Quote:
|
Originally Posted by sirupate
As I said reflection, and Jonathan and I must have the same picture from the GM Chris
|
It is quite clearly not a reflection Simon, one only has to study the enlarged image to see that.
My own copy of this image came courtesy of the Imperial War Museum, Lambeth.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by sirupate
Hi Chris, I don't think one can be certain it was of Nepalese manufacture, especially if it was military.
Of course the Hanshee/Lambendh labels are not Nepalese but Westerners trying to label certain types of kukri, Hanshee by John Powell and Lambendh by Jonathan Sedwell.
As you say Chris reminiscent of earlier types, although the 'Hanshee' name was given to quite a distinctive type, all the best Simon
Hanshee and other 18th Century Kukri, from the National Museum in Kathmandu in Nepal;
|
I think one can be as certain as one can be that the kukri is Nepalese in origin, rather than Indian. What makes you think it isn't?
In regards to the typology of kukri that is rather a broad subject, again, probably best discussed elsewhere, so as not to clutter up this thread.
However, as no real terms exist in Nepal to distinguish between kukri types, in order to separate various design features and further our knowledge, such "labels" must be employed.
I believe it was Bill Martino who introduced the term "Hanshee", which was a corruption of the word "hansiya", a term used for a sickle like tool. It may be wrong, but it is still a term known and used by collectors, and as such, who am I to change it?
As "lambendh" literally translates as "long handle" it certainly makes the most sense. Different people use different terms, and in absence of any labels from the country of origin, we westerners with an interest in such things must do the best we can.
Kind regards,
Chris