Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Ethnographic Weapons
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 12th April 2009, 09:40 AM   #1
sirupate
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: England
Posts: 373
Default

Hello Gonzalo,

Quote:
Since the khukris have an uncertain lineage as weapons and appeared coincidently around the same time of the rajput invasion to Nepal
Actualy High caste Indians fled from the Moghul invasion, and ended up in Nepal, and these should not be confused with the original Khas who were Lamaistic Buddhists, before the Brahman got hold of them.

Quote:
It has been said that the real authentic weapon from the gurkas is the kora, and not the khukri.
As stated in a previous post, its not called a kora in Nepal its called a khuda, the Gurkhas were never issued khuda, unless your are referring to the Gorkhas from Gorkha? Your statement happily neglets the fact that the kukri (khukuri) is the National weapon of Nepal, not the khuda. Also the view that khuda was the real authentic weapon of the Nepalese, is certainley not the view point held in Nepal!!

Quote:
I don´t how much of the design of the blade owes to the indian weapons
This statement seems to completely neglet the potential origins of the many different tribes in Nepal that carried kukri, who were domiciled in Nepal long before the High cast Indians arrived, and also ignores where the Tulwar may have had its origins.

Cheers Simon

Last edited by sirupate; 12th April 2009 at 10:31 AM.
sirupate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th April 2009, 08:40 AM   #2
Gonzalo G
Member
 
Gonzalo G's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Nothern Mexico
Posts: 458
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sirupate
Hello Gonzalo,

Actualy High caste Indians fled from the Moghul invasion, and ended up in Nepal, and these should not be confused with the original Khas who were Lamaistic Buddhists, before the Brahman got hold of them.

As stated in a previous post, its not called a kora in Nepal its called a khuda, the Gurkhas were never issued khuda, unless your are referring to the Gorkhas from Gorkha? Your statement happily neglets the fact that the kukri (khukuri) is the National weapon of Nepal, not the khuda. Also the view that khuda was the real authentic weapon of the Nepalese, is certainley not the view point held in Nepal!!

This statement seems to completely neglet the potential origins of the many different tribes in Nepal that carried kukri, who were domiciled in Nepal long before the High cast Indians arrived, and also ignores where the Tulwar may have had its origins.

Cheers Simon
I am referring to the kora from the gorkhas (I missed a letter, big mistake). Still, most of the tulwar handled khukris I have seen (and I don´t pretend to spell the word 'khuri' in the most correct way, since it seems there are several) are indian. Maybe coincidence.

I am not interested in religious matters, but escentially in pointing the indian presence and the indian influences, which is a fact you can´t deny. Certainly, the tulwar handled khukris are NOT a pure expression of the Nepal culture, but the result of mutual influences. The rest is irrelevant to this matter. I do not discuss if 'kora' is, or is not, the most correct name (here and there, many terms are used only by occidental collectors, and to change this use would be an endless work), but I think we are not talking about names, but cultural influences and weapon origins. Tulwar handled khukris are, or the result of nepali influence over indian population, or the influence of the indian culture over the nepali weapons, isn't it?

I don't neglect anything, but a letter. As I understand,the khurki has an unknown lineage, and its origins are not clear to this moment, no matter it is the 'national weapon of Nepal'. There is a country in Africa which has an AK/47 in its flag, and it is a russian weapon. I mean, there is an historic reason for choosing the khukri as national weapon, but the original weapon the gorkhas carried at the beginning of the nepali state was the kora, and not the khukri, which is a latter weapon. There is not another more respresentative gorkha weapon in the conquest of this territory, and more original in relation with this country. Maybe for this reason the tulwar handled koras are more scarce, if there is any (I personally never saw one), no matter all the indian influences.

Probably the khukri has more extensive use among all the ethnic groups from Nepal, and in this measure it is more representative of this political unity, but the point is irrelevant to my statements: that the kora is more representative from the gorkha, and that the khukri has an uncertain lineage, and probably reflects some indian influences. It is not a definitive statement, it is only a point which dreserves some discussion, in my opinion, as cultural influences have to be taken on account. For above all the diversity of the ethnic groups existing in actual Nepal since long time ago, no one seems to have developed the khukri before the arrival of the indians. Or is it?
Gonzalo G is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th May 2009, 04:36 PM   #3
spiral
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,712
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sirupate
From a Western definition point of view you are quite correct, however in Nepal they don't quite have those defintions on handle types and weapons as a whole, and that's pretty much the mind set I now have when talking about Nepalese weaponry.

However regarding Kora, in Nepal they are not called that, they are called Khuda, so perhaps it should be khuda style handle when refering to Nepalese weapons? If one wants to be definitave in a Western collector type way?
Quote:
Originally Posted by sirupate
As stated in a previous post, its not called a kora in Nepal its called a khuda,
Cheers Simon

Quote:
Originally Posted by sirupate
Khuda/Khunda is pronounced Coodah, the c as in coup, I don't know how the Kora pronunciation came about? Unless that is how its spelt or pronounced in India?
That’s strange, most people we met in Nepal 4 years ago were very aware of aware of differences between kora,tulwar,shamshir , their grips &blade shapes etc.as I recall. They just didn’t bother to define kukri in the sort of detail western collectors & dealers do.

Kora or Khora are acceptable terms to me, as are khuda & khonra as are the 15 or so spellings of khukri there all correct.. After all we are not writing in Sanscrit or Devangari etc.

I would say Its probably Col.Kirkatrik who introduced the spellings khora & indeed Khookeri to the west when his work was published in 1811}.{{By William Miller of London,}
{About his mission to Nepal in 1793} He also pointed out that at that time there were 8 or 9 main languages in Nepal which may explain some people beliving khuda or Khunda to be correct at Khora or Khora incorrect.


Hope that helps a little towards finding about a few more definitive facts about these great swords of the Himalayas & where misunderstandings about British & Nepali history & translations seem to have occurred.

Spiral
spiral is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.