This intriguing axe shown by Colin has had me struggling for days through notes etc. as this curious motif is so familiar, yet as I found, so elusive.
There are interesting clues however in the entry with similar (perhaps exact) item shown in the vague Christies description.
While the term battle axe is used (another term about as useful as descriptions using northern, southern etc without qualification) it seems the implication is that this is an Indian 'tabar', which it is not.
The Tabar was a larger and heavier axe, a much more conservative blade (not 'lunar' as cleverly noted for 'crescent') and a blunt poll at the back of the head. It was its smaller cousin, the tabarzin, which was a saddle axe of same shape only smaller.
What has been most telling is the Christies entry, which shows the example of this type axe along with a bullova. The bullova is a much varied in form axe, used by tribal groups in the Chota Nagpur plateau in Central India.
The most commonly seen form of head on these is the 'moustach' shape, though other variations are often profound.
What is key is the motif found on many of these 'bullova' axes, in particular the wavy lines with dots in each wave, as well as other linear geometric type accents. The curious bird image is also something seen in motif with many weapons often seen in places from Madurai, and into central eastern regions as noted, and of course farther north in cases.
The same type stippled dot linear motif profiling certain devices, triangular shapes etc is seen on what appears to be a variation of bullova (the traces of red paint as often seen still remaining) which has an almost bell shaped head. This shape is familiar as a Nagan form of dao from Assam in the north. Again, the curiously incised designs prevail, though the blade shape is clearly borrowed.
I think this axe is probably fashioned in central regions surrounding Chota Nagpur, and borrowing from the notions of a 'battle axe' of forms using the crescent head primarily parade or ceremonial style in other parts of India. The examples of these with double crescent axe heads are known in courtly settings seemingly for dramatic effect .
Naturally with this 'interpretive' example the spike at the rear is in my opinion added for effect in that sense, as most of these axes for combat had blunt or hammer type features which were indeed for compromising armor. The spike would probably become lodged in mail or armor, and the smashing of armor in the case of plate would render its occupant unable to move effectively etc.
The exception would be the bhuj, essentially a dagger axe which was indeed for penetration, particularly through textile armor or turbans. These were primarily Rajput though used by other groups.
As I was once told by a much respected author on ethnographic arms, "I dislike geographic boundaries! red lines on maps"...weapons have no geographic boundaries!
Obviously then, this axe, while reflecting key motif often seen on the bullova form in Central India and environs, also is made in an interpretive form reflecting both known types in other regions and spheres with added feature for effect . The caveat would be that it could as well have been produced in regions from virtually south to extreme north in eastern India, again using these terms to illustrate the encompassing vagueness unless including cultural groups or specific principalities
Another well seasoned collector once told me years ago, that virtually none of the various 'battle axes' he had ever examined had been sharpened, a most telling factor in determining their actual purpose . Also, various references noted that the crescent shape head was not a favored type for actual combat.
Also, I am curious about lanyards on these, most examples I have looked into do not have such a feature, and I would like to know of examples that do.
|