Karud: the weapon that did not exist:-)

[mariusgmioc]

Originally Posted by Bob A

Beyond that, garlic is an absolute necessity for a worthwhile life. Sufficient garlic breath is a factor in preventing transmission of colds and flu through droplet contamination, as potential vectors are taken aback by the fumes. Pre-emptive garlic eating also assists in choosing the proper mate.

And... IT KEEPS THE VAMPIRES AWAY!

I can't believe you forgot mentioning the most essential feature!

[kronckew]

urban myth put out by vampirs so they could have a ready supply of garlic to flavour their food as it has anti-coagulation properties, it enables vampirs to drain every last drop.

don't ask me how i know these things. if i told you i'd have to bite you.

[motan]

Hi all,
I am a late comer to this discussion because I have been away from computers for several weeks.
Ariel, I join the rest in congratulating you on the fine research work. Besides the facts presented, it is also very plausible, because in many languages short vowls are inserted in a consonant cluster whenever it is uncomfortable to pronounce. The best example I know is spoken Palestinian Arabic where this is done in almost every other word.
However, I also see kronckew's point: why not use karud whether it is invented or not? The naming question has been discussed many times as I understand, but it is a very important for this forum and therefore I will add my own opinion.
No method of naming is without serious flaws. The use of "collectors" terms may not reflect any insight at all and different names for the same items are common, as well as mindless copying of names read somewhere. Local "real" names are good to know, but are often generic and reflect a language of origin more that a type. Many names mean knife, dagger or sword in their language of origin' like saif in Arabic as opposed to shamshir in Persian.

This means that all names are rather loose denotations of certain types and not definitions or tool in a classification system, like in biological species for example. So, any discussion that has names as focus, and these very common in the forum, has really not much value and is far less meaningful than questions like age, origin, use, materials etc. It is not that the discussion of naming is without value, but in contrast to other subjects, there can not be absolute right or wrong because weapon names do not represent real entities.

[A. G. Maisey]

Yes, precisely.

[ariel]

Motan, thank you.
That is my sentiment exactly, and I stated it at the very end of my post.

There is no way we can undo a century of popular usage. Informal discussions will still use "Karud" as a stenographic term. There is, however, a measure of relief in finally knowing whence this European mistranscription come. It was called "Kard" in Farsi and "Kord" in Dari- speaking areas. It will be up to professional arms historians whether they continue to use it in academic publications. I am encouraged by a long list of authors describing it as " straight-bladed pesh kabz", which it is in reality.

Again, thanks to everybody for your interest and opinions.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by motan

Hi all,
I am a late comer to this discussion because I have been away from computers for several weeks.
Ariel, I join the rest in congratulating you on the fine research work. Besides the facts presented, it is also very plausible, because in many languages short vowls are inserted in a consonant cluster whenever it is uncomfortable to pronounce. The best example I know is spoken Palestinian Arabic where this is done in almost every other word.
However, I also see kronckew's point: why not use karud whether it is invented or not? The naming question has been discussed many times as I understand, but it is a very important for this forum and therefore I will add my own opinion.
No method of naming is without serious flaws. The use of "collectors" terms may not reflect any insight at all and different names for the same items are common, as well as mindless copying of names read somewhere. Local "real" names are good to know, but are often generic and reflect a language of origin more that a type. Many names mean knife, dagger or sword in their language of origin' like saif in Arabic as opposed to shamshir in Persian.

This means that all names are rather loose denotations of certain types and not definitions or tool in a classification system, like in biological species for example. So, any discussion that has names as focus, and these very common in the forum, has really not much value and is far less meaningful than questions like age, origin, use, materials etc. It is not that the discussion of naming is without value, but in contrast to other subjects, there can not be absolute right or wrong because weapon names do not represent real entities.

Motan,
A brilliantly written and concise closing summary to the discussion here, and perfectly describing these circumstances concerning the terminology used to describe various weapons.
You may be late to the discussion, but I cant help thinking of the analogy of 'the cavalry arriving' !!
Thank you!

Jim

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by ariel

Motan, thank you.
That is my sentiment exactly, and I stated it at the very end of my post.

There is no way we can undo a century of popular usage. Informal discussions will still use "Karud" as a stenographic term. There is, however, a measure of relief in finally knowing whence this European mistranscription come. It was called "Kard" in Farsi and "Kord" in Dari- speaking areas. It will be up to professional arms historians whether they continue to use it in academic publications. I am encouraged by a long list of authors describing it as " straight-bladed pesh kabz", which it is in reality.

Again, thanks to everybody for your interest and opinions.

Ariel, actually you have been arguing that the term "karud" should not be acknowledged or used at all. You specifically mention using only "pesh kabz" or "kard"...........

Whether currently we should call it Peshkabz, acknowledging the similarity of their physical structure, or Kard, acknowledging its correct pronounciation, is a matter of individual preference, although some uniformity might be useful. But all references to a special weapon called Karud have no linguistic or scientific basis and should be stricken out from professional literature.

So how about other terms, how about "kirach", should it not just be a tulwar since the blade is just straight instead of curved?

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Oliver Pinchot

Interesting topic, Ariel. I applaud and support your work here.
And you are correct, I didn't use that term in Arms of the Paladins because it did not exist as a distinct word in its period of use. Like a number of other inaccurate names applied to weapons, it was recorded by early European and American students of arms and armor who were seeking to establish a viable taxonomy, as they heard it in situ.

Oliver, I have wondered why you would not use "karud" even in your auction descriptions, and I understand your intent but what about other similar words...take "pulowar" "pulwar" "pulouar"...I do not know of any text from the 1800s or early 1900s that uses any of these terms except for Egerton and later Stone, but numerous examples of "Afghan tulwar" exist. Why stop at "karud", why not examine each and every term and delete from our collective memories what is not absolutely historically or linguistically correct???

[Mercenary]

Originally Posted by estcrh

Oliver, I have wondered why you would not use "karud" even in your auction descriptions, and I understand your intent but what about other similar words...take "pulowar" "pulwar" "pulouar"...I do not know of any text from the 1800s or early 1900s that uses any of these terms except for Egerton and later Stone, but numerous examples of "Afghan tulwar" exist. Why stop at "karud", why not examine each and every term and delete from our collective memories what is not absolutely historically or linguistically correct???

You are absolutely right! Word "tulwar" is just "a sword". That is way in India there are "khanda tulwar", "sukhela tulwar", "kirach tulwar" and so. Most of the "Indian" terms that we use now are conditional and pseudo-scientific but we have no other.

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Mercenary

You are absolutely right! Word "tulwar" is just "a sword". That is way in India there are "khanda tulwar", "sukhela tulwar", "kirach tulwar" and so. Most of the "Indian" terms that we use now are conditional and pseudo-scientific but we have no other.

And there is also "talwar"??? Which one was first, did the original users call a certain sword "tulwar / talwar", if not then this particular word should not be used in any "academic publications" etc.

If it were not for the Europeans and others that first took the time to collect, name, research and preserve these weapons were would we be today, and they did it without the internet, I think its wrong to try and erase their contribution to the history of these weapons, even if not always linguistically correct, we owe a debt to these people.

[Mercenary]

Originally Posted by estcrh

And there is also "talwar"??? Which one was first, did the original users call a certain sword "tulwar / talwar", if not then this particular word should not be used in any "academic publications" etc.

Someone asked Indian: "What is this?" - "This is tulwar (a sword)". "And what is this?" - "This is kar(u)d (a knife)". Not a single specific type of weapon, but a common name.
You know in ancient India there were not specific names for flowers, fruits or some other similar group of things, only for very important things for Indians: "What is THIS?" - "It is a flower". "What is THAT one?" - "That is a flower too". "But what is the third one?" - "O! This is LOTUS!"

[kai]

Wow, there seems to be a huge amount of emotional attachment here!

If it were not for the Europeans and others that first took the time to collect, name, research and preserve these weapons were would we be today, and they did it without the internet, I think its wrong to try and erase their contribution to the history of these weapons, even if not always linguistically correct, we owe a debt to these people.

We're all standing on the shoulders of giants. (Well, rather lots of shoulders from along the normal distribution with only a minority of intellectual giants thrown in... )

While the longstanding collecting interest of rulers as well as lots of well-of folks worldwide certainly helped to rescue examples of material culture from the vagaries of conflicts, social change, climate, etc., we should not forget that the colonial/postcolonial times were (and still often are) not fair - not all "acquisitions" either...

However, knowledge is not carved in stone but evolves continually. There will always be changes and it doesn't help to cling to mere words, especially if current usage is shown to be based on misunderstandings or errors.

Discussions rarely lead to universally accepted results, even in an academic setting. A wise human being once remarked that outdated ideas often die with their long-time proponents...

Here we rarely deal with rigorously established scientific facts that lead to clear results; we rather have a vast pool of diverse experiences and knowledge and its free sharing by active forumites yields very valuable insights. I'm sure we can live with some diversity including divergent point of views!

Regards,
Kai

[kronckew]

languages are not static, they are living things, constantly learning and evolving.

[ariel]

[QUOTE=estcrh]Ariel, actually you have been arguing that the term "karud" should not be acknowledged or used at all.

Eric, please be kind enough to actually read the last two words in your citation from my post :" Professional literature"



So how about other terms, how about "kirach", should it not just be a tulwar since the blade is just straight instead of curved?

Kirach or alt. kirich are likely to be ( mis) transcriptions of Turkic word for Kilic ( also just " sword"). That's my hint to you. If you wish to devote time and effort to uncover the real local name for this pattern, you are more than welcome. I shall be the first to applaud you.

[Mercenary]

Kir(a)ch (the same as in the case of kar(a)d).
"Kirch tulwar" (most correctly "kirch tuRwar") - straight sword, literally means "sword for to split (to cleave)".

[ariel]

So, the correct name of Kirach is Kirch?
Sounds good to me:-)

I applaud you.
BTW, where does this information come from?

[Mercenary]

The word is written like "kirch". But pronounced like "kir(a)ch", "kir(u)ch" and so. It depends on who is speaking and who is listening. When the Indians speak, then I, a Russian guy, hear how "kirЭch" (very short sound "Э", like "ae" in English).

[Mercenary]

Originally Posted by ariel

BTW, where does this information come from?

Many thanks. I often travel around India, read in museums the descriptions in Hindi, communicate, talk to antique dealers and gunsmiths, and in Moscow I sit with Hindi/Urdu dictionaries))

[ariel]

Highly commendable.

Can you bring an official reference?

[Mercenary]

Originally Posted by ariel

Highly commendable.

Can you bring an official reference?

About "kirch"? I am sorry. Only the word itself:
کرچ
किरच

[Mercenary]

Ariel, I have been searching for you some references for kirch, but look what I have found in Baden-Powell hand-book. I forgot about it.
Specially for you

[estcrh]

Dolche und Messer aus dem Persischen Kulturraum
1984 (Daggers and knives made ​​of the Persian cultural region
in 1984)

123 different daggers and knives from Islamic countries from the 17th-19th Century
60 pages, 2 color plates, numerous black and white photos, descriptions and history of development in German language.

[estcrh]

Egerton seemed to label just about any type of dagger as "pesh kabz". I give credit to the people who tried to sort out the distinct types by applying individual names. Some people seem to have just gone along with Egerton while others did not, which eventually led us to the current discussion. You can see what is clearly a pesh kabz #717, with two kards #721 and #722 and what looks to be a choora / karud #624


An Illustrated Handbook of Indian Arms: Being a Classified and Descriptive Catalogue of the Arms Exhibited at the India Museum: with an Introductory Sketch of the Military History of India, Earl Wilbraham Egerton Egerton
W.H. Allen, 1880.

[estcrh]

George Stone basically followed Egerton. As noted earlier he also separately mentions the "karud" as being a straight bladed pesh kabz, referencing Moser, but in his illustration he has karud and pesh kabz lumped together and states that "as a rule the blade is straight" so are we to assume that the curved bladed pesh kabz were not well represented in that time period leading Stone to think that the straight blade was the most common construction? In our time, with the benefit of the internet, we have access to many images of karud and pesh kabz.

[estcrh]

P.Holstein, "Contribution A L’Etude des Armes Orientales", 1931. Vol. II, plate XX, the author shows both pesh kabz and karud daggers.

[estcrh]

So, is the kerala dagger a form of the pesh kabz?

[Mercenary]

Estcrh,

Very clearly. Million thanks.
Even if "karud" emerged as "kangaroo", as "kangaroo" it has the right to exist. #historydidit.

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Mercenary

Ariel, I have been searching for you some references for kirch, but look what I have found in Baden-Powell hand-book. I forgot about it.
Specially for you

From the book, here you see kirch (straight sword) mentioned as well as khanjar, which is described as a bigger version of the bichua dagger shown, which does not look like what we would call a "bichua". No mention of a curved pesh at all.

HAND-BOOK of the MANUFACTURES AND ARTS of the PUNJAB, 1872, B.H. BADEN POWEL

[Mercenary]

Originally Posted by estcrh

...which does not look like what we would call ...

It is solely our problems. In the book all right.

Peshkabz is just an object which necessary to keep differently unlike all Indian daggers. If it straight or curve - it is only the details.

[estcrh]

Kard daggers from George Stone.