A Strange Discussion on Indian Weapons

Mercenary · 7th November 2018, 12:55 PM

If we do not discuss matters of faith (this is not a religious forum I hope?), let me summarize:
1. We do not have evidences of using term "zirah bouk" in real history.
2. We do not have writting sources mentioned the term.
3. The term is absent in Urdu, the language of the military camps of Persian-speaking armies, in which most military and weapon terms were Persian-speaking.
4. R.Elgood in the Glossary where for example in the article about katar he quoted ALL sources he had known but in the article about zirah bouk he quoted nothing at all. Maybe because he had not heard and read about it during his 30+ years (God bless him, we need more good pictures) travelling into India?
5. We do not have any information about using zirah bouk against armour.
6. We know nothing if it possible technically and physically to pierce with zirah bouk not a mail but... half inch wooden plank.

We know nothing at all... but we write a lot and defiantly argue.

Jim McDougall · 7th November 2018, 03:35 PM

Interesting rebuttal, so I think at this impasse the discussion has reached its level of useful exchange. I have very much enjoyed the information which has been exchanged since reopening this old thread, and from all of this we can see where continued research might present better understanding of the issues at hand in resolving these questions. Thank you.

Ian · 7th November 2018, 09:21 PM

Jim has suggested, very reasonably, that the present discussion has reached an impasse. The original title of this thread seems very apt. An odd recent discussion indeed.

Unless someone has a different line of discussion, it’s time to let this thread return to the archives.

Ian

Jens Nordlunde · 7th November 2018, 09:39 PM

Thank you Ian.
Jens

Victrix · 7th November 2018, 10:06 PM

And just when we had Comrade Lenin on-line...

ariel · 11th November 2018, 04:28 AM

This is not yet another focused note on katars, Zirah Bouks and the armor.
Just some musings on the origins of some terminology mentioned in this thread.

Let’s trace the word “ ordynka”, a Tatar/ Polish saber.
The entire word as we know it, is Polish and can be roughly translated as “ of Orda origin” .
The word “orda” is Turkic, meaning Army. In Turkey proper it sounds orta: remember different services of the Janissary corps ( not to confuse with corpse!)

In Slavic languages it was written and pronounced as ... you guess: Orda, but in Western Europe it mutated into Horde , and somehow started to define a very large, wild, barbaric and very malicious warlike force. Which is historically incorrect, because the original Orda encountered by the West Europeans, I.e. the Mongol army, was no less well-organized and disciplined than the Roman or Victorian one. The Orda that subjugated Russia and went as far as the Adriatic coast was the so-called Golden Horde, part of Ulus Juchi, I.e. Juchi’s Fiefdom..
It included the Crimea and nearby areas of the Ukraine, and Crimean Khans regularly invaded Russian dukedoms and occasionally served for the Polish-Lithuanian kingdom. Part of them even settled in what now is Belarus, Lithuania and Poland proper . From them, their saber came to the Polish armamentarium and acquired the Polish name. As a matter of fact Russian language contains enormous number of Tatar words and their derivatives, the patrimony of peacefully living under the so-called “Mongol yoke” for more than 3 centuries.

But the Mongolian influence spread far away in a different direction , with the Babur invasion into the NW India. Originally, the language of it was called Hindustani. Then, the division between the Muslim ( largely ethnic Turkic Uzbek) and the Hindu populations divided it into Hindi and Urdu . The only difference between them is the alphabet, with NW Muslim India ( now largely Pakistan) adopting Perso-Arabic one, while the rest largely stuck with Sanskritic one. And the name of the NW Hindustani became Urdu: from the same Proto-Uzbek Turkic dialect ( Chagatai language) that gave us the word Orda: army language. In fact, both speaking Hindi and Urdu are virtually identical: my Indian and Pakistani colleagues freely speak to each other without any problems. But Urdu brought in some Persianized and Chagatai words and has several specific ( although barely perceptible) sounds. This is why Urdu alphabet contains 39 basic letters ( and additional 19 secondary ones), whereas Arabic manages quite nicely with only 28 and Persian with 32.

This is how Mongol army became responsible for the languages spreading from Eastern Europe to the Indian subcontinent. Not a miracle : about 10% of men currently living in what used to be the mighty Mongol Empire have the genetic imprint of a single progenitor. Likely, Chingiz Khan himself. The guy was rather busy:-) And just to think of it: no Viagra.

7th November 2018, 12:55 PM	#1
Mercenary Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Moscow, Russia Posts: 428	If we do not discuss matters of faith (this is not a religious forum I hope?), let me summarize: 1. We do not have evidences of using term "zirah bouk" in real history. 2. We do not have writting sources mentioned the term. 3. The term is absent in Urdu, the language of the military camps of Persian-speaking armies, in which most military and weapon terms were Persian-speaking. 4. R.Elgood in the Glossary where for example in the article about katar he quoted ALL sources he had known but in the article about zirah bouk he quoted nothing at all. Maybe because he had not heard and read about it during his 30+ years (God bless him, we need more good pictures) travelling into India? 5. We do not have any information about using zirah bouk against armour. 6. We know nothing if it possible technically and physically to pierce with zirah bouk not a mail but... half inch wooden plank. We know nothing at all... but we write a lot and defiantly argue. Last edited by Robert; 7th January 2019 at 06:41 PM.

7th November 2018, 09:21 PM	#3
Ian Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Aussie Bush Posts: 4,399	Enough said for now ... Jim has suggested, very reasonably, that the present discussion has reached an impasse. The original title of this thread seems very apt. An odd recent discussion indeed. Unless someone has a different line of discussion, it’s time to let this thread return to the archives. Ian

7th November 2018, 03:35 PM	#2
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,295	Interesting rebuttal, so I think at this impasse the discussion has reached its level of useful exchange. I have very much enjoyed the information which has been exchanged since reopening this old thread, and from all of this we can see where continued research might present better understanding of the issues at hand in resolving these questions. Thank you.

7th November 2018, 09:39 PM	#4
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	Thank you Ian. Jens

7th November 2018, 10:06 PM	#5
Victrix Member Join Date: Apr 2017 Location: Sweden Posts: 755	And just when we had Comrade Lenin on-line...

11th November 2018, 04:28 AM	#6
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	This is not yet another focused note on katars, Zirah Bouks and the armor. Just some musings on the origins of some terminology mentioned in this thread. Let’s trace the word “ ordynka”, a Tatar/ Polish saber. The entire word as we know it, is Polish and can be roughly translated as “ of Orda origin” . The word “orda” is Turkic, meaning Army. In Turkey proper it sounds orta: remember different services of the Janissary corps ( not to confuse with corpse!) In Slavic languages it was written and pronounced as ... you guess: Orda, but in Western Europe it mutated into Horde , and somehow started to define a very large, wild, barbaric and very malicious warlike force. Which is historically incorrect, because the original Orda encountered by the West Europeans, I.e. the Mongol army, was no less well-organized and disciplined than the Roman or Victorian one. The Orda that subjugated Russia and went as far as the Adriatic coast was the so-called Golden Horde, part of Ulus Juchi, I.e. Juchi’s Fiefdom.. It included the Crimea and nearby areas of the Ukraine, and Crimean Khans regularly invaded Russian dukedoms and occasionally served for the Polish-Lithuanian kingdom. Part of them even settled in what now is Belarus, Lithuania and Poland proper . From them, their saber came to the Polish armamentarium and acquired the Polish name. As a matter of fact Russian language contains enormous number of Tatar words and their derivatives, the patrimony of peacefully living under the so-called “Mongol yoke” for more than 3 centuries. But the Mongolian influence spread far away in a different direction , with the Babur invasion into the NW India. Originally, the language of it was called Hindustani. Then, the division between the Muslim ( largely ethnic Turkic Uzbek) and the Hindu populations divided it into Hindi and Urdu . The only difference between them is the alphabet, with NW Muslim India ( now largely Pakistan) adopting Perso-Arabic one, while the rest largely stuck with Sanskritic one. And the name of the NW Hindustani became Urdu: from the same Proto-Uzbek Turkic dialect ( Chagatai language) that gave us the word Orda: army language. In fact, both speaking Hindi and Urdu are virtually identical: my Indian and Pakistani colleagues freely speak to each other without any problems. But Urdu brought in some Persianized and Chagatai words and has several specific ( although barely perceptible) sounds. This is why Urdu alphabet contains 39 basic letters ( and additional 19 secondary ones), whereas Arabic manages quite nicely with only 28 and Persian with 32. This is how Mongol army became responsible for the languages spreading from Eastern Europe to the Indian subcontinent. Not a miracle : about 10% of men currently living in what used to be the mighty Mongol Empire have the genetic imprint of a single progenitor. Likely, Chingiz Khan himself. The guy was rather busy:-) And just to think of it: no Viagra.