Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post

dennee · 17th March 2016, 04:07 AM

I, too, would see no reason to exclude them if they could be demonstrated to be part of that arsenal, which is why I asked if somebody has any. I'm certainly not against the idea in principle, just properly skeptical, I think. I would be just as satisfied knowing either way. But he burden of proof would seem to lie with one claiming that a specific example or type is Tibetan. Why is it Tibetan, and what does it mean to be Tibetan? You seem to suggest it doesn't really mean anything, but I'd disagree.

It is overstating the case to say that borders didn't matter, when they did in fact exist---substantially where they are now, because of the Himalayas---and were defended. What has changed in recent decades is the Chinese occupation choking off much north-south trade and pushing Tibetan refugees into Nepal. Of course, we have to acknowledge that Nepal was not always a unified state, nor was Tibet. Yet Tibet retained a cultural identity since its unification in the 7th century, even when divided or weak.

This forum seems to be a place where people try to draw distinctions between items from different parts of India, Indonesia, the Philippines, the Arabian peninsula, etc. Distinctions can sometimes be made between items from areas less remote from each other and less culturally different. But I would tend to agree that, at some level, it is probably not of earth-shattering importance to draw such distinctions. Perhaps a fixation on classification is silly, yet here we are.

One cannot discount the ethno-linguistic, religious and cultural differences on opposite sides of the border, despite the fact that the boundary was not drawn to include all Sherpas and residents of Mustang. The relations between the countries and the influence on Tibet of the Nepalese since the 7th century is well documented. So is the employment of many Newari builders, painters and metalworkers at the time Buddhism was fading from the land of its birth. And while the granting of extraterritorial rights to Nepali traders in the 17th century indicates Tibetan openness to them (after a war), it was nonetheless another recognition of other-ness. One also cannot discount the influence of the Chinese, especially in the weaponry of the last few centuries, which is presumably the time period we're discussing when it comes to our own collections.

One also has to consider that while the countries border each other, their population centers, where most craftsmen would be found, do not. Despite the considerable trade and even some settlement in each other's countries, the distances that traders traveled was considerable and populations were spread out. While people occupied pretty much all the valleys, there was not quite the mixing that occurs on the U.S.-Canada border.

What is known is that there are some examples of koras in Tibet. Were they introduced by war or trade? If they were instead produced in Tibet, was it by Nepalese craftsmen? Is it possible that the form originated in Tibet? Why are they so different in form from other Tibetan swords? If produced or used there, why don't there seem to have been more examples come out during the Younghusband expedition or the Cultural Revolution (both events resulted in a fair amount of documentation of items collected)? Or maybe they did come out and are in our collections, but don't have clear provenance. Whatever their origins, if they were once used by Tibetans in significant numbers, why don't they so far appear in Tibetan art (where both the archaic Indian and modern Tibetan weapons do)? Is the skinny kora with a medial ridge and deeply concave distal end an older type from the ones we see more commonly, or could it even represent distinctions within Nepal?

Some thoughts about ways to address such questions about Tibet: are there indeed wall paintings that show koras borne by individuals identifiable as Tibetans? Are there more examples of a particular type with a firm provenance in Tibet? Do some koras show signs of being made in Tibet because of the similarities to Tibetan blade steel or fittings?

Anyway, it's not that important, but perhaps as interesting as most other questions that arise here.

17th March 2016, 04:07 AM	#23
dennee Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: College Park, MD Posts: 186	I, too, would see no reason to exclude them if they could be demonstrated to be part of that arsenal, which is why I asked if somebody has any. I'm certainly not against the idea in principle, just properly skeptical, I think. I would be just as satisfied knowing either way. But he burden of proof would seem to lie with one claiming that a specific example or type is Tibetan. Why is it Tibetan, and what does it mean to be Tibetan? You seem to suggest it doesn't really mean anything, but I'd disagree. It is overstating the case to say that borders didn't matter, when they did in fact exist---substantially where they are now, because of the Himalayas---and were defended. What has changed in recent decades is the Chinese occupation choking off much north-south trade and pushing Tibetan refugees into Nepal. Of course, we have to acknowledge that Nepal was not always a unified state, nor was Tibet. Yet Tibet retained a cultural identity since its unification in the 7th century, even when divided or weak. This forum seems to be a place where people try to draw distinctions between items from different parts of India, Indonesia, the Philippines, the Arabian peninsula, etc. Distinctions can sometimes be made between items from areas less remote from each other and less culturally different. But I would tend to agree that, at some level, it is probably not of earth-shattering importance to draw such distinctions. Perhaps a fixation on classification is silly, yet here we are. One cannot discount the ethno-linguistic, religious and cultural differences on opposite sides of the border, despite the fact that the boundary was not drawn to include all Sherpas and residents of Mustang. The relations between the countries and the influence on Tibet of the Nepalese since the 7th century is well documented. So is the employment of many Newari builders, painters and metalworkers at the time Buddhism was fading from the land of its birth. And while the granting of extraterritorial rights to Nepali traders in the 17th century indicates Tibetan openness to them (after a war), it was nonetheless another recognition of other-ness. One also cannot discount the influence of the Chinese, especially in the weaponry of the last few centuries, which is presumably the time period we're discussing when it comes to our own collections. One also has to consider that while the countries border each other, their population centers, where most craftsmen would be found, do not. Despite the considerable trade and even some settlement in each other's countries, the distances that traders traveled was considerable and populations were spread out. While people occupied pretty much all the valleys, there was not quite the mixing that occurs on the U.S.-Canada border. What is known is that there are some examples of koras in Tibet. Were they introduced by war or trade? If they were instead produced in Tibet, was it by Nepalese craftsmen? Is it possible that the form originated in Tibet? Why are they so different in form from other Tibetan swords? If produced or used there, why don't there seem to have been more examples come out during the Younghusband expedition or the Cultural Revolution (both events resulted in a fair amount of documentation of items collected)? Or maybe they did come out and are in our collections, but don't have clear provenance. Whatever their origins, if they were once used by Tibetans in significant numbers, why don't they so far appear in Tibetan art (where both the archaic Indian and modern Tibetan weapons do)? Is the skinny kora with a medial ridge and deeply concave distal end an older type from the ones we see more commonly, or could it even represent distinctions within Nepal? Some thoughts about ways to address such questions about Tibet: are there indeed wall paintings that show koras borne by individuals identifiable as Tibetans? Are there more examples of a particular type with a firm provenance in Tibet? Do some koras show signs of being made in Tibet because of the similarities to Tibetan blade steel or fittings? Anyway, it's not that important, but perhaps as interesting as most other questions that arise here.