Vasily Vereshchagin "Indian poem"

[mahratt]

Many Russian in the 19th century interested in India. They traveled in India, studied it, drew pictures. One of them is Vasily Vereshchagin - known Russian artist.

In 2014, in India, in New Delhi published a book in English "Indian poem", which tells about the journey Vereshchagin in India and published him paintings.

[mahratt]

The painting Vereshchagin "Entrance Prince of Wales in Jaipur in 1876", which is stored in the Victoria Memorial in Calcutta - the biggest in India artistic canvas painted in oil.

[Ren Ren]

One of them is Vasily Vereshchagin - known Russian artist.


Well known Russian artist :)

Exept Russia, Vasily Vasilievich Vereshchagin created in France, Germany, United States and other.
Many years he traveled in Balkan countries, Central Asia, China, Middle East, India, Tibet, USA, Japan, collected very well collection of arms and armor.

[estcrh]

The painting Vereshchagin "Entrance Prince of Wales in Jaipur in 1876", which is stored in the Victoria Memorial in Calcutta - the biggest in India artistic canvas painted in oil.

Despite being the third largest painting in the world of its type I can not find a large image of it.

The state entry of King Edward VII, then prince of Wales, into Jaipur in 1876, painted by Russian artist Veretchagin.

The richly caparisoned elephants advancing majestically with horses and footmen in a procession passing the Amber Chowpar in Jaipur make a composition of very great beauty. The Prince of Wales and Maharaja Ram Singh of Jaipur are seated on the first elephant. Behind them on the same elephant is Sir Alfred Lyall, the political Agent of Rajputana at the time. Sir Henry Bartle Edward Frere who accompanied the Prince of Wales in his Indian tour is on the next elephant and General Sam Brown is on the third.

Two other elephants behind these carry members of the Prince's personal staff as well as some officials of the Jaipur State. Measuring 274 inches by 196. this painting is known to be the largest in oils in India and the third largest in this medium in the world. It was originally the property of Edward Malley of New Haven, U.S.A. from whom it was acquired by the Maharaja of Jaipur and presented to the Victoria Memorial in 1905.

[estcrh]

Many Russian in the 19th century interested in India. They traveled in India, studied it, drew pictures. One of them is Vasily Vereshchagin - known Russian artist.

In 2014, in India, in New Delhi published a book in English "Indian poem", which tells about the journey Vereshchagin in India and published him paintings.

Vasily Vereshchagin: horrors of war through artist’s eyes
17 October 2011 AJAY KAMALAKARAN

Vasily Vereshchagin depicted war atrocities in his paintings for many years, and even his own life tragically ended during a Russo-Japanese war.

When it comes to Russian painters who had a fascination for India, the first name that comes to most people’s minds is Nicholas Roerich, an artist and philosopher who left an indelible mark in both India and Russia with his paintings and books. There was, however, another great Russian artist and traveller, who made a valuable contribution to India by chronicling the country under British Rule: Vasily Vasilevich Vereshchagin.

Born into an aristocratic family in Cherepovets (in what is now the Vologda Region) in 1842, Vereshchagin graduated from the Naval Cadet Corps in St Petersburg but he had a strong inclination towards the fine arts. He then enrolled in the Imperial Academy of Arts (now the St Petersburg Academy of Arts), a school that promoted the neo-classical style and technique. However, a disdain for fixed methods and techniques put him out of favour with many of his teachers and he even denounced methods taught to him in Paris by Jean-Leon Gerome.

The Russian artist’s international legacy is that of a military painter. He had his first taste of war at the age of 26 when he accompanied the Russian Army, under General Konstantin Kaufman on an expedition to modern day Uzbekistan. He was decorated with the Cross of St George for bravery shown during the siege of Samarkand. His future paintings were greatly influenced by what he witnessed during the wars. In what was one of his most graphic paintings, ‘The Apotheosis of War,’ hundreds of skulls are put on top of another on a hill. Although, Vereshchagin was involved in military campaigns, his words of dedication after painting the ‘Apotheosis’ smack of irony and almost sound like a mark of protest against war: “to all conquerors, past, present and to come.”

It was in 1876 that the Russian painter first came to India, a country that just two decades earlier fought a war of independence against Czarist Russia’s rivals, the British Empire. He painted several illustrations of the British Rule of India, the most famous of those being “The State Procession of the Prince of Wales into Jaipur.” This enormous painting, which is now inside Calcutta’s Iconic Victoria Memorial, is the third largest painting in the world. While one may be mistaken into believing that Vereshchagin glorified the British Raj, the painting is more like a modern-day photograph documenting an event. In fact, Vereshchagin’s illustrations of the Raj demonstrated a strong dislike for British rule in India.

The British looked at Vereshchagin with suspicion and were very often critical of his work. The painter specialised in illustrations from several wars, including the Russo-Turkish War of 1877-88. His painting of the 1857 Indian War of Independence titled ‘Blowing from Guns in British India,’ drew flak from the British. The painting showed Indian soldiers getting executed by being tied to gun barrels but the uniforms worn by the British officers suggested that these acts were being carried out in the 1880s. The Russian painter insisted that the British were likely to carry out similar executions if there was another war of independence.

Vereshchagin was one of the first painters to depict the cultural continuity from Central Asia into northern India. The paintings show the similarities in architectural styles in mausoleums and monuments from Samarkand and Bukhara to those around Agra. This month, a Sotheby’s auction managed to sell Vereshchagin’s 1876 oil on canvas painting of the Taj Mahal for $3.7 million to an anonymous buyer. Looking at the masterpiece, it’s hard to believe that there was a time in India, when the Yamuna River was as clean and clear as portrayed in the painting. One can also imagine how unpolluted Agra was in the 19th century, when admiring the blue skies in Vereshchagin’s illustration of the Moti Masjid (Pearl Mosque) in the Agra Fort.

The Russian painter saw many places in India during his two trips. It remains a mystery where the “Adelnur” from his ‘Brahman Temple from Adelnur’ is. Another painting titled “Evening at the Lake, Raj Nagar” shows a marble embankment with bas reliefs in Udaipur at a time when the town was nowhere close to being the tourist magnet that it is in the 21st century. Vereshchagin also painted several portraits of Indians covering a diverse range of people including nomadic Laddakhis, a Muslim fakir, a bania (trader) in Bombay and some people that dressed well enough to look like members of the aristocracy.

Like Nicholas Roerich, Vereshchagin was enamoured by the beauty of the Himalayas and the Tibetan plateau. This writer once saw a pair of phenomenal paintings by the military artist at Moscow’s Tretyakov Gallery titled ‘Glacier on the Road from Kashmir to Laddakh’ and ‘Snows of the Himalayas.’ Vereshchagin even managed to visit Sikkim, when it was an isolated and independent kingdom. Looking at his range of paintings, it’s obvious that the Russian painter and traveller saw more of India in the 19th century than many Indians would in the 21st century.


Despite Vereshchagin’s beautiful illustrations of India, his legacy remains that of a military artist, who witnessed and documented wars. Besides ‘Apotheosis’ and ‘Blowing from Guns of British India,’ the Russian painter drew criticism for his painting of the execution of members of the Nihilist movement in St Petersburg. Vereshchagin moved to the Russian Far East and witnessed both the Russo-Japanese War and Russia’s advances into Manchuria.

Despite surviving a variety of wars that stretched from the Russo-Turkish War to the American campaign in the Philippines, it was on board a Russian naval ship that Vereshchagin died. While accompanying Russian Admiral Stepan Makarov, the Russian artist died when the Petropavlovsk struck two mines and sank off Port Arthur in 1904.

More than a century after his death, no single artist, photographer or journalist has come anywhere close to documenting wars and conflicts the way Vasily Vereshchagin did. Yet, the sheer diversity of his work is what really sets Vereshchagin apart from most artists of any epoch.

[mahratt]

more India

[Saracen]

The painting Vereshchagin "Entrance Prince of Wales in Jaipur in 1876"

Подборка старых фото об этом событии:
A selection of old photos of the event:

http://humus.livejournal.com/4659165.html
http://humus.livejournal.com/4669076.html
http://humus.livejournal.com/4679211.html
http://humus.livejournal.com/4688978.html

[ariel]

The story of Vereshchagin's death along with Admiral Makarov, the only competent Russian naval commander at the time, was a death knell for the Russian Navy. Coupled with humiliating and totally disproportional losses at the Battle of Tsushima ( Russians lost all of their 11 battleships, 4 of 8 cruisers and 6 of 9 destroyers against the Japanese loss of 3 torpedo boats) this left Port Artur totally undefended.

General Kuropatkin, the commander of the Russian Ground Forces was equally incompetent and lost one battle after another.

After Port Arthur surrender, he went into deep depression. To lift his spirits, Tsar Nicolas II presented him with a gorgeous chess set, made by Faberge of rare stones, gold and silver. It had carved signatures of Tsar himself, as well as those of Kuropatkin's fellow generals.

How do I know it?

A good acquaintance of mine is the #1 chess collector in the world, and he bought this set from a London dealer BEFORE it was put on the market. He just pulled out his check book, wrote the name of the dealer, signed it and only then asked " How much?" I never asked what was the number :-)

I spent some time in front of a custom glass cabinet, marveling at the incredible sight.

[mahratt]

The story of Vereshchagin's death along with Admiral Makarov, the only competent Russian naval commander at the time, was a death knell for the Russian Navy. Coupled with humiliating and totally disproportional losses at the Battle of Tsushima ( Russians lost all of their 11 battleships, 4 of 8 cruisers and 6 of 9 destroyers against the Japanese loss of 3 torpedo boats) this left Port Artur totally undefended.

General Kuropatkin, the commander of the Russian Ground Forces was equally incompetent and lost one battle after another.

After Port Arthur surrender, he went into deep depression. To lift his spirits, Tsar Nicolas II presented him with a gorgeous chess set, made by Faberge of rare stones, gold and silver. It had carved signatures of Tsar himself, as well as those of Kuropatkin's fellow generals.

How do I know it?

A good acquaintance of mine is the #1 chess collector in the world, and he bought this set from a London dealer BEFORE it was put on the market. He just pulled out his check book, wrote the name of the dealer, signed it and only then asked " How much?" I never asked what was the number :-)

I spent some time in front of a custom glass cabinet, marveling at the incredible sight.

Ariel, the topic - the artistic creativity Vereshchagin. In particular, his paintings of India. I do not understand your post. If you want to talk about the death of Vasily Vereshchagin - was enough the first half of your first phrase.

If you touch the story, you're right, Ariel. Tsushima - it is the greatest shame of the Russian Navy. It can be likened to Pearl Harbor for the US Navy.
But, You probably do not understand. This issue is not about the history of Russia and the history of the Russian Navy. Your message did not fit the topic. I ask the moderators to remove Ariel message №7 and my message №8.

[David]

Ariel, the topic - the artistic creativity Vereshchagin. In particular, his paintings of India. I do not understand your post. If you want to talk about the death of Vasily Vereshchagin - was enough the first half of your first phrase.
That's interesting Dmitriy, but you know, this is the Ethnographic Arms & Armor Forum, not Art Forum. I do see one painting that you posted that clearly shows arms and armor that we can discuss. One. I am willing to bet that Vereshchagin may have painted quite a few others worthy of discussion here as he is specifically known for his paintings that depict war. Show us those and discuss ethnographic weapons. That is what we do here. We don't discuss artistic creativity of an artist for art's sake. So one might question whether or not your initial post is even on topic for this forum. If you would like to talk about Vereshchagin's work in context to this forum please show us more images of weapons, not palaces, royals on horse and elephant back and street beggars.
:confused: :shrug:

[mahratt]

Pictures Vereshchagin. Central Asia.

[mahratt]

That's interesting Dmitriy, but you know, this is the Ethnographic Arms & Armor Forum, not Art Forum.

Thanks for the reply David. Probably Ariel message fits the theme of the Ethnographic Arms & Armor Forum. In contrast to the images that I show here. Thanks for clarifying.

[mahratt]

Picture, photo, Shamshir

[Robert]

Ariel, one week ban for baiting.

Mahratt, one week ban for taking the bait.

As you both have been warned multiple times the first PM I receive from either of you complaining about this will earn you a month in moderation as well.

Robert

[Ren Ren]

Picture, photo, Shamshir
Vereshchagin is absolutely correct in detail. This is his personal style.

[mahratt]

Turkestan

[mahratt]

Turkestan

[ariel]

Vereshchagin's pictures reflected fascination of the 19th century Western artists with the "mysterious Orient": he was a Russian Gerome. Both painted Muslim soldiers carrying exotic weapons and dressed in exotic garb. In the absense of photography their paintings are our best source of iconographic information, although their complete veracity cannot be vouched for. Orientalism was heavily Romantic. Studio portraits and use of props were customary. One can only wonder how Central Asian nomads, Egyptian soldiers or Ottoman bashibouzuks managed all wear impeccably clean clothes of heavily saturated colors not faded by the unrelenting sunlight and not given to dirt, dust, wear and tear.

[mahratt]

Vereshchagin's pictures reflected fascination of the 19th century Western artists with the "mysterious Orient": he was a Russian Gerome. Both painted Muslim soldiers carrying exotic weapons and dressed in exotic garb. In the absense of photography their paintings are our best source of iconographic information, although their complete veracity cannot be vouched for. Orientalism was heavily Romantic. Studio portraits and use of props were customary. One can only wonder how Central Asian nomads, Egyptian soldiers or Ottoman bashibouzuks managed all wear impeccably clean clothes of heavily saturated colors not faded by the unrelenting sunlight and not given to dirt, dust, wear and tear.

Vereshchagin was not an artist who paints in the studio. He was a direct participant in the events that depict. Of course, like any talented artist, he could embellish some type, which created on the canvas.

The Russian artist’s international legacy is that of a military painter. He had his first taste of war at the age of 26 when he accompanied the Russian Army, under General Konstantin Kaufman on an expedition to modern day Uzbekistan. He was decorated with the Cross of St George for bravery shown during the siege of Samarkand. His future paintings were greatly influenced by what he witnessed during the wars.

Despite Vereshchagin’s beautiful illustrations of India, his legacy remains that of a military artist, who witnessed and documented wars.

More than a century after his death, no single artist, photographer or journalist has come anywhere close to documenting wars and conflicts the way Vasily Vereshchagin did.

But if someone does not have enough dust, dirt and torn clothes, it is known that the Vereshchagin portrayed and this too (because he was trying to show the reality):

[estcrh]

Vereshchagin's pictures reflected fascination of the 19th century Western artists with the "mysterious Orient": he was a Russian Gerome. Both painted Muslim soldiers carrying exotic weapons and dressed in exotic garb. In the absense of photography their paintings are our best source of iconographic information, although their complete veracity cannot be vouched for. Orientalism was heavily Romantic. Studio portraits and use of props were customary. One can only wonder how Central Asian nomads, Egyptian soldiers or Ottoman bashibouzuks managed all wear impeccably clean clothes of heavily saturated colors not faded by the unrelenting sunlight and not given to dirt, dust, wear and tear.

Ariel, you can not simply group all painters from that time period together as "orientalist" as a way to discredit the accuracy of their paintings, although I do see this happening a lot. Many painters visited the areas they painted, some for extended periods of time and they took great pride in factually painting what they saw, while others may have not been so detailed, you have to examine the painting individually before making judgements.

As for the often seen (but not always) paintings of clean, colorful clothing and the people wearing them, I have wondered about that myself, especially when you see someone wearing all white, but photographs from the same time periods can show that this was not just imagination.

Emir Seyyid Mir Mohammed Alim Khan, the Emir of Bukhara, seated holding a sword in Bukhara, (present-day Uzbekistan), ca. 1910, early original color photograph.

[ariel]

Vereshchagin was not an artist who paints in the studio. He was a direct participant in the events that depict. :
Emir Seyyid Mir Mohammed Alim Khan, the Emir of Bukhara, seated holding a sword in Bukhara, (present-day Uzbekistan), ca. 1910, early original color photograph.:

Come on, guys!

This is art, let's not forget it.


The emir from the Prokudin-Gorski's photograph was posing for a color photo-portrait. Of course, he was asked to wear his most colorful khalat ( being rich did not hurt him, either)

And of course, Vereshchagin painted in the studio. Are we to believe that he set his easel right in front of the Turkomans cutting off human heads? Or that he stood behind the Turkoman horde about to annihilate a small band of Russian soldiers?

Or are we to believe that Ingres was given free access to the harem to paint sultan's naked concubines?

There is no doubt that Vereshchagin tried to be as close to the truth as possible, but so was Rembrandt , whose Samson was blinded with a... Balinese keris:-)

[mahratt]

Come on, guys!

This is art, let's not forget it.

The emir from the Prokudin-Gorski's photograph was posing for a color photo-portrait. Of course, he was asked to wear his most colorful khalat ( being rich did not hurt him, either)

And of course, Vereshchagin painted in the studio. Are we to believe that he set his easel right in front of the Turkomans cutting off human heads? Or that he stood behind the Turkoman horde about to annihilate a small band of Russian soldiers?

Or are we to believe that Ingres was given free access to the harem to paint sultan's naked concubines?

There is no doubt that Vereshchagin tried to be as close to the truth as possible, but so was Rembrandt , whose Samson was blinded with a... Balinese keris:-)

We know that Vereshchagin made sketches from nature. Of course, he did not paint during battles. At this time, it is as an ordinary soldier, fought in the ranks of his comrades. This is, in the memoirs of his contemporaries.

But he saw Russian soldiers, the inhabitants of Bukhara and battles. And show us the battles and other terrible pictures helped his memory.

Vereshchagin saw all that and then depict. He was at the center of these developments. And not in a quiet studio ... Therefore, his paintings so accurate in detail. Maybe you point out errors in the pictures Vereshchagin? Such like Balinese keris Rembrandt?

Thank you in advance.

[mahratt]

Bukhara Sarbaz.

[Jim McDougall]

Mahratt, these works you are posting are breathtaking! and the way you place corresponding photos reveal how amazingly close these portrayals are to the traditional styles and weaponry.
Naturally artists painted in studios, but most artists used what are known as 'studys', which are sketches drawn with notes from live and real time situations. From these they crafted their finished works.

Rembrandt, mentioned a number of times here, actually had a considerable and eclectic collection of arms and antiquities from which he drew many of his entries in his paintings. This is of course how the keris came into his Biblical theme painting, as artictic license prevailed.

In many cases, artists used their earlier works or sometimes the work of other artists as studies in varying degree for figures in their work. I have seen great discussions of this in references on 'historical detection' which is essentially forensic type art study.

Art itself is a valuable medium for the comprehensive study of arms (which despite controversial views are also forms of art) and whether the work contains actual weapons or not. Often there are nuanced clues in the figures or materials represented which are telling in many aspects of the motif, style and decoration .

Thank you gentlemen for continuing this most interesting discussion, and presenting the great perspectives helping us better appreciate the topic overall.

[mahratt]

Many thank for the right words, Jim!

[estcrh]

Come on, guys!

This is art, let's not forget it.


The emir from the Prokudin-Gorski's photograph was posing for a color photo-portrait. Of course, he was asked to wear his most colorful khalat ( being rich did not hurt him, either)

And of course, Vereshchagin painted in the studio. Are we to believe that he set his easel right in front of the Turkomans cutting off human heads? Or that he stood behind the Turkoman horde about to annihilate a small band of Russian soldiers?

Or are we to believe that Ingres was given free access to the harem to paint sultan's naked concubines?

There is no doubt that Vereshchagin tried to be as close to the truth as possible, but so was Rembrandt , whose Samson was blinded with a... Balinese keris:-)

Supposedly Eugene Delacroix was allowed access to an Algerian household during a 3 month North African journey, he was said to have actually been allowed to view the female household/harem, something most painters had to imagine or paint from discriptions told to them. He is said to have filled sketch books with drawings of what he saw during his travels.

Along with sketches made while visiting foreign countries some painters did in fact use photographs to capture the memories of what they saw.


Photography makes it possible to incorporate elements in a painting that would be impossible to do otherwise. Certain fleeting lighting conditions for example would long be gone before most artists had the opportunity to set one’s palette, let alone collect the visual data necessary to replicate a scene in the style of high realism.

To this end, the amazing 19th Century Academician, Jean Leon Gerome, used photographs extensively in his process. In fact, he traveled with a photographer on his numerous excursions to the Middle East, specifically for the purpose of gathering the degree of information necessary to execute his brilliant Orientalist paintings.

Would it have been possible for Gerome to create these paintings without using photography, by simply working from life? Personally, I don’t think so, because before Gerome, no artist had ever achieved anything near the same level of illusionistic atmospheric realism so effectively and prolifically.

Before photography was invented, artists used a vast array of devices and strategies to augment their ability to record the world around them. Once photography appeared on the scene, however, realism “coincidently” took a big leap forward.

[ariel]

Bulls-eye!

Their Photorealism mutated into more recent Hyperrealism, that puts even more emphasis on the painters' subtle emotional hints and sheer fantasy.
But very often the latter overcomes the reality and this is exactly what happened with your great example of Vereshchagin's very naturalistic image of Indian sepoys "blown from guns" , a practice he could not have seen. Such is art, and this is its difference from historical evidence.
BTW, I was unaware of his travels to Ladakh and Sikkim. Was he a part of the Russian clandestine intelligence gathering operations? ( Another Russian painter, Nicolas Roerich, was or tried to be, later on). If you are interested in that period and the rivalry between Britain and Russia in Central Asia, you absolutely must read Peter Hopkirk's " The Great Game"!

And if we are talking about India and Vereshchagin, we should not forget Edwin Lord Weeks, a superb American Orientalist painter who was his equal or better ( pure IMHO).

[mahratt]

Some mistakenly believe that Vereshchagin depict execution after the Sepoy rebellion 1857-1859. This is not true. The painting is called "The English penalty in India." She depict in 1884. In reality, the painting depicts the execution of a Sikh-namdhari 1872, which Vereshchagin learned during a visit to India in 1875. In the middle of January 1872 a few hundred namdhari, using the fact that the main forces of the Anglo-Indian troops were concentrated in Punjab maneuvers in Delhi, revolted against the British and attacked two fortified castle - Malodh and Maler Kotla to seize weapons are in them. The rebels were defeated. British troops responded with repression. From guns were firing squad of 65 people.

[mahratt]

And if we are talking about India and Vereshchagin, we should not forget Edwin Lord Weeks, a superb American Orientalist painter who was his equal or better ( pure IMHO).

Of course, because "Made in US - means excellent" :) (this is a pleasantry)

But seriously, I think, to all participants of the forum would be interesting if you have created the theme of the paintings Edwin Lord Weeks.

[ariel]

Perhaps. But he could witness events of 1872 no better than those of 1858: he wasn't there for either:-)

Nothing wrong with it artistically : Rembrandt never witnessed the return of the Prodigal Son, Moses did not have horns and Sistine Chapel is not a documentary account of the Creation of Adam and the Last Judgement.

Once and for all: works of art are not historical facts. In the best possible case they provide us with a glimpse of contemporaneous view of material objects, in the worst one they are malicious distortions of truth. The greatest majority of them are somewhere in between. But no court on Earth would accept them as evidence.

[mahratt]

Perhaps. But he could witness events of 1872 no better than those of 1858: he wasn't there for either:-)


Simple question. Do you think from 1872 until 1875 (ie three years) that has changed dramatically: the shape of the British soldiers, the British guns or Sikhs-namdhari? :)
We all understand that the picture - this is not the photo report from the event. But valuable that Vereshchagin adhered even small details in his paintings.

[David]

Perhaps. But he could witness events of 1872 no better than those of 1858: he wasn't there for either:-)

Nothing wrong with it artistically : Rembrandt never witnessed the return of the Prodigal Son, Moses did not have horns and Sistine Chapel is not a documentary account of the Creation of Adam and the Last Judgement.

Once and for all: works of art are not historical facts. In the best possible case they provide us with a glimpse of contemporaneous view of material objects, in the worst one they are malicious distortions of truth. The greatest majority of them are somewhere in between. But no court on Earth would accept them as evidence.
Ariel, i feel like you are being contrary just for the sake of it here. You are comparing works of classical artists such as Rembrandt that depict biblical themes from two millenniums past to these HISTORICAL paintings that are based, if not on the personal account and sketches of the artist, then upon direct accounts received by him within a few years of their occurrence. Certainly you can concede that the accuracy of Vereshchagin's work regarding the weapons, dress and even the details of the events depicted in his paintings carries more weight and historical correctness than, say, Rembrandt's depiction of the blinding of Samson with a keris blade. :rolleyes:
Yes, painting is not documentary photography, we all know that. Many of these paintings might therefore have added drama of light and perhaps an over saturation of color. But what does that mean regarding our use of them in our study of the weapons and armor used in the conflicts that are depicted in Vereshchagin's paintings? What inaccuracies do you find there? If you can't be specific i think you are just nitpicking for no other purpose but to argue.
:shrug:

[Jim McDougall]

As I noted, this discussion, which has been primarily the topic of the Russian artist Vereshchagin's work, has been most interesting.
Actually I agree heartily with Mahratt as well as David, that essentially works of art (and typically that often includes photographs) must be gauged carefully in their veracity as historical evidence.

It is well known that art itself, is intended to elicit temporal and emotional reaction from the viewer, which is why artists often employed varying degree of license in their portrayals of historical events and situations.
In the many references I have read through on the subject of 'historical detection', the best by far is "After the Fact: The Art of Historical Detection". James Davidson and Mark Lytle, N.Y. 1982, and is remarkable.

In reviewing this book as I write this, I wanted to select a notable comment which addresses our subject of the use of art in studying history, but it is overwhelming as each page is full of compelling perspective on this.

While the methods of 'detection' apply outside art itself to narratives, records, and all manner of historic detail, the references to artists themselves are most telling.

I once did extensive research involving the identification of a Spanish 'cuera', the leather armor of the Spanish colonial soldiers in the frontiers of New Spain. In trying to locate an example of one of these, only two were found....however an unusual example which looked more like an early Roman armor was found in Arizona.
This was remarkable in that not only did two other cuera still exist, this one was of entirely different form than previously known.

The true identification of this curious anomaly in Spanish leather was found in paintings on hide, which incredibly had been discovered in Switzerland though painted in New Mexico in the 1720s. These had been sent there by a Jesuit priest to his family in about 1758. Through many efforts by local historians in New Mexico, these were finally returned there in the 1980s.

In this painting, which was painted by local Pueblos of a tragic battle in Nebraska involving the massacre of a Spanish contingent from Santa Fe, many of the allied Indian warriors accompanying the Spaniards were wearing this type leather armor. It was the only known depiction of such a form, and had been unknown and in Europe since 1758. Therefore, the only references on Spanish colonial weapons and armor did not include this type.
Further, this piece acquired in the late 19th century was only ever shown in a remote private museum in Arizona, whose owner died and the holdings were kept in storage until finally dispersed in an estate sale a number of years ago.
It was captioned, 'old conquistador leather armor' only and in deplorable condition, with little other note.

We used these paintings (known as the Segesser hides), along with considerable research into contemporary narratives and accounts, as well as examining the known corpus of material on Spanish colonial material culture to collect facts. We also confirmed the existence of the only other two cuera (one in the Smithsonian dated c.1820 and one in the Armeria Real dated c1770, both in storage).....and considered their forms as we examined the details of our example.

We were finally able to determine that our cuera was from the 1690s period and produced by Indian artisans with Spanish advisors using the cuir boulli method (contrary to rawhide in the other examples) and apparently used by these Pueblo Indians loyal to the Spaniards in those times and it would appear primarily in the Santa Fe regions.

In this way, with considerable corroboration, we were able to indeed use a work of art, contemporary to the events depicted, by Indian painters being directed by survivors and fashions and forms in use contemporarily there, to identify this rare item of leather armor, the only one of its kind.

This anecdotal case (I apologize for the length) is to emphasize that of course artwork is valuable in historical study, but any reasonable historian will advance with caution and engage in considerable supportive study in applying its place in any study.

Aside from those caveats, I thing it is quite possible to enjoy art for what it is, and greatly respect each artist for their talents and skills. In so many cases, the nuances and symbolism within these works can become history themselves!!! (look at "The DaVinci Code":) !!).

[estcrh]

Perhaps. But he could witness events of 1872 no better than those of 1858: he wasn't there for either:-)


I believe that Vereshchagin responded to this by stating that British tactics (tying captives to cannon and executing them in this vicious manner) would have happened whether he actually saw it or not. In other words he was just using this particular painting as an way to bring attention to what he saw as the brutality of British justice in India, he did the same with his painting depicting the execution of members of the Nihilist movement in St Petersburg, political commentary is not always about realism, it is about making people think.

[Jim McDougall]

I believe that Vereshchagin responded to this by stating that British tactics (tying captives to cannon and executing them in this vicious manner) would have happened whether he actually saw it or not. In other words he was just using this particular painting as an way to bring attention to what he saw as the brutality of British justice in India, he did the same with his painting depicting the execution of members of the Nihilist movement in St Petersburg, political commentary is not always about realism, it is about making people think.


Well said Estcrh!! and a LOT less words than it took me :)

[ariel]

David and I seem to have difference of opinion: he calls my comments nitpicking , whereas I view them as an attempt to define strict parameters of proof. Epistemology is one of the main logical and philosophical branches.


I cannot agree with Estcrh on the appropriateness of Vereshchaging's counter argument: the fact that something could have happened doesn't mean that it did happen.

Jim's story is very instructive: an old image prompted long and careful examination of facts before its veracity was established. Artistic images by themselves carry an aura of factual uncertainty, especially if they are motivated by political considerations.

And, BTW, I just found out ( thank you, Wikipedia!) that the brutal Brits, blowing up people from the cannons, actually learned this practice from the ........Moghuls:-) Apparently, physical annihilation of the body prevented reincarnation.

[mahratt]

Hints on political considerations seem strange, given that Vereshchagin showed the same and cruelty of the Russian justice system:

I believe that Vereshchagin responded to this by stating that British tactics (tying captives to cannon and executing them in this vicious manner) would have happened whether he actually saw it or not. In other words he was just using this particular painting as an way to bring attention to what he saw as the brutality of British justice in India, he did the same with his painting depicting the execution of members of the Nihilist movement in St Petersburg, political commentary is not always about realism, it is about making people think.

Wikipedia seems to me, is not the most serious source. Maybe you can find a reliable source? It is interesting to know the facts proving that Blowing from guns (Devil wind) the British took over from Moghuls .

[Jim McDougall]

I really don't think any of us here as reasonable historians are quite that far apart in our views that art and for that matter most sources of data and record of historical events may not always be entirely accurate. While it seems clear that the main issue is trying to establish the motivations and perspective which might lead to any inaccuracy or deliberate nuance or 'spin' on the source, obviously these are opinions, and should be accepted as such.

I try to make it clear when I am presenting material that my comments are my opinion or view, not necessarily a matter of irreproachable fact. The only time I can assert otherwise is if I actually witnessed the event.

Ironically, as most law enforcement and investigative authorities will tell you, even eye witnesses are often not entirely accurate, thus they rely on cross investigation to compare details.

Ariel, thank you for your comment on my story, which indeed I meant in that very way, to be instructive.

A note regarding Wikipedia, which I confess to using a great deal. It is what I refer to as a 'benchmark' source, presenting material on a topic and hopefully with cited sources. From here the research BEGINS as these are checked and cross checked with others as networking through the materials moves forward.
Actually, art and Wikipedia in this sense have this in common! :)

Actually the Wikipedia entry concerning the ghastly practice of execution by tying to cannon muzzle and firing seems well covered, and the pages of cited references and extensive bibliography have well set the path for any residual research. It does seem the practice certainly was not British alone just as most cases of these kinds of grim circumstance are not restricted to any particular nationality or other denomination.

[David]

David and I seem to have difference of opinion: he calls my comments nitpicking , whereas I view them as an attempt to define strict parameters of proof. Epistemology is one of the main logical and philosophical branches.
Well Ariel, i guess will need to establish what, exactly, we are attempting to "prove" here. Let's put this question into context. As far as i can tell Mahratt did not present any point or question to "prove" in this thread, merely it is a presentation of Vereshchagin's paintings for our viewing. After a short note the content of the works shared turned to depictions of weaponry during war time. This is the Ethnographic Arms & Armour Forum. While we do, from time to time discuss weapons in the context of historical events (it's unavoidable really) our main concern of discussion here is are the weapons themselves, not necessarily the accuracy of the hows and whys of the battles they were used in or the politics of war that surround them. This is not a forum about military strategies per se. And after all, we all know that histories are written by the victors and the actual truth about any particular battle or war is often open to debate. We are here to discuss the weapons themselves, not who was right or wrong in using them or whether the Brits thought up the brutal execution by cannon themselves or got the idea from the Moghuls. We can bruise an awful lot of nationalistic egos here if we focus our arguments on who was right or wrong or most brutal or whose nation was disgraced in which battle or which country had notoriously bad generals. Let's discuss the cannon itself...or the sword or dagger or knife, etc., not the politics of its uses.
So i ask again, what inaccuracies do you find do you find in Vereshchagin's depiction of the weapons and armor in these paintings? What do you think needs to be "proved" here or what misinformation about these weapons do you believe Vereshchagin's work put forth? I certainly don't see any of his figures inaccurately using a keris or some other culturally incorrect weapon in these paintings, do you?

[estcrh]

We used these paintings (known as the Segesser hides), along with considerable research into contemporary narratives and accounts, as well as examining the known corpus of material on Spanish colonial material culture to collect facts. Jim, thanks for this info, I was aware of the scale armor mentioned but not these paintings, here are two links, one with more info and one with zoomable images of the Segesser hides.

http://media.museumofnewmexico.org/events.php?action=detail&eventID=37
http://www.nmhistorymuseum.org/hides/

[mahratt]

Several paintings by Vereshchagin devoted to the Russian-Turkish war 1877-1878.

[Jim McDougall]

Well Ariel, i guess will need to establish what, exactly, we are attempting to "prove" here. Let's put this question into context. As far as i can tell Mahratt did not present any point or question to "prove" in this thread, merely it is a presentation of Vereshchagin's paintings for our viewing. After a short note the content of the works shared turned to depictions of weaponry during war time. This is the Ethnographic Arms & Armour Forum. While we do, from time to time discuss weapons in the context of historical events (it's unavoidable really) our main concern of discussion here is are the weapons themselves, not necessarily the accuracy of the hows and whys of the battles they were used in or the politics of war that surround them. This is not a forum about military strategies per se. And after all, we all know that histories are written by the victors and the actual truth about any particular battle or war is often open to debate. We are here to discuss the weapons themselves, not who was right or wrong in using them or whether the Brits thought up the brutal execution by cannon themselves or got the idea from the Moghuls. We can bruise an awful lot of nationalistic egos here if we focus our arguments on who was right or wrong or most brutal or whose nation was disgraced in which battle or which country had notoriously bad generals. Let's discuss the cannon itself...or the sword or dagger or knife, etc., not the politics of its uses.
So i ask again, what inaccuracies do you find do you find in Vereshchagin's depiction of the weapons and armor in these paintings? What do you think needs to be "proved" here or what misinformation about these weapons do you believe Vereshchagin's work put forth? I certainly don't see any of his figures inaccurately using a keris or some other culturally incorrect weapon in these paintings, do you?


Well said David!!! The art needs to be either appreciated for its aesthetic depictions as intended or analyzed as to the components included in its content, but that is left to the person who is observing it. The opinions expressed should be just that, and held as such.

[Jim McDougall]

Jim, thanks for this info, I was aware of the scale armor mentioned but not these paintings, here are two links, one with more info and one with zoomable images of the Segesser hides.

http://media.museumofnewmexico.org/events.php?action=detail&eventID=37
http://www.nmhistorymuseum.org/hides/

You bet Estcrh! and of course this detail is quite familiar. After viewing and consulting on the cuera in Arizona I travelled to Santa Fe where I viewed these fantastic paintings. I was with one of the men who was instrumental in bringing these hides back to Santa Fe, and who gave me key understanding of the detail in these paintings. I was also in touch with Peter Bleed, Professor of Anthropology in Nebraska who had been at the sites of this battle there. The scale mantle was a different item found near El Paso if I recall, but was part of the research scope and I believe handled by Donald Larocca of the Met in New York.
It was a fantastic project!

[mahratt]

Afghan

[Jim McDougall]

Absolutely amazing art!! and beautiful pieces, especially that Bukharen sabre (always recognized by the 5 rivet pattern in the grip among other features).
Thank you again for sharing all of these Mahratt. I wish I had walls so I could have copies of many of these up. The adventure sensation they convey must have been much like what those intrepid travelers must have felt as they trekked through these Central Asian regions.

[ariel]

David,
Over here we are dealing with historical ethnographic arms. In my opinion it it impossible to study Oriental arms without delving into history, religion, metaphysics, military clashes, etc, etc of that ancient, multicultural and turbulent area. This is the backbone of any serious study of Eastern weapons , with Elgood exemplifying this approach to the highest degree. Not for nothing his ( IMHO) masterpiece is titled "Hindu arms and ritual".

As a matter of fact this is exactly what you yourself mention repeatedly when Indonesian kris is discussed.

I was not trying to denigrate Vereshchagin's at all: in my opinion , he was just another good Orientalist painter.His uniqueness was in the military direction of his artistic efforts ( although Ingres odalisques may be preferred by others :-)))

I was not looking for any factual inconsistencies in his works, but there must be some. Straight from the top of my head, look at the set of pics just above my response, where the supposed Afghani man carries a typical Bukharan shashka the handle of which has only 3 rivets placed in a line. The hallmark of Bukharan Shashkas is 5 rivets, placed in a 2-1-2 arrangement ( see pic in the same post).


So, what kind of profound conclusions about Central Asian weapons should we reach from that painting ? Perhaps that Vereshchagin's sketch must have missed the detail and he might not have had a real Bukharan shashka in his studio.
Also, the above-quoted Indian article about Vereshchagin mentioned wrong British uniforms.

I am sure that careful review of his paintings by real " Where is Elmo?" aficionados might disclose more factual errors. So what? He was just an artist, for crying out loud ! Artists are not, and should not, be held to strict scientific standards. But by the same token, their images cannot be used as evidences without proper verification.

In contrast, Elgood shows temple carving of warriors with D-guarded swords: 11-12th century! This might overthrow the entire idea of European impact on Hindu weapons! However, Elgood, being a scientist, downplayed the significance of art and suggested waiting for an actual example.


And this is the difference between art and science.

[Jim McDougall]

Ariel,
Extremely well thought out and presented response to Davids comments!
I must admit that as a somewhat (perhaps a lot) romantic historian, I am inclined to overlook a lot of probably otherwise significant details in many works of art. Very unscientific I know, but I enjoy the sense the work sends me in appreciating the period or events.

If I am considering the detail of the work in a study or investigation then of course my research broadens to seeking corroborating evidence in other sources.

I don't think anyone who is in an art gallery usually has exactly the same perception or opinions on a work, but art is of course subjectively oriented.

If I am watching a movie, especially something of historical content, of course I will note there will be certain flaws in detail......but I will not sacrifice the enjoyment of the film for these. Most critics delight in finding these detail errors and herald their superior knowledge by making loud and pronounced denigration of such things, but 'in my opinion' this is very belittling to themselves. For some reason I always seem to enjoy the most, the movies that critics hate and tear to pieces!!!

Despite all the discussion , I know I really like the illustrations being posted here.......the philosophy uh......interesting.

[mahratt]

I was not looking for any factual inconsistencies in his works, but there must be some. Straight from the top of my head, look at the set of pics just above my response, where the supposed Afghani man carries a typical Bukharan shashka the handle of which has only 3 rivets placed in a line. The hallmark of Bukharan Shashkas is 5 rivets, placed in a 2-1-2 arrangement ( see pic in the same post).

I really like the researchers who like to nitpick. With them interesting debate.


I put in the topic image Bukhara shashka. And Ariel is definitely right remembering article Torben Flindt. But the world is not limited to one article, and may surprise you :)

1) It is not always Bukhara weapons (knifes and shashkas) to the handle rivets 5. Often they have been - 3:
http://www.oriental-arms.com/item.php?id=2634
http://www.oriental-arms.com/item.php?id=6156
http://www.oriental-arms.com/item.php?id=2029

2) All certainly know that except Bukhara shashka there are Afghan shashka ( 3 rivets to the handle). It is likely that in the picture is just such a an Afghan shashka.

[David]

I am sure that careful review of his paintings by real " Where is Elmo?" aficionados might disclose more factual errors. So what? He was just an artist, for crying out loud ! Artists are not, and should not, be held to strict scientific standards. But by the same token, their images cannot be used as evidences without proper verification.

In contrast, Elgood shows temple carving of warriors with D-guarded swords: 11-12th century! This might overthrow the entire idea of European impact on Hindu weapons! However, Elgood, being a scientist, downplayed the significance of art and suggested waiting for an actual example.

And this is the difference between art and science.
Ariel, again you are missing my point. Again, these images were brought to our attention for an over all appreciation of this artist's work, i suppose due to their extraordinary attention to detail and accuracy. Please forgive all caps, but i guess i feel i need to drive this point home. NO ONE HAS PRESENTED THESE IMAGES AS EVIDENCE OR PROOF OF ANYTHING. Yet you first response to this thread by going off on a tangent on the incompetency of the Russian navy, something which had nothing to do with the material at hand. I can only interpret this as an attempt to get a rise out of Mahratt. From there you seem to do nothing but question the accuracy of Vereshchagin's work despite Mahratt's consistent pairing of actual photographs and the artists work for comparison of weaponry. Of course their is still no thesis being put forth that requires "proving" here. None of the painting have been presented to that end, only for our appreciation. But instead of appreciating the work, you commentary becomes "And if we are talking about India and Vereshchagin, we should not forget Edwin Lord Weeks, a superb American Orientalist painter who was his equal or better ( pure IMHO)."
Perhaps you should start your own similar thread on Weeks then if you find him to be the superior artist. Then we can all argue that Weeks isn't "historical fact" either. If someone were putting that thesis forth perhaps your continued ranting on this point would have some validity. However, once again, no one has presented ANY painting here as evidence in the court of war history.
These paintings do not need to be exact reproductions of historical fact or events to be valuable to us as weapons collectors or amateur historians. How about we try not arguing for argument sake. It adds nothing valuable to the conversation.

[Jim McDougall]

Mahratt offers one of the most reasonable comments noting that writers or persons nitpicking in observations on art present great debate. It offers opportunity for those participating to either change or reinforce opinions and offers perspective for others who have not yet decided.

It is not necessary to add political or personal derisions nor negative notes, one should focus on positive support for their position. This is the strong approach, negative or sarcastic notes otherwise only make the person making them appear weak. We see this too much in political campaigns!

Regarding the accuracy of five rivets or three for example in Bukharen sabres, obviously there are never such hard and fast rules, and in recalling communications with Mr Flindt many years ago, I'm sure he would agree.
The preponderance of five, does not negate the possibility of three.
A fine point, but supports the need for additional research and corroboration with art in question.

[ariel]

Jim,
I am sure you noticed two salient points re. Bukharan shashka: first, their pommels are cardinally different from the eared ones of Afghani " pseudo shashkas", and second, they were worn tucked under the sash, not suspended from the belt:-)

[mahratt]

I have already said that our knowledge is not limited to items that we have. The world is much more diverse than we imagine.

And even if you do not pay attention to Bukhara items with 3 rivets on the handle, and focus on the Afghan shashkas (not true to call them -. Psevdoshashka It is not an imitation of something, but an independent weapon as Bukhara shashkas), it is easy to be convinced, that Afghan shashkas are different pommels hilt from one another. And that Afghan shashkas sometimes wore in his belt (as a shashka to the picture Vereshchagin).

[Jim McDougall]

Jim,
I am sure you noticed two salient points re. Bukharan shashka: first, their pommels are cardinally different from the eared ones of Afghani " pseudo shashkas", and second, they were worn tucked under the sash, not suspended from the belt:-)

Right, thanks for the reminder Ariel, the Afghan 'pseudo shashka' (as Iaroslav terms them) are indeed in a scabbard, I did entirely miss that.
Interesting note on the Bukharen sabres, I have been told a number of times these had nothing to do with the shashka, but that is hardly a talking point, and not worthy of additional debate.
There are so few examples of these Bukharen sabres, as you know, and the only literature on them (as far as I know) is the article by Torben Flindt.

Since Bukhara is essentially in the same region as 'Uzbekistan' and 'Afghanistan' and the Afghan 'shashka' has the cleft and three rivets, it is possible that these cross influenced........as Torben Flindt told me in a letter....."as you have realized Jim, weapons have no geographic borders".
In this we were trying to determine whether a 'shashka' was Uzbek or Afghan, a vaguely defined comparison.

I have to say it is good to be reacquainted with these topics as it has many years since these researches, and good memories. You have far more current experience with these, so thank you for pointing out these salient details.

Again, very little point in debating an artistically depicted hilt, or whether these are termed shashka or not. But it is fun isn't it? :) Clearly it would seem so.

[ariel]

David,
You are perfectly entitled to enjoying the images.
I am perfectly entitled to use the same topic to address a totally different point: art as historical evidence. One does not negate another.

You seem to find animosity ( or frank Russophobia) in my remarks. Let me assure you: there was none. Taking account of historical backgrounds is part and parcel of any discussion of historical weapons.

I do not intend to initiate a topic dedicated to pictures of Edwin Lord Weeks. I do not think it would add anything to the discussion. I prefer him artistically, but am not interested in using his pictures for any martial analysis. By the same token, no Delacroix and no Gerome.

You asked for actual examples of inconsistencies in V's pictures . I presented one. It is of interest that the picture of the "Afghani" was bolstered with a photograph of a Bukharan shashka, but it was quickly replaced with that of an Afghani pseudoshashka when the imprecision of the original image was pointed out. For details, please see my note to Jim above.

Personally, I do not think this discussion is going anywhere.

With best wishes.

[mahratt]

You asked for actual examples of inconsistencies in V's pictures . I presented one. It is of interest that the picture of the "Afghani" was bolstered with a photograph of a Bukharan shashka, but it was quickly replaced with that of an Afghani pseudoshashka when the imprecision of the original image was pointed out. For details, please see my note to Jim above.


Do not focus on the Afghan shashka. Afghan shashka was brought, as a possible example.
The main thing else. I have to repeat:

1) It is not always Bukhara weapons (knifes and shashkas) to the handle rivets 5. Often they have been - 3:
http://www.oriental-arms.com/item.php?id=2634
http://www.oriental-arms.com/item.php?id=6156
http://www.oriental-arms.com/item.php?id=2029

2) Interesting fact - known Bukhara shashka not only with 5 rivet and 3 rivet , but with 4 rivets on the handle.

[ariel]

Yes, there were Bukharan " shashkas" with 4 rivets. But they were an exception while the 5 riveted hilt was the "hallmark", as I wrote. Never 3 in a row. Vereshchagin just erred. Not a big deal.

The term " pseudo-shashka" is from Lebedinski. You can argue with him . It is used for convenience. And Bukharan are even less "shashkas", if you want to be precise:-)))

Still, the sword under the sash in the painting has nothing to do with with Afghani "pseudo-shashkas": see my note to Jim.

[mahratt]

Yes, there were Bukharan " shashkas" with 4 rivets. But they were an exception while the 5 riveted hilt was the "hallmark", as I wrote. Never 3 in a row. Vereshchagin just erred. Not a big deal.



Dear Ariel. We're not talking about the alleged errors Vereshchagin,that you are trying to find. We are talking about specific subjects from Bukhara :)
You first said that the Bukhara items were only 5 rivets, referring to article Torben Flindt. Now, do you agree that it was and 4 rivets.

Let me remind you. I have already shown here in the topic Bukhara weapon with 3 rivets :)

Of course, you can deny the obvious .....

[ariel]

Please pay attention: I am specifically mentioning Bukharan shashkas. Not P'chaks. If you have an example of a shashka with 3 rivets, please show it.

[mahratt]

Please pay attention: I am specifically mentioning Bukharan shashkas. Not P'chaks. If you have an example of a shashka with 3 rivets, please show it.

I'll do better. This is a quote (citation) from Torben Flint.

One man once told me: "My friend, read books and articles attentively. Not only see the pictures. "

I think this is a good recommendation.

[ariel]

Flindt describes there general structure of all Bukharan handles. No argument about kards and bichaks.
I am asking specifically about "shashkas" . All his examples and all I have seen or handled have 5 ( rarely 4, if the grip is narrower than usual).
Can you show an example of a "shashka" with 3 rivets?
I am intrigued.

[mahratt]

Flindt describes there general structure of all Bukharan handles. No argument about kards and bichaks.
I am asking specifically about "shashkas" . All his examples and all I have seen or handled have 5 ( rarely 4, if the grip is narrower than usual).
Can you show an example of a "shashka" with 3 rivets?
I am intrigued.

I'm sorry. Where in the quotation from Torben Flindt which I posted,, you see mention of Kard and Pichok? I specifically placed the piece of text that no one had any doubt as to the correctness of citations Torben Flindt in this fragment writes exclusively about Bukhara shashkas. Or I confuse? In the English word "sword" can mean "knife" ??? My English is bad. And I do not know it.....

[Jens Nordlunde]

In post 59 only part of what Torben wrote about the hilts is shown. Here is it all.

[mahratt]

In post 59 only part of what Torben wrote about the hilts is shown. Here is it all.

Thank you, Jens.
Do I understand correctly that the phrase Torben Flindt "3-5 of rivets on the hilts" refers not only to knifes (Kard and Bichok), but also to Bukhara shashkas?

[Jens Nordlunde]

Torben writes about the swords when he mentions the 3-5 rivets. When it comes to the Bukharan daggers he writes: 'The same materials and manner of fitting them are found on Bukharan daggers of the bytshak and karud types.' So here he doesn't give the number of rivets, but my guess is, that had the number of rivets been different on the daggers he would have mentioned it.

[mahratt]

Torben writes about the swords when he mentions the 3-5 rivets.

Thank you so much. I am glad that I have correctly understood the article Torben Flindt.

[ariel]

Jens,
This passage in Flindt's article is very confusing, and I read it differently.

According to Flindt, it is the large size of the rivets that is the " Bukharan characteristics"

If so, the upper handle with 3 large rivets ( Afghani pseudo-shashka) must be Bukharan, whereas the two lower ones ( both Bukharan shashkas) with 5 small rivets are not Bukharan at all :-)

My point remains the same: can somebody show an example of a Bukharan "shashka" with 3 rivets? I have yet to see one.

[mahratt]

This passage in Flindt's article is not confusing. It just need to read carefully. Torben Flindt says that Bukhara swords (shashkas) on the handle rivets 3-5. This means that the Bukharan shahshkas on the handle can be from 3 to 5 rivets. Yes, in most cases on the hilt of Bukhara 5 rivets (thanks for your example). Sometimes there are 4 rivets (I showed it). And there Bukhara shashkas with 3 rivets on the handle.This writes Torben Flindt and Vereshchagin, who painted them in the 19th century..

I trust Torben Flindt, who studied Bukhara checkers and Vereshchagin, who painted them in the 19th century.

But surely you can have your opinion.

[Jens Nordlunde]

Yes you are right Ariel, Torben mentioned the big rivets, and if he did so, that is what he meant.
I knew Torben very well years ago, and he was very presice when he was writing, so when he wrote 'big rivets' he ment that.
When Torben started to collect Bukhara weapons, he went out there to study the weapons and the art, so I suppose that he would have known about the big rivets, or he would not have mentioned them.
For some reason or other we newer discussed the Bukhara weapons, but only the Indian ones.

[mahratt]

And many Bukharian checkers with 5 rivets on the handle really large rivets, as he wrote Torben Flindt.

[mahratt]

But, as we have seen, we met and small rivets.

But it does not say that Torben Flindt made a mistake in his article.

[ariel]

. And there Bukhara shashkas with 3 rivets on the handle.This writes Torben Flindt and Vereshchagin, who painted them in the 19th century

Sorry, but this is a circular argument: " Vereshchagin's depiction of a Bukharan shashka with 3 rivets is historically correct because Vereshchagin painted a Bukharan shashka with 3 rivets"


And thank you for bringing yet more examples of Bukharan shashkas, all with 5 rivets.

Any examples of a 3-riveted one in your collection of images?

[mahratt]

Sorry, but this is a circular argument: " Vereshchagin's depiction of a Bukharan shashka with 3 rivets is historically correct because Vereshchagin painted a Bukharan shashka with 3 rivets"

And thank you for bringing yet more examples of Bukharan shashkas, all with 5 rivets.


I am glad to help you. I put the picture with 5 rivets, because:
1) are the most widespread Bukhara shashkas
2) on these drafts rivets - large, such as described by Torben Flindt.

There is no lasting circle. There is an example in the picture Vereshchagin, confirming the words Torben Flindt.
Torben Flindt says that on the handles of Bukhara shashkas from 3 to 5 rivets. Do you think that Torben Flindt made a mistake? I am very interested to hear your opinion on this issue.

Of course, I know that you are very good expert and collector. But in this matter trust more Torben Flindt. I'm sorry for this insolence.

Any examples of a 3-riveted one in your collection of images?

Unfortunately, in my collection of Bukhara Shashkas with 3 rivets not. Like you, for 2 of my Bukhara shashkas 5 rivets on the handle (probably the most common option).
But thank you very much Artzi Yarom for his "bank" (reserve) the image^

http://oriental-arms.com/item.php?id=3912

Now I hope you are happy? Or will you continue to not believe Torben Flindt?

[estcrh]

Jens,
This passage in Flindt's article is very confusing, and I read it differently.

According to Flindt, it is the large size of the rivets that is the " Bukharan characteristics"

If so, the upper handle with 3 large rivets ( Afghani pseudo-shashka) must be Bukharan, whereas the two lower ones ( both Bukharan shashkas) with 5 small rivets are not Bukharan at all :-)

My point remains the same: can somebody show an example of a Bukharan "shashka" with 3 rivets? I have yet to see one.

I do not see anything "confusing" about this particular passage.
When wood or horn were used, the gripshells were held together by THREE TO FIVE large iron rivets whose size may be regarded as a Bukharan characteristic.
The question is not whether anyone has a picture of a Bukharan three rivet shashka/sword, the question is....can a Bukharan shashka have small iron rivets. Was Flindt naming the only chatacteristics or just some of several possible Bukharan styles of riveting. Can the Bukharan shashka/sword be identified by shape/style alone or are large rivets the only indicator that a shashka/sword is Bukharan.

A Very fine example of a sword from Uzbekistan of typical Bukharan style. The slightly curved 29 inches long blade is forged of very fine wootz steel of the ladder pattern. The grips of rhino horn, cut axially (Very specific to Bukharan made blade hilts) and of almost black age patina, are in the general shape of that of a Pesh-Kabz dagger, also common in the central Asian countries. The hilt bolster is silver with niello decoration and the scabbard fittings are silver covered with a dense mosaic of small Turquoise stones, also in a typical decorative style of Bukhara.

[ariel]

Now I hope you are happy? Or will you continue to not believe Torben Flindt?


This is just like the one you yourself rejected on the Russian forum because the handle is a replacement.

[mahratt]

This is just like the one you yourself rejected on the Russian forum because the handle is a replacement.


1) 1) You have put a photo of the Afghan shashka. What for?

2) Artzi Yarom writes nothing about replacing the handle of the shashka. You suspect that it introduces all the confusion?

"This rare shashqa style saber is coming from Central Asia or Afghanistan. Blade 29 1/2 inches, slightly up rising, hollow ground cross section inlaid with gold decoration on both faces and on the spine. Wood grips and brass bolster. Total length 35 inches. Later wood scabbard with leather cover and chased brass grip. Very Good condition. Minor wood chips on the handle and later solder repairs on the bolsters. The attribution to Central Asia and /or Afghanistan is derived from the shape of the handle, very similar to Karud / Pesh Kabz daggers from the same area. A very rare saber".

3) If you did not accept my example, here's another example:

[mahratt]

This is just like the one you yourself rejected on the Russian forum because the handle is a replacement.

By the way, it seems to me that it is better to put not only one photo where you can see the details only under a microscope. If you just put here more photo, it would be clear that in Bukhara, this shashka is not relevant.

[ariel]

Re: shashka with agate handle.
Flindt specifically states the rivets on wooden and horn handles. Agate doesn't seem to relate here.

[Gavin Nugent]

Trying to work past the school yard antics here are some facts about the rivets and hilt materials.

My sabre hilt from my gallery has already been presented above, 5 large rivets.

My turquoise pichoq set with sheaths and baldric, 2 small rivets.

The named and dated pair of pichoq shown in my gallery that interlock are two small rivets.

The large Rhino hilt Karud has 3 small rivets.

Another pichoq has five small rivets which is a lot for such a small knife.

One Mahratt now has, I think 4 or 5 small rivets from memory.

I've personally seen turquoise and silver, timber, ivory, both walrus and Elephant, jade or agate, and various horn types too.

It all comes down to the makers I am sure...for timber sabre grip slabs I only recall large rivet types, for other materials smaller iron pins...such large
rivets would look very out of place on a full silver and turquoise hilt...of those I have had, it seems timber had more rivets...it might have something to do with securing the burl like timber...to be sure to be sure, or perhaps an unknown thought process behind that aspect?

Ariel, the three rivet shashka type hilt you have presented with the engraved bolster is in my opinion Afghanistan, Herat to Kabul, influenced from the Central Asian regions further north.

Gavin

[ariel]

Gavin,
Of course the 3-riveted handle belongs to the Afghani pseudoshashka.
I showed it only for the size of the rivets, to compare with 5 small rivets on the Bukharan examples. I thought I made it clear. If not, I am sorry. Hope it is clear now.

[mahratt]

Re: shashka with agate handle.
Flindt specifically states the rivets on wooden and horn handles. Agate doesn't seem to relate here.


Now back to Bukhara shashka. Maybe you do not know that there Bukhara shashkas with a handle made of precious stone. Such shashka have, for example, in the collection of Henry Moser.

[mahratt]

Trying to work past the school yard antics here are some facts about the rivets and hilt materials.

My sabre hilt from my gallery has already been presented above, 5 large rivets.

My turquoise pichoq set with sheaths and baldric, 2 small rivets.

The named and dated pair of pichoq shown in my gallery that interlock are two small rivets.

The large Rhino hilt Karud has 3 small rivets.

Another pichoq has five small rivets which is a lot for such a small knife.

One Mahratt now has, I think 4 or 5 small rivets from memory.

I've personally seen turquoise and silver, timber, ivory, both walrus and Elephant, jade or agate, and various horn types too.

It all comes down to the makers I am sure...for timber sabre grip slabs I only recall large rivet types, for other materials smaller iron pins...such large
rivets would look very out of place on a full silver and turquoise hilt...of those I have had, it seems timber had more rivets...it might have something to do with securing the burl like timber...to be sure to be sure, or perhaps an unknown thought process behind that aspect?

Ariel, the three rivet shashka type hilt you have presented with the engraved bolster is in my opinion Afghanistan, Herat to Kabul, influenced from the Central Asian regions further north.

Gavin

Gavin, my friend, you are saying the right thing. You and I have seen many different examples, because you and I specifically interested in Central Asia.

[Battara]

Gentlemen, I have redacted some of what I have seen due to the fact that THEY DO NOT BELONG HERE!

Both you, Ariel and Mahratt, been warned privately (as well as other measures). This is a good thread and I have learned from the information you folks have provided. Please keep on topic. Personal attacks and slander on ANYONE will not be tolerated here. I do not want to close this thread...........

[mahratt]

I want to show Bukhara shashkas from Hermitage and the Museum of artillery in St. Petersburg . Incidentally, the term "Bukhara shashka" unites the shashkas of Bukhara, Khiva and Kokand.

[carlitobrigante]

oh my! that 2nd sword from your post immediately above mine is one of the most gorgeous looking swords i have ever seen.

What is the scabbard made of, and in which museum does this beauty reside?

Thank you for keeping this thread civil so it can continue. Although not my area of collecting it has been fascinating seeing the paintings and some of the examples posted.

[mahratt]

oh my! that 2nd sword from your post immediately above mine is one of the most gorgeous looking swords i have ever seen.

What is the scabbard made of, and in which museum does this beauty reside?

Thank you for keeping this thread civil so it can continue. Although not my area of collecting it has been fascinating seeing the paintings and some of the examples posted.

Many thanks. I am glad that you like!
I also really like the first and second shashkas :) These shashkas were presented to the Tsar of Russia. These shashkas presented Khan of Kokand.

Now they are kept in the Hermitage in Russia

[Gavin Nugent]

oh my!

What is the scabbard made of

Oh my indeed!

Having a pair of hilts in the same manner, this is what I suspect at face value.

I suspect a timber inner core with a possible "Moroccan" leather inner throat area for the blade.
The outer is dressed with a silver, almost entirely like a honey comb or reptile scale pattern, but specifically a random pattern with each hole is the final appearance. Again, I suspect as I only see the final product in hand, but small turquoise and garnet stones are resin inset in to each tiny hole, once cured, ground, polished and shaped with a wheel.
These hilt types are mostly considered as political gifts to other rulers and men of standing as only the Amir had the means for such time, expense and beauty.

Gavin

[Jim McDougall]

Indeed it is great to see this discourse return to the now apparent diversion to this fascinating study of Bukharen and Afghan swords, which in itself is probably one of the most esoteric areas of the edged weapons on Central Asia.
It is almost unfortunate that this particular discussion has begun under the title of the original post which pertains to the distinguished Russian artist Vasily Vereshchagin, as these swords certainly deserve their own titled thread to bring in broader interest in their study.

Meanwhile, I am very grateful for all of the fantastic pictures of these swords and the most interesting attention to their features and details.
I would have to agree however, that this curious debate over the number of rivets or their size is to me fully specious. While there are seemingly some preponderances such as five rivets placed on the Bukharen sabres as appeared in Mr. Flindt's venerable article, he did note potential variances.

As far as I can imagine, the development and production of these types of saber (Bukharen) and the cleft pommel shashka like versions attributed to Afghanistan and Uzbekistan are so predisposed to cross diffusion that most finite attribution is unlikely, if not nearly impossible.

As I have mentioned many times, as Mr. Flindt once said to me, weapons have NO geographic boundaries.
This was noted in what became a rather inconclusive struggle to classify one of these 'shashkas' as either Uzbek or Afghan about 18 years ago.
While it I was once told that the Bukharen sabre had of course nothing to do with the shashka, it remains seemingly likely that the profound Russian presence in these regions in the times of the "Great Game" (c. 1813-1907) certainly may have influenced these Uzbek and Afghan sabres with the distinct cleft pommels.

The Khanate of Bukhara was of course situated in Uzbekistan in the 18th century, and Uzbekistan included a notable part of Northern Afghanistan until the mid 19th century. As most of these sword forms evolved in these particular times amidst all of this geopolitical turmoil, then it seems almost futile to assign a distinct classification and pattern of features responsibly to any of them unless using other mitigating factors in their decoration etc.

What remains undisputed regardless, is that these 'Central Asian' sabres are some of the most intriguing, beautiful and exciting swords in the spectrum of the sabre.

[estcrh]

This was noted in what became a rather inconclusive struggle to classify one of these 'shashkas' as either Uzbek or Afghan about 18 years ago.
Jim, while there may not be much in the way of new information since then there are a lot more images available.

[Battara]

W :eek: W!

I never heard of Bukharen shashqas until this thread! And what beautiful examples!

Amazing (putting eyes back in their sockets)

[mahratt]

Bukhara shashkas from Russian museums.

[mahratt]

By the way, a little more about the three rivet.

http://www.oriental-arms.com/item.php?id=4632

[mahratt]

Beautiful Bukhara shashka of collection Gavin:

http://www.swordsantiqueweapons.com/s355_full.html

[estcrh]

This seems to be a Bukharan shashka or is it?

[mahratt]

This seems to be a Bukharan shashka or is it?

Afghanistan...

[mahratt]

Our esteemed Ariel suddenly remembered that in addition to Bukhara existed Khiva Khanate and existed Kokand Khanate ;)
And Ariel writes:

Sorry, I must have missed your post with Bukharan shashka with 3 rivets. Unless you refer to the heavily re-worked and modified one that is attributed by the Hermitage not to Bukhara, but to Khiva, with 7 rivets, that you yourself defined as an inappropriate example on a Russian forum. Moreover, the color of the rivets ( dark or bright) tells us nothing: as can be seen on my Bukharan shashkas ( thanks for the pics), their rivets are very shiny: it depends on the metal.
Please indicate the exact number of a post with this info.

On my picture, the handle with 3 big rivets belongs to the Afghani pseudoshashka. Nothing Bukharan.

I have to repeat my post to Ariel understood me (forgive me for my bad english).

In this topic, I showed a few Shashka of Bukhara with three rivets. And I think that this is enough. Now you insist that I show Bukhara shashkas with large rivets. Perhaps you began to doubt that the shashkas, which you have shown (with small rivets) from Bukhara?
Do not worry. This is a good shashkas. I even a little jealous of you.

Here is shashkas of which I speak. They have small rivets, but you wrote yourself, it's Bukhara shashkas. I'm sorry that I remind you of this:
...whereas the two lower ones ( both Bukharan shashkas) with 5 small rivets...

[Emanuel]

Beautiful!!

I know nothing about these swords. Any corelation between the brittleness of the handle scale material and the size/number of rivets?

I imagine it would be harder to drill the larger rivet holes in more brittle material like jade, agate and turqoise, than in softer material like wood, horn and ivory. Hence the use of multiple thinner pins/rivets.

[mahratt]

Beautiful!!

I know nothing about these swords. Any corelation between the brittleness of the handle scale material and the size/number of rivets?

I imagine it would be harder to drill the larger rivet holes in more brittle material like jade, agate and turqoise, than in softer material like wood, horn and ivory. Hence the use of multiple thinner pins/rivets.

Absolutely, Emmanuel.
If the handle of horn or wood - often large rivets. If the handle of stone or bone - small rivets.
But the main thing is the words Torben Flindt, who for some reason sometimes lead to misunderstanding that: "When wood or horn were used, the gripshells were held together by three to five rather large iron rivets whose size may be regarded as a Bukharan characteristic" :) while that seems not always exclusively the case.

[Gavin Nugent]

Here is shashkas of which I speak. They have small rivets, but you wrote yourself, it's Bukhara shashkas. I'm sorry that I remind you of this:

With regards to the image presented by Ariel and re-presented by Mahratt, in particular the ivory hilted example, this is not Buhkara in my opinion, it is Afghan, North India.
I say this based on the small iron bolster present. This is typically a North Indian Karud feature, not a Bukhara feature.

Gavin