LOHAR - Solving The Mistery - Page 2

Tim Simmons · 3rd December 2006, 05:15 PM

I have finally located this sugar hammer. It had been tidied away by my wife, one of the things she calls ornaments

you can take a horse to water

. Anyway as you can see it is jolly impressive and of the same size as the folding lohar. I feel sure that the lohar, small or large is a domestic tool, made to impress at social gatherings and other communal festivities. Sugar and other consumables did and probably still now not come in the easy packaged form we are used to. Sugar breaking apparatus were common in large houses in the west untill the late 19th century. The question is if you have a lohar, how do you feel? Have you paid too much because it is not a weapon or did you really get a bargin for a very nice piece of ethnographic art?

tom hyle · 4th December 2006, 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Marsh

I also wonder why Lohar are flat,almost unfinished, on one side even when heavily decorated on the other side. Maybe you could ask your friend? Seriously, is it because they were made to hang on a wall?

I doubt that. More likely because they were meant to be worn on a body, where only one side shows. It is a common (of course not universal) practice for blades to have a front decorated side and a back plain side. On saxes it was quite prominent, and it is also seen frequently on earlier modern European kitchen knives (which are marked and spine-swedged from the thumb side; medieval ones were often grooved and inlayed on the same side only.) and swords (commonly marked from the hand side, if on one side only. Machetes have often been deliberately marked as knives). Only one side shows when you're wearing one.
The ice/candy pick seems realistic, and I don't know that in preindustrial environments ice and candy would be considered a domain of children.
As for an icepick as a weapon; that's pretty much all they're currently known as in N America.

BBJW · 27th December 2006, 10:46 PM

Hello- My first post. I have several lohars and don't believe the ice/candy pick explanation. The folding ones would not hold up to tough use and were folded for concealment. I was told by an Afghani that the lohar was originally intended to cut the reins of horses, camels, or donkeys. This explanation has always made sense to me.

Tim Simmons · 28th December 2006, 03:49 PM

A tool need not be very heavy to chip pieces of sugar off a big lump for sweet tea at gatherings. Why would you want to cut reins? they might be relatively expensive. Also a risky move if fighting when your adversary may be slashing around with a saber. Just a few thoughts.

BBJW · 29th December 2006, 06:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tim Simmons

A tool need not be very heavy to chip pieces of sugar off a big lump for sweet tea at gatherings. Why would you want to cut reins? they might be relatively expensive. Also a risky move if fighting when your adversary may be slashing around with a saber. Just a few thoughts.

A man on foot would cut the reins to disable the "power steering" on a mounted warrior and would not be worried about the expense to the rider. Also it would not be so risky a move if there was more than one man on foot. A lohar would be an extremely efficient weapon for grabbing the reins and cutting them without hurting the animal which would have been much more valuable than the reins. The lohars in my collection do not look like your sugar hammer in post # 31. I have used a hunting knife to open a can, but that doesn't make it a can opener.

Tim Simmons · 29th December 2006, 09:57 AM

That sounds very logical. But it sounds as wrong to me as a sugar hammer/pick/tool does to you. A horseman would surely be able to control a horse without reins? what if the horse was moving quite quickly? Anyway what ever they are, they can be very attractive artifacts. With Radu's information and yours, that makes two differing native opinions

katana · 29th December 2006, 11:21 AM

Perhaps if these were used against horsemen, cutting the girth straps would be more effective.......but very difficult. With the girth straps cut the saddle ( and rider) would 'slip off' ...

Unfortunately.....if you were a horse on a battle field.....you would be a prime target. Logistically, it would be greatly beneficial to 'take out' the 'mounted ' enemy to nullify any advantage that it gave your opponent. Horses would be met with 'lethal intent'.

There is the possibility that the Lohar could be used to 'ham string' a horse, rider or foot soldier. Ham stringing....effectively a cut to the back of the leg..which severs the tendons......immobilises the victim. Armour or other forms of protection were not commonly used for the back of the legs and therefore were vulnerable. A 'ham strung' victim.....no longer able to fight would either bleed to death or would receive the lethal blow later.

One other thing that has just struck me......some Lohar have 'fold away' blades.....that suggests to me that they were carried. A utility knife in the home is 'one piece'......the 'folder' type knife is designed to be transported.
Would you need to carry a 'sugar axe' to your local cafe....

katana · 29th December 2006, 10:44 PM

What are the usual dimensions of a Lohar?......because this certainly looks like one....this is a part of a photo posted by DhaDha after a visit to Jodhpur, India. If the Lohar is a smaller version....perhaps it evolved into a secondary weapon....possibly used as a main gauche you could parry or hook your opponent's sword.

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=3756

Jim McDougall · 30th December 2006, 01:40 AM

This has been an intriguing thread, and it is always interesting to try to imagine exactly how many of these unusual weapons were used.It seems the lohar tends to be dismissed as a serviceable weapon due to the typically small size.

Many edged weapons such when actually seen seem relatively small, but in the skilled hands of a warrior were of course very deadly.As I had mentioned in discussion of the lohar at another time, in Afghan regions which were in British control in the 19th c. it was common for weapons to be concealed among tribesmen , and weapons such as the lohar in small size, or with folding handles would seem likely. While the suggestions for cutting reins or hamstringing etc. seem plausible in degree it does not seem that such a specialized weapon would be necessary for such opportunities in the heat of combat.

The discovery of these items being used for 'candy cutters'or 'ice picks' does not seem unusual in present day or recent application, as novelty items are often fashioned recalling such weapons. I have seen many letter openers fashioned from interpretations of daggers and swords, and to see a traditional weapon used in local regions as a practical utility item seems perfectly understandable.

It would seem to me that hafted weapons such as the zaghnal and others that may have associations to early dagger axes from China may well have influenced such a weapon form in regions in Afghanistan such as the lohar. The itinerant blacksmiths from Indian regions to the south that were known as the Lohar may well have fashioned early examples of these hafted weapons recalling such weapons, possibly in larger size.

As always, it would be interesting to find earlier examples of 'lohar' to see if that may be the case.

Best regards,
Jim

27th December 2006, 10:46 PM	#33
BBJW Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Idaho, USA Posts: 228	Lohar in use Hello- My first post. I have several lohars and don't believe the ice/candy pick explanation. The folding ones would not hold up to tough use and were folded for concealment. I was told by an Afghani that the lohar was originally intended to cut the reins of horses, camels, or donkeys. This explanation has always made sense to me.

29th December 2006, 11:21 AM	#37
katana Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Kent Posts: 2,653	Perhaps if these were used against horsemen, cutting the girth straps would be more effective.......but very difficult. With the girth straps cut the saddle ( and rider) would 'slip off' ... Unfortunately.....if you were a horse on a battle field.....you would be a prime target. Logistically, it would be greatly beneficial to 'take out' the 'mounted ' enemy to nullify any advantage that it gave your opponent. Horses would be met with 'lethal intent'. There is the possibility that the Lohar could be used to 'ham string' a horse, rider or foot soldier. Ham stringing....effectively a cut to the back of the leg..which severs the tendons......immobilises the victim. Armour or other forms of protection were not commonly used for the back of the legs and therefore were vulnerable. A 'ham strung' victim.....no longer able to fight would either bleed to death or would receive the lethal blow later. One other thing that has just struck me......some Lohar have 'fold away' blades.....that suggests to me that they were carried. A utility knife in the home is 'one piece'......the 'folder' type knife is designed to be transported. Would you need to carry a 'sugar axe' to your local cafe.... Last edited by katana; 29th December 2006 at 12:28 PM.

29th December 2006, 10:44 PM	#38
katana Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Kent Posts: 2,653	What are the usual dimensions of a Lohar?......because this certainly looks like one....this is a part of a photo posted by DhaDha after a visit to Jodhpur, India. If the Lohar is a smaller version....perhaps it evolved into a secondary weapon....possibly used as a main gauche you could parry or hook your opponent's sword. http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=3756 Attached Images

3rd December 2006, 05:15 PM	#31
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,806	I have finally located this sugar hammer. It had been tidied away by my wife, one of the things she calls ornaments you can take a horse to water . Anyway as you can see it is jolly impressive and of the same size as the folding lohar. I feel sure that the lohar, small or large is a domestic tool, made to impress at social gatherings and other communal festivities. Sugar and other consumables did and probably still now not come in the easy packaged form we are used to. Sugar breaking apparatus were common in large houses in the west untill the late 19th century. The question is if you have a lohar, how do you feel? Have you paid too much because it is not a weapon or did you really get a bargin for a very nice piece of ethnographic art?

28th December 2006, 03:49 PM	#34
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,806	A tool need not be very heavy to chip pieces of sugar off a big lump for sweet tea at gatherings. Why would you want to cut reins? they might be relatively expensive. Also a risky move if fighting when your adversary may be slashing around with a saber. Just a few thoughts.

29th December 2006, 09:57 AM	#36
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,806	That sounds very logical. But it sounds as wrong to me as a sugar hammer/pick/tool does to you. A horseman would surely be able to control a horse without reins? what if the horse was moving quite quickly? Anyway what ever they are, they can be very attractive artifacts. With Radu's information and yours, that makes two differing native opinions

30th December 2006, 01:40 AM	#39
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 9,943	This has been an intriguing thread, and it is always interesting to try to imagine exactly how many of these unusual weapons were used.It seems the lohar tends to be dismissed as a serviceable weapon due to the typically small size. Many edged weapons such when actually seen seem relatively small, but in the skilled hands of a warrior were of course very deadly.As I had mentioned in discussion of the lohar at another time, in Afghan regions which were in British control in the 19th c. it was common for weapons to be concealed among tribesmen , and weapons such as the lohar in small size, or with folding handles would seem likely. While the suggestions for cutting reins or hamstringing etc. seem plausible in degree it does not seem that such a specialized weapon would be necessary for such opportunities in the heat of combat. The discovery of these items being used for 'candy cutters'or 'ice picks' does not seem unusual in present day or recent application, as novelty items are often fashioned recalling such weapons. I have seen many letter openers fashioned from interpretations of daggers and swords, and to see a traditional weapon used in local regions as a practical utility item seems perfectly understandable. It would seem to me that hafted weapons such as the zaghnal and others that may have associations to early dagger axes from China may well have influenced such a weapon form in regions in Afghanistan such as the lohar. The itinerant blacksmiths from Indian regions to the south that were known as the Lohar may well have fashioned early examples of these hafted weapons recalling such weapons, possibly in larger size. As always, it would be interesting to find earlier examples of 'lohar' to see if that may be the case. Best regards, Jim