Translation of Indian blade inscription

A. G. Maisey · 25th February 2012, 01:00 AM

Jens, the way in which a person shares the information he or she may have is a very strong indication of the depth of that person's knowledge and also of his character.

For instance, I have known and still know a number of academics who cling tenuously to their tenures, and who possess shallow knowledge and very mean characters. These people are reluctant to share any information at all.

I also know people who are at the very top of their professions who openly share all and everything they know, except the perhaps the one or two percent of their knowledge that places them above the drones.

On the very few occasions when I do lodge a query in this Forum I expect nothing at all. If somebody with superior knowledge to my own in a particular field chooses to answer, it is his decision to do so, or not.

Personally, I do not see the involvement of anybody in this discussion group of being on the basis of "you give me this, and I'll give you that" . Every day of my life I answer questions from people all over the world, people whom I have never met and am never likely to meet. If I know an answer to the question, I give it, if I do not know I say so.

The question I have lodged concerns script, nothing more, nothing less.

If it can be read by somebody, an answer will be greatly appreciated.

The script has nothing at all to do with the object upon which that script has been placed. All the information necessary to answer the question has already been given.

This idea of yours that if a full photograph of somebody's possession is not given, then an answer to a straight forward, though apparently obscure question should not be given, I do indeed find very peculiar.

But then we all live by different standards, don't we?

Jens Nordlunde · 25th February 2012, 09:24 AM

Alan, it is commonly used on this forum, when a detail of a weapon is shown for discussion, also to show the whole weapon. The detail shown does not help me to find out from where the dagger comes, as my knowledge of the language shown on the detail, is very little, and does not give me a clear indication from where it comes, a picture of the whole dagger might have helped.

I use a lot of time researching and answering questions from other collectors, so your comment on my lack of help in this case, is taken with a

.

Jens

A. G. Maisey · 25th February 2012, 11:49 AM

Jens, your reaction to my overly polite post is very surprising to me.
I have not commented in even the slightest degree upon your assistance, nor lack of it.

I have commented in general terms upon what I perceive to be a rather peculiar attitude. I am extremely familiar with this attitude, and it is one that has always mystified me.

I am also familiar with the usual practice of posting a photo of an entire piece, and the sticky that requests this, and this was the reason for my apology for being unable to comply with this practice. I would have thought that no further comment would have been required in regard to this.

The query I posted concerns script. Only script, nothing else. The fact that it is on a weapon is totally irrelevant, it might just as well have been on a piece of paper. If it can be read, it can be read: if cannot be read, then it cannot be read.

My friend was not asking to be told where this object was from, nor what it was called, nor how old it was, he was simply asking if the script could be read. It appears it cannot be read. End of story.

I thank you most sincerely for your efforts in attempting to read this script, but I accept that this is beyond you, as many things are equally beyond myself, and all of us. Since you cannot read it, then it is clear that you are not withholding any assistance, so how is it possible that I could make any sort of remark that referred to your lack of assistance? I'm sure you have done the best you could, and again I thank you for your efforts.

Emanuel · 28th February 2012, 02:07 AM

Hello Alan,

A friend's father identified the script as indeed being Kannada. The translation is attached.

First picture (top)

Quote:

I think this is in Kannada. It says: “Choo Ra Sam. 47” (Here abbreviated ‘Sam’ stands for ‘Samvatsar’ or year. ‘Choo Ra’ could be name ‘Shoora’ ( or valiant person)

Second picture (bottom) writing is oriented upside down

Quote:

See this picture through a mirror. Now it looks as below. (I rotated the picture clockwise 360 degree)

In Kannada it reads as follows:
“Shri Krishna Sam. 1163” (Shri Krishna Samvatsar 1163) (or Sri Krishna. Year 1163)

PS: I am not 100% sure whether my interpretation is correct.

The "choo ra" mention is interesting. We use this name for the smaller variant of these pesh-kabz/karud type daggers, but we've heard that this word is not used locally used. Perhaps the name was derived by some early collector from a similar inscription.

Regards,
Emanuel

A. G. Maisey · 28th February 2012, 02:29 AM

I thank you most sincerely for the time and effort you have taken in providing this translation, Emanuel, and I offer my friend's thanks on his behalf.

Do we know what the year is in our calendar?

Emanuel · 28th February 2012, 02:46 AM

My pleasure Alan.

1163 in the Malayalam calendar seems to correspond to 1988 Gregorian

If correct, then either the inscription is a later addition to the blade, or the whole thing is of recent manufacture - not unlikely.

A. G. Maisey · 28th February 2012, 09:34 AM

Again I thank you Emanuel, however, I feel there may be some degree of error in the dating.

As I said, I know this dagger. In fact I know it very well, until a few years go it belonged to me, before me it belonged to my grandfather, and he purchased it before 1920, on the way home from WWI.

It is a genuinely old dagger, and has been in Australia since before 1920, so I rather think the dating may be just a little bit off the mark.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

25th February 2012, 01:00 AM	#1
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,992	Jens, the way in which a person shares the information he or she may have is a very strong indication of the depth of that person's knowledge and also of his character. For instance, I have known and still know a number of academics who cling tenuously to their tenures, and who possess shallow knowledge and very mean characters. These people are reluctant to share any information at all. I also know people who are at the very top of their professions who openly share all and everything they know, except the perhaps the one or two percent of their knowledge that places them above the drones. On the very few occasions when I do lodge a query in this Forum I expect nothing at all. If somebody with superior knowledge to my own in a particular field chooses to answer, it is his decision to do so, or not. Personally, I do not see the involvement of anybody in this discussion group of being on the basis of "you give me this, and I'll give you that" . Every day of my life I answer questions from people all over the world, people whom I have never met and am never likely to meet. If I know an answer to the question, I give it, if I do not know I say so. The question I have lodged concerns script, nothing more, nothing less. If it can be read by somebody, an answer will be greatly appreciated. The script has nothing at all to do with the object upon which that script has been placed. All the information necessary to answer the question has already been given. This idea of yours that if a full photograph of somebody's possession is not given, then an answer to a straight forward, though apparently obscure question should not be given, I do indeed find very peculiar. But then we all live by different standards, don't we?

25th February 2012, 09:24 AM	#2
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	Alan, it is commonly used on this forum, when a detail of a weapon is shown for discussion, also to show the whole weapon. The detail shown does not help me to find out from where the dagger comes, as my knowledge of the language shown on the detail, is very little, and does not give me a clear indication from where it comes, a picture of the whole dagger might have helped. I use a lot of time researching and answering questions from other collectors, so your comment on my lack of help in this case, is taken with a . Jens

25th February 2012, 11:49 AM	#3
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,992	Jens, your reaction to my overly polite post is very surprising to me. I have not commented in even the slightest degree upon your assistance, nor lack of it. I have commented in general terms upon what I perceive to be a rather peculiar attitude. I am extremely familiar with this attitude, and it is one that has always mystified me. I am also familiar with the usual practice of posting a photo of an entire piece, and the sticky that requests this, and this was the reason for my apology for being unable to comply with this practice. I would have thought that no further comment would have been required in regard to this. The query I posted concerns script. Only script, nothing else. The fact that it is on a weapon is totally irrelevant, it might just as well have been on a piece of paper. If it can be read, it can be read: if cannot be read, then it cannot be read. My friend was not asking to be told where this object was from, nor what it was called, nor how old it was, he was simply asking if the script could be read. It appears it cannot be read. End of story. I thank you most sincerely for your efforts in attempting to read this script, but I accept that this is beyond you, as many things are equally beyond myself, and all of us. Since you cannot read it, then it is clear that you are not withholding any assistance, so how is it possible that I could make any sort of remark that referred to your lack of assistance? I'm sure you have done the best you could, and again I thank you for your efforts.

28th February 2012, 02:29 AM	#5
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,992	I thank you most sincerely for the time and effort you have taken in providing this translation, Emanuel, and I offer my friend's thanks on his behalf. Do we know what the year is in our calendar?

28th February 2012, 02:46 AM	#6
Emanuel Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 1,242	My pleasure Alan. 1163 in the Malayalam calendar seems to correspond to 1988 Gregorian If correct, then either the inscription is a later addition to the blade, or the whole thing is of recent manufacture - not unlikely.

28th February 2012, 09:34 AM	#7
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 6,992	Again I thank you Emanuel, however, I feel there may be some degree of error in the dating. As I said, I know this dagger. In fact I know it very well, until a few years go it belonged to me, before me it belonged to my grandfather, and he purchased it before 1920, on the way home from WWI. It is a genuinely old dagger, and has been in Australia since before 1920, so I rather think the dating may be just a little bit off the mark.