Mysore Dagger Inscription Help

Mare Rosu · 7th January 2005, 07:34 PM

This Dagger is now in my possession

The following information was "pulled" from last year old forum.
I would like to reestablish this thread so as to decipher the inscriptions.
Ian and BI , as well as Radu I need your help on this!

Quote
W beautiful dagger.
The attribution of this dagger to Tipu Sultan is somewhat confused by the description of the piece. The Royal Mysore Armory was never controlled by Tipu Sultan, but rather the Maharaja of Mysore.

Tipu's father, Hyder Ali, was head of the Maharaja's army. Tipu and his father took exception to British rule and led several uprisings against the British. While the Maharaja continued to "rule" in Mysore, Tipu set up his palace at Seringhapatan, about 10 miles outside Mysore. He coined his own currency and manufactured his own weapons, some of which were specifically designed by Tipu. It was this citadel that the British -- including Wellesley (later the Duke of Wellington) -- stormed, and Tipu was killed in its defense.

I believe this knife is more likely from the property of the Maharaja of Mysore. It bears none of the motifs that Tipu used (such as the tiger), and the armory mark is not consistent with Tipu having commissioned the piece. The writing on the blade does appear to be Kanada.

Ian.

[This message has been edited by Ian (edited 08-28-2004).]

IP: Logged

BI
Member posted 09-02-2004 05:43
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Ian:
The attribution of this dagger to Tipu Sultan is somewhat confused by the description of the piece. The Royal Mysore Armory was never controlled by Tipu Sultan, but rather the Maharaja of Mysore.
Ians assessment seems borne from a keen eye and is very accurate, in that this piece is not directly from the ‘Tipu’ armoury, but rather from the armoury of Mysore. Sellers use the term ‘Tipu’ unscrupulously to attract attention, and I don’t think this done in ignorance.
The script is indeed Kannada and I can provide a brief history of the armoury and the pieces it contained.
After Tipu’s defeat at Seringapatum, the armoury was dispersed as spoils and divided amongst the officers in charge. The best and the most historical were given as gifts to the leading officers and the regent and brought back to England. The land that comprised the Mysore state was divided between the East India Company and the Nizam of Hyderabad. The throne of mysore was restored to the original Hindu dynasty (usurped by Tipus father) by the English and a 5 year old heir of the Wadiyar family became the new Maharaja, under tutorage and annually funded by the Company.
One of the tasks appointed the royal family was to rebuild the palace and restore the wealth and armoury. This was continued during the reigns of the following descendants. However, the presence of certain earlier pieces (17th-18thC) imply that many items were probably handed back from the Company after seringapatum to form the nucleus of the new armoury and a stable beginnings for the new Maharaja to add to. In this, we can loosely attribute a ‘Tipu’ link but as we question pieces taken during the siege and fallen around the Sultans body by his elite guard, so we should be even more wary of pieces handed back afterwards. A quote, shortly after the conquest of Seringapatum would give an idea of the amount of weapons taken – ‘There were taken 929 pieces of cannon, including mortars and howitzers, 424000 iron balls, 520000 lbs of powder and 99000 stand if arms, whilst in the magazines and foundaries was found all manner of warlike munition in the same proportion.’
The Mysore armoury still exists, and many pieces sold from the dispersal of the Tanjore armoury in 1878 (?) found its way here. However, many pieces were sold of over the last few decades and taken all over the world. The style of these pieces were very specific (chiselled amalgamations of ancus/axes etc), although, like this dagger, some were more standardised. About 10 years ago, a large collection was sold in London that came straight from the armoury and these were the best of their kind. Many pieces were indeed early and all held this same script. The script itself (from recordings, not my own translations) held the words ‘Sri Krishna’, followed by a series of numbers. Some held a short description of the weapon eg ‘hidden dagger’ or hidden axe’, ‘big dagger’ etc. These inscriptions were thought to be added later and the ‘Sri Krishna’ is normally attributed to Krishnaraja Wadiyar 3rd. The pieces from this armoury were never of the quality as its surrounding areas ie Tipus original armoury or Tanjore, as the armoury was rebuilt during a relatively peaceful time (after occupation). Tipu’s taste led to a much higher quality, even in the fairly municipal pieces. The Mysore armoury has been shut from a short while but the armoury, as far as I know still exists and is normally open to the public.
Actually Tipu pieces do exist and occasionally surface onto the market. Collectors seem more wary now as quality and true provenance is paramount to any serious collection. Loose attributions from small dealers are normally ignored and tend only to catch people unaware across the internet, where a piece cannot be held and scant descriptions and clever photography are all you can go by. Very recently, Tipus bedchamber sword was sold in London. This sword had a double provenance, in that it was found in Tipus bedchamber (by tradition, a different sword was brought from his armoury to his bedchamber every night). This sword was handed to General Baird (an important attribution in itself), who spent time in Tipus dungeons and, after returning to England, came back to India to lead the storming of Tipu’s capital. The sword remained in his family (in Scotland) until recently. This sword lacked the ‘tiger’ motif normally associated with Tipu swords, but held pious inscriptions inlaid into the hilt. The scabbard, however, held a border of ‘bubri’ stripes, inherently attributed to pieces from Tipu’s armoury. The blade was straight and of European style, and was fully inscribed on presentation to Baird in 1799. Whilst likened to relatively normal tulwars, it held a real presence and fetched a high price by a Mysore businessman who wanted to return the sword to its ‘true home.’

7th January 2005, 07:34 PM	#1
Mare Rosu Deceased Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: USA, DEEP SOUTH, GEORGIA, Y'all hear? Posts: 121	Mysore Dagger Inscription Help This Dagger is now in my possession The following information was "pulled" from last year old forum. I would like to reestablish this thread so as to decipher the inscriptions. Ian and BI , as well as Radu I need your help on this! Quote W beautiful dagger. The attribution of this dagger to Tipu Sultan is somewhat confused by the description of the piece. The Royal Mysore Armory was never controlled by Tipu Sultan, but rather the Maharaja of Mysore. Tipu's father, Hyder Ali, was head of the Maharaja's army. Tipu and his father took exception to British rule and led several uprisings against the British. While the Maharaja continued to "rule" in Mysore, Tipu set up his palace at Seringhapatan, about 10 miles outside Mysore. He coined his own currency and manufactured his own weapons, some of which were specifically designed by Tipu. It was this citadel that the British -- including Wellesley (later the Duke of Wellington) -- stormed, and Tipu was killed in its defense. I believe this knife is more likely from the property of the Maharaja of Mysore. It bears none of the motifs that Tipu used (such as the tiger), and the armory mark is not consistent with Tipu having commissioned the piece. The writing on the blade does appear to be Kanada. Ian. [This message has been edited by Ian (edited 08-28-2004).] IP: Logged BI Member posted 09-02-2004 05:43 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [QUOTE]Originally posted by Ian: The attribution of this dagger to Tipu Sultan is somewhat confused by the description of the piece. The Royal Mysore Armory was never controlled by Tipu Sultan, but rather the Maharaja of Mysore. Ians assessment seems borne from a keen eye and is very accurate, in that this piece is not directly from the ‘Tipu’ armoury, but rather from the armoury of Mysore. Sellers use the term ‘Tipu’ unscrupulously to attract attention, and I don’t think this done in ignorance. The script is indeed Kannada and I can provide a brief history of the armoury and the pieces it contained. After Tipu’s defeat at Seringapatum, the armoury was dispersed as spoils and divided amongst the officers in charge. The best and the most historical were given as gifts to the leading officers and the regent and brought back to England. The land that comprised the Mysore state was divided between the East India Company and the Nizam of Hyderabad. The throne of mysore was restored to the original Hindu dynasty (usurped by Tipus father) by the English and a 5 year old heir of the Wadiyar family became the new Maharaja, under tutorage and annually funded by the Company. One of the tasks appointed the royal family was to rebuild the palace and restore the wealth and armoury. This was continued during the reigns of the following descendants. However, the presence of certain earlier pieces (17th-18thC) imply that many items were probably handed back from the Company after seringapatum to form the nucleus of the new armoury and a stable beginnings for the new Maharaja to add to. In this, we can loosely attribute a ‘Tipu’ link but as we question pieces taken during the siege and fallen around the Sultans body by his elite guard, so we should be even more wary of pieces handed back afterwards. A quote, shortly after the conquest of Seringapatum would give an idea of the amount of weapons taken – ‘There were taken 929 pieces of cannon, including mortars and howitzers, 424000 iron balls, 520000 lbs of powder and 99000 stand if arms, whilst in the magazines and foundaries was found all manner of warlike munition in the same proportion.’ The Mysore armoury still exists, and many pieces sold from the dispersal of the Tanjore armoury in 1878 (?) found its way here. However, many pieces were sold of over the last few decades and taken all over the world. The style of these pieces were very specific (chiselled amalgamations of ancus/axes etc), although, like this dagger, some were more standardised. About 10 years ago, a large collection was sold in London that came straight from the armoury and these were the best of their kind. Many pieces were indeed early and all held this same script. The script itself (from recordings, not my own translations) held the words ‘Sri Krishna’, followed by a series of numbers. Some held a short description of the weapon eg ‘hidden dagger’ or hidden axe’, ‘big dagger’ etc. These inscriptions were thought to be added later and the ‘Sri Krishna’ is normally attributed to Krishnaraja Wadiyar 3rd. The pieces from this armoury were never of the quality as its surrounding areas ie Tipus original armoury or Tanjore, as the armoury was rebuilt during a relatively peaceful time (after occupation). Tipu’s taste led to a much higher quality, even in the fairly municipal pieces. The Mysore armoury has been shut from a short while but the armoury, as far as I know still exists and is normally open to the public. Actually Tipu pieces do exist and occasionally surface onto the market. Collectors seem more wary now as quality and true provenance is paramount to any serious collection. Loose attributions from small dealers are normally ignored and tend only to catch people unaware across the internet, where a piece cannot be held and scant descriptions and clever photography are all you can go by. Very recently, Tipus bedchamber sword was sold in London. This sword had a double provenance, in that it was found in Tipus bedchamber (by tradition, a different sword was brought from his armoury to his bedchamber every night). This sword was handed to General Baird (an important attribution in itself), who spent time in Tipus dungeons and, after returning to England, came back to India to lead the storming of Tipu’s capital. The sword remained in his family (in Scotland) until recently. This sword lacked the ‘tiger’ motif normally associated with Tipu swords, but held pious inscriptions inlaid into the hilt. The scabbard, however, held a border of ‘bubri’ stripes, inherently attributed to pieces from Tipu’s armoury. The blade was straight and of European style, and was fully inscribed on presentation to Baird in 1799. Whilst likened to relatively normal tulwars, it held a real presence and fetched a high price by a Mysore businessman who wanted to return the sword to its ‘true home.’ Attached Images Last edited by Mare Rosu; 7th January 2005 at 08:25 PM.