both pesh kabz and karud daggers. Attached Images

6th September 2017, 10:27 AM	#8
estcrh Member Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: USA Posts: 1,492	Kerala daggers So, is the kerala dagger a form of the pesh kabz? Attached Images

6th September 2017, 10:44 AM	#4
Mercenary Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Moscow, Russia Posts: 426	Estcrh, Very clearly. Million thanks. Even if "karud" emerged as "kangaroo", as "kangaroo" it has the right to exist. #historydidit.

6th September 2017, 10:23 PM	#6
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Eric, Forgive me for saying it, but time after time you appear to believe that nobody here ( and me in particular) had ever seen books by Egerton, Stone and Baden-Powell. Well, allow me to disabuse you of that notion: we had. Bringing Stone as a final authority is not a great idea if you want to convince anybody here. Even Stone himself ( whom I admire deeply) openly admitted that his book needed to be updated with " more accurate information". Nothing is " carved in Stone":-) Second, as Kubur has already mentioned, Holstein's book was written in French. Your illustration is Plate XX from Volume 2. The legend, however, is in English, translated by somebody who had his own ( or, likely, Stone's) ideas about the examples, and is completely fabricated: Holstein never had a legend to this plate or labeled any of the objects as "Karud". All of them were described in the text as Peshkabz. Where did you get this mistranslated source from? Are you trying to use this " false fact" as an argument in favor of your position? And lastly, you seem to concentrate on my personal recommendation to use a correct term for a straight-bladed Peshkabz. You may not like it, and this is your right. Just as it is my right, as an author of the original post, to have my own opinion. " And the twain shall never meet". Moreover, you have already agreed that the use of correct term is appropriate in academic publications, i.e. exactly what I have been saying from the beginning and what was clearly stated in the text of my original post. So, what are you arguing with? Last edited by ariel; 6th September 2017 at 10:41 PM.