Indian armoury marks

Jens Nordlunde · 23rd June 2007, 04:48 PM

It is an interesting turn the discussion on Alex’s thread about the stamps has taken, but in order not to confuse the matters, I have decided to start a new thread on armoury marks. Anyone who has any armoury marks on their weapons, or who have any comments, please show the mark and comment on them.

Yes Jim, you are right, to study the history of India will give the reader a vague idea of, how complex it all was – and how weapons ‘travelled’. At the moment I am reading A History of Rajasthan by Rima Hooja, ISBN 81-291-0890-9. It’s a book on XIX, 1246 pages, bibliography 20 pages and index 46 pages, just to give you an idea. I can recommend the book very much.

You ask about the umbrella symbol, often also shown with alams on the top. I am sorry that I can’t answer your question, but as I have seen them made in different qualities, my guess is, that rulers and high officials used them.

You should also notice that not all armouries marked their weapons. I think it is fairly safe to say that the bigger armouries did, but it seems as if not even all of the bigger armouries did. Swords were more often marked than daggers, but the marks can also be seen on daggers.

Jens

Jim McDougall · 23rd June 2007, 06:18 PM

This is excellent Jens, and thank you so much for not only taking this topic to another thread, but for the beautifully done illustrations and labeling them. This will give us a core of known markings that I hope we can add to as more examples and evidence become known.

Regarding the umbrella marking, what is the alam, significance? Sorry I keep forgetting these things but cannot locate in resources at hand. I think you are right that these umbrella stamped markings were used by rulers or extremely high rank court officials possibly, but still wonder if they might have significance as quality marking, i.e. of the quality of a blade made for a king etc.

As I mentioned on the other thread, there seems some variation in parlance for the use of the term armoury vs. that of arsenal. In the definitions I found, the armoury would have been a storehouse for weapons and such material, but apparantly may have included captured or 'trophy' weapons collected by the ruler or his forces in battle. This is well illustrated in the instances of the swords of Crusaders taken in battle that ended up in Alexandria and finally Istanbul. These weapons were often marked or inscribed, and quite possibly the same practice occurred in India in many cases.

The arsenal seems to have included the additional feature in addition to being a storehouse for weapons , as the armoury, that it often included a factory to produce weapons. It would be interesting to consider if an 'arsenal' might have a staff of makers or might they have used neighboring makers on an 'ad hoc' contract basis. As mentioned, markings were not always added, and perhaps weapons produced outside the arsenal by private contractor might have received different treatment as for markings. It does seem the weapons might have had a numeric code or such for benefit of payment or contract of the contractor, and we have seen such numeric instances on many weapons.

Concerning the fact that swords do seem to more often carry markings, presumably from armouries (or arsenals), makers and the fact that daggers do not usually carry same may derive from the probability that daggers are much more 'personal' weapons. Since these would seem more often privately purchased and outside the perview of the armouries, the only markings would seem of more personal nature rather than these stamps.

The book you note on Rajasthan sounds very interesting, and it would seem that it may hold a lot of important related information. This area was, if I am not mistaken, a key manufacturing region that was key in producing weapons especially in the 19th century (to present time actually). I believe the armouries you have identified are in the Rajasthan region as well if I am not mistaken.

Very much looking forward to more input on the topic of markings found on Indian weapons and hope that everyone will contribute. This subject has never been even close to adequately addressed in studies of Indian weapons and it would be great to see to the outstanding core of knowledge and resources here resolve that!

All the best,
Jim

dralin23 · 24th June 2007, 11:32 AM

hi jens
your pictures from these amour marks ara also from these book? (a history of rajasthan?) i´m search a long time some realy good reference boos over swords from rajasthan and also the moghul time. can i find something in these book ore can someone tell me where i can find such books? these new book fom elgood ( hindu arms and ritual) is realy very good but over this kind of arms you can´t find nothing in it.
kinds regards, stefan

Jens Nordlunde · 24th June 2007, 04:30 PM

Hi Stefan,

In A History of Rajasthan you will only find one picture of a weapon, the one shown here. The text is Rajasthan ca 1960.

Robert Elgood’s book is good, and very recommendable, but it is true that he does not show blade markings. The marks I have shown are gathered over some time, from different sources. It can be difficult to get pictures of the marks, but it is even more difficult to pin point the marks to a specific place. I don’t know of any book on this subject, I am sorry to say, but my gut feeling tells me, that there must be something somewhere – the question is – where? Lets hope we find something some day, but if we do, this will only solve part of the question, as swords were sold and could turn up in another part of the country, or maybe in another country, they were also captured and taken to other armouries, sometimes rehilted, so the marks will only help us part of the way – although it will be a big help.

Jens

Jim McDougall · 24th June 2007, 08:18 PM

Hi Dralin,
As Jens has noted, in studies of weapons from India, there has been no detailed material ever included on the markings such as from arsenals or armories. The only published material has focused on primarily typology, and Dr.Elgood's book is outstanding for his revolutionary attention to the key symbolism, superstitions and tradition found in the weapons. This approach is truly the most sound method for understanding ethnographic weapons and in many cases the development of decoration and motifs.

Jens,
In the current discussion on the Tipu thread I realized I had forgotten to ask about the Tanjore armoury....are there markings known to have been associated there?

All best regards,
Jim

Jens Nordlunde · 25th June 2007, 12:58 PM

Hi Jim,

As far as I know, the Tanjore armoury did not mark their weapons. At least I have never seen nor heard about any markings, and as there are enough weapons around, without an armoury mark; weapons known to have been in the armoury, it is fairly sure that they did not mark them. This may sound strange as it was not a small armoury, and I don’t know how they made sure that the weapons supposed to be there actually were there, but maybe someone one day will find the answer on a dusty shelf in British Library.

Jens

23rd June 2007, 04:48 PM	#1
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	Indian armoury marks It is an interesting turn the discussion on Alex’s thread about the stamps has taken, but in order not to confuse the matters, I have decided to start a new thread on armoury marks. Anyone who has any armoury marks on their weapons, or who have any comments, please show the mark and comment on them. Yes Jim, you are right, to study the history of India will give the reader a vague idea of, how complex it all was – and how weapons ‘travelled’. At the moment I am reading A History of Rajasthan by Rima Hooja, ISBN 81-291-0890-9. It’s a book on XIX, 1246 pages, bibliography 20 pages and index 46 pages, just to give you an idea. I can recommend the book very much. You ask about the umbrella symbol, often also shown with alams on the top. I am sorry that I can’t answer your question, but as I have seen them made in different qualities, my guess is, that rulers and high officials used them. You should also notice that not all armouries marked their weapons. I think it is fairly safe to say that the bigger armouries did, but it seems as if not even all of the bigger armouries did. Swords were more often marked than daggers, but the marks can also be seen on daggers. Jens Attached Images

24th June 2007, 11:32 AM	#3
dralin23 Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 194	hi jens your pictures from these amour marks ara also from these book? (a history of rajasthan?) i´m search a long time some realy good reference boos over swords from rajasthan and also the moghul time. can i find something in these book ore can someone tell me where i can find such books? these new book fom elgood ( hindu arms and ritual) is realy very good but over this kind of arms you can´t find nothing in it. kinds regards, stefan Last edited by dralin23; 24th June 2007 at 03:48 PM.

24th June 2007, 04:30 PM	#4
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	Hi Stefan, In A History of Rajasthan you will only find one picture of a weapon, the one shown here. The text is Rajasthan ca 1960. Robert Elgood’s book is good, and very recommendable, but it is true that he does not show blade markings. The marks I have shown are gathered over some time, from different sources. It can be difficult to get pictures of the marks, but it is even more difficult to pin point the marks to a specific place. I don’t know of any book on this subject, I am sorry to say, but my gut feeling tells me, that there must be something somewhere – the question is – where? Lets hope we find something some day, but if we do, this will only solve part of the question, as swords were sold and could turn up in another part of the country, or maybe in another country, they were also captured and taken to other armouries, sometimes rehilted, so the marks will only help us part of the way – although it will be a big help. Jens Attached Images

23rd June 2007, 06:18 PM	#2
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 9,896	This is excellent Jens, and thank you so much for not only taking this topic to another thread, but for the beautifully done illustrations and labeling them. This will give us a core of known markings that I hope we can add to as more examples and evidence become known. Regarding the umbrella marking, what is the alam, significance? Sorry I keep forgetting these things but cannot locate in resources at hand. I think you are right that these umbrella stamped markings were used by rulers or extremely high rank court officials possibly, but still wonder if they might have significance as quality marking, i.e. of the quality of a blade made for a king etc. As I mentioned on the other thread, there seems some variation in parlance for the use of the term armoury vs. that of arsenal. In the definitions I found, the armoury would have been a storehouse for weapons and such material, but apparantly may have included captured or 'trophy' weapons collected by the ruler or his forces in battle. This is well illustrated in the instances of the swords of Crusaders taken in battle that ended up in Alexandria and finally Istanbul. These weapons were often marked or inscribed, and quite possibly the same practice occurred in India in many cases. The arsenal seems to have included the additional feature in addition to being a storehouse for weapons , as the armoury, that it often included a factory to produce weapons. It would be interesting to consider if an 'arsenal' might have a staff of makers or might they have used neighboring makers on an 'ad hoc' contract basis. As mentioned, markings were not always added, and perhaps weapons produced outside the arsenal by private contractor might have received different treatment as for markings. It does seem the weapons might have had a numeric code or such for benefit of payment or contract of the contractor, and we have seen such numeric instances on many weapons. Concerning the fact that swords do seem to more often carry markings, presumably from armouries (or arsenals), makers and the fact that daggers do not usually carry same may derive from the probability that daggers are much more 'personal' weapons. Since these would seem more often privately purchased and outside the perview of the armouries, the only markings would seem of more personal nature rather than these stamps. The book you note on Rajasthan sounds very interesting, and it would seem that it may hold a lot of important related information. This area was, if I am not mistaken, a key manufacturing region that was key in producing weapons especially in the 19th century (to present time actually). I believe the armouries you have identified are in the Rajasthan region as well if I am not mistaken. Very much looking forward to more input on the topic of markings found on Indian weapons and hope that everyone will contribute. This subject has never been even close to adequately addressed in studies of Indian weapons and it would be great to see to the outstanding core of knowledge and resources here resolve that! All the best, Jim

24th June 2007, 08:18 PM	#5
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 9,896	Hi Dralin, As Jens has noted, in studies of weapons from India, there has been no detailed material ever included on the markings such as from arsenals or armories. The only published material has focused on primarily typology, and Dr.Elgood's book is outstanding for his revolutionary attention to the key symbolism, superstitions and tradition found in the weapons. This approach is truly the most sound method for understanding ethnographic weapons and in many cases the development of decoration and motifs. Jens, In the current discussion on the Tipu thread I realized I had forgotten to ask about the Tanjore armoury....are there markings known to have been associated there? All best regards, Jim

25th June 2007, 12:58 PM	#6
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	Hi Jim, As far as I know, the Tanjore armoury did not mark their weapons. At least I have never seen nor heard about any markings, and as there are enough weapons around, without an armoury mark; weapons known to have been in the armoury, it is fairly sure that they did not mark them. This may sound strange as it was not a small armoury, and I don’t know how they made sure that the weapons supposed to be there actually were there, but maybe someone one day will find the answer on a dusty shelf in British Library. Jens