Indian axe

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

This intriguing axe shown by Colin has had me struggling for days through notes etc. as this curious motif is so familiar, yet as I found, so elusive.
There are interesting clues however in the entry with similar (perhaps exact) item shown in the vague Christies description.

While the term battle axe is used (another term about as useful as descriptions using northern, southern etc without qualification) it seems the implication is that this is an Indian 'tabar', which it is not.
The Tabar was a larger and heavier axe, a much more conservative blade (not 'lunar' as cleverly noted for 'crescent') and a blunt poll at the back of the head. It was its smaller cousin, the tabarzin, which was a saddle axe of same shape only smaller.

Depending on the source "tabar" simply means "axe", Egerton in "Indian and Oriental Arms and Armour" uses tabar to describe crescent, hoe, triangular, long curved, forked and short curved axe heads.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by estcrh

Depending on the source "tabar" simply means "axe", Egerton in "Indian and Oriental Arms and Armour" uses tabar to describe crescent, hoe, triangular, long curved, forked and short curved axe heads.

Interesting and most salient point, the use of certain specific terms for various weapon forms is indeed a slippery slope in the study of ethnographic arms. Much of this is the result of transliteration, semantics and other disruptions in using terms used locally in their respective cultures. In other cases, there is the instance of common parlance used by collectors and those historians who study these weapons, and often errors perpetuated by subsequent writers on them.

Case in point here is Egerton, who is a venerable and most respected author whose seminal work on Indian arms has stood as a benchmark for many serious students of these weapons. It must be remembered that he wrote in 1880, and there has been considerable research done since then.
It is indeed intriguing to see these entries in Egerton's catalog, in which this entire series of axes are termed 'tabars', to which I would agree that the term is indeed a Persian word for 'axe', hence the diminutive 'tabar-i-zin which means effectively 'saddle axe'.
In todays studies of ethnographic weapons, we would recognize these varying forms of axe as 'bullova' and known as forms from the tribes of Chota Nagpur as previously noted.

Egerton probably was unaware of the now accepted term for these axes as 'bullova', as they are referenced in Stone who wrote in 1934, and listed as his reference, "Sport and Adventure in the Indian Jungle", Mervin A. Smith, London, 1904.

With regard to the use of terminology on weapons, Stone did unfortunately follow Egerton in due course with his use of the term katar, for the transverse grip daggers well known to us by that name. In an ironic twist, Egerton shows the original plate (Plate 1,p.23)of the early reference on Indian arms, the "Ain -I-Akbari", a treatise on arms at the time of Akbar, where these type daggers are termed properly 'jamadhar'. In his subsequent entries, Egerton consistently uses the term katar for these daggers, which spurred the incorrect use of the term by following writers, including Stone.
("Indian Arms and Armor" Pant, 1980,
pp.162-163)
To add to the confusion which clearly illustrates the proper terms and use of them for certain Indian weapons, item #376 in Egerton shows a proper 'tabar'* which is a 'triangular' (actually trapezoidal geometrically) head axe (plate X). Then he shows a crow bill (zaghnol, #471) as a 'buckie"; then #473, a 'buckie' (actually a bhuj) and most puzzling another tabar , #474, as a 'buckie'.

* by 'proper' 'tabar', I mean the commonly held form typically thought of in general discussion of Indian arms without parlance deviation. I did find that in some cases Indian tabars were indeed crescent shaped (in Haider, p.233, on Mughal arms).

In "By My Sword and Shield" (E.Jaiwent Paul, 1995, p.84), it is noted that G.N.Pant (op.cit.) stating that "...tabar consisted of a triangular blade with one broad cutting edge"

However, in defense of the use of the term widely, in "The Tabar of a Turkish Dervish" (A.S. Melikian-Chirvani, "Islamic Arms & Armour" ed. Robert Elgood, 1979, pp.112-115). ..the author describing a piece shown in Paris in 1886, a crescent head with sweeping downward 'beard', and that"..this remarkable piece is indeed a tabar, which is Persian for 'axe'".
He also notes the tabar is of larger size traditionally than the tabarzin.
Also noted is that while this piece is a tabar, Islamic India can lay no claim to it.
It is interesting that these would be called 'tabar' as the Turkish word for axe is 'balta'...but it seems that term is used more specifically to the double crescent head axes carried by the Sultans bodyguards.

Terms can be confounding, as shown here. The term 'tulwar' in India is a general sort of term for sword, and is applied equally to shamshirs in Indian context. The term kilij well known in Turkey, is another term for sword, not only the familiar pistol grip sabres or the pala with pronounced yelman.
We can go on forever here with what we often term 'the name game'.

It seems that in many references, the term axe is used along with proper qualification including any locally used terms etc. and that seems most agreeable.

The profusion of photos is most impressive, as well as the illustrations of lanyard bearing examples as requested. While colorful and wonderful visually it would be good if they were captioned so as to be more helpful to those reading here. Also, it is helpful if photos, just as with quoted references are cited or referenced. Much as with references from various resources, it helps if images come with context and description.

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

The profusion of photos is most impressive, as well as the illustrations of lanyard bearing examples as requested. While colorful and wonderful visually it would be good if they were captioned so as to be more helpful to those reading here. Also, it is helpful if photos, just as with quoted references are cited or referenced. Much as with references from various resources, it helps if images come with context and description.

Jim, I am not sure how to add text along with the images on this particular forum, there is no "inline" attachments feature that I can find. You or anyone else can follow this link for any of the images I posted along with what descriptions there are.

http://www.pinterest.com/worldantiqu...hnal-and-bhuj/

[Andrew]

Originally Posted by estcrh

Jim, I am not sure how to add text along with the images on this particular forum, there is no "inline" attachments feature that I can find.

Here is an example of how to overcome this hurdle: http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=18957

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Andrew

Here is an example of how to overcome this hurdle: http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=18957

Crude but effective, thanks

[Ian]

If you have an account with one of the image hosting sites, such as Photobucket, you can insert graphics anywhere in your Vikingsword message by inserting a link to specific graphics in your Photobucket account. You need the image tag [IMG] before the link and then [/IMG] after it. The image will then appear at the place that you insert its link. You can then continue to type text. On the old UBB site there used to be a limit on how many graphics could be inserted in one message, and I suspect that may still be the case but Lee would be able to tell us that. I've used more than five graphics recently and had no problem.

Of course, if you close you graphics hosting account or move images around within it, the links will be broken and your images will no longer appear in your posted messages here.

Ian.

[Andrew]

Originally Posted by Ian

Of course, if you close you graphics hosting account or move images around within it, the links will be broken and your images will no longer appear in your posted messages here.

Exactly. MUCH preferred to attach photos through the forum software for preservation of the images. Otherwise, many very informative threads become useless.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by estcrh

Jim, I am not sure how to add text along with the images on this particular forum, there is no "inline" attachments feature that I can find. You or anyone else can follow this link for any of the images I posted along with what descriptions there are.

http://www.pinterest.com/worldantiqu...hnal-and-bhuj/

I appreciate the response to at least this part of my post. As Andrew has noted, often attached images after time disappear from threads, and as I have indicated, the text included loses a great deal of its detail without images which are specified in the text.

These threads have actually become an archives of sorts for those who are interested in pursuing the history of these weapons, rather than simply admiring images of them, despite the fact that these photos are often pretty breathtaking.

Naturally I know the old adage, 'a picture is worth a thousand words' (probably why my posts are so long), but referenced detail and notes from resources is also important, and takes quite a bit of time which I gladly take as I want to add as much as I can to discussions.

Although some of the processes here might seem crude, we all take whatever effort is necessary to add as much as we can to the threads, which often come up on web search entries for researchers studying various forms.

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

I appreciate the response to at least this part of my post. As Andrew has noted, often attached images after time disappear from threads, and as I have indicated, the text included loses a great deal of its detail without images which are specified in the text.

These threads have actually become an archives of sorts for those who are interested in pursuing the history of these weapons, rather than simply admiring images of them, despite the fact that these photos are often pretty breathtaking.

Naturally I know the old adage, 'a picture is worth a thousand words' (probably why my posts are so long), but referenced detail and notes from resources is also important, and takes quite a bit of time which I gladly take as I want to add as much as I can to discussions.

Although some of the processes here might seem crude, we all take whatever effort is necessary to add as much as we can to the threads, which often come up on web search entries for researchers studying various forms.

Jim, actually "attached" images are stored on the forums server and will not be lost, "linked" images are what disappears. "In line attachments" is when you can actually see your attached images in your post when you edit it, you can write above and in between the images and actually move the images around, the images appear over each other in the order you want and you can change the order, they are still stored on the forums server, its just a much easier way to add descriptions etc. Some forums support this, this one does not I guess. Of course attaching images is the best way to keep the posts for future research.

Here is what it looks like.

[Richard G]

Colin,
The configuration of the head of your axe is very similar to that of the traditional farrier's axe, altho' your one does seem rather small to be used on a horse! Perhaps it is associated with some other form of animal husbandry.
Just an idea.
Regards
Richard

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Richard G

Colin,
The configuration of the head of your axe is very similar to that of the traditional farrier's axe, altho' your one does seem rather small to be used on a horse! Perhaps it is associated with some other form of animal husbandry.
Just an idea.
Regards
Richard

Interesting, here is a picture of an Indian farrier's axe, while I do not think the Indians who made this axe even had horses maybe they saw a British one and liked the design.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by Richard G

Colin,
The configuration of the head of your axe is very similar to that of the traditional farrier's axe, altho' your one does seem rather small to be used on a horse! Perhaps it is associated with some other form of animal husbandry.
Just an idea.
Regards
Richard

Thank you Richard for adding this!
I would not have thought of an axe like this as a utilitarian implement, but your entry certainly adds new dimension to this topic......not to mention returning to Colin's axe, the original topic .

It is often amazing when things we perceive as weapons actually are more utilitarian, though obviously tools, weapons and implements are often cross utililized. Case in point was a recent post on a lance head which turned out being an oxen goad.
When thinking of utilitarian implements as expected to be austere in appearance, I think of the ankus, which of course were remarkably decorated and made.