Ancient, armed Indian from Kabul - Page 2

ariel · 23rd May 2005, 02:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew

Thanks for posting that, Ariel!

I think, however, that the museum's attribution is dubious. Given the provenance that apparantly came with the knife, one can hardly blame the museum, but I've never seen such a knife reliably attributed to India.

Ariel, is it double edged?

It is single edged.
As to the attribution, I guess the curators of this Armoury (an offshot of the London Tower) know a thing or two about the origins of their exponates and have a record to prove it.
I see no reason why the Rajastani origin is such an implausibility: after all, French copied the Nimcha , the Russians made splendid Yataghans, the Vietnamese swords were influenced by the Japanese etc, etc. People saw blades they liked and made copies with the local flavor.

Andrew · 23rd May 2005, 02:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ariel

It is single edged.
As to the attribution, I guess the curators of this Armoury (an offshot of the London Tower) know a thing or two about the origins of their exponates and have a record to prove it.
I see no reason why the Rajastani origin is such an implausibility: after all, French copied the Nimcha , the Russians made splendid Yataghans, the Vietnamese swords were influenced by the Japanese etc, etc. People saw blades they liked and made copies with the local flavor.

I truly intended no disrespect for the Armoury. However, I think we can agree it is not uncommon for innacurate provenance to perpetuate innacurate descriptions and attributions, even by otherwise excellent institutions.

Yes, I concede this could be a Rajastani knife in a Burmese/Thai style. However, Occam's Razor suggests to me it is more likely just mis-identified.

Here are some similar knives from Oriental Arms' gallery:

http://www.oriental-arms.co.il/photo...00116/ph-0.jpg
http://www.oriental-arms.co.il/photo...00115/ph-0.jpg

I think it much more likely that this form of knife, with its slightly recurved, khandjar-like blade is the result of influence flowing from India into SEA, rather than the reverse.

Andrew · 23rd May 2005, 02:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by B.I

well spotted, ariel. it seems that i dont know the armouries anywhere as well as i thought, and that my trips there are spent looking in the wrong direction :-)
unfortunately i dont have a better image (or a worse one either) but it seems to give the original post a different outlook. maybe it was as first assumed, but your new evidence seems just as plausable. would the dha experts give their opinion. the armouries piece (i am assuming) is in no way typical of burma, just heavily influenced (? i'm guessing here). then, is the illustrated dha typical in form or possibly some sort of hybrid.
although relatively late in date, the great exhibition gave us a definate starting point in back-tracking. the only faults are assumption of course. the stands held collections as well as items for sale/examples of stock. if the description given at the time was on an older piece/antique, then this can only come under assumption of the knomledge known at the time. however, most of the pieces there were examples of stock and so we can normally bowl ahead.
attached is from the armouries and is an example of lahore armour. again, a description by a museum is in no way evidence, but these pieces were brought back by Login fron the sikh courts and so we can verify their origin, especially when compared with evidence from the great exhibition.

Hi Brian.

Actually, I think the Armory's knife is quite typical of the knives seen in Burma and Thailand. The fullered blade and scabbard fittings, in particular. The sole "odd" characteristic of the type is the horn handle which appears to be faceted. Normally, the handles of these knives are slightly bulbous or cylindrical, sometimes dependant on the material used.

The sword in Jens' photos really doesn't look like anything other than a long-handled Thai darb to me. The distal end of the handle (i.e. that portion visible above the subject's hand) is unusually slim, but I'm not discouraged by what is perhaps just artistic interpretation.

I do tend to be hasty in my observations, however. I'm interested to hear what the other "dha guys" think now.

ariel · 23rd May 2005, 03:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew

I truly intended no disrespect for the Armoury. However, I think we can agree it is not uncommon for innacurate provenance to perpetuate innacurate descriptions and attributions, even by otherwise excellent institutions.

Yes, I concede this could be a Rajastani knife in a Burmese/Thai style. However, Occam's Razor suggests to me it is more likely just mis-identified.

Here are some similar knives from Oriental Arms' gallery:

http://www.oriental-arms.co.il/photo...00116/ph-0.jpg
http://www.oriental-arms.co.il/photo...00115/ph-0.jpg

I think it much more likely that this form of knife, with its slightly recurved, khandjar-like blade is the result of influence flowing from India into SEA, rather than the reverse.

It is not a matter of disrespect at all: museums err just like we do (hopefully less as they at least require cataloguing, unlike most of us, freelancing collectors).
I just hope they have valid provenance.
As to the direction of influence... of course it works both ways. My only point was that the Afghani warrior at the picture might have worn a Dha (or Dha-like sword) and it might not have been an artistic license.

Andrew · 23rd May 2005, 03:59 AM

Here's an example of a dha similar to that depicted in Jens' illustration:

http://www.oriental-arms.co.il/photo...01752/ph-1.jpg

Again, courtesy of Oriental Arms.

Jim McDougall · 23rd May 2005, 05:11 AM

Hi Brian,
Thanks very much!! Its really good to have you posting on this as your expertise on India arms and armour overall is extremely important on this anomaly.
As I reviewed the Robinson notes it seemed that the description of the fabric armour may apply to this illustration. I will be the first to admit that I have less than familiar perception on armour and chain mail, and looking at the illustration the coat and the headgear seemed very textured. I had always regarded chain mail as less than tightly woven, with links easily perceptible.
This seemed almost brocade in appearance...between the image and probably needing a tuneup on my glasses !!

In any case, I think we are clear on Rajasthan being likely for the major part of the gear.

Returning to the most unusual element of the anomaly ..the dha.
Nice work Ariel!! bringing in that dagger from the Royal Armouries and with attribution to Burma is extremely interesting in relation to this discussion.

I think that often one of the most confounding issues in studying weaponry is items in museums that are collected from armouries or collections of high ranking or regal individuals of key regions and miscatalogued. It seems that weapons received as gifts or presented to such persons can sometimes become associated with various other weapons not necessarily from the same place or cultural sphere (thinking of certain items in Calvert's descriptions of the Royal Armoury in Madrid). I tend to think such an error highly unlikely however in the Royal Armouries.
I recall our discussion of some time ago where we noticed a photo of Red Cloud, one of the Sioux Chiefs from the Battle of the Little Big Horn in his home c.1880's. On the wall behind him was a Japanese katana, something incredibly misplaced on the American plains! We concluded this must have been the result of such diplomatic gift giving while he was in Washington, and the weapon probably had gotten there from some previous Japanese diplomatic mission, known to have been occurring about these times.

I keep wondering about who may have done the cataloging on the Tzarskoe-Selo collection, and more on the provenancing. I had hoped some of the early arms writers may have noted something, but in checking Boutell, Demmin, Burton etc. only the collection as a reference is noted. Burton was quite open about his opinions on previous writers and grumbled at Demmin's noted inaccuracies, while curiously duplicating some of these errors in some of his own work.
As has been noted, errors are certainly not unusual, and a museums holdings will occasionally (hopefully not often) reflect errors that are a result of the misgroupings described. Since Rajasthan was extemely active in arms production, and actually still is, it might be presumed that trade from such volume of production may have brought diplomatic contact with regions distant, and possibly gifts of weapons even as exotic as from Burma.

It is worthy of note that some of Afghanistan's warriors did actually have a guardless sabre, the shashka. While these were somewhat uncommon deep in Afghanistan, they were certainly known in the border regions near Uzbekistan and it is often difficult to discern Uzbek from Afghan examples of these sabres typically associated with the Caucusus. Obviously the dha illustrated could never be mistaken for a shashka, but seemed worthy of note. An artist unfamiliar with weapons that was trying to recapture a guardless sabre may possibly ? have used a dha that was handy in other weapon groupings. I think this case would be about as far from Occams Razor as one could get

but when we hear hoofbeats lets not forget the zebras!!!

At this point I think I've run speculation to the limit, and you guys will probably have me admitted to the tabloidism ward....but had to say it anyway.

Best regards,
Jim

Ian · 23rd May 2005, 07:11 AM

A couple of years ago I visited the Royal Palace at Mysore and its adjacent museum. Within the museum's display of arms were a half dozen Burmese dha from the first half of the 19th C. They were gifts to the Maharajah of Mysore from a Burmese delegation. This was not surprising perhaps because the British had already gone through the First Burmese War and opened up trade to some degree with Burma.

The dha that was the original subject of this discussion in the picture of an "Afghan" is not a typical Burmese design, but rather a long handled version more closely associated with Thailand, probably a cavalry sword.

Here is a picture of a similar styled darb from my collection. The hilt and scabbard are covered with silver.

In the early 19th C. Thailand was also reticent to open its borders to trade with Europe. There were some Thai delegations sent to W. Europe around this time, especially to France as the French were planning to enter Indo-China as an attempt to balance the British influence in the region.

Much harder to explain a Thai sword on an "Afghan" than a Burmese one.

Ian.

Aqtai · 23rd May 2005, 09:29 AM

B.I.

I have just dug up that V&A postcard to see what it says on the back. The caption is Lahore, first half of 19th century... Courtesy of the board of Trustees of the Armouries.

That year there was an exhibition of Sikh Art, and it may be that the armour was loaned for that reason. I'm surprised though, the V&A already has a very good collection of Islamic and Oriental armour, you wouldn't have thought they needed a loan from the Royal Armouries.

I have seen other pictures as well as real examples in museums of Ganga-Jamni mail, and I know that they do other patterns, including Arabic writing.

This particular picture comes, from of all places, a Dorling Kindersley book

.

The same book has another picture of mail identical to the one in the original picture in this thread.

tom hyle · 23rd May 2005, 01:29 PM

One thing worth noting about the royal armouries dagger is that they are/were clearly aware of the resemblance to a SE Asian piece, and considered that worth mentioning; it could be an error, but is not a simple mistake of ignorance of forms. it is possible dhas were known to the curators, but the yaganesque blade threw them off, for instance. Perhaps they "knew" that this shape of blade came from Alexander/Macedon....

23rd May 2005, 07:11 AM	#37
Ian Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Aussie Bush Posts: 4,200	Dha in Royal Museum, Mysore A couple of years ago I visited the Royal Palace at Mysore and its adjacent museum. Within the museum's display of arms were a half dozen Burmese dha from the first half of the 19th C. They were gifts to the Maharajah of Mysore from a Burmese delegation. This was not surprising perhaps because the British had already gone through the First Burmese War and opened up trade to some degree with Burma. The dha that was the original subject of this discussion in the picture of an "Afghan" is not a typical Burmese design, but rather a long handled version more closely associated with Thailand, probably a cavalry sword. Here is a picture of a similar styled darb from my collection. The hilt and scabbard are covered with silver. In the early 19th C. Thailand was also reticent to open its borders to trade with Europe. There were some Thai delegations sent to W. Europe around this time, especially to France as the French were planning to enter Indo-China as an attempt to balance the British influence in the region. Much harder to explain a Thai sword on an "Afghan" than a Burmese one. Ian.

23rd May 2005, 09:29 AM	#38
Aqtai Member Join Date: May 2005 Location: Merseyside, UK Posts: 222	B.I. I have just dug up that V&A postcard to see what it says on the back. The caption is Lahore, first half of 19th century... Courtesy of the board of Trustees of the Armouries. That year there was an exhibition of Sikh Art, and it may be that the armour was loaned for that reason. I'm surprised though, the V&A already has a very good collection of Islamic and Oriental armour, you wouldn't have thought they needed a loan from the Royal Armouries. I have seen other pictures as well as real examples in museums of Ganga-Jamni mail, and I know that they do other patterns, including Arabic writing. This particular picture comes, from of all places, a Dorling Kindersley book . The same book has another picture of mail identical to the one in the original picture in this thread. Last edited by Aqtai; 23rd May 2005 at 10:00 AM.

23rd May 2005, 03:59 AM	#35
Andrew Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: USA Posts: 1,725	Here's an example of a dha similar to that depicted in Jens' illustration: http://www.oriental-arms.co.il/photo...01752/ph-1.jpg Again, courtesy of Oriental Arms.

23rd May 2005, 05:11 AM	#36
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 9,945	Hi Brian, Thanks very much!! Its really good to have you posting on this as your expertise on India arms and armour overall is extremely important on this anomaly. As I reviewed the Robinson notes it seemed that the description of the fabric armour may apply to this illustration. I will be the first to admit that I have less than familiar perception on armour and chain mail, and looking at the illustration the coat and the headgear seemed very textured. I had always regarded chain mail as less than tightly woven, with links easily perceptible. This seemed almost brocade in appearance...between the image and probably needing a tuneup on my glasses !! In any case, I think we are clear on Rajasthan being likely for the major part of the gear. Returning to the most unusual element of the anomaly ..the dha. Nice work Ariel!! bringing in that dagger from the Royal Armouries and with attribution to Burma is extremely interesting in relation to this discussion. I think that often one of the most confounding issues in studying weaponry is items in museums that are collected from armouries or collections of high ranking or regal individuals of key regions and miscatalogued. It seems that weapons received as gifts or presented to such persons can sometimes become associated with various other weapons not necessarily from the same place or cultural sphere (thinking of certain items in Calvert's descriptions of the Royal Armoury in Madrid). I tend to think such an error highly unlikely however in the Royal Armouries. I recall our discussion of some time ago where we noticed a photo of Red Cloud, one of the Sioux Chiefs from the Battle of the Little Big Horn in his home c.1880's. On the wall behind him was a Japanese katana, something incredibly misplaced on the American plains! We concluded this must have been the result of such diplomatic gift giving while he was in Washington, and the weapon probably had gotten there from some previous Japanese diplomatic mission, known to have been occurring about these times. I keep wondering about who may have done the cataloging on the Tzarskoe-Selo collection, and more on the provenancing. I had hoped some of the early arms writers may have noted something, but in checking Boutell, Demmin, Burton etc. only the collection as a reference is noted. Burton was quite open about his opinions on previous writers and grumbled at Demmin's noted inaccuracies, while curiously duplicating some of these errors in some of his own work. As has been noted, errors are certainly not unusual, and a museums holdings will occasionally (hopefully not often) reflect errors that are a result of the misgroupings described. Since Rajasthan was extemely active in arms production, and actually still is, it might be presumed that trade from such volume of production may have brought diplomatic contact with regions distant, and possibly gifts of weapons even as exotic as from Burma. It is worthy of note that some of Afghanistan's warriors did actually have a guardless sabre, the shashka. While these were somewhat uncommon deep in Afghanistan, they were certainly known in the border regions near Uzbekistan and it is often difficult to discern Uzbek from Afghan examples of these sabres typically associated with the Caucusus. Obviously the dha illustrated could never be mistaken for a shashka, but seemed worthy of note. An artist unfamiliar with weapons that was trying to recapture a guardless sabre may possibly ? have used a dha that was handy in other weapon groupings. I think this case would be about as far from Occams Razor as one could get but when we hear hoofbeats lets not forget the zebras!!! At this point I think I've run speculation to the limit, and you guys will probably have me admitted to the tabloidism ward....but had to say it anyway. Best regards, Jim

23rd May 2005, 01:29 PM	#39
tom hyle Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 1,254	One thing worth noting about the royal armouries dagger is that they are/were clearly aware of the resemblance to a SE Asian piece, and considered that worth mentioning; it could be an error, but is not a simple mistake of ignorance of forms. it is possible dhas were known to the curators, but the yaganesque blade threw them off, for instance. Perhaps they "knew" that this shape of blade came from Alexander/Macedon....