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.
Quote:
|
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.