Quote:
Originally Posted by ariel
I know full well that the Forum has very negative attitude to political discussions.
But we are discussing historical weapons here and history includes politics.
We cannot discuss Indian weapons without mentioning the roles and actions of British government or of EIC, the "Mutiny", Afghani weapons without mentioning the causes and aftermaths of British-Afghani wars , Philippine weapons without mentioning Spain and the USA, French in Indochina and North Africa, Britain in Arabia, Portuguese in India and Arabia, Mughals in South India etc, etc, etc.
By the same token, the consequences of different Russian governmental actions in the Caucasus and Central Asia need to be discussed to understand histories and weapons of those regions.
We obviously have very different views and you are entitled to yours. However, I would suggest you read the book by Paul Bergne " The birth of Tajikistan" and Richard Frye's " The heritage of Central Asia". Perhaps, they will add something to what you were taught at school.
Just one comment: unilaterally pronouncing that some other country taken by force becomes your permanent and inviolable property and then asserting that any anti-occupation (liberation) movement is illegal because " You cannot " occupy" what is already yours" is a non sequitur. We can see it even today in daily news.
On a lighter note, Monty Python had a skit in which pupils were forced to pray for the memories of soldiers who "died to keep China British":-)))
|
Definitely, history includes politics. But for some reason, it is with regard to the history of Russia that you are overuse "politics".
I am grateful for your recommendation to study the books by Paul Bergne "The birth of Tajikistan" and Richard Frye's "The heritage of Central Asia". But for your information, enough books on the history of Central Asia have been published in Russia. My views on the historical processes in the region were formed under the influence of these numerous sources. It is a pity that your views are limited to the school and the couple of books that you recommended to me.
Since we are talking about "the history of Central Asia", let me remind you that Britain sought to make the khanates its colony, similar to India, seeking to limit the Russian Empire in her southern borders. Although maybe you were taught that the British Empire sought to Central Asia to bring the "light of democracy" to native peoples?
I explained in sufficient detail your incorrect statements about the "history of Central Asia". Don't muddle the Russian Empire and Soviet Russia. Do not muddle the Basmachi, who oppose the ideas of Soviet Russia, with the people's liberators. People's liberators do not kill their fellow citizens and fellow believers because they do not agree with their ideas and do not want to support them. The Basmachi movement was not anti-occupation (liberation).
Those who stood at the head of the Basmachi movement belonged to the "top" of the rule of the khanates: these were former ministers, judges, religious figures and just very rich native people... The arrival of Soviet Russia threatened their power and wealth. Therefore, they took advantage of the mistakes of the representatives of the Soviet government and at first were able to attract a significant number of the native people to their side. Freeing the "common people" was the last thing they were interested in.
You should understand this period of the history of Central Asia a little deeper, not limited to English-speaking authors.
But enough about history and politics. Maybe let's go back to shamshirs? Will you show samples of shamshirs from Central Asia that you mentioned? I think it would be interesting in this topic for its further development.
Photos to understand the issue of leather (suede) covers for the handles of shamshirs in the khanates of Central Asia: