Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post

B.I · 14th September 2005, 10:37 PM

i think both jens and i took your posting of these two daggers as a comparative point, of which it seems we were wrong.
i think that in indian arms, sometimes all we have is comparative specualtion and so we have to look for a symplistic way of 'categorising pieces, otherwise these discussion would be pretty short.
the point i was trying to make is that your dagger could have possibly made from an older katar (or something similar) as the blade from is one i have seen in curved katars. indian pieces do have a certain progressive form which, although loose, allows us to push specualtion a little further. this was the point robert was making in his book, when he pulled together a 'type' in order to emphasise that this could be done, instead of just re-showing the same old 'wallace collection' indian arms.
still not sure which type your dagger fits into, so maybe the way forward is to list the 'types' that it doesnt conform to.

14th September 2005, 10:37 PM	#14
B.I Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 485	i think both jens and i took your posting of these two daggers as a comparative point, of which it seems we were wrong. i think that in indian arms, sometimes all we have is comparative specualtion and so we have to look for a symplistic way of 'categorising pieces, otherwise these discussion would be pretty short. the point i was trying to make is that your dagger could have possibly made from an older katar (or something similar) as the blade from is one i have seen in curved katars. indian pieces do have a certain progressive form which, although loose, allows us to push specualtion a little further. this was the point robert was making in his book, when he pulled together a 'type' in order to emphasise that this could be done, instead of just re-showing the same old 'wallace collection' indian arms. still not sure which type your dagger fits into, so maybe the way forward is to list the 'types' that it doesnt conform to.