Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Ethnographic Weapons
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 25th October 2015, 07:21 PM   #1
Mercenary
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 428
Default

You should to learn other styles of Mughal daggers decoration. There was very beautiful Animal style and others.
After that you will be able to understand that Mughals could not to present each other only "floral style" which you think was phul-katara ))
Mercenary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27th October 2015, 02:34 PM   #2
Emanuel
Member
 
Emanuel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1,242
Default

They did have a lot of figural styles
Those with flowers and large plant motifs would be termed "floral", and those with animals would be "zoomorphic" I think. Also a lot defying any such simple classification.
Emanuel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st October 2015, 01:00 PM   #3
ariel
Member
 
ariel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
Default

I spoke with native Hindi and Farsi speakers. It seems that Mercenary's theory in defining wootz as something like " floral ( or flowery) steel" is indeed mistaken.

In Hindi flower is Ful, steel is Loha. In Farsi flower is Gol, and steel is Fulad.

Thus, Fulad and Ful define two totally different things, and the only thing that "unites" them is partial homophony.

It is indeed a confusing area, especially when two languages are compared or intermixed. Even in the same language there are confusing pairs: complement and compliment, for example. Or, even worse, horse and whores:-)
People may make such mistakes very easily, especially when the language in question is not their native.

So, Mercenary, no cigar, but nice try:-)
ariel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 31st October 2015, 06:29 PM   #4
Jim McDougall
Arms Historian
 
Jim McDougall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,278
Default

Just to add some notes amidst the phulishness theme, it seems Pant ("Indian Arms and Armour", 1980), notes (p.188-89) that "...the word phul (flower) is obscure. Perhaps it means the knot or crochet of jewels called by Chardin ' une enseigne ronde de pierceries' and which the Persians called 'rose de Poignard'.

It seems that many of the examples shown and described are heavily jeweled, so that might lend to the idea of that kind of decoration, however with many examples of 'phul katara' it seems they are sans jewels but highly decorated florally in theme.

In a number of references from the Turk I Jahangir an account noted an offering to an ambassador to Bijapur in 1613 as a jeweled dagger, and then a phul katara along with other items. Another instance in the same account notes a 'jeweled phul katara' among items.

These suggest some disparity in the idea of 'jewelled' being the case for the term 'phul' as applied on these daggers, and perhaps stronger for the floral theme.

Interesting though is that the article " The Use of Flora and Fauna Imagery in Mughal Decorative Arts" by Stephen Markel (Marg magazine , Vo.50 #3, pp.25-35) throughout the remarkably thorough descriptions and images concerning material culture and arms does not mention the term 'phul' anywhere. Possibly as it was a broader coverage of the decorative theme than just arms.
Possibly then the phul-katara designator was more arms oriented?

As far as the term phul being rooted (no pun intended) in the concept of pulad (=watered steel) as a flowered pattern seems to me tenuous at best, and particularly in the idea that phul katara must have all had wootz blades.
I think this has been well resolved however already but wanted to add these notes.

It seems clear that the debates and discourse pertaining to these kinds of disparity in terminology and classifications especially with ethnographic arms often becomes heated out of pure frustration . Altogether too many times it is misconstrued that debate or difference in opinion has to be contentious or dynamic. For me I learn more from solidly supported and presented ideas and positions. Aside from the occasional barbs, this has been a pretty good discussion.
Jim McDougall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th November 2015, 05:01 PM   #5
Mercenary
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 428
Default

Many thanks Jim.

But whole quotation is "the katara was a long, narrow dagger. But the word phul (flower) is obscure...". So "phul" is inextricably linked with blade. That is why:
Quote:
Interesting though is that the article " The Use of Flora and Fauna Imagery in Mughal Decorative Arts" by Stephen Markel (Marg magazine , Vo.50 #3, pp.25-35) throughout the remarkably thorough descriptions and images concerning material culture and arms does not mention the term 'phul' anywhere
What kind of daggers were used by Jahangir's court and what daggers were bestowed? I was able to find only two gifts. And there were nothing such as flower, roses or so. Let's see:
Attached Images
           
Mercenary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th November 2015, 05:02 PM   #6
Mercenary
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 428
Default

...
Attached Images
     
Mercenary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th November 2015, 05:06 PM   #7
Mercenary
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 428
Default

I do not think that it is could be "phul-katara" as "flower+blade". Just "jeweled dagger with some (?) blade". Not "jeweled dagger with jeweled flawored hilt with blade" ))
Attached Images
 

Last edited by Mercenary; 28th November 2015 at 05:40 PM.
Mercenary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28th April 2016, 11:51 PM   #8
ariel
Member
 
ariel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mercenary
Not touching why in India some kind of steel was called phauladi (from "phul-" - flower) I can now confidently conclude that "phul-katara" is definitely simply a bunch of gems that was attached to a string which fastened a dagger on a waist belt

Taking into account that the above assertion comes from Pant who was citing Chardin, and who prefaced this statement with words " obscure" and "perhaps", the confidence of the above author seems a bit excessive:-)))))

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim McDougall
Just to add some notes amidst the phulishness theme, it seems Pant ("Indian Arms and Armour", 1980), notes (p.188-89) that "...the word phul (flower) is obscure. Perhaps it means the knot or crochet of jewels called by Chardin ' une enseigne ronde de pierceries' and which the Persians called 'rose de Poignard'.
(( this very topic, post #98))
ariel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th April 2016, 12:09 AM   #9
Mercenary
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 428
Default

It is very nice that in the end you always agree with me in any subject. If still in the middle of the debate you (and not only you) would be more patient we could all learn more. In any case I found out a lot of interesting things from the time of Jahangir and Shah-Jahan so it will be very good article I hope.
Mercenary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th April 2016, 12:11 AM   #10
ariel
Member
 
ariel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
Default

We seem to have heard multiple brilliant, conclusive and mutually-exclusive theories of the origin of "Phul kattara".

Among them a homophony of Hindi "Ful" and Persian " Phulad", allusion to the dried leaves/flowers added to the crucible for wootz manufacture, pommels with flowery figures, gem- studded katars, strings of brilliants attached to daggers etc, etc.


Perhaps, the truth is much simpler than that.

Flower(y) in a sense of flamboyant? Lavishly decorated?

( My free contribution to your future article)
ariel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th April 2016, 01:08 AM   #11
Mercenary
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 428
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ariel
We seem to have heard multiple brilliant, conclusive and mutually-exclusive theories of the origin of "Phul kattara".

Among them a homophony of Hindi "Ful" and Persian " Phulad", allusion to the dried leaves/flowers added to the crucible for wootz manufacture, pommels with flowery figures, gem- studded katars, strings of brilliants attached to daggers etc, etc.
In this topic you could observe the usual process of study of any problem. When the wrong versions are gradually discarding and only one are retaining in the end. Usually this process is hidden from prying eyes. But in this case you were lucky enough to witness this firsthand. It was the real research. I am very grateful to all the participants of this discussion.

Last edited by Mercenary; 29th April 2016 at 01:59 AM.
Mercenary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29th April 2016, 12:43 AM   #12
Mercenary
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 428
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ariel
Originally Posted by*Jim McDougall

Just to add some notes amidst the phulishness**theme, it seems Pant ("Indian Arms and Armour", 1980), notes (p.188-89) that "...the word phul (flower) is obscure. Perhaps it means the knot or crochet of jewels called by Chardin ' une enseigne ronde de pierceries' and which the Persians called 'rose de Poignard'.
Many thanks. It was not in Pant's book. It was the note of a translator in one of translations of the Jahangirnama. Unfortunately, in another later translation, the translator clearly wrote that "phul-katara" is a pommel in the shape of a flower. A misconception took the beginning from there ((

Last edited by Mercenary; 29th April 2016 at 01:51 AM.
Mercenary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th January 2016, 08:23 PM   #13
David
Keris forum moderator
 
David's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 7,218
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ariel
In Hindi flower is Ful, steel is Loha. In Farsi flower is Gol, and steel is Fulad.
This might mean little to this discussion, but i believe that "Loha" is Hindi for iron, not steel. Steel in Hindi seems to be a variation on the English word and seems to be pronounced "Stila".
David is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th January 2016, 08:59 PM   #14
ariel
Member
 
ariel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
Default

"Loha" verified with several native speakers, both from the North and the South. "Stila" sounds like "indianized" English.


In any case, it is the homophony of "Ful" in Hindi and Farsi that is the point.


But the relation of Sukhela (var. Sakhela) to the current discussion is puzzling. The kind of steel used for its production is only one possiblilty, but Sukhela or Dhup as a specific name for a straight-bladed sword was recorded by Tarassuk & Blair in their Encyclopedia and by E. Jaiwant Paul in his book on Indian weapons. This "controversy" is nothing new.

That was even discussed here in passing years ago..
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=10071

Last edited by ariel; 13th January 2016 at 09:27 PM.
ariel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th January 2016, 09:54 PM   #15
Jens Nordlunde
Member
 
Jens Nordlunde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 2,718
Default

As far as I can see, the discussion is not running as it should.
Whatever blade you show, or whatever steel type you mention will be called something else in other parts of India.
If you really want to discuss this, you should specify which part of India you want to discuss.

Something else. Did you know that there is a place called Qandahar in Deccan? Or did you know that there is a Hyderabad in Sind?

We cant know it all. - can we?
Jens Nordlunde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th January 2016, 11:37 PM   #16
Mercenary
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 428
Default

"I'll be back" (c)
Soon )
Mercenary is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:21 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.