Kora

[Panzerraptor]

Hello again. I'm back and I'd like to share a new acquisition that I managed to obtain just yesterday: the unique sacrificial blade - the Kora. This is the fourth sword to my collection.

I guess I could get into a little backstory, which is a bit fun. Last month, I was browsing the net and I found myself on an auction site. Feeling bored, but a bit adventurous, I found a listing featuring a listing for a "Indo-Persian Sword with Two Shields" with the starting bid at about 10 GBP. After about a couple of days, the final price was 110 GBP, and guess who has two thumbs and won that lot. This guy!lol Anyway, after week of playing the waiting game with the auctioneer and another couple weeks waiting for validation with the shipping company, I managed to get the two swords and the kora at such a low price, I feel like I made off like a bandit!lol So I left the shields in the box still wrapped and have the kora on my wall in all its glory.

Anyway, enough of my gloating, onto the main point. The kora I obtained is roughly twenty-seven inches in length with a sharp curve at the end and a flange. This signature feature is clearly a sign that the weapon in my possession was most likely created for ceremonial purposes as, from what I understand, the versions used for battle were thinner, lighter, and had a smaller flange and curve. There is some light decoration along the blade with a sun with either a gold/brass central face and a war god on opposing sides of the flange and then figures within squares near the hilt of the sword (one of which covered in gold or brass). Speaking of the hilt, this kora's grip has a strange configuration. From what I've seen, kora hilts usually have a pair of disc shaped plates on opposing sides of the leather wrapped handle or at least a simple hand guard. However, this specimen has a metal hilt with balled ends on the crossguard and a remnant of a spike at below the familiar bottom disc. Perhaps this sword is a hybrid carrying a simplified khanda grip?

Anyway, I'm guessing this Kora is either 18th or 19th Century and hailing from Nepal based on the accompanying shields. Of course, I'm not entirely sure if that's the case. Can anyone help me assess this beautiful sword?

[Timo Nieminen]

It's an Indian tulwar hilt. Sometimes one sees these hilts on Nepali weapons.

In this case, I think it's Bengali. Some past discussion of these:
http://vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?p=56083
... and I've seen similar elsewhere described as Bengali. If you google for "tulwar kora", you should a fair number of examples.

[Miguel]

Definitely Indian.
Miguel

[mariusgmioc]

Congratulation for the brilliant acquisition! :)
Now that's a bargain!

Both shields and sword seem to be Indian to me.

[Panzerraptor]

So is there anything I need to know about maintaining this sword? I use mineral oil and a good towel to clean my swords every couple of weeks or so.

[mahratt]

Congratulation for the brilliant acquisition! :)
Now that's a bargain!

Both shields and sword seem to be Indian to me.

So few authentic items that we congratulate the other participants with the items that were made in the late 19th - early 20th centuries as souvenirs for the Europeans? :(

[mariusgmioc]

So few authentic items that we congratulate the other participants with the items that were made in the late 19th - early 20th centuries as souvenirs for the Europeans? :(


Hmmm... you might be right... :confused:

[ariel]

So few authentic items that we congratulate the other participants with the items that were made in the late 19th - early 20th centuries as souvenirs for the Europeans? :(

Why the sarcasm?

A Forumite showed pics, honestly described the story and politely requested help.

A condescending snark was not asked for and was not deserved.

[ariel]

Panzerraptor,
These items date from the end of 19 to the beginning of 20 century. They are ceremonial. They might have been produced as tourist items, but Oliver Pinchot in his book of the late R. Wagner collection had shown a khanda with very similar decorations. In his comment, items of such decorative abundance were produced for the Dehli durbars ( 1877,1903,1911), all-India assemblies at the coronations of British Kings, them being also The Emperors of India. Every Rajah brought a retinue armed to the teeth with very "show-y" weapons. Theatrical? Historical? Depends on the point of view of a collector.

Unless you are specifically interested in the battle-proven weapons, these shields and kora reflect prevailing trends in Indian arms culture of that time.

[mahratt]

Why the sarcasm?

A Forumite showed pics, honestly described the story and politely requested help.

A condescending snark was not asked for and was not deserved.


My question (in any case not sarcasm) was not addressed to the author of the topic. My question to participants who began to admire an item that is a souvenir.


These items date from the end of 19 to the beginning of 20 century. They are ceremonial. They might have been produced as tourist items, but Oliver Pinchot in his book of the late R. Wagner collection had shown a khanda with very similar decorations. In his comment, items of such decorative abundance were produced for the Dehli durbars ( 1877,1903,1911), all-India assemblies at the coronations of British Kings, them being also The Emperors of India. Every Rajah brought a retinue armed to the teeth with very "show-y" weapons. Theatrical? Historical? Depends on the point of view of a collector.

Unless you are specifically interested in the battle-proven weapons, these shields and kora reflect prevailing trends in Indian arms culture of that time.

I'm surprised how can compare the elegant sword from the collection of Wagner and rough souvenir sword that we are discussing.

[estcrh]

My question (in any case not sarcasm) was not addressed to the author of the topic. My question to participants who began to admire an item that is a souvenir.



I'm surprised how can compare the elegant sword from the collection of Wagner and rough souvenir sword that we are discussing.

You find these crudely decorated weapons made with flat sheet type metal in the way of swords, daggers and axe heads etc.

[ariel]

Erroneously I mentioned khanda. Sorry.
I meant # 4-21.

[mahratt]

Tegha number 4-21, a little closer to the subject under discussion.
But:
1) and it is much more elegant, than the subject discussion.
2) I would love to see photos of the Hindu with such Tegha in the Durbar.

And in Book can write anything you like;) In Russia we have a saying: "Paper endure all" .... I prefer facts rather than captions for pictures in the album for a coffee table.

[ariel]

I wish there were more "coffee table albums" like that...

I tend to respect Oliver Pinchot's opinions. Obviously you do not. To each his own. Pity you cannot comprehend his wise and nuanced insights: you might have changed your mind.

[mahratt]

Again, I see only the words ... No photo Hindu on Durbar with the same sword..... But I'm not surprised)))

[ariel]

Again, I see only the words ... No photo Hindu on Durbar with the same sword..... But I'm not surprised)))

Folks, what else can I say?
:shrug:

[Jim McDougall]

I wish there were more "coffee table albums" like that...

I tend to respect Oliver Pinchot's opinions. Obviously you do not. To each his own. Pity you cannot comprehend his wise and nuanced insights: you might have changed your mind.


Very well said Ariel!!! and I am with you 150% re: Oliver !!!

[estcrh]

Erroneously I mentioned khanda. Sorry.
I meant # 4-21.Is there a picture of this one?

[mahratt]

Is there a picture of this one?

Here is the this sword.

[mahratt]

Very well said Ariel!!! and I am with you 150% re: Oliver !!!

Jim, that's fine - trust people! I repeat to you the question that asked ariel (ariel not answer). You know Durbar photo, for example, in Delhi, which has a similar sword? :)

[Panzerraptor]

Just to make sure, my weapon is likely a 19th Century Indian kora/tulwar hybrid crafted for royals? Sounds awesome! I figured that this weapon was ceremonial based on the design and flange size, but I wasn't sure where it was from or who could've actually used it. Also, I forgot to mention that this item still has an edge along the inner curve.

Also, I think I've seen that kind of tegha before. A month or so before, a similar specimen had been circulating around some auction sites and eBay. Though when it was listed, I wasn't sure it was the real deal. Maybe I should take it seriously the next time it ever shows up.

Anyway, about cleaning it. Is there a specific way of doing it for this sword other than the usual mineral oil/paper towel method? Also, are the colored portions of this sword brass or gold?

[mahratt]

Just to make sure, my weapon is likely a 19th Century Indian kora/tulwar hybrid crafted for royals? Sounds awesome! I figured that this weapon was ceremonial based on the design and flange size, but I wasn't sure where it was from or who could've actually used it. Also, I forgot to mention that this item still has an edge along the inner curve.

Also, I think I've seen that kind of tegha before. A month or so before, a similar specimen had been circulating around some auction sites and eBay. Though when it was listed, I wasn't sure it was the real deal. Maybe I should take it seriously the next time it ever shows up.

Anyway, about cleaning it. Is there a specific way of doing it for this sword other than the usual mineral oil/paper towel method? Also, are the colored portions of this sword brass or gold?

I probably bad writing in English :) This sword (Kora) - a souvenir of the late 19th - early 20th century for Europeans. And a souvenir of poor quality. yellow metal on the blade - brass.

And the question to all participants. Guys, anyone of you has a picture Durbar Square, where there are people with sword-Kora? ;)

I will be happy to see such a photo.

[sirupate]

The hilt type on the Khunda in your original post Panzerraptor, is not uncommon in Nepal on their swords, but rarer on their Khunda

[ariel]

Just to make sure, my weapon is likely a 19th Century Indian kora/tulwar hybrid crafted for royals? Sounds awesome! I figured that this weapon was ceremonial based on the design and flange size, but I wasn't sure where it was from or who could've actually used it. Also, I forgot to mention that this item still has an edge along the inner curve.


Well, let's not exaggerate:-)
This is a ceremonial weapon 19-20 century, but the purpose of its creation is unknown. More likely it is a purely decorative piece, although the style of decoration is of the pattern that was thought to be used for arming retinues of Rajahs attending Delhi Durbars in an attempt to look colorful and lavish.

That was exactly what I wrote in post #9. Weapons cannot talk and the individual stories of them cannot be known . That's why we cannot be categorical and insist on our version of their origin and purpose. Stating with certainty that it is a cheap souvenir is just as incorrect as claiming that it was produced for a particular celebration and searching for positive or negative evidence. As was said, buy the weapon, not the story:-))
And I agree with Timo: more likely Bengal.

[mahratt]

Unfortunately, no one can prove to you that this is a ceremonial weapon. Because no evidence of this - no. You will not find any one pictures of India, where the ceremony would be with such swords))) Books that are written dealers or to assist in the implementation of the collection - it is not the best source of knowledge .... And if there is no evidence that it is the sword for the ceremony, it turns out that it is a souvenir sword.

Always nice to believe that you have in your collection "ceremonial sword", and not old souvenir. But the truth is that the this sword - this souvenir

Dont be upset. We all (with few exceptions) at the beginning of the formation of its collections made similar mistakes.

[Oliver Pinchot]

I'm with Mahratt, I like to see supporting examples whenever possible.

This photo is from a 1903 edition of National Geographic, commemorating the Delhi Durbar held in that year, which celebrated the accession of Edward VII. In the photo is a no-nonsense character in fanciful armor (some of it repurposed from an elephant armor) holding a massive sword of the sort someone pictured above; although it is sheathed, the type can be determined from its size and shape. I no longer have a hard copy of that NG, but I am sure that someone who has the time to do so can find it online. There was a later reissue of the photo in the 1930s or 40s that was colored. Both refer to "The Executioner" in the title, but it looks to me like a posed photo designed strictly to awe European guests.

Delhi Durbar weapons are usually very well made, but not always. Some were actually carried or worn to the Durbar itself by the nobility. Others were carried by lesser attendees. And still others were offered for sale to guests to commemorate their visit, either in the bazaars or hotels; the range of quality from one to the next is enormous.

[mahratt]

I'm with Mahratt, I like to see supporting examples whenever possible.


This famous photo. Unfortunately, the sword in the scabbard, and we can not say how this sword looks. I think it looks like this:

[mahratt]

And still others were offered for sale to guests to commemorate their visit, either in the bazaars or hotels; the range of quality from one to the next is enormous.

That is what we now call - souvenirs? :)

[ariel]

Delhi Durbar weapons are usually very well made, but not always. Some were actually carried or worn to the Durbar itself by the nobility. Others were carried by lesser attendees. And still others were offered for sale to guests to commemorate their visit, either in the bazaars or hotels; the range of quality from one to the next is enormous.

Oliver,

No arguments about it.
But calling the "for sale" items "souvenirs" would not be correct, IMHO.
Any item connected with an historical event acquires special aura and meaning.


A lavishly illustrated booklet sold to the visitors to the Statue of Liberty is a souvenir. A genuine official programme of the unveiling ceremony of the same Statue of Liberty is a true antique object worth collecting ( I recently saw it being bought by Rick from the "Pawn Stars" for several hundred bucks:-)))

Thus, if one could provenance the Kora in question to the actual Durbar event, it would be a worthwhile collector's item.
Unfortunately, we cannot. However, we also cannot dismiss such a possibility. And that was the entire gist of my comment to the current owner.


I really do not think that this forum needs sarcastic and supercilious snarks addressed to the novices who are genuinely seeking information.

[mahratt]

I really like the stories that are concoct (because they have no real evidence) :)

What for is encouraging new participants in the forum, telling them beautiful legends? Does anyone have some real evidence that this bark, as we are discussing here, used to Durbar? Or at least it was prepared to Durbar? I'll be glad to see such evidence.

[Jim McDougall]

Jim, that's fine - trust people! I repeat to you the question that asked ariel (ariel not answer). You know Durbar photo, for example, in Delhi, which has a similar sword? :)



I don't trust everyone........but I will tell you that if Oliver says it, you better believe it! He says more in just a few well chosen words than a lot of arms scholars can put together in many (including me :). That is why I always resent this book of a fine collection by him being even remotely classified as 'coffee table' !!!

So that was a serious question (or statement?) on photos being required as proof of the weapons appearing in these Durbars, as well noted by Ariel ?
That particular prerequisite seems rather humorous in this context, as I would imagine many archaeological and anthropological papers and texts must be rendered inconsequential as many assertions concerning artifacts do not have photographic proof. There weren't many cameras around before the 1850s (at least as far as I know).

In any case, Oliver perfectly responded to this (I believe tongue in cheek question?) insistence on photographic proof of weaponry at durbars. This was in my opinion well placed as it illustrated the sort of weaponry, and clearly somewhat theatrical or exaggerated types of costume etc. were extant in these events.

The British Raj and many colonial circumstances in various countries and regions lent well to the cottage industry of supplying souveniers to both occupying forces and whatever tourism might have developed by visitors.

These items were inherently of traditional forms, and meant to be impressive. They were not of the quality of diplomatic gifts or presentation items, but as Ariel has noted, have gained their own historic value as pertains to the events in which they might have been emplaced.

To speak of these kinds of items dismissively seems unwarranted when being shown in good faith for discussion.
I would share this little note here for consideration:

" ...I was once told that it was said of Laking that he
would always find something kind to say about
a fellow collectors object".
re: Sir Guy Francis Laking (1875-1919) arms collector and historian
-"Arms & Armour Study in Edwardian Britain"
Sid Blair and Michael Lacy (1999)

I guess sort of the mark of a gentleman. I know I choose to try to
follow that lead......but not all collectors do.

[mahratt]

So that was a serious question (or statement?) on photos being required as proof of the weapons appearing in these Durbars, as well noted by Ariel ?
That particular prerequisite seems rather humorous in this context, as I would imagine many archaeological and anthropological papers and texts must be rendered inconsequential as many assertions concerning artifacts do not have photographic proof. There weren't many cameras around before the 1850s (at least as far as I know).


My dear friend, Jim, of course, I understand that in 1850 there were some problems with taking pictures :) But, we're kind of talking about 1903? I do not get them mixed up?


This photo is from a 1903 edition of National Geographic, commemorating the Delhi Durbar held in that year, which celebrated the accession of Edward VII. .

But I do not insist on the pictures. After all, we both know that nobody knows these photos if no one was able to show this photo. For I will have enough historical source of the late 19th - early 20th century, which will be write of such items. Anybody can quote? I am very interested.


In any case, Oliver perfectly responded to this (I believe tongue in cheek?) insistence on photographic proof of weaponry at durbars. This was in my opinion well placed as it illustrated the sort of weaponry, and clearly somewhat theatrical or exaggerated types of costume etc. were extant in these events.


Can you give more examples (besides photos that kindly showed Oliver), where clearly somewhat theatrical or exaggerated types of costume etc.? I can show you a few images of Durbar. But there are all dressed real, without exaggeration.


To speak of these kinds of items dismissively seems unwarranted when being shown in good faith for discussion.
I would share this little note here for consideration:

" ...I was once told that it was said of Laking that he
would always find something kind to say about
a fellow collectors object".
re: Sir Guy Francis Laking (1875-1919) arms collector and historian
-"Arms & Armour Study in Edwardian Britain"
Sid Blair and Michael Lacy (1999)

I guess sort of the mark of a gentleman. I know I choose to try to
follow that lead......but not all collectors do.

I understand that tolerance is fine :) I love when forum participants see an modern item (such as a souvenir knife) and a few posts flowery praise this item. And to end the discussion, the words that it "is not quite old an item". But I do not understand why can not just say, "Man, this is not the authentic item is. Great if you like him, but this is not the old thing..."

Is telling the truth - this is not the act of a gentleman? ;)


Dear Oliver, you write about an similar item in his book: "Many were produced for the Dehli Durbars". Tell me, please, in which a book on Delhi Durban you get this information?Or is it your personal opinion?

[Ian]

Hi Mahratt:

Perhaps some of the discussion of durbars reflects the different functions of these events, especially under British rule in India during the second half of the 19th C and into the 20th C.

Durbar is originally a Persian word for the King's Court--a place where the king did his business with nobles and courtiers, and important ceremonies were held. A special durbar could be called for major events, such as the marriage of the next heir to the kingdom, etc. These practices continued in the various Indian princely courts, even during the time of the British Raj. Traditional durbar were held into the first half of the 20th C. in many of the princely states.

The British somewhat corrupted the process by holding large gala pageants when a new Viceroy was installed or a new British monarch was crowned or celebrated a jubilee. This practice started in the late 19th C. In keeping with local custom, the British called these events durbar but there was no traditional business conducted at these spectaculars.

I think it's important to distinguish between the traditional functions of durbar and what foreigners introduced at a fairly late stage. That's not to say that traditional durbar were devoid of spectacle, but the British versions were all spectacle and no real substance other than showing loyalty to the Viceroy and the Crown.

Ian.

[mahratt]

Ian, thank you!

I have no doubt that you are right. But I understand that there is no evidence that at the time of such theatrical durbars for Europeans, the Hindu had swords, like a sword that we are discussing? Or I'm wrong?

[Jim McDougall]

Ian, thank you so much for the great synopsis on durbars! This really gives a great perspective on the significance of these notable events. Clearly these evolved into events of quite different character eventually, and of course the nature of items either presented, displayed or sold would have had various degrees of character.

Mahratt, you do know of course that the analogy on cameras was to illustrate a point. We do not always have the benefit of photographic evidence to support every aspect of our observations or suggestions.
Naturally much of what is presented here in discussion will be a matter of opinion, but in most cases 'informed' opinion. I am more inclined to accept an opinion offered by a person who has handled enormous numbers of weapons, studied academically and produced considerable published material on topics than someone who simply makes an off the cuff comment.

While you clearly do not approve of Oliver's book on the Wagner Collection, referring to it as 'coffee table' level, he entered a post supportive of your other comments and tried to accommodate your 'requests' for images of durbars. He was being in my view quite gentlemanly if you noticed.

His comments on the durbars and nature of the weaponry found in them is based on profound experience, and many years of handling and researching arms. Just how much proof is needed to convince you of the integrity of his comments ? It is often difficult for someone to produce exact references for every observation over many years of studies. I know that I cannot always do so regarding my mere five decades of study, and citing examples from many years back....but I know the veracity of what I say . Would then a comment by me be considered useless if I could not produce exact reference?

Here we have friendly (?) usually, discussions where stringent academic protocol is not required to make observations or comments. If another does not agree, then that is their own choice.

As for making comments on a weapon here for discussion. There is nothing wrong with being truthful, however it seems that it should not be too hard to say an item is probably modern and commercial.......but to withhold calling it junk or low quality etc. It is not necessary to deride others who politely comment on an item regardless of its quality, and these things are just common courtesy.

Regarding the question you just asked Ian........yes, there is evidence that there were weapons like this in use. I have one, a kora with a tulwar hilt. These I have found are Bengali, just as noted in earlier discussions.These I have been told were used in sacrificial rituals of doves , but I have no proof or pictures, and I have not had access to the sword for years, and mine was not embellished.
Im just sayin' :)

[mahratt]

Dear Jim, I did not want to offend anyone. But I prefer the concrete facts of the private view.

Do I understand correctly that if someone will handle a lot of weapons, even if this man will not have any historical evidence of his words, you will consider these words right? (Sorry for my english, but I hope you understand my question?)

I thank Oliver for the fact that it supports my words. And I really liked his article on the Shamshir and collaboration with K.RIvkin "Arms and military history of the Caucasus".
Dear Oliver, accept my compliments.

But let's talk referring to the facts. Here are the photos with the Delhi Durbar in 1903 and 1911's. I'll be glad if You show on these photos of people who would be overly theatrical or exaggerated types. Maybe someone will see too theatrical weapon in these photos?

[ariel]

Jim,
You have opened an interesting angle on the theory of evidence.

There is a well-known rule in science: absense of evidence is not the same as evidence of absense.

Ignoring it is a routine mark of an inexperienced or , even worse, overzealous researcher trying to prove his (or her) pet theory :-))

[mahratt]

Well, facts probably will not ...

[Jim McDougall]

Dear Jim, I did not want to offend anyone. But I prefer the concrete facts of the private view.

Do I understand correctly that if someone will handle a lot of weapons, even if this man will not have any historical evidence of his words, you will consider these words right? (Sorry for my english, but I hope you understand my question?)

I thank Oliver for the fact that it supports my words. And I really liked his article on the Shamshir and collaboration with K.RIvkin "Arms and military history of the Caucasus".
Dear Oliver, accept my compliments.

But let's talk referring to the facts. Here are the photos with the Delhi Durbar in 1903 and 1911's. I'll be glad if You show on these photos of people who would be overly theatrical or exaggerated types. Maybe someone will see too theatrical weapon in these photos?



Actually Mahratt, your English is remarkably clear, and clearly in our discussion there are some different points of view. I agree with you and of course Oliver, that it is preferred that substantial evidence should be provided in support of assertions. In the case of photographic evidence, even this cannot always be trusted for irrefutable truth.

For example, it is well known, particularly in earlier stages of the 'photographic era', that photos were typically staged, and in many cases (often possibly most) used props and various embellished posturing etc. .
This is often seen in the military photos of the times, where actual combat scenes were staged, and there are many other examples.

With reference to these durbars, most of these photos I would suspect fall into these categories. It is, in my mind, inconceivable that the entire scope of these events would be captured photographically. I perceive these durbars as much like 'fairs', where these scenes involving significant people and groups are shown do not include the lesser scenes at accompanying bazaars with vendors hawking their wares and materials,

In many cases facts may be found in related mediums, such as narratives, personal notes or recollections, and particularly provenanced items.
Sometimes it may be that a reasonable assumption might be made which is compelling by other factors, but these cases are so many that including them here would be almost impossible. Most of these kinds of situations are well explained in books like "After the Fact: The Art of Historical Detection",
( J.W. Davidson, M.H. Lytle, N.Y. Knopf, 1982).
Those interesting in carrying investigations in these degrees would be most enlightened by this and other writings on this topic. Here, we maintain a more fluid and not quite as collegiate discussion format, which enables us to cover a broader scope pertaining to items at hand. Naturally many elements of these discussions serve as benchmarks for those choosing to pursue detailed factors to more comprehensive study .

While your personal levels of study and research are clearly of very high standards and academically exemplary, they are not necessarily demanded nor even expected in our formats. While recommendations for more thorough supportive findings are welcomed, it is purely elective as far as the other participants in discussion are concerned. With that in mind, those recommendations should be entered as just that, and in a cordial manner, without negative feature.

I think in that light, your knowledge will be better employed to the advantage of us all, rather than in conflicting interaction.

Best regards
Jim

[Mercenary]

The Durbars were not theatrical performances.

[Mercenary]

.

[Mercenary]

More likely it is a purely decorative piece, although the style of decoration is of the pattern that was thought to be used for arming retinues of Rajahs attending Delhi Durbars in an attempt to look colorful and lavish.

May be you are confusing with Indian festivals?

[Jim McDougall]

LOL!!!!:)
Good one Mercenary!!! 'durbars were not theatrical' !!!????
Great photos which illustrate the monumental degree of 'performance' which were intended fully to impress and influence.

These were oriented toward British officialdom and often nobility and naturally the highest degree of embellishment could be found on all manner of costume, material cultural items, weapons etc.

Indian 'festivals' were far more often and regularly held events with the purpose of traditional and often religious orientation. While the durbars of course brought in colonial populace, officials and occupying military and many associated groups who certainly sought souveniers of these great events.......the festivals would have been far less 'commercial' in my view.

The term 'theatrical' in our discussion as I have understood is a metaphoric term to describe something embellished far beyond similar items in regular situations, made to outwardly attract attention. Often this term refers to stage type props which would not be of the quality and durability of the items they portray.

[mahratt]

Jim, monumentality and theatricality - is not the same))))) The greatness and cheap farce - different.
Excellent swords, that we see among the participants durbar in Delhi (in the photo) do not look like the sword that we are discussing :)

[Mercenary]

Jim, monumentality and theatricality - is not the same)))))
Of course. I think there were not any cheap sham items. The real weapons or ceremonial of high quality.

[Mercenary]

Well, let's not exaggerate:-)
This is a ceremonial weapon 19-20 century...

...likely it is a purely decorative piece .... that was thought to be used for arming retinues of Rajahs attending Delhi Durbars in an attempt to look colorful and lavish.

And I agree with Timo: more likely Bengal.
As I remember the rulers of Bengal were muslims. I do not think that on the Durbar of Bengal court such the Hindu weapon could be used. It is just the unjustified fantasies which lead to false conclusions.

[Tim Simmons]

Asian things are not my thing but I have to agree with Mahrrat . In the UK these things are extremely common and the very same decorative techniques can be be found on many blade weapon forms. They are late 19th century early 20th century souverniers. Really not worth argument in my mind. Still look good if you like Asian stuff.

[Jim McDougall]

Guys, maybe I'm not making what I am suggesting clear enough. If we are talking about durbars........the EVENTS are monumental and theatrical in sense.
The weapons and costume etc. USED or PRESENTED in these events are of course often highly embellished and of superb quality.

The items often hawked in bazaars and by sellers AROUND these events during their time and frequented by TOURISTS and SOUVENIER SEEKERS
though NOT actually USED in the durbar itself are of course of lower quality,
often even cheap.

The bizarrely costumed guy with the huge tegha and spikes galore is what I would call THEATRICAL......this is not the common costume worn .....it seems this image is often referred to as an executioner, but that is because of the IMPRESSION being staged.

The durbar events were MONUMENTAL because if their huge scope, celebration and importance.

I hope this might clarify what I was trying to say. Please pardon the capital letters, my goal was to emphasize the terms . I apparently often don't make myself clear so my apologies for the confusion.

I really had no idea that trying to describe an item from a durbar in the 19th century which falls into 'souvenier' scope would be confused with the presentation and lavish items used by important individuals there.

[David]

I must say that i have been following this thread with some amusement, but also a little bit of concern. It seems to me that the need to be contrary has trumped the obligations we may have to present the OP with some clear and understandable opinions. I can only image what must be going through our novice collector Panzerraptor's mind at this point. He came to us very excited about what he had hoped was a great buy on an authentic weapons lot. After some uncomfortable discourse between certain members here was his initial take from the debate.
Just to make sure, my weapon is likely a 19th Century Indian kora/tulwar hybrid crafted for royals? Sounds awesome! I figured that this weapon was ceremonial based on the design and flange size, but I wasn't sure where it was from or who could've actually used it. Also, I forgot to mention that this item still has an edge along the inner curve.
Now, i'm not expert by far in this particular field of collection, but from what i can see in the photos and from what i can glean from what others have been presented here so far, Panzerraptor's kora does indeed seem to be a souvenir. I mean, that is what you call an item bought in a place or at an event to commemorate that moment and experience in your life. And that is a possible description of what this item might be (sans the actual word souvenir) as provided by both Oliver and Jim. Now, it does seem to be an antique souvenir so i suppose it has some collector's value as such. It may or may not be an "historic" souvenir depending on whether or not it was purchased in a bazaar at one of these grand Durbars or just anywhere at any other time. But to be clear, i don't think anyone won the lottery here with this purchase and i would hate to see Panzerraptor get the wrong impression from this discussion. Though i could be wrong i cannot image such an example as this being crafted for royals for ceremonial purposes at a Durbar. And from what i understand these Durbars put on for the British Raj didn't really conduct any real business of state as the original Durbars did so what kind of ceremony would this kora possibly be used for. I believe it is important that we be kind, especially to new collectors, but also as clear and accurate as possible for Panzerraptor's sake and not be feeding him any false hopes that this kora is more than it appears to be, a souvenir. While there may indeed be some possibility that this kora was sold at market to someone who attended one of these Durbars, since their is no commemoration marked on the blade nor any written provenance to that fact, nor any photographic evidence showing similar blades either in use ceremonially or even being sold in the markets there in the first place, nor for that matter, AFAIK, any written evidence describing such similar swords of this quality being used in ceremonies at any of these Durbars it seems imprudent of us to suggest otherwise. To give Panzerraptor hope of this being anything more than an antique souvenir seems to serve no purpose as far as i can see. I don't think any of us can say for sure that it is anything else no matter how many photographs we show or what arguments we want to make about the added importance of "historic" souvenirs that were acquired at important events over everyday souvenirs collected by travelers at any other time in history. If Panzerraptor were to decide tomorrow to then re-sell this kora would it be fair of him to present the Durbar story as a selling point? I don't think so.
That said, i am really enjoying the historic photographs of these events. Jim, for your sake, and speaking from the perspective of a professional photographer and photography instructor who teaches a bit of photo history, i would say that it would be more correct to say that most of these images are "posed" not "staged". Staged would imply they were set up specifically for the photograph while posed means they were simply told to hold it for the long exposures of the time while going about their ordinary business at hand. There were one or two group shots that might come under the heading of staged, but the overall scenes of the proceedings themselves went on regardless of whether a photographer was trying to capture them or not. :)

[David]

BTW, i did find a few other similar koras when searching the net. Their engravings are of somewhat varying qualities as i believe Oliver stated was common for these blades found in the market places. None of these made any claims to be connected to any Durbars, some where labelled as Nepali, some Indian.

[Ian]

David, you raise an interesting point about whether early photographs were "posed" or "staged." I agree with Jim that many early photographs of, say, western U.S. subjects, especially Native Americans, were both posed and staged. The subjects of some of these were given costumes to wear and weapons to brandish that were not their own but were simply props for the purpose of the picture. This is still done today and there was a photographer at the Minnesota State fair who for many years would take pictures of his customers in 19th C. style clothing that he provided and carrying a variety of facsimile weapons.

In this spirit, the picture of the big guy (perhaps a Sikh) earlier in this thread wearing the spiked elephant armor would seem to have the characteristics of a staged portrait. Some of his costume may well be his own, but it looks to me like he was dressed up further for this picture. No way of knowing for sure, I suppose, but I don't see any reason why some of these pictures were not "staged," as Jim suggested.

Ian.

[ariel]

[QUOTE=Mercenary]As I remember the rulers of Bengal were muslims. I do not think that on the Durbar of Bengal court such the Hindu weapon could be used. It is just the unjustified fantasies which lead to false conclusions.[/QUOTE/]

Last Delhi Durbar occurred in 1911. At that time Bengal was a defined historico-geographical unit.

One should not confuse historical Bengal and Bangladesh:-))))

West Bengal was Hindi and stayed in India in 1947. Muslim East Bengal became Bangladesh.

Historical Hindi West Bengal , Assam etc directly border or are in the vicinity of Nepal. Muslim East Bengal is almost Burma.


As a matter of fact, when Nepal became independent after WWI it retained some old Bengal kingdoms.

Plenty of Hindi Koras in historical Bengal:-)))

[David]

David, you raise an interesting point about whether early photographs were "posed" or "staged." I agree with Jim that many early photographs of, say, western U.S. subjects, especially Native Americans, were both posed and staged. The subjects of some of these were given costumes to wear and weapons to brandish that were not their own but were simply props for the purpose of the picture. This is still done today and there was a photographer at the Minnesota State fair who for many years would take pictures of his customers in 19th C. style clothing that he provided and carrying a variety of facsimile weapons.

In this spirit, the picture of the big guy (perhaps a Sikh) earlier in this thread wearing the spiked elephant armor would seem to have the characteristics of a staged portrait. Some of his costume may well be his own, but it looks to me like he was dressed up further for this picture. No way of knowing for sure, I suppose, but I don't see any reason why some of these pictures were not "staged," as Jim suggested.

Ian.
Well Ian, i certainly wouldn't argue with you about the staged nature of the guy with the spiky armor. But i am talking about the large majority of these images, not the odd man out. Take a look at the last group of photos that Mercenary put up for instance. You think a photographer staged all those people in those photos. Of course he didn't, they are the actual event including up to thousands of participants. Even the group shot of the dignitaries doesn't look staged since all their attentions seem to be elsewhere rather than on the photographer.
The photographer you are thinking about regarding Native American photos was Edward Curtis. It is true that he staged many rituals for the camera in order to preserve them for history, though generally not incorrectly. Some of the rituals he recorded have never been seen otherwise by any other white man. He was known to carry some wardrobe with him, but he travelled extensively throughout native lands living with tribes for long periods at a time so he got to know them and their ways rather well. There are not many cases known where he gave incorrect weapons to his subjects to hold. He created tens of thousands of images and collect copious notes chronicling the tribes he studied creating an invaluable collection for research despite what we might consider today to be a few missteps in his methodology. :)

[Mercenary]

[QUOTE=Mercenary]As I remember the rulers of Bengal were muslims. I do not think that on the Durbar of Bengal court such the Hindu weapon could be used. It is just the unjustified fantasies which lead to false conclusions.[/QUOTE/]

Last Delhi Durbar occurred in 1911. At that time Bengal was a defined historico-geographical unit.

One should not confuse historical Bengal and Bangladesh:-))))

West Bengal was Hindi and stayed in India in 1947. Muslim East Bengal became Bangladesh.

Historical Hindi West Bengal , Assam etc directly border or are in the vicinity of Nepal. Muslim East Bengal is almost Burma.


As a matter of fact, when Nepal became independent after WWI it retained some old Bengal kingdoms.

Plenty of Hindi Koras in historical Bengal:-)))

What was it? Read this for a start:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hassan_Ali_Mirza
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wasif_Ali_Mirza
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waris_Ali_Mirza
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rulers_of_Bengal

[ariel]

David,
Nobody ever claimed here that this particular Kora was actual armament of a royal retinue. Nor was a claim introduced that this particular Kora was even a commemorative piece sold at the Durbar pageant.

The only thing that was said, that according to Oliver, weapons of similar decorative motives were manufactured en masse for Delhi Durbars.

For some reasons, some people misinterpreted ( misread? misunderstood?) the meaning of this statement, took it as an categorical claim about the posted Kora and started a pseudo-academic Jihad , demanding documented and photographic proof affirming the idea nobody here ever advanced.

Please re-read my posts ## 9 and 24 and try to find a single statement that was misleading Panzerraptor or anybody else about historical, artistic or commercial value of the Kora.

Once again, I think that a question asked by a novice deserves truthful, informative and respectful answer. No sarcasm. No snarks. And that was exactly I and Jim tried to convey.

[Jim McDougall]

Panzerraptor,
In hopes you are still here!!! :)
I would like to point out the kind of excitement, drama, controversy, discussion, debate and all manner of dynamics which are brought out by even the most simple of weapons being collected.

You can see the diversity of perspectives, interests, and views being expressed here with the focus being on just what this particular weapon was, and what sort of history might have surrounded it.

Here we have individuals with expertise in a number of fields of arms, some who have studied academically and authored books, some who have written and are amidst finishing other articles on many topics. Even as the subject of photographic evidence is brought into the discussion, we have the benefit of professional photography experience to add to the dimension of our adding that into the equation.
We have English critique to examine the proper words or terms to use in describing some of the circumstances involved in our investigative discussion.

But above all, we have history, so you see how important weapons can be as virtual icons of the times, events and people in which they came from!

While you began a thread with wonderfully posed questions about the collecting of arms, what you have here is a fully dynamic exercise in exactly what collecting weapons is all about!
It is an adventure which becomes lifelong, and 'monumentally' (if the right word:) exciting!!!!!
WELCOME TO OUR WORLD!!! Glad to have you here.

All best regards
Jim

[Jim McDougall]

David, you raise an interesting point about whether early photographs were "posed" or "staged." I agree with Jim that many early photographs of, say, western U.S. subjects, especially Native Americans, were both posed and staged. The subjects of some of these were given costumes to wear and weapons to brandish that were not their own but were simply props for the purpose of the picture. This is still done today and there was a photographer at the Minnesota State fair who for many years would take pictures of his customers in 19th C. style clothing that he provided and carrying a variety of facsimile weapons.

In this spirit, the picture of the big guy (perhaps a Sikh) earlier in this thread wearing the spiked elephant armor would seem to have the characteristics of a staged portrait. Some of his costume may well be his own, but it looks to me like he was dressed up further for this picture. No way of knowing for sure, I suppose, but I don't see any reason why some of these pictures were not "staged," as Jim suggested.

Ian.


Thank you Ian!
As you note, photographers indeed produced many fascinating photos of Native Americans etc. and I found David's edification on the terms 'posed' vs,. 'staged' most interesting.
I fully thought, as you have perfectly noted, that a 'staged' photo would have been of an 'action' illustration, as in my mention of 'combat' photos.
A posed photo would be a still 'portrait type photo.



In an interesting analogy (and I fully expect correction) it seems that in the Mexican Revolution. a movie (film?) maker wanted to use Pancho Villa and his men in a movie. They filmed an actual charge or attack while accompanying him on campaign......however they declined to use the footage.......it wasn't real enough!!!! :)
Now I cannot state which documentary I saw this in, so I present it here anecdotally for entertainment value only.

[ariel]

Say what?

You cannot present a photograph of the movie crew actually filming Pancho Villa at the head of the charge?
Then how can you claim that Pancho was a real living human being? Or that there was a war between the U.S. and Mexico? Or that there was such country as Mexico?

:-))))))))))))))


Argumentum ad absurdum.....

[Jim McDougall]

Say what?

You cannot present a photograph of the movie crew actually filming Pancho Villa at the head of the charge?
Then how can you claim that Pancho was a real living human being? Or that there was a war between the U.S. and Mexico? Or that there was such country as Mexico?

:-))))))))))))))


Argumentum ad absurdum.....

LOL!
I think the problem was that the charge was actual and not staged, so perhaps it posed a reality issue. Also, this was not a war between U.S. and Mexico but an in house problem, the Revolution! We do know that Pancho Villa posed for photographs, as did his men in many cases, and they had weapons, which I believe were real, and not souveniers.

Quo Vadis :)

[David]

Please re-read my posts ## 9 and 24 and try to find a single statement that was misleading Panzerraptor or anybody else about historical, artistic or commercial value of the Kora.
I can assure you Ariel that it is not necessary for me to re-read any of your posts since i have already read yours and everyone else's on this thread 5 or 6 times. But please feel free to re-read my posts as i don't believe any of them have accused you of misleading anybody. :)

[mahratt]

Nobody ever claimed here that this particular Kora was actual armament of a royal retinue. Nor was a claim introduced that this particular Kora was even a commemorative piece sold at the Durbar pageant.

The only thing that was said, that according to Oliver, weapons of similar decorative motives were manufactured en masse for Delhi Durbars.

For some reasons, some people misinterpreted ( misread? misunderstood?) the meaning of this statement, took it as an categorical claim about the posted Kora and started a pseudo-academic Jihad , demanding documented and photographic proof affirming the idea nobody here ever advanced.

Please re-read my posts ## 9 and 24 and try to find a single statement that was misleading Panzerraptor or anybody else about historical, artistic or commercial value of the Kora.

Once again, I think that a question asked by a novice deserves truthful, informative and respectful answer. No sarcasm. No snarks. And that was exactly I and Jim tried to convey.

I do not understand why play with facts? You wrote:


These items date from the end of 19 to the beginning of 20 century. They are ceremonial. They might have been produced as tourist items, but Oliver Pinchot in his book of the late R. Wagner collection had shown a khanda with very similar decorations. In his comment, items of such decorative abundance were produced for the Dehli durbars ( 1877,1903,1911), all-India assemblies at the coronations of British Kings, them being also The Emperors of India. Every Rajah brought a retinue armed to the teeth with very "show-y" weapons. Theatrical? Historical? Depends on the point of view of a collector.

Unless you are specifically interested in the battle-proven weapons, these shields and kora reflect prevailing trends in Indian arms culture of that time.

It now appears that there is no documentary evidence that such swords (as we discuss) worn on the Durbar. Moreover such swords - it is not "part of Indian culture." It - kitsch.

But in the absence of evidence to support "the version that these swords were made for Durbar", conversations were reduced to thinking "posed" thousands of people in the photo or not :)

Some forgotten that those who "posed" no such swords (which we are discussing).

[estcrh]

In this spirit, the picture of the big guy (perhaps a Sikh) earlier in this thread wearing the spiked elephant armor would seem to have the characteristics of a staged portrait. Some of his costume may well be his own, but it looks to me like he was dressed up further for this picture. No way of knowing for sure, I suppose, but I don't see any reason why some of these pictures were not "staged," as Jim suggested. Ian.Ian, I do not know of any Indian elephant armor that looks like this armor, I see no reason to assume that this armor is not real until proven otherwise. If anyone has a picture of Indian elephant armor that resembles the armor being worn in this photo please post it.

I have posted the only other photo I know of Indian spiked armor.

(Indian (Rajasthan) back armor, 17th c, plates of steel with cast pointed spikes joined together with steel mail, giving it strength and flexibility. The entire armour consists of nine rows with five spiked plates in each row. It is padded with red velvet. There are four laces, one at each corner, with which it was tied over a zirah (shirt of mail), L: 66, width : 65 cm. The National Museum, New Delhi.)


Here is a description of the executioner photo from The Wide World Magazine, Volume 1. 1898
LORD HIGH EXECUTIONER OF THE STATE OF REWAH, CENTRAL INDIA.

This picturesque person is not a full - dress character out of one of Mr. Gilbert's operas, nor is he a candidate for a prize at a fancy-dress ball. No, he is none of these things. Do not laugh when I tell you that this is the Lord High Executioner of the State of Rewah, in Central India. As you may see for yourselves, he is a man of most gigantic stature, and he is so rigged up as to inspire feelings of terror in the condemned criminal, whose head he is presently to slice off with his formidable scimitar. He is stuck all over with spikes, even to the underneath part of his forearms, and he would be an unpleasant person to run up against on dark nights, for more reasons than one.

[Mercenary]

Dima, relax. The rare kora of Durbar of Bengal court. Don't upset people.

[ariel]

I can assure you Ariel that it is not necessary for me to re-read any of your posts since i have already read yours and everyone else's on this thread 5 or 6 times. But please feel free to re-read my posts as i don't believe any of them have accused you of misleading anybody. :)

Of course, not.

You understood it very well.
Others, obviously, either relied too much on Google translator ( charitable interpretation) or had some other agenda in mind. Well, to each his own:-)

[ariel]

[QUOTE=ariel]

What was it? Read this for a start:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hassan_Ali_Mirza
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wasif_Ali_Mirza
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waris_Ali_Mirza
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rulers_of_Bengal

These references do not talk about weapons.
And a gentle reminder: 1. Religion of a ruler at a certain period of history does not always reflect religion of a large number of his subjects; 2. Religion of a ruler does not alway reflect the type of weaponry his military uses.

To wit:

I thought we were talking about Kora as a Bengali weapon, weren't we?

Suggest to read Elgood's glossary in his book on Indian arms, re. Bughalee ( p. 238) and Kora ( p.252)
Even Mughals might used it. Sharp steel is sharp steel :-;

[mahratt]

Others, obviously, either relied too much on Google translator ( charitable interpretation) or had some other agenda in mind. Well, to each his own:-)

Dear Ariel, please tell me which of your phrases not correctly translated Google translator?

They are ceremonial.

You say that swords (similar Kora, which we are discussing) - ceremonial. I understand correctly?

I understand that it can not be proven?

Panzerraptor,
They might have been produced as tourist items, but Oliver Pinchot in his book of the late R. Wagner collection had shown a khanda with very similar decorations. In his comment, items of such decorative abundance were produced for the Dehli durbars ( 1877,1903,1911), all-India assemblies at the coronations of British Kings, them being also The Emperors of India. Every Rajah brought a retinue armed to the teeth with very "show-y" weapons.

You say that swords (similar Kora, which we are discussing) - can be souvenirs. But, quoting the book of respected Oliver Pinchot, refuting his same thoughts.

At the same time we have seen that in the book - just a personal opinion respected Oliver. And unfortunately, this view is not supported by historical sources ....

...these shields and kora reflect prevailing trends in Indian arms culture of that time.

Do you honestly think that these items (such as those that we are discussing), once considered India as a weapon ????))))))

Cultural traditions such swords, too, do not reflect. Or do you think otherwise?

[Mercenary]

1. Religion of a ruler at a certain period of history does not always reflect religion of a large number of his subjects; 2. Religion of a ruler does not alway reflect the type of weaponry his military uses. To wit: I thought we were talking about Kora as a Bengali weapon, weren't we?
You told about official Durbar, aren't you? You as always very quickly change your opinion.

Suggest to read Elgood's glossary in his book on Indian arms, re. Bughalee ( p. 238) and Kora ( p.252) Even Mughals might used it. Sharp steel is sharp steel :-;
How from this follows that the subject is muslim's?

You should be careful to give advice to novice collectors. This may render them a poor service, as has already happened some times.

[ariel]

The Siberian Tag Team at work:-)))))

Please, both of you, try to read carefully and think before you fire up your responses. Then, hopefully, you will be able to understand thing better. Example: Elgood's notes are not directed at proving that Bengalis were Muslim. They prove that Kora was a Bengali weapon, too.

In general, your comments bore and annoy me.
Please ignore my posts as I am trying to ignore yours.


OK?

[mahratt]

It is a good idea - to offer to ignore the message. Especially when you can not answer the questions that you ask :)

[Jim McDougall]

LOL!!! :)
You guys are amazing!! Why ignore each other?

This thread IS a durbar!!!!! A festival of hilarity in these barbs and inuendos filled with theatrical and entertaining performances, and bringing in a scope of topics, subject matter of amazing dimension, presented in wonderfully creative scenes.

As this gala thread unfolds , it is amazing to have revealing and informative courses in English, geopolitical history, cultural studies, theosophy and even photographic history and theory among others I may have overlooked.

Mahratt, may I say your English is vastly improving as you bring in new words as well as edification on others such as 'kitsch' and even your astute understanding of the 'word play' on 'posing' etc.

As always, Estcrh you are remarkable in posting these sources and added images!!!! Fascinating notes on this type of armor, I thought Ian was using the term 'elephant' as metaphorical referring to the size of this guy :)
In any case, there are of course cases of various armor used in India (Rajputs?) which were referred to as 'coat of nails'. I doubt that they had these huge spikes, but who knows.......after all, this IS from a DURBAR :)

Sometime in the past, around the early part of this thread I mentioned koras of this form (I think that was the thread topic if memory serves)..were used in ritual (sacrifice of doves). I will rely on the edification of the word smiths here to determine if that might be considered 'ceremonial'.

Is the form Bengali? Some examples are, but the kora is 'believed; to be effectively Nepalese.
Now, I am unsure whether there were border check points to ensure that
these forms were not diffused into either region.

[estcrh]

LOL!!! :)
Fascinating notes on this type of armor, I thought Ian was using the term 'elephant' as metaphorical referring to the size of this guy :)
In any case, there are of course cases of various armor used in India (Rajputs?) which were referred to as 'coat of nails'. I doubt that they had these huge spikes, but who knows.......after all, this IS from a DURBAR :)



Jim, looking back I see that it was actually Oliver that initially mentioned that the armor was made from "elephant armor". Since this image appears to date back to the late 1800s I do not know how it would be from the 1903 Delhi durbar. This photo is from a 1903 edition of National Geographic, commemorating the Delhi Durbar held in that year, which celebrated the accession of Edward VII. In the photo is a no-nonsense character in fanciful armor (some of it repurposed from an elephant armor)

The "coat of nails" that you mention is actually "chilta hazar masha"or "coat of a thousand nails" which is made up of layers of fabric faced with velvet and studded with numerous small brass nails, which were often gilded. The padded coat, minus its nails, is known for short as a chilta and was worn over armour or on its own. Fabric armour was very popular in India because metal became very hot under the Indian sun.

[Ian]

estrch:

I was referring to an earlier comment by Oliver Pinchot about the elephant armor.

Incidentally, The Wide World Magazine is probably not the best source of factual and reliable information. A British monthly publication from 1898-1965, it was the perpetrator of a major hoax through the serial publication of "The Adventures of Louis de Rougement" who was supposed to have spent many years in outback Australia. When the magazine shut down, The Times of London described it as running mostly stories about "brave chaps with large moustaches on stiff upper lips, who did stupid and dangerous things." Not exactly National Geographic. :rolleyes:

Ian

[ariel]

Estrch,
Every time I see this pic I am always wondering: why should an executioner need a helmet, a shield and a heavily-spiked coat? Was he supposed to duel with the convicted person, and how was he supposed to strike with his humongous tegha without impaling his own arm?

I am sure it is a staged portrait to terrify British accountants and rosy-cheeked milkmaids:-)

" By Jove! 'ad it not been for 'is Majesty, these savages would 'ave eaten each other alive! Mistuh 'ennessy, I'll 'ave bangers and a pint of bittuh. Double quick."

[estcrh]

Estrch,
Every time I see this pic I am always wondering: why should an executioner need a helmet, a shield and a heavily-spiked coat? Was he supposed to duel with the convicted person, and how was he supposed to strike with his humongous tegha without impaling his own arm?


Ariel, armor is not necessarily for protection, it was probably part of the show, for the spectators of an event. if this man was actually an executioner then making him seen ferocious would make sense. I can not comment on the usefullness of the armor only that it appears to not be made from parts of an elephant armor as far as I can tell.

Armor was worn by some participants of durbars and other state events, I do not think it was necessary for protection in this case either, but the armor was real, just from a different (earlier) time period.

Bikaner soldiers wearing armor for the Prince of Wales visit to India in 1875-76.

These mail and plate shirts are from a large group of armor that was stored in the Bikaner armory in Rajastan, northern India. Maharaja Anup Singh (reigned 1669–98) was a general in the armies of the Mughal emperor Aurangzeb and led a series of campaigns in the Deccan in the 1680s and 1690s, including battles at Golconda in 1687 and Adoni in 1689. Dates on similar armors indicate that they taken as war trophys during one of the Deccan campaigns. In recent years some of these armors were sold off to dealers and have ended up in private and public collections.

[estcrh]

The Wide World Magazine is probably not the best source of factual and reliable information.

Ian
Ian, I do not doubt that, but the image was published in The Wide World Magazine, 1898 so I am not sure how it could be claimed as an 1903 durbar image, one date is wrong.

[ariel]

Estrch,

Might well be a Durbar-type costume: staged picture or theatrical costume.
Just like the Kora.
If they were connected in some capacity to the Durbar pageant, they would have antiquarian value; if not, they would be worth the cost of materials.

But still, admit it, the journalist mentioning Gilbert and Sullivan defined this costume very well:-)

[estcrh]

Estrch,

Might well be a Durbar-type costume: staged picture or theatrical costume.
Just like the Kora.
If they were connected in some capacity to the Durbar pageant, they would have antiquarian value; if not, they would be worth the cost of materials.

But still, admit it, the journalist mentioning Gilbert and Sullivan defined this costume very well:-)
Ariel, we would just be speculating, it could just as well be an older type of armor that has been re-purposed, when it comes to Indian armor and weapons you just never know, which is why I have an interest in them over lets say American civil war weapons. Here is a similar example, this spiked armor is said to be Siberian bear hunting armor...is it...could be, maybe not, without further info I can not comment further. Maybe the spiked Indian armor was originally used for hunting dangerous animals or some sort of blood sport between fighters, who can say for sure??

The object is being called a Siberian bear-hunting suit,
but I suspect it is more likely to be for bear baiting than hunting,
since I can't imagine anyone could run around the woods in it. It
consists of leather pants and jacket (and an iron helmet) studded
all over with 1-inch iron nails about 3/4 in. apart. The nails are
held in place by a second layer of leather lining the whole thing
and quilted into place between the nails.

[mahratt]

These mail and plate shirts are from a large group of armor that was stored in the Bikaner armory in Rajastan, northern India. Maharaja Anup Singh (reigned 1669–98) was a general in the armies of the Mughal emperor Aurangzeb and led a series of campaigns in the Deccan in the 1680s and 1690s, including battles at Golconda in 1687 and Adoni in 1689. Dates on similar armors indicate that they taken as war trophys during one of the Deccan campaigns. In recent years some of these armors were sold off to dealers and have ended up in private and public collections.

estcrh,
you notice in the picture we see the real weapons and armor. But we do not see the grotesque objects similar discussion to the sword (Kora) :)

[ariel]

Here is a similar example, this spiked armor is said to be Siberian bear hunting armor...is it...could be, maybe not, without further info I can not comment further. Maybe the spiked Indian armor was originally used for hunting dangerous animals or some sort of blood sport between fighters, who can say for sure??

Now I know where the idea for the Pinhead from "Hellraiser" came from.

My son, who is a horror movie encyclopedia, also mentioned a Russian movie by some budding Fellini named Andrei Iskanov titled "Nails".
Seems hammering nails into the head might be a national Siberian pastime.
You know, a bottle of vodka, a pickle, some body piercing with 9 inch brights ... and off we go to get us a bear:-))))

[estcrh]

Now I know where the idea for the Pinhead from "Hellraiser" came from.

My son, who is a horror movie encyclopedia, also mentioned a Russian movie by some budding Fellini named Andrei Iskanov titled "Nails".
Seems hammering nails into the head might be a national Siberian pastime.
You know, a bottle of vodka, a pickle, some body piercing with 9 inch brights ... and off we go to get us a bear:-))))There is a precedent for spikes being used against animals in India, there are examples of spiked doors being used to keep elephants from breaking them down and below is a picture of what is said to be a spiked ball used to hang in the door of elephant stables to keep the elephants from leaving. The "executioners armor" could have been originally for tiger hunting or fighting with wild animals, a known sport in some parts of India.

[David]

You guys are cracking me up with all these photos of spiky things.
It seems that the prevailing wisdom here is that if we can prove that there really was were spiky armor (and walls and balls) in India at the time we can prove what, exactly, about the kora presented here??? :shrug: :confused:
I find it amazing that this image of the "High Executioner" in his spiked armor is creating so much controversy here.
FACT: This image of the "High Executioner" was indeed published in The Wide World Magazine edition of June, 1898. So i am sorry Oliver, your source for this photo is simply wrong. It may have been printed later in National Geographic and purported to be from the 1903 Delhi Durbar, but that information would be completely incorrect, barring the possibility of a time a traveling photographer ;) . There is just no way that it could have been taken at the Delhi Durbar in 1903. Ariel started this whole Durbar red herring early on in this thread due to what i can only suspect was a misunderstanding of what was presented in Oliver's book and it has, IMVHO, squashed any real analysis of this kora ever since, becoming little more than a rematch for old adversaries to trade barbs and sarcasm. I have now looked at many very interesting photos of these Durbar spectacles and read all the offerings of speculation from all sides and have still not seen one single shred of evidence that could possibly link this kora to that historic event, either as a ceremonial weapon carried in processions or even as a cheap souvenir bought in one of the bazaars that would be surrounding a grand Durbar.
Look, i realize this is not an academic, scholarly forum, despite the fact that we do indeed have academics and scholars in our membership. But this whole Durbar thing is just and incredible flight of fancy as far as i can tell. Speculation is fine, but it needs some basis of justification. Instead we are spending our time debating a photo of a guy in a porcupine suit of armor and trying to connect it falsely to the Delhi Durbar as some kind of proof that this kora could still be a ceremonial weapon from the same Durbar that this executioner photo is NOT from because if it is (which it is NOT) then it somehow proves that cheap, decorative weapons might also be used in ceremonies at the Durbar??? Welcome to bizarre world. :rolleyes:
Let me remind everyone of the what Oliver did write when he appeared briefly in this thread.
"Delhi Durbar weapons are usually very well made, but not always. Some were actually carried or worn to the Durbar itself by the nobility. Others were carried by lesser attendees. And still others were offered for sale to guests to commemorate their visit, either in the bazaars or hotels; the range of quality from one to the next is enormous."
"Durbar weapons are usually very well made..." It is amazing to me that some people could then latch onto the "but not always" and use that as some justification that this kora could possible be anything other than a wall hanger.
I must say that this thread has been very entertaining and in many ways informative, but i do feel that it has failed in it's obligation to inform the original poster anything of much use about the kora he brought forward for discussion.

[mahratt]

David, thank you for a reasonable words.

[ariel]

David,
I think you are missing the point: nobody here claims that this Kora is anything but decorative.
The Durbars, especially the 1903 one were giant fairs, with real Rajas and their legitimate retinues , but also with vast logistical and commercial establishments and opportunities.
Here is a text from Wiki about Lord Curzon brilliant administrative achievements:
"The two full weeks of festivities were devised in meticulous detail by Lord Curzon.[5] It was a dazzling display of pomp, power and split second timing. Neither the earlier Delhi Durbar of 1877, nor the later Durbar held there in 1911, could match the pageantry of Lord Curzon’s 1903 festivities. In a few short months at the end of 1902, a deserted plain was transformed into an elaborate tented city, complete with temporary light railway to bring crowds of spectators out from Delhi, a post office with its own stamp, telephone and telegraphic facilities, a variety of stores, a Police force with specially designed uniform, hospital, magistrate’s court and complex sanitation, drainage and electric light installations. Souvenir guide books were sold and maps of the camping ground distributed. Marketing opportunities were craftily exploited. Special medals known as Delhi Durbar Medals, were struck, firework displays, exhibitions and glamorous dances held."

If we accept veracity of Oliver's information about the pattern of decorative work ( and I have no doubt he knows what he is talking about), as well as the inevitable range of quality, the plausibility of this Kora coming from the rock-bottom layer of the Durbar " marketing opportunities ...craftily exploited" becomes not far-fetched.
Not finding it among long-distance images of the throngs of participants and visitors is not an argument that it was not there ( or was not sold from some peripheral bazaar stand): I am certain that even some Rajas cannot be found on these "Where is Elmo?" photographs.

Once again: absense of evidence is not evidence of absense.


So the point is simple: yes, it is ceremonial, commemorative, theatrical, decorative, souvenir ( choose any definition). If it participated in the pageant or even sold as a souvenir there , it still has historical value. If not, it is just a clumsy piece of metal not worth much culturally, historically of financially.


The hooker is, we shall never know for certain.......

[Berkley]

The workmanship on the OP’s kora is typical of Indian decorative “weapons” sold over a period of many years. An illustrative group is from the section headed “Military Decorations” in the 1927 Francis Bannerman catalog.
A “Goorka knife” from the same source exhibits characteristic decoration and fanciful description.
Blades are invariably made from flat stock with minimal taper.

Compare the OPs "kora" with a genuine Indian sacrificial kora on Artzi's site:LINK ( http://www.oriental-arms.com/item.php?id=763)

[Jim McDougall]

Berkley, thank you ! Those are exactly the kukris I was thinking of which are so much like this kora. The BANNERMAN catalog!!! This seller of the early 20th century is an incredible source of so many collectable weapons of shall we say, more affordable stature, which permeated collections by the 50s and 60s. These were the early glory days of collecting where the arms we now can often only dream of owning were around in huge numbers, and very affordable.

This actually quite nicely puts this thread well back on track!
While we have had many fascinating and intriguing entries which digressed into many areas, they have been most informative, and again I thank Estcrh for this wealth of illustrations and data!

The nature of the kora originally posted here has been the point of contention, and while it remains unclear whether it was a 'souvenier' of a durbar or simply one hawked in bazaars at another time cannot be conclusively known.

It is important to realize that in assessing or categorizing weapons being studied or collected, often the term 'of the type' is used.

The term 'ceremonial' here has implied that a kora 'of this form and decoration might have been carried by a participant in the durbars.
While that may be plausible, it cannot be proven.
As Ariel has noted, and in citing Oliver's notes, there was certainly a distinct 'range' of quality in weapons used and otherwise available in these gala events. The quality of this particular example would be the best indicator of its place in that range, and how it may have been placed in the scope of a durbar.......if in fact related at all.

Ceremonial also describes the character of SIMILAR examples without this decoration and usually of sound quality used in sacrificial rituals in Bengal.
That description simply refers to the TYPE of sword, and not necessarily applicable to THIS sword in that sense. This is clearly not such a sword but something more embellished.

[David]

I think you are missing the point: nobody here claims that this Kora is anything but decorative.

So the point is simple: yes, it is ceremonial, commemorative, theatrical, decorative, souvenir ( choose any definition). If it participated in the pageant or even sold as a souvenir there , it still has historical value. If not, it is just a clumsy piece of metal not worth much culturally, historically of financially.

No Ariel, i am not missing the point. And here you are contradicting yourself in a single post. You say "nobody is claiming this kora is anything but decorative" and then go right on to again make claim that it is "ceremonial" and "commemorative". Yes Ariel, you are claiming that it is more than just decorative. You just did now and you have consistently throughout this thread. And this has been a key point of the argument that has ensued.
No one has shown here that any pageants or ceremonies took place at a Durbar where a kora of this quality would have been used. Not in photographs or in written word about such Durbars. Your claim that the "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" is nothing more than double-speak in this context. IMO This type of informal fallacy doesn't really have much practical purpose in our field of study and discussion. Yes, i am quite familiar with the philosophical concept. For those who aren't you can read about it here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance
However, in a case were a member comes to us seeking comments on a sword, while we are free to speculate, i believe we are obligated not to confuse the bejeezus out of him with completely unprovable flights of fancy.
Yes, we probably can never know for sure that this sword was not sold in a market at a Durbar, which, i suppose, would add something to its historical value. At the same time we certainly cannot say that it was, nor should we be giving its new owner the impression that this completely unprovable possibility can ever rightfully be presented in a description of this sword, especially when so many other possibilities exist.

[ariel]

David,
I think that continuing this dialogue is fruitless: we are in different dimensions. I am trying to tell you that I agree with what you are saying about the uncertainty, but you hear that I insist on some certainty. Perhaps, I do not explain myself well...

As to more outcomes for a situation with no evidence, there is alway a possibility in the future that such an evidence is going to announce itself: a sale receipt, collection record etc. Till then we are in a limbo. Rather a common situation in any research: the model was not good, the assay sensitivity sucked, the "n" was miscalculated in a power analysis.... As long as the evidence is theoretically obtainable, it will be obtained sooner or later.

You are right: it is not good to plant seeds of unjustified hope. Just as proclaiming that the case is hopeless. In the absense of firm evidence we can only guess. Statistically, chances are ~95% that you are right. Just let's not forget about those little nasty 5% that this Kora might have been sold for real as a memento of the Great Durbar:-) I have seen enough cases of mild bladder infection progressing into full renal failure, and just a week ago I had a long phone conversation with a good colleague of mine, a very well-known medical researcher who had been found to have inoperable pancreatic cancer about 20 years ago... At a ripe age of 80+ he had been charged by our Society to develop a certain policy, and I am his sidekick. He drives me hard:-)))



That is exactly how I wanted to present the case to the owner. If I phrased it badly, it's my fault. But the meaning was there.

With best wishes,
Ariel

[mahratt]

It's nice that we found out that the discussed sword - it's just a souvenir.. And most likely produced in the early 20th century. And the distinguished Berkley provided evidence of this.

[Jim McDougall]

Very nicely explained Ariel, and nicely noted as well in accord Mahratt!!
Berkeley, beautifully done!!!
You deserve the Nobel Peace Prize here!!!!!!! :)