.

May be you are confusing with Indian festivals?

LOL!!!!:)
Good one Mercenary!!! 'durbars were not theatrical' !!!????
Great photos which illustrate the monumental degree of 'performance' which were intended fully to impress and influence.

These were oriented toward British officialdom and often nobility and naturally the highest degree of embellishment could be found on all manner of costume, material cultural items, weapons etc.

Indian 'festivals' were far more often and regularly held events with the purpose of traditional and often religious orientation. While the durbars of course brought in colonial populace, officials and occupying military and many associated groups who certainly sought souveniers of these great events.......the festivals would have been far less 'commercial' in my view.

The term 'theatrical' in our discussion as I have understood is a metaphoric term to describe something embellished far beyond similar items in regular situations, made to outwardly attract attention. Often this term refers to stage type props which would not be of the quality and durability of the items they portray.

Jim, monumentality and theatricality - is not the same))))) The greatness and cheap farce - different.
Excellent swords, that we see among the participants durbar in Delhi (in the photo) do not look like the sword that we are discussing :)

Of course. I think there were not any cheap sham items. The real weapons or ceremonial of high quality.

As I remember the rulers of Bengal were muslims. I do not think that on the Durbar of Bengal court such the Hindu weapon could be used. It is just the unjustified fantasies which lead to false conclusions.

Asian things are not my thing but I have to agree with Mahrrat . In the UK these things are extremely common and the very same decorative techniques can be be found on many blade weapon forms. They are late 19th century early 20th century souverniers. Really not worth argument in my mind. Still look good if you like Asian stuff.

Guys, maybe I'm not making what I am suggesting clear enough. If we are talking about durbars........the EVENTS are monumental and theatrical in sense.
The weapons and costume etc. USED or PRESENTED in these events are of course often highly embellished and of superb quality.

The items often hawked in bazaars and by sellers AROUND these events during their time and frequented by TOURISTS and SOUVENIER SEEKERS
though NOT actually USED in the durbar itself are of course of lower quality,
often even cheap.

The bizarrely costumed guy with the huge tegha and spikes galore is what I would call THEATRICAL......this is not the common costume worn .....it seems this image is often referred to as an executioner, but that is because of the IMPRESSION being staged.

The durbar events were MONUMENTAL because if their huge scope, celebration and importance.

I hope this might clarify what I was trying to say. Please pardon the capital letters, my goal was to emphasize the terms . I apparently often don't make myself clear so my apologies for the confusion.

I really had no idea that trying to describe an item from a durbar in the 19th century which falls into 'souvenier' scope would be confused with the presentation and lavish items used by important individuals there.

I must say that i have been following this thread with some amusement, but also a little bit of concern. It seems to me that the need to be contrary has trumped the obligations we may have to present the OP with some clear and understandable opinions. I can only image what must be going through our novice collector Panzerraptor's mind at this point. He came to us very excited about what he had hoped was a great buy on an authentic weapons lot. After some uncomfortable discourse between certain members here was his initial take from the debate.
Now, i'm not expert by far in this particular field of collection, but from what i can see in the photos and from what i can glean from what others have been presented here so far, Panzerraptor's kora does indeed seem to be a souvenir. I mean, that is what you call an item bought in a place or at an event to commemorate that moment and experience in your life. And that is a possible description of what this item might be (sans the actual word souvenir) as provided by both Oliver and Jim. Now, it does seem to be an antique souvenir so i suppose it has some collector's value as such. It may or may not be an "historic" souvenir depending on whether or not it was purchased in a bazaar at one of these grand Durbars or just anywhere at any other time. But to be clear, i don't think anyone won the lottery here with this purchase and i would hate to see Panzerraptor get the wrong impression from this discussion. Though i could be wrong i cannot image such an example as this being crafted for royals for ceremonial purposes at a Durbar. And from what i understand these Durbars put on for the British Raj didn't really conduct any real business of state as the original Durbars did so what kind of ceremony would this kora possibly be used for. I believe it is important that we be kind, especially to new collectors, but also as clear and accurate as possible for Panzerraptor's sake and not be feeding him any false hopes that this kora is more than it appears to be, a souvenir. While there may indeed be some possibility that this kora was sold at market to someone who attended one of these Durbars, since their is no commemoration marked on the blade nor any written provenance to that fact, nor any photographic evidence showing similar blades either in use ceremonially or even being sold in the markets there in the first place, nor for that matter, AFAIK, any written evidence describing such similar swords of this quality being used in ceremonies at any of these Durbars it seems imprudent of us to suggest otherwise. To give Panzerraptor hope of this being anything more than an antique souvenir seems to serve no purpose as far as i can see. I don't think any of us can say for sure that it is anything else no matter how many photographs we show or what arguments we want to make about the added importance of "historic" souvenirs that were acquired at important events over everyday souvenirs collected by travelers at any other time in history. If Panzerraptor were to decide tomorrow to then re-sell this kora would it be fair of him to present the Durbar story as a selling point? I don't think so.
That said, i am really enjoying the historic photographs of these events. Jim, for your sake, and speaking from the perspective of a professional photographer and photography instructor who teaches a bit of photo history, i would say that it would be more correct to say that most of these images are "posed" not "staged". Staged would imply they were set up specifically for the photograph while posed means they were simply told to hold it for the long exposures of the time while going about their ordinary business at hand. There were one or two group shots that might come under the heading of staged, but the overall scenes of the proceedings themselves went on regardless of whether a photographer was trying to capture them or not. :)

BTW, i did find a few other similar koras when searching the net. Their engravings are of somewhat varying qualities as i believe Oliver stated was common for these blades found in the market places. None of these made any claims to be connected to any Durbars, some where labelled as Nepali, some Indian.

David, you raise an interesting point about whether early photographs were "posed" or "staged." I agree with Jim that many early photographs of, say, western U.S. subjects, especially Native Americans, were both posed and staged. The subjects of some of these were given costumes to wear and weapons to brandish that were not their own but were simply props for the purpose of the picture. This is still done today and there was a photographer at the Minnesota State fair who for many years would take pictures of his customers in 19th C. style clothing that he provided and carrying a variety of facsimile weapons.

In this spirit, the picture of the big guy (perhaps a Sikh) earlier in this thread wearing the spiked elephant armor would seem to have the characteristics of a staged portrait. Some of his costume may well be his own, but it looks to me like he was dressed up further for this picture. No way of knowing for sure, I suppose, but I don't see any reason why some of these pictures were not "staged," as Jim suggested.

Ian.

[QUOTE=Mercenary]As I remember the rulers of Bengal were muslims. I do not think that on the Durbar of Bengal court such the Hindu weapon could be used. It is just the unjustified fantasies which lead to false conclusions.[/QUOTE/]

Last Delhi Durbar occurred in 1911. At that time Bengal was a defined historico-geographical unit.

One should not confuse historical Bengal and Bangladesh:-))))

West Bengal was Hindi and stayed in India in 1947. Muslim East Bengal became Bangladesh.

Historical Hindi West Bengal , Assam etc directly border or are in the vicinity of Nepal. Muslim East Bengal is almost Burma.


As a matter of fact, when Nepal became independent after WWI it retained some old Bengal kingdoms.

Plenty of Hindi Koras in historical Bengal:-)))

Well Ian, i certainly wouldn't argue with you about the staged nature of the guy with the spiky armor. But i am talking about the large majority of these images, not the odd man out. Take a look at the last group of photos that Mercenary put up for instance. You think a photographer staged all those people in those photos. Of course he didn't, they are the actual event including up to thousands of participants. Even the group shot of the dignitaries doesn't look staged since all their attentions seem to be elsewhere rather than on the photographer.
The photographer you are thinking about regarding Native American photos was Edward Curtis. It is true that he staged many rituals for the camera in order to preserve them for history, though generally not incorrectly. Some of the rituals he recorded have never been seen otherwise by any other white man. He was known to carry some wardrobe with him, but he travelled extensively throughout native lands living with tribes for long periods at a time so he got to know them and their ways rather well. There are not many cases known where he gave incorrect weapons to his subjects to hold. He created tens of thousands of images and collect copious notes chronicling the tribes he studied creating an invaluable collection for research despite what we might consider today to be a few missteps in his methodology. :)

[QUOTE=ariel]What was it? Read this for a start:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hassan_Ali_Mirza
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wasif_Ali_Mirza
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waris_Ali_Mirza
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List...lers_of_Bengal

David,
Nobody ever claimed here that this particular Kora was actual armament of a royal retinue. Nor was a claim introduced that this particular Kora was even a commemorative piece sold at the Durbar pageant.

The only thing that was said, that according to Oliver, weapons of similar decorative motives were manufactured en masse for Delhi Durbars.

For some reasons, some people misinterpreted ( misread? misunderstood?) the meaning of this statement, took it as an categorical claim about the posted Kora and started a pseudo-academic Jihad , demanding documented and photographic proof affirming the idea nobody here ever advanced.

Please re-read my posts ## 9 and 24 and try to find a single statement that was misleading Panzerraptor or anybody else about historical, artistic or commercial value of the Kora.

Once again, I think that a question asked by a novice deserves truthful, informative and respectful answer. No sarcasm. No snarks. And that was exactly I and Jim tried to convey.

Panzerraptor,
In hopes you are still here!!! :)
I would like to point out the kind of excitement, drama, controversy, discussion, debate and all manner of dynamics which are brought out by even the most simple of weapons being collected.

You can see the diversity of perspectives, interests, and views being expressed here with the focus being on just what this particular weapon was, and what sort of history might have surrounded it.

Here we have individuals with expertise in a number of fields of arms, some who have studied academically and authored books, some who have written and are amidst finishing other articles on many topics. Even as the subject of photographic evidence is brought into the discussion, we have the benefit of professional photography experience to add to the dimension of our adding that into the equation.
We have English critique to examine the proper words or terms to use in describing some of the circumstances involved in our investigative discussion.

But above all, we have history, so you see how important weapons can be as virtual icons of the times, events and people in which they came from!

While you began a thread with wonderfully posed questions about the collecting of arms, what you have here is a fully dynamic exercise in exactly what collecting weapons is all about!
It is an adventure which becomes lifelong, and 'monumentally' (if the right word:) exciting!!!!!
WELCOME TO OUR WORLD!!! Glad to have you here.

All best regards
Jim

Thank you Ian!
As you note, photographers indeed produced many fascinating photos of Native Americans etc. and I found David's edification on the terms 'posed' vs,. 'staged' most interesting.
I fully thought, as you have perfectly noted, that a 'staged' photo would have been of an 'action' illustration, as in my mention of 'combat' photos.
A posed photo would be a still 'portrait type photo.



In an interesting analogy (and I fully expect correction) it seems that in the Mexican Revolution. a movie (film?) maker wanted to use Pancho Villa and his men in a movie. They filmed an actual charge or attack while accompanying him on campaign......however they declined to use the footage.......it wasn't real enough!!!! :)
Now I cannot state which documentary I saw this in, so I present it here anecdotally for entertainment value only.

Say what?

You cannot present a photograph of the movie crew actually filming Pancho Villa at the head of the charge?
Then how can you claim that Pancho was a real living human being? Or that there was a war between the U.S. and Mexico? Or that there was such country as Mexico?

:-))))))))))))))


Argumentum ad absurdum.....

LOL!
I think the problem was that the charge was actual and not staged, so perhaps it posed a reality issue. Also, this was not a war between U.S. and Mexico but an in house problem, the Revolution! We do know that Pancho Villa posed for photographs, as did his men in many cases, and they had weapons, which I believe were real, and not souveniers.

Quo Vadis :)

I can assure you Ariel that it is not necessary for me to re-read any of your posts since i have already read yours and everyone else's on this thread 5 or 6 times. But please feel free to re-read my posts as i don't believe any of them have accused you of misleading anybody. :)

I do not understand why play with facts? You wrote:

It now appears that there is no documentary evidence that such swords (as we discuss) worn on the Durbar. Moreover such swords - it is not "part of Indian culture." It - kitsch.

But in the absence of evidence to support "the version that these swords were made for Durbar", conversations were reduced to thinking "posed" thousands of people in the photo or not :)

Some forgotten that those who "posed" no such swords (which we are discussing).

Ian, I do not know of any Indian elephant armor that looks like this armor, I see no reason to assume that this armor is not real until proven otherwise. If anyone has a picture of Indian elephant armor that resembles the armor being worn in this photo please post it.

I have posted the only other photo I know of Indian spiked armor.

(Indian (Rajasthan) back armor, 17th c, plates of steel with cast pointed spikes joined together with steel mail, giving it strength and flexibility. The entire armour consists of nine rows with five spiked plates in each row. It is padded with red velvet. There are four laces, one at each corner, with which it was tied over a zirah (shirt of mail), L: 66, width : 65 cm. The National Museum, New Delhi.)


Here is a description of the executioner photo from The Wide World Magazine, Volume 1. 1898

Dima, relax. The rare kora of Durbar of Bengal court. Don't upset people.

Of course, not.

You understood it very well.
Others, obviously, either relied too much on Google translator ( charitable interpretation) or had some other agenda in mind. Well, to each his own:-)

[QUOTE=Mercenary] These references do not talk about weapons.
And a gentle reminder: 1. Religion of a ruler at a certain period of history does not always reflect religion of a large number of his subjects; 2. Religion of a ruler does not alway reflect the type of weaponry his military uses.

To wit:

I thought we were talking about Kora as a Bengali weapon, weren't we?

Suggest to read Elgood's glossary in his book on Indian arms, re. Bughalee ( p. 238) and Kora ( p.252)
Even Mughals might used it. Sharp steel is sharp steel :-;

Dear Ariel, please tell me which of your phrases not correctly translated Google translator?
You say that swords (similar Kora, which we are discussing) - ceremonial. I understand correctly?

I understand that it can not be proven?

You say that swords (similar Kora, which we are discussing) - can be souvenirs. But, quoting the book of respected Oliver Pinchot, refuting his same thoughts.

At the same time we have seen that in the book - just a personal opinion respected Oliver. And unfortunately, this view is not supported by historical sources ....

Do you honestly think that these items (such as those that we are discussing), once considered India as a weapon ????))))))

Cultural traditions such swords, too, do not reflect. Or do you think otherwise?

You told about official Durbar, aren't you? You as always very quickly change your opinion.

How from this follows that the subject is muslim's?

You should be careful to give advice to novice collectors. This may render them a poor service, as has already happened some times.

The Siberian Tag Team at work:-)))))

Please, both of you, try to read carefully and think before you fire up your responses. Then, hopefully, you will be able to understand thing better. Example: Elgood's notes are not directed at proving that Bengalis were Muslim. They prove that Kora was a Bengali weapon, too.

In general, your comments bore and annoy me.
Please ignore my posts as I am trying to ignore yours.


OK?

It is a good idea - to offer to ignore the message. Especially when you can not answer the questions that you ask :)

LOL!!! :)
You guys are amazing!! Why ignore each other?

This thread IS a durbar!!!!! A festival of hilarity in these barbs and inuendos filled with theatrical and entertaining performances, and bringing in a scope of topics, subject matter of amazing dimension, presented in wonderfully creative scenes.

As this gala thread unfolds , it is amazing to have revealing and informative courses in English, geopolitical history, cultural studies, theosophy and even photographic history and theory among others I may have overlooked.

Mahratt, may I say your English is vastly improving as you bring in new words as well as edification on others such as 'kitsch' and even your astute understanding of the 'word play' on 'posing' etc.

As always, Estcrh you are remarkable in posting these sources and added images!!!! Fascinating notes on this type of armor, I thought Ian was using the term 'elephant' as metaphorical referring to the size of this guy :)
In any case, there are of course cases of various armor used in India (Rajputs?) which were referred to as 'coat of nails'. I doubt that they had these huge spikes, but who knows.......after all, this IS from a DURBAR :)

Sometime in the past, around the early part of this thread I mentioned koras of this form (I think that was the thread topic if memory serves)..were used in ritual (sacrifice of doves). I will rely on the edification of the word smiths here to determine if that might be considered 'ceremonial'.

Is the form Bengali? Some examples are, but the kora is 'believed; to be effectively Nepalese.
Now, I am unsure whether there were border check points to ensure that
these forms were not diffused into either region.

Jim, looking back I see that it was actually Oliver that initially mentioned that the armor was made from "elephant armor". Since this image appears to date back to the late 1800s I do not know how it would be from the 1903 Delhi durbar. The "coat of nails" that you mention is actually "chilta hazar masha"or "coat of a thousand nails" which is made up of layers of fabric faced with velvet and studded with numerous small brass nails, which were often gilded. The padded coat, minus its nails, is known for short as a chilta and was worn over armour or on its own. Fabric armour was very popular in India because metal became very hot under the Indian sun.

estrch:

I was referring to an earlier comment by Oliver Pinchot about the elephant armor.

Incidentally, The Wide World Magazine is probably not the best source of factual and reliable information. A British monthly publication from 1898-1965, it was the perpetrator of a major hoax through the serial publication of "The Adventures of Louis de Rougement" who was supposed to have spent many years in outback Australia. When the magazine shut down, The Times of London described it as running mostly stories about "brave chaps with large moustaches on stiff upper lips, who did stupid and dangerous things." Not exactly National Geographic. :rolleyes:

Ian

Estrch,
Every time I see this pic I am always wondering: why should an executioner need a helmet, a shield and a heavily-spiked coat? Was he supposed to duel with the convicted person, and how was he supposed to strike with his humongous tegha without impaling his own arm?

I am sure it is a staged portrait to terrify British accountants and rosy-cheeked milkmaids:-)

" By Jove! 'ad it not been for 'is Majesty, these savages would 'ave eaten each other alive! Mistuh 'ennessy, I'll 'ave bangers and a pint of bittuh. Double quick."

Ariel, armor is not necessarily for protection, it was probably part of the show, for the spectators of an event. if this man was actually an executioner then making him seen ferocious would make sense. I can not comment on the usefullness of the armor only that it appears to not be made from parts of an elephant armor as far as I can tell.

Armor was worn by some participants of durbars and other state events, I do not think it was necessary for protection in this case either, but the armor was real, just from a different (earlier) time period.

Bikaner soldiers wearing armor for the Prince of Wales visit to India in 1875-76.

These mail and plate shirts are from a large group of armor that was stored in the Bikaner armory in Rajastan, northern India. Maharaja Anup Singh (reigned 1669–98) was a general in the armies of the Mughal emperor Aurangzeb and led a series of campaigns in the Deccan in the 1680s and 1690s, including battles at Golconda in 1687 and Adoni in 1689. Dates on similar armors indicate that they taken as war trophys during one of the Deccan campaigns. In recent years some of these armors were sold off to dealers and have ended up in private and public collections.

Ian, I do not doubt that, but the image was published in The Wide World Magazine, 1898 so I am not sure how it could be claimed as an 1903 durbar image, one date is wrong.

Estrch,

Might well be a Durbar-type costume: staged picture or theatrical costume.
Just like the Kora.
If they were connected in some capacity to the Durbar pageant, they would have antiquarian value; if not, they would be worth the cost of materials.

But still, admit it, the journalist mentioning Gilbert and Sullivan defined this costume very well:-)

Ariel, we would just be speculating, it could just as well be an older type of armor that has been re-purposed, when it comes to Indian armor and weapons you just never know, which is why I have an interest in them over lets say American civil war weapons. Here is a similar example, this spiked armor is said to be Siberian bear hunting armor...is it...could be, maybe not, without further info I can not comment further. Maybe the spiked Indian armor was originally used for hunting dangerous animals or some sort of blood sport between fighters, who can say for sure??

estcrh,
you notice in the picture we see the real weapons and armor. But we do not see the grotesque objects similar discussion to the sword (Kora) :)

Now I know where the idea for the Pinhead from "Hellraiser" came from.

My son, who is a horror movie encyclopedia, also mentioned a Russian movie by some budding Fellini named Andrei Iskanov titled "Nails".
Seems hammering nails into the head might be a national Siberian pastime.
You know, a bottle of vodka, a pickle, some body piercing with 9 inch brights ... and off we go to get us a bear:-))))

There is a precedent for spikes being used against animals in India, there are examples of spiked doors being used to keep elephants from breaking them down and below is a picture of what is said to be a spiked ball used to hang in the door of elephant stables to keep the elephants from leaving. The "executioners armor" could have been originally for tiger hunting or fighting with wild animals, a known sport in some parts of India.