European blades in India

estcrh · 11th January 2016, 04:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

* this assumption is indeed reasonable with the number of European blades found in the Tanjore katars.

The Met has some very nice katar that are described as having European blades, several others appear to have them as well but it is not mentioned in the description.

ariel · 11th January 2016, 04:45 PM

We need to be precise in our definition of the question: are we asking whether European bladed were USED of PREFERRED?

The USE is indisputable. The PREFERENCE is unprovable: it depended on personal circumstances of the owner ( individual or his sovereign). We cannot get into heads of people dead for 200-300 years. Limited number of individual opinions or testimonies cannot reflect prevailing attitude of the entire society. Moreover, such individual snippets are reasonably evenly divided between pros and cons. This is a dead end.

Were European blades POPULAR in India? But of course. Wre Indian blades popular among the Europeans? Not very. Was it because of their quality or simply because EIC or (later) The Crown supplied their British soldiers with regulation, British-made, weapons? Probably both.

The reference to Rawson re. Basket Hilt misses the point: it is a mix of a modified Old Indian hilt and a European D-guard. It is the latter that largely transformed the older version into a new pattern. Elgood discussed ~ 12th century ( have no book nearby) temple depiction of warriors wielding swords with D-guards ( i.e. well before the contact with the Portugese), but doubts them because there are no ancient actual examples. I am a bit uneasy with that, but can't argue with the fact: no similar feature prior to 16th century is known. In general, I would hesitate using Rawson as the final evidence: his book is full of statements that are no longer considered valid by the contemporary body of knowledge. Suffice it to say that he did not know the difference between wootz and mechanical damascus. He should get full credit as the author of the first systematic book on Indian swords, but his materials and conclusions are significantly outdated and cannot be viewed as 100% reliable without further confirmation. Well, this is the fate of almost every book :-)

Jim McDougall · 11th January 2016, 05:21 PM

You are most welcome Richard! It was as always very much my pleasure.

Actually I think Ariel has summed this up perfectly in his last post.
The differences between use and preference as well as the diversity of one of the most complex subcontinents in so many aspects. Indeed we cannot know what was in the minds people in this hugely broad spectrum over considerable time and vast regions.
I know the question was directed at finding written evidence in the literature but again , it will vary considerably depending on circumstances as shown.

Mercenary · 11th January 2016, 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Indeed we cannot know what was in the minds people in this hugely broad spectrum over considerable time and vast regions.

I can not agree. As for me, I know what was in the mind of admiral Angria in Maharashtra in the beginning of 18th :-)

Jens Nordlunde · 11th January 2016, 09:40 PM

I think Ariel is right.
Someone told me years ago, that my European logic way of thinking was wrong. The Indians did not think in the same way. It took me very long time to understand this, and although I am far from sure that I have understood it fully, I think that I have understood part of it.
The logic we use in the western part of the world to day, can not be compared to the logic the Indians would have used centuries ago.
Their religious tiers were strong, and the supersticion was very strong.
We sit in our sofas in front of the TV, and try to decide what the Indians thought centuries ago - do you think that is research?

Mercenary · 11th January 2016, 09:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jens Nordlunde

I think Ariel is right.
Someone told me years ago, that my European logic way of thinking was wrong. The Indians did not think in the same way. It took me very long time to understand this, and although I am far from sure that I have understood it fully, I think that I have understood part of it.
The logic we use in the western part of the world to day, can not be compared to the logic the Indians would have used centuries ago.
Their religious tiers were strong, and the supersticion was very strong.
We sit in our sofas in front of the TV, and try to decide what the Indians thought centuries ago - do you think that is research?

That is why I prefer the descriptions of eyewitnesses. Preferably the cross descriptions.

ariel · 11th January 2016, 11:44 PM

I think we have flogged this horse enough. The questions have been answered to the satisfaction of every reasonable person and we are just repeating ourselves.

Jim McDougall · 11th January 2016, 09:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mercenary

I can not agree. As for me, I know what was in the mind of admiral Angria in Maharashtra in the beginning of 18th :-)

That is wonderful! I very much admire your confidence in the narrative by Mr. Grose, and it seems quite apparent that Admiral Angria did not like English blades, or that was what was perceived by the narrator or perhaps whatever source he used (Im not sure if Grose was there when he said this).

I think Jens explained 'perception' from culture to culture if not in different times alone extremely well. I have personally always been most impressed by Jens' profoundly restrained approach to research and fact finding and realizing the boundaries we must often recognize as we proceed .

Mercenary · 12th January 2016, 09:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

That is wonderful! I very much admire your confidence in the narrative by Mr. Grose, and it seems quite apparent that Admiral Angria did not like English blades, or that was what was perceived by the narrator or perhaps whatever source he used (Im not sure if Grose was there when he said this).

I think Jens explained 'perception' from culture to culture if not in different times alone extremely well. I have personally always been most impressed by Jens' profoundly restrained approach to research and fact finding and realizing the boundaries we must often recognize as we proceed .

I am very appreciate for your excellent search through the secondary sources and good generalization of all known information. I agree with Jens too.
But I only wanted to know if some of the travelers or authors of the court chronicles right mentioned that Indians prefered the European blades. I haven't been able to find it.

11th January 2016, 04:45 PM	#2
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	We need to be precise in our definition of the question: are we asking whether European bladed were USED of PREFERRED? The USE is indisputable. The PREFERENCE is unprovable: it depended on personal circumstances of the owner ( individual or his sovereign). We cannot get into heads of people dead for 200-300 years. Limited number of individual opinions or testimonies cannot reflect prevailing attitude of the entire society. Moreover, such individual snippets are reasonably evenly divided between pros and cons. This is a dead end. Were European blades POPULAR in India? But of course. Wre Indian blades popular among the Europeans? Not very. Was it because of their quality or simply because EIC or (later) The Crown supplied their British soldiers with regulation, British-made, weapons? Probably both. The reference to Rawson re. Basket Hilt misses the point: it is a mix of a modified Old Indian hilt and a European D-guard. It is the latter that largely transformed the older version into a new pattern. Elgood discussed ~ 12th century ( have no book nearby) temple depiction of warriors wielding swords with D-guards ( i.e. well before the contact with the Portugese), but doubts them because there are no ancient actual examples. I am a bit uneasy with that, but can't argue with the fact: no similar feature prior to 16th century is known. In general, I would hesitate using Rawson as the final evidence: his book is full of statements that are no longer considered valid by the contemporary body of knowledge. Suffice it to say that he did not know the difference between wootz and mechanical damascus. He should get full credit as the author of the first systematic book on Indian swords, but his materials and conclusions are significantly outdated and cannot be viewed as 100% reliable without further confirmation. Well, this is the fate of almost every book :-)

11th January 2016, 05:21 PM	#3
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,295	You are most welcome Richard! It was as always very much my pleasure. Actually I think Ariel has summed this up perfectly in his last post. The differences between use and preference as well as the diversity of one of the most complex subcontinents in so many aspects. Indeed we cannot know what was in the minds people in this hugely broad spectrum over considerable time and vast regions. I know the question was directed at finding written evidence in the literature but again , it will vary considerably depending on circumstances as shown.

11th January 2016, 09:40 PM	#5
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	I think Ariel is right. Someone told me years ago, that my European logic way of thinking was wrong. The Indians did not think in the same way. It took me very long time to understand this, and although I am far from sure that I have understood it fully, I think that I have understood part of it. The logic we use in the western part of the world to day, can not be compared to the logic the Indians would have used centuries ago. Their religious tiers were strong, and the supersticion was very strong. We sit in our sofas in front of the TV, and try to decide what the Indians thought centuries ago - do you think that is research?

11th January 2016, 11:44 PM	#7
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	I think we have flogged this horse enough. The questions have been answered to the satisfaction of every reasonable person and we are just repeating ourselves.