Information Please about Ivory Ceremonial Staff and Hatchet
 

These were acquired about 15+ years ago, along with some indo persian weapons during a purchase of oriental rugs from a fellow who was a nephew of a singer sewing machine salesman in India in the very early 1900s.

They are ivory with painted bone inlay and wood in the knob of the staff. We assume they are ceremonial from India. the tall staff is nearly 6 ft. long and can be disassembled into two pieces. the other is similar construction, with a rusted but ornate blade with a temple on top and a small image underneath on both sides. I don't know how they were used or really anything about them.

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/search...2&pp=25&page=5

THE AX IS REFERRED TO AS A ZAGHNAL AND IS FROM INDIA. YOURS IS NOT ONE USED FOR WAR BUT WOULD BE USED IN PROCESSIONS AND PARADES AND PERHAPS IN CEREMONIES. I HAVE ATTEMPTED TO ATTACH A OLD POST ON THEM. MY FIRST ATTEMPT TO DO SO. IF IT DOSEN'T WORK A SEARCH OF THE FORUMS FOR ZAGHNAL SHOULD BRING UP SOME INFORMATION.

I agree with vandoo is a ceremony zaghnal

Heres one off my wall. The narrow wooden shaft is reenforced with a metal insert down the centre. According to my friends at the RA this one is probably 18thC. The working point is heavily reenforced for armour piercing.

Were they drunk?

The OP's pieces look like Victorian 'take home' stuff, imho . :shrug:

No, they were acknowleged experts and professionals in the field, who had the item in their hands rather than just looking at a photo. Bit of a suprise for me as well as I thought it more likely 19th when I bought it.
Possibly they were referring to the head only, which is quite robust. I think the shaft a little delicate for a user...but it does have the steel fillet down the centre usual for Indian shafted weapons.

Ah, because that's not what you said is it?
But even the head doesn't look 18thC to me. Which part of the head? The whole head including the brass elephant of the type well known on the later 19thC pieces and even early 20th wall hangers?
Oh well, I guess the "acknowleged experts and professionals in the field" can't be argued with ;)
Who was it BTW?


I sure changed my mind about Lion headed chrome plated Indian Kukri after Manchester Museum (who have a nice selection of fine Kukri) identified this 'Rare Ghurka sword': http://insidethem60.journallocal.co....hester-museum/
In case the picture is too small, here's the larger version:

Their faces are priceless xD Oh how much I wish to tell them that its a touristy item made in some basement... lol

They have been told Lotfy. I posted a comment on that site linked to explaining that the Kukri was a 1970s Indian made export item and it was deleted. I know other people sent them emails.
I'm guessing that this 'rare' Kukri won't make it to the public display that they mentioned.

In some ways museums are more likely to misidentify than collectors. Museums sometimes have the problem that their experience seems limited to genuine items and when they see fakes or reproductions they try to fit them into their sphere of knowledge.
Often it's the collectors who have more 'experience' of the later or reproduced items than the so-called experts.


Then of course there is 'expert syndrome' as well. lol

Anyway. Your Zaghnal looks all contemporary to me. I'd say a kindly estimate would be circa 1875 give or take a 1/4C.

But AS ALWAYS I live to learn and if proven wrong will be all the happier to have increased my understanding.

;)

Edit: Here's just one:
http://www.oriental-arms.com/item.php?id=3588

"*snip*axe of the Zaghnal family, India, mid to late 19 C."

Well whatever, I bought it as 19th C for a bargain price, and have no particular investment in it being 18th C, I took it in for one of our meetings and was very pleased to hear the opinion that it was possibly older.
Even the best can make mistakes, but they have a world level collection for reference, and the advantage of handling it. I will leave it to you to contact them and inform them of their mistake. http://www.royalarmouries.org/visit-...eeds-galleries

You're very welcome, glad to have been of help.

I'm confused. were they actually used in processions, in the temple, or just souvenirs? With the little temple on the Zaghnal, it is i assume hindu. Who might have carried it in a procession? I found one identical to the staff sold a few years ago at Sotheby's in London for a considerable sum. Only identifiers were Indian 19th C.

I HAVE SEEN EXAMPLES OF THIS INDIAN FORM OF BATTLE AX /HAMMER TYPE WEAPON SUITABLE FOR BATTLE AND OTHERS LIKE THIS EXAMPLE MORE SUITED TO PROCESSIONAL USE.
I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS
1. ARE THEY PRESENT IN INDIAN ARSENALS IN LARGE NUMBERS OR VERY UNCOMMON?
2. WERE THEY ONLY CARRIED BY PERSONS OF RANK OR WEALTH.?
3. THE HEAD CAN BE REMOUNTED EASILY SO A SHAFT SUITABLE FOR ACTUAL BATTLE USE COULD BE ADDED OR REMOVED IN MANY EXAMPLES.
4. THERE SHOULD BE MORE SIMPLE FORMS OF HEAD IF THEY WERE USED IN BATTLE BY LARGER NUMBERS OF TROOPS HAS ANYONE SEEN PLAIN EXAMPLES WITH STEEL SHAFTS PERMANENTLY ATTACHED?
5.OFTEN THE FANCY ONES HAVE A HIDDEN SPIKE DAGGER IN THE BASE OF THE HANDLE SIMULAR TO WHAT IS SOMETIMES FOUND IN THE HANDLE OF A ANKUS. COULD THE ZAGHNAL HAVE ANY SPECIFIC USE ON ELEPHANTS IN WAR OR USE IN PROCESSIONS. ?

WE HAVE HEARD STORIES OF THE MAUHT KILLING AN ELEPHANT WHEN IT WAS OUT OF CONTROL WITH THE SPIKE IN THE ANKUS HANDLE OR WITH A KATAR PERHAPS A HEAVY ARMOR PIERCING BLADE SUCH AS THE ZAGHINAL HAS COULD SERVE THE SAME PURPOSE BETTER THAN EITHER OF THE OTHER TWO? IT COULD ALSO SERVE AS AN ANKUS FOR WELL TRAINED ANIMALS IN PROCESSIONS AND PARADES.

WITH LUCK PERHAPS WE WILL HAVE SOMEONE WITH GOOD INFORMATION AND REFRENCES ON SUCH A UNUSUAL AND OFTEN ELABORATE ITEM AND ITS USES. ANY COMMENTS OR INFORMATION WELCOME. :)

A little late in the game with this observation and a little OT, but in all fairness to the Manchester Museum, the quote from some journalist's online article appears as just that - a quote from a journalist. ;)

In the absence of a direct attribution to an official representative of the museum, i.e., the absence of quotations to denote this was told to a journalist verbatim as it appears in the article, I would suggest all they are guilty of is allowing the inaccuracy to go unaddressed, as in turn they are receiving some additional publicitiy - a welcomed gift in this day and age of tightened purse strings. :shrug:

And of course, curators do get things wrong from time to time, though as a general rule and in the absence of verifiable error* I tend to defer to their knowledge base and depth of archival references, often incorporating their attributions into my own reference library.

As a final note, I personally am thankful for the fallibility of 'experts,' as on more than one occasion, their error has been to my benefit! :D

*That mirror-finished chrome kukri is obviously one such exception... ;)