Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Ethnographic Weapons

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 10th November 2015, 01:55 AM   #1
Emanuel
Member
 
Emanuel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1,242
Default

The example I question is a basically a small shield with blades on it. The bagh nakh is a small "glove" with claws hidden in the hand. One is a parrying weapon, the other is a small concealed weapon.

Santie/saintie may not be the name for it, but it is a parrying weapon.

I won't repost them here but I think you added some awesome parrying weapons on your Pinterest. They do seem to vary a lot, some more like the madu or the haladie, others more like jamadhar.

Last edited by Emanuel; 10th November 2015 at 03:51 AM.
Emanuel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th November 2015, 07:05 AM   #2
estcrh
Member
 
estcrh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 1,492
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Emanuel
The example I question is a basically a small shield with blades on it. The bagh nakh is a small "glove" with claws hidden in the hand. One is a parrying weapon, the other is a small concealed weapon.

Santie/saintie may not be the name for it, but it is a parrying weapon.

I won't repost them here but I think you added some awesome parrying weapons on your Pinterest. They do seem to vary a lot, some more like the madu or the haladie, others more like jamadhar.
Emanuel, Indian parrying weapons have one thing in common, side bars for parrying, the weapon you are questioning has no side bars so how can you parry a weapon with it. To me it appears to be an evolved type of bagh nakh, it has five blades instead of claws and it is grasped by bars instead of rings and and it shields the holders hand but its basic purpose seems to be the same.

Last edited by estcrh; 10th November 2015 at 04:35 PM.
estcrh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th November 2015, 12:16 PM   #3
Emanuel
Member
 
Emanuel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1,242
Default

I disagree with you Eric but I'll leave it at that.
It remains that these are fascinating weapons
Emanuel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th November 2015, 02:44 PM   #4
Pukka Bundook
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 803
Default

Gentlemen,

I know little of these weapons, but as a bagh nakh is a concealed weapon, I do not think we can call the weapon in question by this name, and as it would appear to be a secondary weapon, with say a longer blade in the other hand, I would say its use was for parrying.

I do hope other examples of this type can be found, as I have never seen one in Egerton or Elgood or anywhere else. There surely had to be a name for this, as it does appear to have some age to it.

Best regards Richard.
Pukka Bundook is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th November 2015, 04:27 PM   #5
Jens Nordlunde
Member
 
Jens Nordlunde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 2,718
Default

Emanuel and Richard are right, the first one shown has nothing to do with a bagh nakh, it is for parrying maybe to spike the opponents shield.
The bagh nakh is 'tiger claws' hidden in the hand, so the later ones shown, with a dagger at each end, is more than doubtful to be a bagh nakh, as it can hardly be hidden the way it should be.
Jens Nordlunde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th November 2015, 04:44 PM   #6
estcrh
Member
 
estcrh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 1,492
Default

There seems to be some difference in how people define a "parrying weapon", to me it needs to have a long blade or bar to parry a sword such as the example below.
Attached Images
 
estcrh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th November 2015, 09:59 PM   #7
VANDOO
(deceased)
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: OKLAHOMA, USA
Posts: 3,138
Smile

HERE ARE A FEW MORE I HAVE PICTURES OF NONE OF THEM ARE MINE.
#1. bagh nakh circa 1800
#2 " " 20 th. century, 12 cm.
#3. & #4. " " circa 1900, 10.2 cm.
#5. " "
#6. " " ready for use.
#7. & #8 bagh nakh two that belonged to Lew.
# 9. a picture of a weapon similar to the one you show i had it listed as a 5 bladed armored hand and forearm with a katar type grip.
# 10, #11. & #12. a odd India weapon with multiple blades and a katar grip and hand guard.
Attached Images
            
VANDOO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th November 2015, 08:39 PM   #8
estcrh
Member
 
estcrh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 1,492
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jens Nordlunde
Emanuel and Richard are right, the first one shown has nothing to do with a bagh nakh, it is for parrying maybe to spike the opponents shield.
The bagh nakh is 'tiger claws' hidden in the hand, so the later ones shown, with a dagger at each end, is more than doubtful to be a bagh nakh, as it can hardly be hidden the way it should be.
Jens, there is no rule that I know of that bagh nakh had to be hideable, many bagh nakh that I have seen could not actually have been hidden due to their size except maybe in the dark, some were smaller or had folding blades so it could be hidden but most that I have seen had several claws sticking out, not exactly something you could put into your front pocket. My bagh nakh is 5.25 in long with 1.5 in claws, not something you could easly hide. The word that Stone uses is "concealed", other descriptions do not mention "hidden" or "concealed" at all. Some bagh nakh did have blades attached making this form not hideable at all, these types maybe need a hyphenated name like the tabar-zaghnal but they are just as much a bagh nakh as a dagger.

A few references that do not mention "concealed" or "hidden".

On the left from "Chambers's Journal", W. & R. Chambers, 1892.

On the right from "Life in Bombay, and the neighbouring out-stations" Richard Bentley, 1852.

On the bottom from George Stone.
Attached Images
   
estcrh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th November 2015, 05:58 PM   #9
Jim McDougall
Arms Historian
 
Jim McDougall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by estcrh
Jens, there is no rule that I know of that bagh nakh had to be hideable, many bagh nakh that I have seen could not actually have been hidden due to their size except maybe in the dark, some were smaller or had folding blades so it could be hidden but most that I have seen had several claws sticking out, not exactly something you could put into your front pocket. My bagh nakh is 5.25 in long with 1.5 in claws, not something you could easly hide. The word that Stone uses is "concealed", other descriptions do not mention "hidden" or "concealed" at all. Some bagh nakh did have blades attached making this form not hideable at all, these types maybe need a hyphenated name like the tabar-zaghnal but they are just as much a bagh nakh as a dagger.

A few references that do not mention "concealed" or "hidden".

On the left from "Chambers's Journal", W. & R. Chambers, 1892.

On the right from "Life in Bombay, and the neighbouring out-stations" Richard Bentley, 1852.

On the bottom from George Stone.

When it comes to the wide spectrum of innovative and varying types of weapons in India, there really are no 'rules' or specific guidelines. What Jens was referring to with the bagh nakh corresponds more to its use as a 'weapon' by assassins which suggests an offensive (vs. defensive) and often 'concealed' item.
I think that the suggestion of being 'hidden' is one widely held, as seen by comments of numerous participants here.

The idea of this being 'ceremonial' I think corresponds well to that most unforgettable image of the 'prickly' executioner at durbar. It seems to me that these durbars, and exhibitions often during the reign of Queen Victoria in the Raj were the source for a good number of 'innovative' creations in weaponry intended to showcase the skills of Indian armourers.

In many cases these unusual weapons were meant to appear threatening or formidable, though their often vestigial features would likely have been quite impractical in actual combat or use.

I think that the item posted here in the thread topic is as has been noted, more aligned with a parry weapon, and with blades for thrust supported by the transverse grip as in katar. The bagh nakh is obviously intended for slashing and tearing, and clearly insufficient for any type of parry as would be expected in a covertly used weapon against unsuspecting victim.

While not large (as many 'bucklers' were small) this has arm guards akin to the vambrace, which could offer protection in degree as used. Many Indian shields had spear points at the boss used in much the same way.
Jim McDougall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th November 2015, 01:19 AM   #10
estcrh
Member
 
estcrh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 1,492
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pukka Bundook
I do hope other examples of this type can be found, as I have never seen one in Egerton or Elgood or anywhere else. There surely had to be a name for this, as it does appear to have some age to it.

Best regards Richard.
Richard here is one more, this has seven pattern welded blades. These hybred type weapons are a bit hard to categorize.
Attached Images
  
estcrh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th November 2015, 02:25 PM   #11
Emanuel
Member
 
Emanuel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1,242
Default

Beautiful example Eric!

We're getting farther from the bagh nakh discussion but I wonder if this multi-bladed thing wasn't part of some ceremonial accoutrements like the garb of the High Executioner at the Delhi Durbar (attached pic). His arm guards look similar.

These things look very well built and to be made entirely from crucible steel must say something about their importance.
Attached Images
 
Emanuel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th November 2015, 07:46 PM   #12
estcrh
Member
 
estcrh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 1,492
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Emanuel
We're getting farther from the bagh nakh discussion
Emanuel, the bladed bagh nakh were mentioned, there are some that were definately bagh nakh with a blade added, then there are daggers with bagh nakh type claws, its fairly easy to distinguish between the two types. I have not seen a bagh nakh with a fixed blade at both ends but there are examples with two fixed blades, one in the middle and one at the end. Bottom right, George Stones description of bichwa-bagh nakh.
Attached Images
    

Last edited by estcrh; 11th November 2015 at 08:02 PM.
estcrh is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:29 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.