An old Tibetan warrior

[Gavin Nugent]

Nice Kora Ariel,

I'd be inclined to pin yours down as Tibet too.

To my eye but without formal factual data to back it up, the rounded Stupa pommel arrangement, the form of the disc guard and the slender blade point to Tibet for me.

I'd love to replace the very early Tibetan Kora I sold years ago but the wheels must keep turning so other treasures like the Tibet sword can be obtained and studied.

Gavin

[Gavin Nugent]

Perhaps a new thread or an old Kora thread should be revived....this image of a Sikh holding a Kora, although a line drawing from the 19th century puts an alternative perspective on the early type when viewing the hilt.

Gavin

[kronckew]

poor guy looks under armed. needs a couple of quivers too. and a few more knives.

[dennee]

I'd love to see any solid attributions of 'koras' to Tibet. There were certainly examples found there, whether or not any actually originated there. There are some early to mid-twentieth-century photos of religious dancers with koras, and these are of this type: narrow, with a very convex end.

But I haven't seen koras in other period photos or paintings from Tibet or in monasteries. I have seen talwars, 'katars,' Indian shields, etc. Weapons made their way into Tibet in any number of ways (including Gorkha invasions), and many were donated to the protector chapels in monasteries. Koras may have been attractive for ceremonial use because of their exotic appearance and origins, rather like the flamboyant archaic Indian sword forms remaining in Buddhist art.

One could certainly argue that the medial ridge found on this type has more in common with Indian swords than Tibetan, which were more heavily influenced by Chinese weapons. (Such a ridge is probably structurally necessary on such a narrow sword.) Of course, we lack truly ancient Tibetan swords (although I hear there's a sword in Bhutan that is said to be more than a thousand years old, although I believe it was derived from the Chinese pallasch, as you would expect).

There also appear to be rare examples of what folks have called "Tibetan" kukris, presumably made in Nepal using hairpin-laminated steel. I don't have any photos, so I don't know if they were made from scratch or fashioned from Tibetan trade blades.

[Jim McDougall]

I agree with Dennee, it does seem that the kora in Tibet would be an anomaly, but certainly not entirely discounted on an incidental basis.
As with most cultural diffusion with arms, any number of circumstances might account for these, but as far as a regularly present form of weapon in Tibet, the kora seems unlikely.

Gav, that image of the Sikh holding one of these very forms of kora is phenomenal!! and I am wondering if perhaps the connections between Nepal and Rajputs might account for this seemingly hybrid form of kora. As Dennee has mentioned, various forms of such hybrids have been seen as the tulwar hilted types, usually it seems in upper Bengal, and Nepalese regions.
It would seem that as closely as Rajput and Sikh were regionally to the west, that movements of such forms might have traversed into these areas, or perhaps the Sikh portrayed may have been alternately in more eastern area?
The tulwar hilted kukri is also well noted, and seems part of these hybrid anomalies.

When we first considered identification of this unusual kora bladed weapon of Gav's, it seems the Stone classification was the primary basis.

[ariel]

Nepal and Tibet are neighbors, borders were irrelevant , populations and goods moved unimpeded, ethnicities and religions overlapped. What we call Tibet and Nepal now had no relations to the situation on the ground several centuries ago. I see no real reason to exclude Koras from the "Tibetan" arsenal.

[dennee]

I, too, would see no reason to exclude them if they could be demonstrated to be part of that arsenal, which is why I asked if somebody has any. I'm certainly not against the idea in principle, just properly skeptical, I think. I would be just as satisfied knowing either way. But he burden of proof would seem to lie with one claiming that a specific example or type is Tibetan. Why is it Tibetan, and what does it mean to be Tibetan? You seem to suggest it doesn't really mean anything, but I'd disagree.

It is overstating the case to say that borders didn't matter, when they did in fact exist---substantially where they are now, because of the Himalayas---and were defended. What has changed in recent decades is the Chinese occupation choking off much north-south trade and pushing Tibetan refugees into Nepal. Of course, we have to acknowledge that Nepal was not always a unified state, nor was Tibet. Yet Tibet retained a cultural identity since its unification in the 7th century, even when divided or weak.

This forum seems to be a place where people try to draw distinctions between items from different parts of India, Indonesia, the Philippines, the Arabian peninsula, etc. Distinctions can sometimes be made between items from areas less remote from each other and less culturally different. But I would tend to agree that, at some level, it is probably not of earth-shattering importance to draw such distinctions. Perhaps a fixation on classification is silly, yet here we are.

One cannot discount the ethno-linguistic, religious and cultural differences on opposite sides of the border, despite the fact that the boundary was not drawn to include all Sherpas and residents of Mustang. The relations between the countries and the influence on Tibet of the Nepalese since the 7th century is well documented. So is the employment of many Newari builders, painters and metalworkers at the time Buddhism was fading from the land of its birth. And while the granting of extraterritorial rights to Nepali traders in the 17th century indicates Tibetan openness to them (after a war), it was nonetheless another recognition of other-ness. One also cannot discount the influence of the Chinese, especially in the weaponry of the last few centuries, which is presumably the time period we're discussing when it comes to our own collections.

One also has to consider that while the countries border each other, their population centers, where most craftsmen would be found, do not. Despite the considerable trade and even some settlement in each other's countries, the distances that traders traveled was considerable and populations were spread out. While people occupied pretty much all the valleys, there was not quite the mixing that occurs on the U.S.-Canada border.

What is known is that there are some examples of koras in Tibet. Were they introduced by war or trade? If they were instead produced in Tibet, was it by Nepalese craftsmen? Is it possible that the form originated in Tibet? Why are they so different in form from other Tibetan swords? If produced or used there, why don't there seem to have been more examples come out during the Younghusband expedition or the Cultural Revolution (both events resulted in a fair amount of documentation of items collected)? Or maybe they did come out and are in our collections, but don't have clear provenance. Whatever their origins, if they were once used by Tibetans in significant numbers, why don't they so far appear in Tibetan art (where both the archaic Indian and modern Tibetan weapons do)? Is the skinny kora with a medial ridge and deeply concave distal end an older type from the ones we see more commonly, or could it even represent distinctions within Nepal?

Some thoughts about ways to address such questions about Tibet: are there indeed wall paintings that show koras borne by individuals identifiable as Tibetans? Are there more examples of a particular type with a firm provenance in Tibet? Do some koras show signs of being made in Tibet because of the similarities to Tibetan blade steel or fittings?

Anyway, it's not that important, but perhaps as interesting as most other questions that arise here.

[Gavin Nugent]

Originally Posted by dennee

There also appear to be rare examples of what folks have called "Tibetan" kukris, presumably made in Nepal using hairpin-laminated steel. I don't have any photos, so I don't know if they were made from scratch or fashioned from Tibetan trade blades.

I can confirm that I have had two of these Kukri types Dennee.

To me, the blades were not re-purposed from other Tibet blades but made in this manner. The spacings between the hairpins was far too large when considering the width and thickness of the blade, along with the contours of metals within the form from the forte to the tip, they were all very specific rather than a melding of old metals.

Gavin

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Gavin Nugent

Perhaps a new thread or an old Kora thread should be revived....this image of a Sikh holding a Kora, although a line drawing from the 19th century puts an alternative perspective on the early type when viewing the hilt.

Gavin

Here is a comparison between Gavins kora (lt) and a kora from Artzi (rt), with the Indian kora drawing in the middle, with Gavins being described as Tibetan and Artzis described as being Central / North Indian. The Indian kora drawing has a different blade type and hilt. Gavins and Artzis kora seem to be of the same type.

Below is George stones kora description with Arials kora on the bottom right, which looks just like the kora that Stone describes as being from Nepal. Both of the kora that Stone describes as being from Tibet seem to have a different blade type fron the Nepal kora.

[dennee]

Yes, Stone appears to be the origin of the terminology. Without his catalog, the issue would probably never have been raised. But if he is the first word on the subject, shall we accept him as the final word? If he had been correct in all particulars throughout his catalog, I'd be more inclined in that direction.

Stone might be absolutely correct as to Tibet being the source of collection of that kora. As we have seen, there are or have been at least a few of that type documented in Tibet. But we have also seen that there were plenty of opportunities for them to get there through warfare and trade. So, we can't yet be positive of their being manufactured there.

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by dennee

Yes, Stone appears to be the origin of the terminology.............Stone might be absolutely correct as to Tibet being the source of collection of that kora. As we have seen, there are or have been at least a few of that type documented in Tibet.

Dennee, what are the documented examples again? As for Stone, he may have been right but that is not much to go on, were did he get his information from?

Notes on the Ethnology of Tibet: Based on the Collections in the United States National Museum, William Woodville Rockhill, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1895.

[Jim McDougall]

This discussion has become a fascinating look into these swords from Tibet and Nepal, which have clearly long remained relatively loose as far as general understanding of development and history of the forms.

Focusing on the issues concerning the classification by Stone of a distinct form of kora as being 'Tibetan', it would seem that is likely quite improperly classified as far as an accepted form regularly produced there or widely used by them.
As has been shown by Estcrh, the references from Rockhill (1895) which presumably is where he obtained his data are notably void of mention of a sword of kora type. So it is curious where he might have gotten this assumption of a 'Tibetan form of kora'.

What is most interesting on these are the longer, more slender blade, as well as the distinctively Indian (cf. temples, viragals and other early iconography from their regions) style of hilt. While the kora (proper) seems to characteristically have the rondel type hilt, which is much simplified of these early Indian temple type swords, the swept up lotus (?) type base and stacked stupa form pommel resemble the more complex forms and seem to traditionally recall those early Indian forms.

Most interesting is the 19th century image of a Sikh clearly depicted with one of these, and begs the question of why a Sikh would have a weapon of presumably 'Tibetan' form. We know that the Sikhs indeed did 'invade' Tibet in 1841 via the Dogra's (their Rajput vassals) ....however this would not necessarily account for a Sikh brandishing this weapon.

Perhaps we should look earlier into Nepali heritage, and the Gorkhas.
In 1769, the Bag Bharirav Temple at Kirtipur was sacked by the Gorkhas, though the rest of Kathmandu had already fallen. A photo of this was posted by Sirupate 11 Sep 2005 (unable to repost) of groups of kora taken from the defenders.......on the left is one of these type kora.

We know that Nepal and its heritage is primarily of Rajput descent, and that Tamils fled northward in earlier times as the Mughal Empire expanded. We know that the kora as a form likely evolved out of early Indian forward angled swords and probably has early evolution from the Deccan and Tamil regions. These trace as far as 9th century AD, if not earlier, and as far as their northward diffusion, their Gorkha presence seems represented as early as 16th century (one of Draya Shah founder of Gorkha Kingdom c. 1560).
The Bengali associations of the kora may be attributed to Tamil mercenaries who likely carried them north.

We know of the kora in traditional form as well from 8 examples in Copenhagen (from East India venture by Denmark at Tranquebar c.1620) which were catalogued 1674 and 1689 but of course collected earlier.
These seem to be a bit longer and narrower blade form (attached B&W photo).

So returning to these kora as a 'Tibetan' form. These seem well situated in Nepali and Gorkha context, and the image of a Sikh holding one is likely a 19th century account of either the Sikh conflict in 1841 or possibly this as a 'trophy' type weapon.

That these were not included in nor apparent in accounts of the Younghusband Expedition of 1903-1904 is certainly because there were probably no examples of these to be found. It would seem that either the unusual nature of this form of kora is most probably of traditional Indian style applied to examples in minority or border regions of Nepal and Tibet with unclear period of use. As these were, like many forms in these regions, in use for many generations, let alone centuries.

As well noted, weapon forms cannot typically be confined geographically, and cannot be classified to certain cultures or regions unless there is a profound preponderance of examples and production of them centered in that context.

As for George Cameron Stone, in the introduction to his monumental work, he clearly states, "..I am fully aware that this book is far from complete or perfect, but I trust that it may be an incentive to someone better qualified than I to write another in similar lines that will give more accurate information".

Thus, he set the course for those of us who would desperately try to follow, and indeed continue to try to pursue the history development and classification of weapon forms. I know that to me personally, he has always been a cornerstone and benchmark in this pursuit, which I have always believed is exactly what we all do here, on these pages.

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

This discussion has become a fascinating look into these swords from Tibet and Nepal, which have clearly long remained relatively loose as far as general understanding of development and history of the forms.

Jim, all very true, here is another image showing an Indian with a kora, this has been posted before but with a lower quality image.

Warriors and Musicians by a well in a Landscape, India, Mughal, circa 1660-80, a group of figures arranged in a semi-circle with a landscape or garden background and with a moody, slightly darkened atmosphere, is typical of several paintings executed in the second half of the seventeenth century. More specifically, a group of military men and musicians arranged in this manner was a subject painted twice by Payag in the mid-seventeenth century.