Choora-- Pesh Kabz-- Definition

[katana]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

When you come to think of it, since it enjoyed such popularity as a civilian weapon, the people of that time would have had to have had an obsession with inflicting damage on one another's noble parts for it to have been named for the mode of use.

I am not saying that the bollock knife was used exclusively to attack the groin....more of a 'nick name' ...that stuck.

As to names ...the humble 'pen knife' was originally used to re-point a writing quill......that function is no longer necessary.....but the name 'stuck' and is still in common useage.

[kronckew]

it'd be a lot easier to shove one of these thru an eye slit in a helmet than thru the mail at the groin if the opponent was down.(my knife)


the ballock grip looks a bit like a Scottish dirk taken to it's suggestive extreme, i understand the raunchy Elizabethans wore these on the front rather that on the hip or small of the back to emphasize the phallic connotation.

[A. G. Maisey]

In respect of the ballock dagger, as with many other things, we can all believe what we will.

As I have already said, this is outside my area of expertise, but through long association with other collectors who do have expertise in this field, I acquired the opinions which I have already stated.

This morning, after reading Katana's further posts I pulled out Ewart Oakeshott's "Archaeology of Weapons".

If my opinion is incorrect, then it appears Mr. Oakeshott is also incorrect.

[Jim McDougall]

It is extremely interesting to review the terminology used in classifying weapons, especially the folklore, etymology and often 'urban legend' that produce the terms applied colloquially to many forms. Actually the term ch'hura does appear in the index of the original "Illustrated Handbook of Indian Arms" by Lord Egerton (1880) , and it interestingly describes three knives with ivory handles fitting one into another (#380) as ch'hura. It would seem here that the term 'next' or 'another' might apply nicely (these are noted from Ulwar).
In the entry for #483, a dagger termed ch'hura kati is described as short straight blade with ivory hilt, and 'presented' by the Rajah of Vizianagram. This would suggest to me that the term may not be derisively used, at least in Hindu parlance.
It is unclear exactly how the term ch'hura, or choora as more commonly described, may be applied in northern regions, especially the Khyber regions where these are typically associated with the Mahsud (Stone, p.180).

Getting into the arcane terminology of European weapons, the so called 'ballock' knife worn by civilians in the 14th c. was worn on a lowslung belt in Low Countries, Germany and in Britain (where it became known as a 'dudgeon dagger' for the box-root often used for the hilts). These often hung between the thighs, and the phallic handle and dual rounded lobes obviously brought the colloquial term, 'ballock knife'. In Victorian times, the prudish collectors desperately attempted renaming these 'kidney daggers'.
(information from "The Lore of Arms", William Reid, 1976, p.49).

In studying weapons there are so many examples of transliteration, semantics, collectors terms (especially many coined during Victorian times) and local colloquialisms that one becomes extremely wary of relying on terms alone in weapon descriptions. The terms however often add colorful dimension to the study of these weapons, and there may well be considerable elements of fact involved in the lore surrounding the terms.

All the best,
Jim

[Berkley]

Thanks for the reference to the ch’huri [plural] item 380, which I had overlooked. From the description, these “three knives” appear to have little similarity to the Mahsud knife “like the Persian peshkabz” pictured and named “Choora” (without citation) by Stone as his Fig. 227. I had noticed the “ Ch’hura-kati” 483 “dagger”, but its provenance from Vizianagram in southeastern India seems pretty remote from the Khyber area. As Artzi noted in an earlier post: “distribution [of the choora] is limited to the areas around the borders of today’s Pakistan and Afghanistan.” I understood this knife to be the subject of the anecdote regarding the Englishman in “the Afghanistan area” and the Afghan (Farsi? Pashto? One of many others? ) word for “ emasculated”. It may well be that Hindi or other Indian languages contain a similar word, albeit with a somewhat different meaning.

[spiral]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

This would suggest to me that the term may not be derisively used, at least in Hindu parlance.
It is unclear exactly how the term ch'hura, or choora as more commonly described, may be applied in northern regions, especially the Khyber regions where these are typically associated with the Mahsud (Stone, p.180).
Jim

Wednesday, February 22, 2006, The Tribune, Chandigarh, India



"Ropar, February 21"

I"n violation of human rights the word “choora” (lower caste) was inscribed on the back of a 20-year-old Dalit undertrial, Narinder Singh, with hot metal and he was paraded naked allegedly by officials of the Nabha jail. The matter came to light today when Narinder, a resident of Balakalna village, near Morinda town, was produced before the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mr S.K Goel, by his counsel this afternoon. "

Full stoy...

http://www.tribuneindia.com/2006/200...punjab1.htm#12

Nabna is of course in the Punjab, North west India which historicaly includid parts of what today is called Pakistan, { Which is on the Afghan border, after all.}

While I know newspapers are unrealiable in many of articles they print, one assumes they understsand thier own language & its uses.
Perhaps it also helps to remember off course the confusion words like Dear or deer in English can have. with thier various meanings.{But identicle prounounciations.

Perhaps this can also occur in the varios Afghan & Indian languages?

Spiral.

[katana]

Originally Posted by A. G. Maisey

This morning, after reading Katana's further posts I pulled out Ewart Oakeshott's "Archaeology of Weapons".

If my opinion is incorrect, then it appears Mr. Oakeshott is also incorrect.

Hi A.G.,
I think you have misunderstood my view point. This is NOT my opinion ...it is the view of others....I only mentioned it, because it illustrates the point that accepted names of weapons and the origins of that name are not always widely accepted.

AFAIK this 'alternative' view of the 'bollock' knife has not been refuted. If the more widely accepted view is fact, then it should easily survive 'attacks' from differing views? I am no expert....but I do allow myself to be 'open minded', open to plausible 'alternative' view points.

The early Victorian 'researchers' were, to an extent, 'bogged' down with 'social constraint's (many ancient works of Art were left in storage, unavailable for public viewing due to the nudity/sexual content of these pieces) The 'romancism' that proliferated Victorian society had an impact in the 'research' of ancient weapons and warfare. A number of these facts, deduced by these 'researchers' and perpetuated by their published findings have since been disproved. For instance, it was believed that Knights were chivalrous in battle.....untrue ...they fought in any manner they could to survive and if a stab in the back would 'despatch' an enemy ..the opportunity would be taken. Armour was so heavy that knights were winched onto their large horses (shire houses ?) and that if they fell, they would be unable to get up...(like a turtle on its back)...all complete fallacy.

I am sure that many that oppose these published 'facts' were told they were incorrect in their assumptions ....until they were able to 'prove' conclusively that these 'facts' were incorrect. I say 'conclusively'.....because often, many would still believe 'the written word' and the common held belief that it created.(and of course, the situation that other authors use these 'facts' when they use them from 'references' to the original) There is always a danger that if 'published facts' (that are untrue, but not known to be incorrect at the time) are unchallenged they become 'gospel', and often,the longer they survive...the harder it is disprove....because it is so widely accepted ...people begin to believe that if the 'majority' say it is fact...then it must be. Not so long ago the masses believed that the heavenly bodies revolved around the earth.......they were wrong.

[A. G. Maisey]

Katana, I used the word "opinion" in reference to myself.

As you point out, you have not expressed an opinion, but have simply passed on information relative to the opinions of others.

I do have an opinion, which I have expressed, and that opinion has been formed formed by research carried out by recognised authorities in this field.

As you point out, the research to date, the opinions of recognised authorities, and my own opinion could all be in error, and I acknowledge that this is so. However, for the moment, and based upon available evidence, I prefer to stay with my current opinion.

As I have already remarked:- we are all entitled to believe what we will.

[Jim McDougall]

Spiral, well done! Nicely supported proof of the use of the term for 'lower caste', thank you for the clarification. It would appear then that the term does in fact carry that connotation. It would be great at this point to find someone with knowledge of the many dialects in these northern regions to help with etymology.
Berkley, you're welcome. It seems that this term is applied rather loosely to varying forms of dagger and as far as SE India, and apparantly may have more to do with the anecdote applying to Lord Egerton.

Best regards,
Jim