Zaghnal

[Emanuel]

This piece ended recently on the bay. The seller copied one of Jim's old posts on the zaghnal without sourcing (to his credit, Jim's concise summary was italicized).

I was interested at first, but then a few things came back from mem storage. There were few talks about these zaghnal in past years, but there seemed to be a concensus that this type was put together from different pieces. The blade looks solid but is really short. The spike doesn't really belong, and the koftgari is often late 19th c. work. It is also quite different from examples in Stone and Egerton.
In the end the piece went for a fair penny, i'm inclined to thing way more than it is worth.

Is the above applicable to the piece herein or not? What more can be added?

Emanuel

[Jim McDougall]

Hi Emanuel,
I just wanted to thank you for the kind note on this. It's very nice to know my 'work' is recognized, and I often wonder how many of our posts are used as material on these type auction listings. While it is flattering in some ways, it is a bit disturbing to not be asked by the person using the material...clearly we would prefer not to be associated with an item of questionable integrity.

I'm really not sure on this zaghnal, and I think your assessment is actually quite well placed. While my study is primarily on the weapon forms, I think in most cases yourself and most of the other members actually handling these weapons are far more qualified than I to assess authenticity.

Thank you again Emanuel!
All the best,
Jim

[Rick]

I am not happy with this at all; I share Jim's reservations about misuse of the information given on this forum .

[Gavin Nugent]

I too think direct use of this information by others for publishing it wrong, I thought all material found with the pages was somewhat of a copyright to the original owner of the text.
Although these forums are here for the whole world to see, I certainly feel a lot more reserved in the text and images I would continue to post, especially the long QianLong Shuang Jian I thought of sharing.
I know from the website I currently have under construction, that I can to a large degree protect images and text with programming, text cannot be simply cut and paste. Although it does not stop text being copied, it certainly reduces this issue as only the dedicated would want to type word for word.
Perhaps some programming can be added to cater for this?

Just some idle thoughts.

Gav

[katana]

The seller is 'one of our own'....I am sure he didn't mean to cause offence....and I'm also sure that he was impressed enough to refer to Jim's comments directly....perhaps in hindsight he should have cited Jim as the 'author'.

Regards David

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by katana

The seller is 'one of our own'....I am sure he didn't mean to cause offence....and I'm also sure that he was impressed enough to refer to Jim's comments directly....perhaps in hindsight he should have cited Jim as the 'author'.

Regards David

Hi David,
I am sure that the individual meant so harm, and as cognizant as we are around here on copyright and such matters, I am sure this instance was simply an oversight. As I mentioned, I am actually flattered that my work is found worthy of such use, so I hope that comments are not considered over reacting, its simply that I am a strong believer that courteous protocol would preclude misunderstandings.

I can understand concerns this issue may present to those who contribute here, but sincerely hope that everyone will continue to unabatedly continue our standard practice of openly sharing data, items and ideas as we always have. It is what sets us apart from others, and actually it has always been my intent that our threads would become essentially archives that might serve as benchmarks for future research and the benefit of collectors who seek information on weapons.

The simple matter is, follow the golden rule, and when in doubt, ask.

I would prefer to let the matter go at that......and assure everyone that there are no hard feelings here toward anyone. If the person who used this was 'off campus' I may have different feelings in the matter, but frankly I'm relieved the user was indeed 'one of us'....and actually pleases me that they found my work worth using

All very best regards,
Jim

[katana]

Hi Jim ,
I totally agree....permission should have been sought.

....and Jim...with your usual informative posts, I think this will not be the last occurence , hopefully people will now realise that 'courteous protocol' should be adopted, especially within a community like this forum. Knowing the member is usually very 'courteous'...I know this was an oversight.

All the best

Kind Regards David

[VANDOO]

I THINK MOST OF US ARE NOT CONCERENED WITH OTHERS USING THE INFORMATION OR PICTURES WE POST OPENLY HERE AS THEY SORT OF BECOME PUBLIC DOMAIN WHEN POSTED. BUT AS JIM MENTIONED WE WOULD NOT LIKE OUR INFORMATION OR NAME USED ON SOME LESS THAN HONEST SALE OR DEAL.
FORUM MEMBERS SEEM TO BE INTERESTED IN GAINING AND SHAREING KNOWLEGE NOT IN CAUSING OFFENSE AND WE WOULD ALL SOUND SILLY IF WHEN WE STATED SOMETHING WE HAD LEARNED HERE WE HAD TO ALSO SAY QUOTE AND THE PERSONS NAME AND DATE HE SAID IT.
I HAVE BEEN WORKING ON A REFRENCE STOCKPILE BORROWING PICTURES FOR SOME TIME AND ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS HAVE NEEDED TO USE A PICTURE FROM SOMEONE ELSE TO SHOW WHAT KIND OF SWORD I WAS TALKING ABOUT AND SIMULARITYS OR WHY I REASONED AS I DID. OFTEN IT MAY BE A MEMBERS PICTURE OF A SWORD AND AS I ONLY LABEL THE PICTURE AS TO WHAT IT IS NOT WHERE I GOT IT OR WHO IT BELONGED TO I HAVE NO IDEA WHO IT BELONGS TO. SO FAR NO ONE HAS BEEN OPENLY OFFENDED BY THIS AND I HOPE NO ONE HAS BEEN AS NO OFFENSE WAS INTENDED AND I DON'T KNOW WHO TO GIVE CREDIT TO.
ANOTHER GOOD THING ABOUT HAVING THESE PICTURES IS IF THEY GO MISSING FROM OLD POSTS THEY COULD BE REPLACED. WHEN THE PICTURES DISSAPEAR FROM OLD POSTS IT OFTEN MAKES THE POST WAY LESS IMFORMATIVE AS WE CAN NO LONGER SEE THE ITEMS BEING DISCUSSED.
IN THE PAST MANY DEALERS FIX IT SO YOU CAN'T GET THEIR PICTURES AND THEN WHEN THE SALE IS DONE THE PICTURES GO IN THE DELETE TRASH AND ARE LOST FOREVER. IT IS A WASTE BUT THERE IS NO PROBLEM THERE BECAUSE YOU CAN'T PUT THEM IN YOUR COMPUTER AND IT IS THE PERSONS CHOICE WHAT HE DOES WITH HIS PICTURES.
LATELY THERE IS SOME OTHER PROGRAM BEING USED THAT ALLOWS YOU TO TAKE THE FILE BUT IT CAN'T BE OPENED, MOVED OR DELETED SO YOU JUST HAVE A DEAD CHUNK OF MEMORY TAKEING UP SPACE IN YOUR COMPUTER FOREVER. IF THIS BECOMES MORE COMMON I WILL HAVE TO STOP BUILDING A REFRENCE AS I WILL SOON HAVE TOO MUCH JUNK THAT I CAN'T PUT IN THE APPROPRIATE FOLDER OR DO ANYTHING WITH AT ALL. SOME OF THESE HAVE HAVE COME FROM FORUM POSTED PICTURES AND IT IS A FAIRLY RECENT THING IN THE LAST YEAR OR SO. ITS KIND OF LIKE GETTING REVENGE ON ANY WHO TRY TO TAKE YOUR PICTURE INSTEAD OF JUST SAYING NO THIS IS MINE (COPYWRITE)
I PERSONALLY DON'T MIND IF SOME ONE USES ANYTHING HE LEARNED FROM ME OR IF A SELLER USES INFORMATION I GAVE TO SELL SOMETHING. IF I WAS LIKE SOME I WOULD SAY KNOWLEGE IS POWER AND HOARD WHAT LITTLE I KNOW AND NEVER SHARE AND GLOAT THAT I KNEW SOMETHING THEY DIDN'T AND TAKE IT TO MY GRAVE WITH ME.
FORTUNATELY THERE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN SOME PEOPLE WHO HAVE TAKEN THE TIME TO COLLECT THIS KNOWLEGE AND LEAVE BOOKS OR PAPERS OR COLLECTIONS WITH CATALOGED INFORMATION FOR THE REST OF US OR WE WOULD KNOW EVEN LESS OF THE HISTORY OF WEAPONS THAN WE DO.
THIS FORUM IS AND WILL BE A VERY VALUABLE RESOURCE IN THE FUTURE.

[Emanuel]

I seem to recall this has happened before, with ebay sellers using the forum as a trust-worthy/formal/definitive source.

Jim, I am merely mining what I read on this very forum from folks like yourself. As for qualifications, few are as qualified as your are, my friend, to talk about arms.

About the zaghnal, is it safe to say that this is indeed a late 19th century piece assembled from miscelaneous other weapons?

Best regards
Emanuel

[Jim McDougall]

When I was a very young collector, I learned very quickly that the most important thing in collecting, weapons in this case, was to absorb every bit of knowledge possible. After many extremely unfortunate instances where I was very much taken advantage of, I started acquiring books. I always wished there was someone I could learn from, but I had no close access to museums, other collectors and the few resources I had were dealers, who were often less than straighforward in many cases (not always, and certainly not all of them, but the key was knowing the difference).

I began a quest for knowledge on weapons that became a lifelong obsession, and always dreamed of establishing a center for the study of the history and development of arms, a place where collectors could seek and share knowledge, and advance this study to preserve this valuable history.

The arrival of the computer brought amazing possibilities, and when I found the forums it was beyond belief! Of the forums I experienced, ours was the most friendly and the members and staff were the most dedicated to the ideals I believed in, and proudly I have been here for over ten years.

I can honestly say, that not only have I learned along with members and staff here, but from them. I have always passionately studied all I could, and in responding, my admittedly epic length posts often seem more like Michener novels (...and then the earth cooled...etc. or Tolstoy........but I have always wanted to find and share all that I could. It is how I learn.

Our forums are virtually my dream, online....and here we all share and learn together. As Vandoo has noted, these forums will be a valuable resource in the future, much as it is now. The research we all spend countless hours on is something that in essence belongs to all of us, and I think that while we are the authors and copyright holders......our words verbatim are in that perview. Our work can be paraphrased or used for information freely, but again .....for commercial purposes....permission for quoted material is best.

I know that I always try to acknowledge the observations or comments of others in my text as I do not want to take credit for thier ideas or thoughts. I do so as I have the highest respect for the knowledge of members here, just as I value thier friendship . I feel very fortunate to be among some of the finest arms scholars in the world here.

With regard to the question on the zaghnal Emanuel (I knew I'd get to that eventually ) I think your views are well placed, and agree with the 19th c. date. It is really hard to tell much from the photos, but I am inclined to think that many weapons in India especially toward latter 19th c. were indeed put together. I suppose the good news would be that the components were often from other damaged or contemporary weapons, so although composite, in many cases they were returned to servicability for use. In this case, your thoughts about the incongruence are well placed as noted.

Thank you Emanuel for the very kind words!!

All the best,
Jim

[Anandalal N.]

Dear Jim,

Your sentiments on the hazards of collecting and regarding what a wonderful and stimulating place this forum is; I shall not dwell on other than to express my wholehearted approval of same.

I am on the following part of the post where we are all trying to make sense of these interesting and miscellaneous pieces that appear from time to time.

With regard to the question on the zaghnal Emanuel (I knew I'd get to that eventually ) I think your views are well placed, and agree with the 19th c. date. It is really hard to tell much from the photos, but I am inclined to think that many weapons in India especially toward latter 19th c. were indeed put together. I suppose the good news would be that the components were often from other damaged or contemporary weapons, so although composite, in many cases they were returned to servicability for use. In this case, your thoughts about the incongruence are well placed as noted.

I wonder if I would be able to pursuade you otherwise in you conclusion that this Zaghnal is a composite made up of components of other weapons by posting images of what is surely the twin of the zaghnal under discussion. In the handling of the piece; to me it appears quite serviceable. Its weight which is well forward only requires you to arm and aim and it moves of its own volition -- almost.

Another issue that arises at least with this type of Zaghnal is that in view of the fact that these Zaghnals have a point and no actual cutting edge they were probably helmet and armour piercing weapons rather than hamstringing.

Regards.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by Anandalal N.

Dear Jim,

Your sentiments on the hazards of collecting and regarding what a wonderful and stimulating place this forum is; I shall not dwell on other than to express my wholehearted approval of same.

I am on the following part of the post where we are all trying to make sense of these interesting and miscellaneous pieces that appear from time to time.



I wonder if I would be able to pursuade you otherwise in you conclusion that this Zaghnal is a composite made up of components of other weapons by posting images of what is surely the twin of the zaghnal under discussion. In the handling of the piece; to me it appears quite serviceable. Its weight which is well forward only requires you to arm and aim and it moves of its own volition -- almost.

Another issue that arises at least with this type of Zaghnal is that in view of the fact that these Zaghnals have a point and no actual cutting edge they were probably helmet and armour piercing weapons rather than hamstringing.

Regards.

Hello Anandalal,
I think perhaps you should teach a class in friendly persuasion !! and coupled with a most convincing example to support your case, it would be difficult to resist.
Actually I intended my comments on many Indian weapons often being composites was intended in a broad sense. My comments on this piece noted that Emanuels comments were well placed, based on the seemingly fragile attachment of the blade to the knob on the head block, and its variance from most of the examples shown not having the spike atop.
In reviewing several sources, it does seem that there were extremely wide variants of these, and that the spike atop did appear on some. Also,many of the examples shown had similar knob bases for the blade attachment.

With that, I would note that this example does well correspond to the one you have posted, as well as in degree to others shown in various resources.
It is noted in the brief entries that these were indeed intended for piercing armor (mail) and helmets (probably well turbanned heads as well), so would not have had cutting edges, as you have noted. I have not found the hamstringing reference but suspect that particular use might not be necessarily well supported ( I cannot as yet find the reference and I do not have the Nicolle reference handy).

All the very best,
Jim

[Anandalal N.]

Dear Jim,

Thank you for your valuable comments and clarifications and in particular the reference vis-à-vis my skills in persuasion. In fact, that is only the initial approach in my usual repertoire failing which the Zaghnal in question may have been brought into the fray.

I have delayed in responding since I have been agonizing over the source of the comment regarding the hamstringing. I have also been looking at the question of Hoolurge and Zaghnal.

The distinction is not clear in Egerton who illustrates three arms of this type. The first called a Zaghnol is from the Ain-I-Akbari.

The second is item 471 called Crow-bill or “Buckie”.

The third is item 716 called a Crow-bill or Hoolurge and has many features in common with the one under discussion.

Stone on the other hand makes a distinction between the two. He refers to Hoolurge as an axe with a thin, curved knifelike blade, of Northern and Central India. He does not illustrate it but refers to Egerton 472 and 716. Egerton item 472 is not illustrated.

Under Zaghnal; Stone states that it is an axe with one or two heavy curved knifelike blades of India and refers to Kaemmerer XXXIX. I wonder if anyone has access to Kaemmerer and could provide this information?

So as far as Stone is concerned the distinction appears to be that the Hoolurge has a single, thin blade while the Zaghnal has one or two heavy blades.

The question is does the word ‘thin’ refer to the width or the thickness of the blade? If the distinction lies in the blade being thin as in reduced thickness of the blade; that would be difficult to observe in the illustrations which are in profile.

There has indeed been much variation in these arms as Stone (Figure 874) illustrates. Note that item 5 there is referred to as one with a thin blade but still called a Hoolurge.

I do not have the Nicolle reference.

Hope this is useful.

Best Regards.

[Jim McDougall]

Hello Anandalal,
Excellent summary of the entries in these resources!
Over many years in discussions here we have discovered that the semantics and transliterations of many descriptive terms for many weapons have resulted in considerable confusion in properly identifying them. In most cases we have resorted to using the commonly used terms found in most of the references used by collectors.
While that brings some relief in carrying out discussions on these forms, I think it is still important to catalog and note these various terms, as often these variations in terminology can reveal important details concerning the development and use of the weapon form.
It seems that 'zaghnal' is more the typically applied term collectively for these dagger axes (while crows bill or beak is more a colloquial term used in various local parlance). It is unclear on the term 'hoolurge' as to whether that refers to the zaghnal or a variation of the weapon (possibly as to whether another blade or hammer type poll, or with/without spike).
The interesting term 'buckie' seems another colloquially applied local reference, as far as I know only seen in Egerton.

These 'zaghnal' seem to have very ancient history, and I personally believe they developed from the Chinese dagger axe.

In discussions here we have also discussed the small version of these in the form of the 'pickaxe' type weapons of certain tribes in Khyber regions known as the 'lohar' (also found in Stone). These are similar in concept and it seems that hamstringing was mentioned in discussions of use of these, although there was a great deal of concern over whether these somewhat diminutive dagger axe type weapons were viable as weapons at all.
While uncertain on the hamstring use, these would seem effective at penetrating turbans, and I think these did have a sharpened edge so the hamstring idea may have some degree of application.

Actually I think the hamstring use of these weapons had never seemed of gret issue previously, as there was more focus on the armor and helmet piercing use, and it is maddening to have included that comment without having referenced it, which I deeply regret.

I do not have access to the Nicolle reference either....frustrating! It is among the many references I do not have with me presently in the bookmobile (RV we are travelling in, 2 years now, and presently in Ozark Mountains with lousy computer signal!).

We'll keep looking,
All the best,
Jim

[Jim McDougall]

In "Islamic Arms and Armour of Muslim India" (Dr.S.Haider, Lahore, 1991, p.235) on the zaghnal:
"...it had a pointed lance like head, provided with two cutting edges and arranged at right angle to the shaft. The head resembled a crows beak, hence its name zaghnol."
The Ain i Akbari reference is footnoted as list #30, plate xii, fig. 24.

It would seem that 'cutting edges' would suggest this blade could indeed be used for such an action as hamstringing.

I searched through Pant ("Indian Arms and Armour") who makes no reference to the zaghnal, but does note the 'bhuj'.

The bhuj is the hafted knife with blade in line with the haft, favored in Scinde, and often termed the 'elephant knife' due to the consistant presence of elephant figural motif usually at base of blade.

Note that many of these zaghnals have elephant figure motif on them.

In Egerton, fig, 26, is a line drawing of one of these bhuj, which is referred to as an axe called 'ravensbeak'.

The zaghnal is termed crows beak or crowbill, and apparantly the term zaghnal has something to do with the crow, as suggested by Haider.
Perhaps the questionmarked term 'buckie' shown in Egerton has similar application. The term 'hoolurge' also has a questionmark with it, suggesting Egerton is uncertain of this term as well as the buckie term.

I continued searching for any reference to Rajputs hamstringing, in "Islamic Arms and Armour" (Robert Elgood, 1979) and the chapter on Muslim warfare dealt with strategy and formation, not with incidental practices in battle.

I did find that the Scindi warriors preferred to dismount and fight on foot, and this was common among border tribes between Scinde and Rajputana.
("Sindh Revisited" C. Ondaatje, 1996. p.287).

I sincerely doubt that we will find the Kaemmerer reference outside a very large institution as it is apparantly over 30 volumes, with an exhausting title,
"Arsenal d'Tsarskoe Selo ou Collection d' armes de so Majestie l'Emperor de Toutes les Russies", G.Kaemmerer, St.Petersburg, 1869 !!! Yikes.

I think perhaps the best place to find specifics on Rajputs would be,
"Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan" James Tod, 1820's London and reprinted many times...descriptions of the Rajput clans and history. Wish I had my copy!!!

All I could find today,

Best,
Jim

[Jens Nordlunde]

In Indian Art at Marlborough House, case E #98 a Crow-bill or Hoolurge is shown. The text says it was given by the Jagudar of Alipoora/Alipur. This place is in Bangladesh, at the Ganges delta. I don’t have a picture at hand, but some years ago I posted all the show cases, maybe they can be found on the old forum.

[Sikh_soldier]

Hi Everyone,

First of all I would like to Humbly apologise Jim, I bought this item I believe 2 years ago, and I usually collect pictures and research on all the items I buy.
When I came to sell the Zaghnal I just used the materials I had acquired earlier, and did not think to credit the author. I did italicize the text to show that it was not my knowledge to be respected but anothers.

It is the first Zaghnal that I have seen, so I did not know too much about it, however the seller from whom I bought it labelled it as 18th if I remember correctly (will try and dig up the old files) it was off ebay.com.

I listed it as late 18th to 19th so not to misguide anyone, I also started the auction for £39.99, in any event I have probably made a small loss on the item, as I originally bought it for around £230-250 incl shipping and customs tax.

Sorry again to have offended anyone, and I will be more carefull in the future this forum has been a godsend, giving me inspiration and in an otherwise occassionally dubious and dodgy collecting world a source of good ethics and principles.

Bally

[Rick]

You're an honorable man , Bally .

[Jim McDougall]

Hi Bally,
Thank you very much for stepping forward, and I second Ricks comment, it takes distinct courage to admit error especially publicly...but in this case it is a matter of simple oversight, so no apology is necessary.

Actually, as I previously noted, I was pleased that my work was considered worthy of such application, and particularly that it was 'one of our own'..which you profoundly are!

This thread actually resulted in some good discussion, not as much on the topic of the accrediting in use of material, as on the study of these interesting dagger axes. This caused my review of earlier notes and adding somewhat I believe to what we know on them from extant sources.

Thank you for your kind words and for your forthright action, and especially for being a valuable member here........right on Bally!!!

All the very best,
Jim

[Anandalal N.]

Dear Jim,

Your effort in bringing these sources together is appreciated; even whilst hampered by impaired access to your books. Since you refer to Pant I shall add the following from A Catalogue of Arms & Armours in Bharat Kala Bhavan by Pant and Yashodhara Agrawal. As you see he uses the spelling Jaghnol, the same as Nicolle I believe? I have added his description of Tabar in order to clarify Tabar-Jaghnol.

Tabar – It was a single battle-axe consisting of a curved blade with a broad cutting edge. The wooden shaft was inserted into the socket of the blade. The sharp-edged blade was semi-circular. It had many sub-types. The size of the blade varied from 7 inches to 15 inches.

Jaghnol – It contained a steel handle and the head was thick and shaped like the beak of a bird. It had cutting edges on both the sides and a thickened point which was very useful in piercing a helmet or a coat of mail.

Tabar-Jaghnol – It was the combination of tabar and jaghnol hence the name. On one side it had the blade like that of the jaghnol and, opposite to it, one similar to that of a tabar.

There are no illustrations however. Note the reference to the steel handle and cutting edges.

The Weapons of War of the Indo Islamic Armies by A. I. Makki states the following:

Another favorite weapon was a narrow-bladed axe with a spike attached to its back that was used as an armor-piercing weapon (Jaghnol). Its use was widely popularized by the Ghurid armies and was later fashioned by the Rajputs into an advanced war weapon.

This can be found at:

http://www.alshindagah.com/marapr2006/islamic.html

Bally; your humility does you cerdit and Jim, yours too.

Best Regards.

[Jim McDougall]

Thank you very much Anandalal, and I appreciate the references you have added here as well. It is interesting, as I noted earlier, that Pant, in his 1980 work "Indian Arms and Armour" , nowhere makes reference to the 'zaghnal' or 'jaghnol' or any variation of it, dagger axe etc.as far as I can find. He does make note of the Sindhi 'bhuj' , which is of course a hafted knife mounted inline with the shaft though.
While he discusses Rajputs and Rajput weapons, it seems odd that these are not included in a work widely discussing Indian arms.

Dr.Pant did write numerous works, as I understand he did work with the National Museum in New Delhi, but I was not aware of this title from 1995, "A Catalog of Arms and Armours in Bharat Kala Bhavan", written with Yashodha Agrawal. In this work, the 'jaghnol' is included. I am absolutely no linguist, but would I be correct in assuming the use of the letter 'z' in place of 'j' would be a Persian spelling characteristic?

In checking other sources, I have two books by E.Jaiwent Paul, and cite them here even though they are decidedly general in scope. They do however, emphasize the Rajput's in reference to the weaponry discussed, by the broader references to them in various text.

"By My Sword and Shield" (E.Jaiwent Paul, New Delhi, 1995), on p.84,
notes that according to Pant discussion on battle axes, "...another type was the zaghnol (crows beak) in which the head was pointed and provided with two cutting edges".

It would seem that Pant, by 1995, was including the zaghnol in his discussions, but as quoted by Paul, used the 'z' in the spelling. Perhaps the co-author used the 'j'...who knows?

I dont know on Nicolles reference, but every reference I have seen from Egerton, Stone, Paul, and the later Pant reference use zaghnol.
Probably not relevant, but curious.

In E.Jaiwent Paul's more colorfully illustrated "Arms and Armour: Traditional Weapons of India" (2004) the 'zaghnol' is illustrated p.99, using the same text from his previous book. The example shown is from Rajasthan.

Still not finding the 'hamstring' note, but it seems well established these type dagger axes were used by Rajputs, and it does seem that many of the references note cutting edges, despite emphasis on armor piercing blows. The reinforced tip seen on these resembles of course the malle perce tip on the katars and many of the edged weapons incl. 'zirah bhonk'.
It would seem that the spike atop the head would serve well in stabbing at mail in close quarters, and as many Indian weapons, provide multi functional elements in combination.

Thank you again for these additional references that I can add to notes,

All the best,
Jim

[Sikh_soldier]

Thanks Rick and Jim, for making me feel better and also Katana for defending my reputation

But it gets worse.....I am a Law Graduate, and one of my electives was Intellectual Property Law (Trademarks and Copyrights) so I really should have known better!

To add something to the discussion, as you may already know, in indian languages definately punjabi, urdu and hindi, The letter J and Z are interchangeable in some words so that is probably why you get Zaghnal written sometimes and other times Jaghnal.

For example a very important Sikh Gurdawara (temple) is called Sri Hazoor Sahib, but also called Sri Hajoor Sahib, and both are correct.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by Sikh_soldier

Thanks Rick and Jim, for making me feel better and also Katana for defending my reputation

But it gets worse.....I am a Law Graduate, and one of my electives was Intellectual Property Law (Trademarks and Copyrights) so I really should have known better!

To add something to the discussion, as you may already know, in indian languages definately punjabi, urdu and hindi, The letter J and Z are interchangeable in some words so that is probably why you get Zaghnal written sometimes and other times Jaghnal.

For example a very important Sikh Gurdawara (temple) is called Sri Hazoor Sahib, but also called Sri Hajoor Sahib, and both are correct.

Hi Bally,
You truly are a good sport as well. Thank you for sharing the note on your studies in copyright law!
It is funny that it is not unusual for someone in a profession or well studied in a particular field to sort of drop ones guard. I was a gate agent for a major airline for nearly 40 years, and we often joked among ourselves that we were often our own worst passengers..late for flights etc. I recall one harrowing day when I somehow managed to board an entirely full planeload of people on the wrong airplane!! Incredibly, I was able to cover it by announcing there was a problem with this plane but we fortunately had another standing by!!
No one was ever the wiser until I confessed years later, and since no delay or problems occurred it was never an issue.

Thank you for the explanation on the interchangable letters z and j. It does seem that in the English language there are instances between British and American spelling interchanging the z with an s on occasion as well.
Also, though I am presuming, is the co-authors name with Dr. Pant on the title mentioned by Anandalal, Mr. Agrawal, a Sikh surname? If so, perhaps this may explain the spelling, jaghnol, since it would seem this author has added the weapon to the forms discussed.

All the very best,
Jim

[Sikh_soldier]

Hi Jim,

Thats an amazing observation and a correct one at that!

[roshan]

Indian languages do not have the letter "z" as a native sound. Z is only found in words borrowed from Arabic, Persian or English. Most Indians will pronounce z as a j instead, as they do not have any sound that is closer to z. Indian scripts do not even have letters for z - in most writing systems, it is written as a J with a dot below it.

However, well educated, urban speakers will often pronounce the z's in borrowed Arabic or Persian words correctly - Hindus as a result of English language education, and Muslims as a result of Urdu.

The situation varies from region to region though. For example, in the Sindhi language, due to the use of Persian as an administrative language during precolonial times, z's and j's are always distinguished. In Punjabi, Hindi and Urdu the situation is as I described above (with urban speakers distinguishing and rural ones replacing), while in other languages, such as Gujarati, z is always replaced by j, although this could be changing due to the influence of Hindi/Urdu and because replacing z with j is regarded as a sign of being uneducated.

Hope this post has been informative.

[Jim McDougall]

Thank you so much Roshan! The languages and dialects of the Indian Subcontinent and regions into Central Asia are fascinating as well as formidable in trying to understand linguistically, especially for non-linguists like myself. I really appreciate you taking the time to explain so carefully and in detail. This information is indeed profoundly helpful.

It is also great to review the discussion in this thread, not only about the interesting weapon form, the zaghnal, but discussion of matters that are coincidentally a very prevalenent topic of late. I had forgotten about these discussions on this thread, and it is great to reread this material.


Thank you once again Roshan.

All the best,
Jim

[ward]

The reason pictures are pulled after a auction or sale is because cutomers request it. They may be publishing it a later date,reselling it a later date, or just want their privacy. It is not unusuall.

Regarding this type of zaghnal most of these are late late 19th-20th century they are ususally attached together by a screw system and the koftkagari is not particularly well done.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by ward

The reason pictures are pulled after a auction or sale is because cutomers request it. They may be publishing it a later date,reselling it a later date, or just want their privacy. It is not unusuall.

Regarding this type of zaghnal most of these are late late 19th-20th century they are ususally attached together by a screw system and the koftkagari is not particularly well done.

Very helpful information on both counts Ward, Thanks very much.

All the best,
Jim