Indian armoury markings

[Jens Nordlunde]

’The Art and Architecture of Bikaner State’ by Hermann Goetz, on p. 68 the author writes.

“When in 1588-1593 rao Rai Singhji [Singh] constructed his great fort at Bikaner, all the stones had to be brought from Jaisalmer. But only this ruler, who could marshal the revenues of a kingdom increased by the conquest of half Marwar and the grant of half Gujarat, and who could make use of immense booty from Jodhpur, Gujarat, and the North West Deccan, could afford such an expenditure.”

Rao Rai Singh, who was one of the best generals in the Mughal army, served in the army for many years; including as governor of Deccan, but he also participated in many campaigns in places like Afghanistan, Punjab, Sind, Deccan, Bengal to name a few of the places. Many of the later rulers of the Bikaner state also took part in campaigns, but he was no doubt the one, who brought most booty back to Bikaner. By doing this, he helped Bikaner, although placed in the Thar Desert, to be a wealthy state. The fact that Bikaner was placed on the Silk Road and was centre for some of the more local trading routes helped too, but what he brought back must have been enormous amounts of many things – this includes weapons as well.

Most of us know the Bikaner dot marking on the weapons, and I believe that all weapons entering the armoury were marked. If I am right, a lot of weapons with armoury marks from Bikaner origins from somewhere else. Collectors of Indian weapons should be aware of, that weapons with the Bikaner armoury mark, or any armoury mark for that matter, not necessarily origins from the armoury they are marked at, and this goes for weapons being ‘said’ to have come from any armoury.

When you think of the size of the armies they had at the time, it must be clear, that the winners would have brought a lot of weapons back to their armouries, marked them, and a collector to day would believe the marking to be a ‘mark of origin’, but it may not be.

As an afterthought. The marking of the weapons may not have taken place until quite a bit later.

[olikara]

Originally Posted by Jens Nordlunde

Collectors of Indian weapons should be aware of, that weapons with the Bikaner armoury mark, or any armoury mark for that matter, not necessarily origins from the armoury they are marked at, and this goes for weapons being ‘said’ to have come from any armoury.

Very correct, Jens. We cannot take an armoury mark as the origin of that weapon.

The beauty of these weapons is the adventure that they have been through and when you possess them, you accompany them on that adventure. Take the case of the Bikaner Deccan pieces. Many of them are typically Hindu Vijaynagara. They were later taken by the Bijapur Sultans after the sack of Vijaynagar. Then after the Deccan Sultanates fell to Aurangazeb under his Bikaner General in Adoni, we see them moving up to Rajasthan. And now you or me have a few pieces in Switzerland and for me back to South India where it hailed from in the first place

That is what makes collecting them interesting.

Nidhi

[ariel]

Originally Posted by olikara

That is what makes collecting them interesting.

Nidhi

And attributing them nigh impossible... :-)