[Jim McDougall]

Hi Jens & Brian,
I think we all agree that many of the more elaborate Indian weapons as well as western observations on them were in degree whimsical and subject in many cases to certain folklore in traditional sense.

In "Indian Firearm Curiosa" ("Arms & Armour" Vol.1, #1, p.81), Ian Bottomley states; "...Indian gunmakers enjoyed the patronage of clients who delighted in novelties. Guns were incorporated into other weapons such as axes,maces and swords...".

Naturally this illustrates the climate of armourers in India, especially in the 19th c. , when unique and exotic looking weapons were quite in vogue with the many rulers of varied principalities. Probably these proved interesting as gifts in the diplomatic strains between rulers under the suzerainty of the British Raj as well.

Bottomley (op.cit.) states further; "...all of these weapons, no matter how
cunningly concealed or cleverly devised, were in reality highly impractical".

I think this is for most of these 'weapons curiosa' typically the case, whether edged weapons or firearms, or both combined. As Tom Hyle mentioned, the concept of poisoned weapons seems to have been well known in folklore and tradition in most cultures. It seems the only actual application which seems undoubtedly established are the poison darts and arrows known in tribal warfare. For most edged weapons, the poison seems redundant as presumably the thrust or blow would prove mortal in most cases, especially with limited medical expertise available. With the dart or arrow, the wound potential is somewhat limited as a distanced projectile, thus the wound with a poisoned tip would prove certainly fatal regardless of its location anatomically.
Much of the concept with 'poisoned weapons' is likely psychological, as is presumed with 'voodoo' where the conditioned response to implication is sometimes quite measurable with the victims reaction.

All the best,
Jim