Quote:
|
Originally Posted by VANDOO
... WHICH ONE WOULD YOU CONSIDER HUNTING IN THE JUNGLE WITH A KNIFE OF ANY SORT.
PERHAPS SOMEONE WAS ATTACKED AND SURVIVED AND KILLED A TIGER AND THE LEGENDS AND STORIES GREW. ANYONE WITH A CLEAR MIND WOULD NOT RISK LIFE AND LIMB ON SUCH A HUNT ESPECIALLY RAJAHS AND KINGS WHO HAD MUCH TO LOSE. RULERS ARE USUALLY SMART OR THEY WOULDN'T BECOME RULERS OR REMAIN IN POWER LONG.  |
Mostly true,
Still we have to consider that the sense of survival and all those values weren't so extreme a few centuries ago.
Leaders used to go into battle in front of their troops and only 'the other day' they started positioning themselves in the back stage.
You take Rajputs, the originators of the katar; for them, war was almost a sport. In the 1490's Rana Kombah sent his son Prithi Raj put down a rebellion started by the Rana's brother Soorajmal. During battle, at the end of the day, uncle and nephew camped in sight of each other, the nephew visiting his uncle's tent, asking him for his wounds, and eating dinner off the same platter. When leaving the tent,the nephew assured his uncle that they would finish their battle in the morning and the uncle recomended him to be early on the field.
I wouldn't be surprised if guys with such life disdain would engage a fight with a tiger bearing only blades ... if circumstances arose.
Ah, by the way, Prithi Raj won the battle.