Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post

dennee · 10th June 2005, 01:01 AM

The knife or short sword is the traditional "ban" of the Lepcha people, who principally came to live in remoter, forested valleys in Sikkim, but were found in Bhutan as well and across the Nepal border. Although it frequently appears as "Bhutanese," it is distinct (in length, blade shape and composition, scabbard and decoration) from the typical arms of the ethnically Tibetan Bhutias who migrated into the area and became the majority (at least before the influx of a great number of Nepalis to the area). I believe that Lord Egerton identifies such a piece as from Bhutan, as indeed it could have been made, used and collected there. A photographed example in his book is identified as from "Bhotan or Nepalese Frontier."

I confess that I can't make out clearly from the photos details suggesting folding or lamination. Earlier examples may have had blades more like Tibetan and Bhutanese swords--although I confess that I have not seen any documented early examples. By the late nineteenth century it seems that they were monosteel, as are all the examples I have seen. J. Claude White, in "Sikhim & Bhutan: Twenty-One Years on the North-East Frontier, 1887-1908," reported that "Very good knives are manufactured in Sikhim. They used to be made from indigenous charcoal iron, but now that steel bars can be bought so cheaply the workmen--more is the pity--have entirely abandoned the old method of extracting the iron direct from the ore."

I'd agree with Tim in that, while I have several "hairpin folded" swords from Tibet, Bhutan, and Burma, I would not etch them to try to make the contrast more pronounced. It may be conservatism, but it would certainly tend to better preserve the blade and its patination. It may be truer to the original appearance of the blade as the differences in the steel used for the blades may have become more pronounced over the years--as opposed to their appearance in a new blade--because of differential oxidation. Surely, the Tibetans, for instance, appreciated the patterns--particularly the "jelly roll" type sometimes employed on daggers or short swords--but it doesn't seem to be a characteristic meant to be as pronounced or as significant as on, say, krisses. Just my opinion, of course.

10th June 2005, 01:01 AM	#3
dennee Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: College Park, MD Posts: 186	The knife or short sword is the traditional "ban" of the Lepcha people, who principally came to live in remoter, forested valleys in Sikkim, but were found in Bhutan as well and across the Nepal border. Although it frequently appears as "Bhutanese," it is distinct (in length, blade shape and composition, scabbard and decoration) from the typical arms of the ethnically Tibetan Bhutias who migrated into the area and became the majority (at least before the influx of a great number of Nepalis to the area). I believe that Lord Egerton identifies such a piece as from Bhutan, as indeed it could have been made, used and collected there. A photographed example in his book is identified as from "Bhotan or Nepalese Frontier." I confess that I can't make out clearly from the photos details suggesting folding or lamination. Earlier examples may have had blades more like Tibetan and Bhutanese swords--although I confess that I have not seen any documented early examples. By the late nineteenth century it seems that they were monosteel, as are all the examples I have seen. J. Claude White, in "Sikhim & Bhutan: Twenty-One Years on the North-East Frontier, 1887-1908," reported that "Very good knives are manufactured in Sikhim. They used to be made from indigenous charcoal iron, but now that steel bars can be bought so cheaply the workmen--more is the pity--have entirely abandoned the old method of extracting the iron direct from the ore." I'd agree with Tim in that, while I have several "hairpin folded" swords from Tibet, Bhutan, and Burma, I would not etch them to try to make the contrast more pronounced. It may be conservatism, but it would certainly tend to better preserve the blade and its patination. It may be truer to the original appearance of the blade as the differences in the steel used for the blades may have become more pronounced over the years--as opposed to their appearance in a new blade--because of differential oxidation. Surely, the Tibetans, for instance, appreciated the patterns--particularly the "jelly roll" type sometimes employed on daggers or short swords--but it doesn't seem to be a characteristic meant to be as pronounced or as significant as on, say, krisses. Just my opinion, of course.