Afghan Jezail in York, UK

Jim McDougall · 28th March 2010, 05:44 PM

Actually I put little stock with pundits, and it is the passion for the study of military history which is the determining factor rather than the degree itself. Clearly you have the powerful dimension of both

It seems you and I have been on very much the same page, and that particular link I found very useful as there is surprisingly little information is available in the limited resources on firearms I have. The one book I wish I had on hand on the British guns is "British Military Firearms" by the late Howard Blackmore, as well as another title by I believe, Brooker.

As Ward has well illustrated, tradition runs deep in these formidable regions, and through the millenia these warrior tribes have always proven virtually unconquerable as a whole. It seems quite plausible that these markings and working components were put together in good faith for use in these frontier regions in a traditional tribal sense. Through the centuries native armourers have copied European markings on blades and weapons as they believed the power imbued in the original weapons would be transferred to thier work through them. With the trade sword blades ,merchants often would focus on the markings emphasizing them to the buyers. As many of these markings were symbols of various form they lent well to native sensitivity to cross any language barriers and became presumed representative of power.

While the markings are clearly and instantly recognized by a westerner to be incorrect, such as the dates incongruent (i.e. VR in 1952; 1817 on a percussion lockplate) letters backwards and words misspelled, a native would not be aware of these errors.

Regardless of being a modern interpretation of a historic weapon, for those of us who study ethnographic weapons, it is exciting to know that many of these weapons are still used anachronistically in many cultures. We study the kaskaras and takoubas of the Sudan and the Sahara, still worn by tribesmen there. In the remote mountain villages of the Georgian Caucusus, Khevsurs still wore mail as late as the 1930's and fought with swords. In Saudi Arabia the Bedouin still wear swords and in some cases still have adhered to the old matchlock muskets.

Rather than seeing this rugged piece as a modern forgery as certainly some might claim, I see it more as an example of historic tradition alive and well in our modern times and perhaps fighting with descendants of the warriors who have used them for centuries.

All very best regards,
Jim

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

28th March 2010, 05:44 PM	#6
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,198	Actually I put little stock with pundits, and it is the passion for the study of military history which is the determining factor rather than the degree itself. Clearly you have the powerful dimension of both It seems you and I have been on very much the same page, and that particular link I found very useful as there is surprisingly little information is available in the limited resources on firearms I have. The one book I wish I had on hand on the British guns is "British Military Firearms" by the late Howard Blackmore, as well as another title by I believe, Brooker. As Ward has well illustrated, tradition runs deep in these formidable regions, and through the millenia these warrior tribes have always proven virtually unconquerable as a whole. It seems quite plausible that these markings and working components were put together in good faith for use in these frontier regions in a traditional tribal sense. Through the centuries native armourers have copied European markings on blades and weapons as they believed the power imbued in the original weapons would be transferred to thier work through them. With the trade sword blades ,merchants often would focus on the markings emphasizing them to the buyers. As many of these markings were symbols of various form they lent well to native sensitivity to cross any language barriers and became presumed representative of power. While the markings are clearly and instantly recognized by a westerner to be incorrect, such as the dates incongruent (i.e. VR in 1952; 1817 on a percussion lockplate) letters backwards and words misspelled, a native would not be aware of these errors. Regardless of being a modern interpretation of a historic weapon, for those of us who study ethnographic weapons, it is exciting to know that many of these weapons are still used anachronistically in many cultures. We study the kaskaras and takoubas of the Sudan and the Sahara, still worn by tribesmen there. In the remote mountain villages of the Georgian Caucusus, Khevsurs still wore mail as late as the 1930's and fought with swords. In Saudi Arabia the Bedouin still wear swords and in some cases still have adhered to the old matchlock muskets. Rather than seeing this rugged piece as a modern forgery as certainly some might claim, I see it more as an example of historic tradition alive and well in our modern times and perhaps fighting with descendants of the warriors who have used them for centuries. All very best regards, Jim