Tulwar-hilted kukri information

[sirupate]

Hello Jim,

Many thanks for your reply, Tulwar hilted kukri were certainley in use in Nepal before the Anglo Nepali war of 1814-1816, captured versions in 1806 came from Palpa in the Palpa war Nepal, pic below;

So I would say they were almost certainley in use in the 18th century in Nepal as well.
Tulwar had long been in use in Nepal before 18th century, so I would think it was more than likely that it was a natural Nepalese development, and these styles were quite common in Nepalese households at one time;



Cheers Simon

[Jim McDougall]

Hi Simon,
Now thats what I'm talkin' about! Excellent information and thank you for you great photos. Its been quite a while since we've had any discussions on these interesting hybrids, so Im really glad to see this thread, and especially glad to review the topic. It seems I have often heard of the incredible diversity of weaponry in Nepal, and friends I have known who visited there noted the longstanding presence of many Indian weapons, including the tulwar as you have observed.
Nice call, and the supported information very much appreciated...now when I find those notes I can get them updated

All the very best,
Jim

[sirupate]

Glad to be of help Jim, last time I was in Nepal, I was able to get interviews with some of Nepal's top historians whilst doing re-search for the book, I'm co-writing with Captain Indra Gurung, I was a very lucky man

[Gavin Nugent]

Originally Posted by sirupate

Hello Jim,

Many thanks for your reply, Tulwar hilted kukri were certainley in use in Nepal before the Anglo Nepali war of 1814-1816, captured versions in 1806 came from Palpa in the Palpa war Nepal, pic below;

So I would say they were almost certainley in use in the 18th century in Nepal as well.
Tulwar had long been in use in Nepal before 18th century, so I would think it was more than likely that it was a natural Nepalese development, and these styles were quite common in Nepalese households at one time;



Cheers Simon

Hi all,

Not my field of collecting but aren't all but the bottom image presented above Kora hilt Kukri not Tulwar? The bottom one is of Tulwar form but to my eyes it looks wrong, it is also expressed to me by a learned kukri collector that this one presents itself as more of a "put together" as the langet/cross guard is not in the correct place one would expect it to be on a piece made with care. I have seen another tulwar hilted kukri where the cross guard is central rather than offset as this one is, perhaps another can supply images of the way it should look, also please look at the original image in the first posting.

[sirupate]

From a Western definition point of view you are quite correct, however in Nepal they don't quite have those defintions on handle types and weapons as a whole, and that's pretty much the mind set I now have when talking about Nepalese weaponry.

However regarding Kora, in Nepal they are not called that, they are called Khuda, so perhaps it should be khuda style handle when refering to Nepalese weapons? If one wants to be definitave in a Western collector type way?

With the Bottom kukri, there were two main ways of attaching khuda/kora/tulwar style hilts for the not so rich, the way you see in the picture or to have them melted on, is the only way I can descibe it, as per examples in other museums outside of the National Museum in Nepal, which has the very best of the best kukri and swords left in Nepal.

Most Nepalese were not rich enough to have them done to the standard of high caste Rana', Shah's, Thapa's etc. and certainley throughout Nepalese history, kukri have been re-handled as and when necessary, with whatever was available, or desired at that time, in the cheapest possible way!

Cheers Simon

[Jim McDougall]

Good observation Gav, I hadnt noticed that langet way off!!!

More outstanding information Simon, and its really great to have some insight and informative input on these weapons. We have really missed the depth and esoterica that we used to get from John Powell, who steadily researched on these weapons with incredible tenacity. We seem to have lost touch with him several years ago, and I hope he is well wherever he is now.
I'm really interested to hear more about the book you are co-authoring, and look forward to new published material on these topics.

Excellent note on the local term used for the kukri, and this subject of terminology and semantics has come up often around here. It seems that not only are ethnographic weapons often called by terms that are distinct only in western collectors parlance, but terms locally can vary widely by region and language variation of course. Certain weapons in Indonesian regions, I have been told ,can almost be called by different terms almost village to village.

Then we have changes in terms from earlier times as dialects develop, the use of improper terms in contemporary narratives, transliteration of these earlier records, colloquial and metaphorical or poetical descriptions etc etc.

The detective work in linguistics is but one aspect that makes all of this so fascinating.

All the best,
Jim

[Gonzalo G]

Although, most of the tulwar handled khukris I have seen are from indian provenance. Since the khukris have an uncertain lineage as weapons and appeared coincidently around the same time of the rajput invasion to Nepal, I don´t how much of the design of the blade owes to the indian weapons. It has been said that the real authentic weapon from the gurkas is the kora, and not the khukri. I would like to read more opinions on this point. Mutual influences are evident, and tulwar handled khukris seems more natural development for an indian than for a nepalese. Besides, the hilts are usually the part of the sword which is "adapted" by the late owners to their cultural preferences. I also find relevant the comment from Freebooter.
Regards

[sirupate]

Hello Gonzalo,

Since the khukris have an uncertain lineage as weapons and appeared coincidently around the same time of the rajput invasion to Nepal

Actualy High caste Indians fled from the Moghul invasion, and ended up in Nepal, and these should not be confused with the original Khas who were Lamaistic Buddhists, before the Brahman got hold of them.

It has been said that the real authentic weapon from the gurkas is the kora, and not the khukri.

As stated in a previous post, its not called a kora in Nepal its called a khuda, the Gurkhas were never issued khuda, unless your are referring to the Gorkhas from Gorkha? Your statement happily neglets the fact that the kukri (khukuri) is the National weapon of Nepal, not the khuda. Also the view that khuda was the real authentic weapon of the Nepalese, is certainley not the view point held in Nepal!!

I don´t how much of the design of the blade owes to the indian weapons

This statement seems to completely neglet the potential origins of the many different tribes in Nepal that carried kukri, who were domiciled in Nepal long before the High cast Indians arrived, and also ignores where the Tulwar may have had its origins.

Cheers Simon

[Gonzalo G]

Originally Posted by sirupate

Hello Gonzalo,

Actualy High caste Indians fled from the Moghul invasion, and ended up in Nepal, and these should not be confused with the original Khas who were Lamaistic Buddhists, before the Brahman got hold of them.

As stated in a previous post, its not called a kora in Nepal its called a khuda, the Gurkhas were never issued khuda, unless your are referring to the Gorkhas from Gorkha? Your statement happily neglets the fact that the kukri (khukuri) is the National weapon of Nepal, not the khuda. Also the view that khuda was the real authentic weapon of the Nepalese, is certainley not the view point held in Nepal!!

This statement seems to completely neglet the potential origins of the many different tribes in Nepal that carried kukri, who were domiciled in Nepal long before the High cast Indians arrived, and also ignores where the Tulwar may have had its origins.

Cheers Simon

I am referring to the kora from the gorkhas (I missed a letter, big mistake). Still, most of the tulwar handled khukris I have seen (and I don´t pretend to spell the word 'khuri' in the most correct way, since it seems there are several) are indian. Maybe coincidence.

I am not interested in religious matters, but escentially in pointing the indian presence and the indian influences, which is a fact you can´t deny. Certainly, the tulwar handled khukris are NOT a pure expression of the Nepal culture, but the result of mutual influences. The rest is irrelevant to this matter. I do not discuss if 'kora' is, or is not, the most correct name (here and there, many terms are used only by occidental collectors, and to change this use would be an endless work), but I think we are not talking about names, but cultural influences and weapon origins. Tulwar handled khukris are, or the result of nepali influence over indian population, or the influence of the indian culture over the nepali weapons, isn't it?

I don't neglect anything, but a letter. As I understand,the khurki has an unknown lineage, and its origins are not clear to this moment, no matter it is the 'national weapon of Nepal'. There is a country in Africa which has an AK/47 in its flag, and it is a russian weapon. I mean, there is an historic reason for choosing the khukri as national weapon, but the original weapon the gorkhas carried at the beginning of the nepali state was the kora, and not the khukri, which is a latter weapon. There is not another more respresentative gorkha weapon in the conquest of this territory, and more original in relation with this country. Maybe for this reason the tulwar handled koras are more scarce, if there is any (I personally never saw one), no matter all the indian influences.

Probably the khukri has more extensive use among all the ethnic groups from Nepal, and in this measure it is more representative of this political unity, but the point is irrelevant to my statements: that the kora is more representative from the gorkha, and that the khukri has an uncertain lineage, and probably reflects some indian influences. It is not a definitive statement, it is only a point which dreserves some discussion, in my opinion, as cultural influences have to be taken on account. For above all the diversity of the ethnic groups existing in actual Nepal since long time ago, no one seems to have developed the khukri before the arrival of the indians. Or is it?

[spiral]

Originally Posted by sirupate

From a Western definition point of view you are quite correct, however in Nepal they don't quite have those defintions on handle types and weapons as a whole, and that's pretty much the mind set I now have when talking about Nepalese weaponry.

However regarding Kora, in Nepal they are not called that, they are called Khuda, so perhaps it should be khuda style handle when refering to Nepalese weapons? If one wants to be definitave in a Western collector type way?

Originally Posted by sirupate

As stated in a previous post, its not called a kora in Nepal its called a khuda,
Cheers Simon

Originally Posted by sirupate

Khuda/Khunda is pronounced Coodah, the c as in coup, I don't know how the Kora pronunciation came about? Unless that is how its spelt or pronounced in India?

That’s strange, most people we met in Nepal 4 years ago were very aware of aware of differences between kora,tulwar,shamshir , their grips &blade shapes etc.as I recall. They just didn’t bother to define kukri in the sort of detail western collectors & dealers do.

Kora or Khora are acceptable terms to me, as are khuda & khonra as are the 15 or so spellings of khukri there all correct.. After all we are not writing in Sanscrit or Devangari etc.

I would say Its probably Col.Kirkatrik who introduced the spellings khora & indeed Khookeri to the west when his work was published in 1811}.{{By William Miller of London,}
{About his mission to Nepal in 1793} He also pointed out that at that time there were 8 or 9 main languages in Nepal which may explain some people beliving khuda or Khunda to be correct at Khora or Khora incorrect.


Hope that helps a little towards finding about a few more definitive facts about these great swords of the Himalayas & where misunderstandings about British & Nepali history & translations seem to have occurred.

Spiral

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by Gonzalo G

Although, most of the tulwar handled khukris I have seen are from indian provenance. Since the khukris have an uncertain lineage as weapons and appeared coincidently around the same time of the rajput invasion to Nepal, I don´t how much of the design of the blade owes to the indian weapons. It has been said that the real authentic weapon from the gurkas is the kora, and not the khukri. I would like to read more opinions on this point. Mutual influences are evident, and tulwar handled khukris seems more natural development for an indian than for a nepalese. Besides, the hilts are usually the part of the sword which is "adapted" by the late owners to their cultural preferences. I also find relevant the comment from Freebooter.
Regards

Excellent observations Gonzalo!!! I am constantly amazed by the scope and diversity of your interests and knowledge on so many fields of weapons.
I know that it is great to have discussions like this where I can learn more on weapons where I seem to have had rather complacent understanding that is clearly not as well founded as I thought.

Your comments, and the reinforcing qualifications noted by Simon are certainly putting these Nepalese weapons in perspective. I have always been under the impression that the kukri probably derived indirectly from the ancient kopis of the Greeks via a number of early weapons in India. I think these are reflected in varying degree in Indian iconography such as found in Ajanta.

Simon, I am really with Gav and Gonzalo on learning more about the kora and the kukri and thier origins and hope you can share more here of your research as possible, as I know it is part of work in progress. I think that the term 'khuda' easily was transliterated into 'kora' to the western ear because of the way it is likely pronounced. Its amazing how an almost undetectable twist in the tongue or tonal inflection can change entire words and meanings in so many cases.

I would like to know about the shape of the kora blade tip and its dual concave curves, and what it might represent.
Also, I think you note an important point....the 'Gurkhas' were military units who served with British forces with great valor, while the Gorkhas were of course distinct tribes in regions of Nepal, many of whom served in these units. In research some time ago, it seems that Brian Farwell (author of "The Gurkhas") mentioned that there were instances of these tough warriors using 'khuda' despite the kukri being the weapon of standard use and issue.

All best regards,
Jim

[spiral]

In my expierience of the Nepal national museam, collecters & dealers there, almost evry one recognises the differance between a khuda or kora handle & those of a tulwar.

I have numerous photos on an old hard drive i can use to illustrate that tulwar & kora {or khuda.} have had different handles from each other for centuries in Nepal. Ill dig them out in a week or two.

The kukri & the Kora are both regarded as Nepali national weapons in Nepal.

The kukri that started this thread was often made for tourists in 1920s & 30s, most tourists in India at that time were members of British Indian army or British Indian civil service.

Many soldiers , civil servants, entrenapurs & indeed Officers brought back tourist pieces of many types for wall decoration even up to & after ww2.

Spiral

[Gonzalo G]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Your comments, and the reinforcing qualifications noted by Simon are certainly putting these Nepalese weapons in perspective. I have always been under the impression that the kukri probably derived indirectly from the ancient kopis of the Greeks via a number of early weapons in India. I think these are reflected in varying degree in Indian iconography such as found in Ajanta.

Jim, I am very interested in the khukris. My first post here was related to one of my own. There is a book from Fernando Quesada Sanz, La Falcata, Arma y Símbolo, in which an analysis is made about the use of the term 'kopis' in the ancient sources. It demostrates that the use of this term is ambiguos and many times is referred to a different kind of weapons. Anyway, the use of the kopis seems not to be much extended in the greek armies, and there is but a few icinographic representations from this period. In the other hand, Alexander only arrived to the Indus, or not far from there, and its passing seems ephimeral. Other thing is the hellenistic presence in northern part of India, in Central Asia, but the influence shuould be seen otherwise in the indian vicinity of this area. Ajanta is far from there, and I never saw this representation to judge the similarities, have you? Have any in this forum? Can we see it to judge? All we have in this respect, is the statement of a 19th Century author pretending to establish the origin of this weapon on an european one. Based only in the use of a down curved blade, which maybe (and I don't make a definitive statement, because it cannot be done to this moment) had a more older african use, if not origin. I seriouly doubt something as simple as a down curved blade has to have only one origin, as it was a unique and oustanding invention.

As with the rest of the european 'influences' we talked about in the past, we need more clear evidences to state a probable cause (not only possible, but probable) of their existence, and sometimes, in the absence of material proof, we have to use the historical context of the weapons studied and dig deep in the cultures. It is far more academic (and interesting) than ID some known type of weapon and put it in a timeframe. I don't deny the existence of this influences, but I think we have to restraint fantasy and speculation to frame this discussions in the strict facts of history and archaeology, if we pretend to be serious students of this kind of weapons. And I know you like the historical analysis.

I only have seen the sculptoric images of down curved swords in the book from J. Paul, Traditional Weapons of India. They come from South India, and they do not look in anyway reminiscent of a kopis, not even in the form of the down curved blade, but in the fact that is down curved. It seems that down curved blades are originally often related to agricultural work and they could be independently developed in several places. And, if we accept the aryan theory, we can also speculate if this kind of weapon or tool was originally carried by this group, which supposedly conquered part of India.

I expect not to be wandering (too much), and I apology in advance for my mistakes in spelling.

My best regards

Gonzalo

[Gavin Nugent]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Good observation Gav, I hadnt noticed that langet way off!!!

Hi Jim,

I cannot claim full credit for observation, I had noticed it and thought it odd when initially reading this posting but through conversations with another collector about this thread, it reinforced my views.

Originally Posted by sirupate

This statement seems to completely neglet the potential origins of the many different tribes in Nepal that carried kukri, who were domiciled in Nepal long before the High cast Indians arrived, and also ignores where the Tulwar may have had its origins.

Hi Simon,

Could you please elaborate on this history of the possible kukri origins and that of the Kora if it is also from this point in time?
I would also like to know more on the large Kora hilted kukri's you presented originally and their origins as they are indeed Kora hilted not tulwar hilted.


Gav