The exhibition oriental weapons "The Mortal Beauty" of private collections in Russia,

[ariel]

Originally Posted by mahratt

I told only about the exhibition and the catalog only. Just my opinion. I do not understand what makes you so angrily that you attack me constantly. And it is very strange to talk so unkind about man who lived 200 years ago, he can not hear you. It is madness. If you continue I afraid moderators will warn you.

Under no circumstance do I attack you personally, and there is no anger on my part. There was not, and there will not be any personal insult or sarcasm. I just find inaccuracies and misinterpretations in your presentation of your arguments and try to correct them using direct references and objective facts. If you re-read my comments carefully, you will not find any attack or unkind word about you as a person.

Arguing about the facts is another ball of wax.

The whole idea of the Forum is to exchange objective information ( interspersed, of course, with personal but objective interpretation of the content).

As to prince Saltykov, my opinion about him plummeted down after his badmouthing his host who invited him into his house. Kind of " The food was terrible, and the portions were too small". This is not something I find acceptable.
The fact that he is dead plays no role: all historical personalities are dead by now. This had never prevented historians to express their opinions about them. Alexander the Great? Caligula? Hitler? Stalin? Mao? Sometime ago I have read withering critique of Mother Theresa, of all people.

[Battara]

I agree with David, especially posts after Jim's feedback.

You are skating on thin ice, especially if I am getting involved!

Please be very careful........

[Jim McDougall]

Please understand guys, I noted I AM very pleased with the informational aspects of your comments........WITHOUT any personal remarks .
You can express points of view and your own agreement or contrary perspective without personal comments.
The personal jabs are not clever, simply demeaning to the issuer.
In that, I agree that these are very tedious.

Regardless of rules, there are simple matters concerning courtesy and gracious interaction which have more to do with common sense, which should be quite familiar to everyone here.

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by ariel

As to prince Saltykov, my opinion about him plummeted down after his badmouthing his host who invited him into his house. Kind of " The food was terrible, and the portions were too small". This is not something I find acceptable.
The fact that he is dead plays no role: all historical personalities are dead by now. This had never prevented historians to express their opinions about them. Alexander the Great? Caligula? Hitler? Stalin? Mao? Sometime ago I have read withering critique of Mother Theresa, of all people.

I do not understand what this has to study the weapons? But, since you're talking about it, let's find out the situation.

Prince Saltykov, as I understand it, did not say something about what you say to the owner in person. So Saltykov did not offend his host. If you specify more accurately describes that Prince Saltykov, perhaps all will be easier to draw conclusions. I do not remember this quote, so ask your clarification.
It seems strange to compare politicians and philanthropists. But that's just my opinion ...

[mahratt]

Photo:

[ariel]

"Prince Saltykov, as I understand it, did not say something about what you say to the owner in person. So Saltykov did not offend his host."

Yes, that is exactly what I meant: he did it behind his back. And this is exactly what I do not like.

But enough about that: we obviously have different criteria of " proper behavior", and since Prince S. is dead, we cannot change anything:-)

However, I have a different angle on the same story, addressing not ethical but very practical issues that may be of greater interest to the Forumites.

I am not at home now, rather far away from my library. In the evening I shall try to concoct another missive, less controversial but more interesting this time:-) OK?

[mahratt]

Life example: a friend of mine recently returned from Afghanistan and he was telling me about how was a guest of Afghans. He told me about the horror of dirt and terrible unsanitary conditions. He is constantly thought of not threatened if he dysentery. It was just his story about the journey. My friend had no desire to offend the master of the house in Kabul. He shared his impressions. My analogy is clear?

But I think enough about it? Take a look a few more photos:

[estcrh]

Thanks for the very nice image of the vajra-mushti and bagh nakh, any idea what the two small items are in the lower right side?

[estcrh]

Love this.

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by estcrh

Thanks for the very nice image of the vajra-mushti and bagh nakh, any idea what the two small items are in the lower right side?

That is what is written in the exhibition catalog:

[Gavin Nugent]

Originally Posted by estcrh

Thanks for the very nice image of the vajra-mushti and bagh nakh, any idea what the two small items are in the lower right side?

They look like Scribes tools Estcrh.

No much to add other than thanks for sharing the images of the exhibition Mahratt, it is greatly appreciated.

I see one of my old Patissa there too...I am very glad to see it displayed and hopefully well published.

Gavin

Edit; I see a crossed post, thank you for the further confirmation Mahratt.
The straight type is sometimes found with the Pia Kaetta knives too.

[ariel]

OK, I am back:-)



I just want to put together some thoughts re. recent Elgood's book about arms & armour at Jaipur Court and how it changes our perception of Indian weapons collections all over the world in general ( our little private oases included, regretfully:-((( ) and Saltykov's contribution in particular.



One of the main ( if not THE MAIN!) theses of the book is the conclusion that many objects traditionally attributed to the 17-18 centuries were in fact made at the end of the 19th century and sold by itinerant vendors to tourists. This thesis is supported by the multiple lines of evidence and seems to be incontestable. The analysis of actual pieces and the points why they should be attributable to the 19th century is more complicated, and I would love to see a separate chapter summarizing distinguishing characteristics in an organized and systematic fashion. Otherwise, I have no doubt that Dr. Elgood himself can date the objects admirably well, but he did not teach me how to repeat the feat:-)

Well...
What was the price of "good" objects made and sold at the end of the 19th?

There are 3 damascened katars ( ##68,70,71) valued Rs 40, 50,and 150.
A bunch of tulwar hilts, similarly damascened , Rs.20-150
Shamshir Shikargah with true damascening, Rs.137
P.23 quotes "...swords, shields, daggers etc. from Agra, prices up to Rs.200"

These prices are in remarkable agreement with Prince Saltykov's acquisition at Lahori bazaar of "....2 metal shields, straight-bladed sword ( khanda?) and two curved daggers for a total of Rs.750..."

It seems likely that Saltykov bought cheap and newly-made objects: compare with #95, Afghani or Sindhi sword belonging to Mir Ibrahim ( Rs. 3,095),steel shield from Alwar armoury ( see #118) bought in 1830 for Rs. 1000, 2 swords presented by Aurangzeb to Raja Ram Singh ( Rs.2,000 and 3,000 respectively) or Ranjit Singh's sword at Rs. 10,000, half of which was for the blade alone. This were likely the "high-end" weapons he encountered at the Lahore Court and dismissed as having "no taste" ( or something like that.) Instead he went to the bazaar with predictable consequences...

In the book by Obraztsov about Oriental arms and armour in the Hermitage Museum I was able to find a single Indian example from the "Saltykov Collection": a lavishly damascened metal shield with no evidence of wear and tear , but with multiple forging defects, cracks masked by golden decorations. I wonder whether it could have been acquired in Lahore as part of the Rs.750 deal...



All his stuff ended in the Hermitage Museum and it might be interesting for the Museum poobahs to ask Dr. Elgood to re-evaluate Saltykov Collection: it may consist largely of late 19th century objects made for "those who travel" :-)

The same may apply to other major museums, especially if the date of acquisition is " second half of the 19th century" .

Elgood attributes quite a few objects in the Jaipur Armory to the same group, but I do not think that local Rajah were victims of deception: they themselves happily redecorated their new acquisitions, were more familiar with bazaar practices and ... well, an attempt to swindle an Indian Raja was rather dangerous for one's health:-)

On the other hand, tourists ( like Saltykov) or British officers and administrators were very legitimate targets.The wealth was thus redistributed in accordance with Karl Marx slogan " Exploit the exploiters!"

Personally, I am surely glad for not having lavishly adorned, damascened and artistically-decorated Indian swords:-)))

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by ariel

One of the main ( if not THE MAIN!) theses of the book is the conclusion that many objects traditionally attributed to the 17-18 centuries were in fact made at the end of the 19th century and sold by itinerant vendors to tourists.

Sold by "itinerant vendors" but made by whom? I have read several recollections by travelers to latter 1800s India were they were lamenting the lack of availability of authentically made weapons/armor. They also stated that there were still craftsmen that made these items in an authentic manner. Even in this time people or at least some seemed to be aware of the difference which apparently was not to hard to decern.

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by ariel

OK, I am back:-)
I just want to put together some thoughts re. recent Elgood's book about arms & armour at Jaipur Court and how it changes our perception of Indian weapons collections all over the world in general ( our little private oases included, regretfully:-((( ) and Saltykov's contribution in particular.

One of the main ( if not THE MAIN!) theses of the book is the conclusion that many objects traditionally attributed to the 17-18 centuries were in fact made at the end of the 19th century and sold by itinerant vendors to tourists. This thesis is supported by the multiple lines of evidence and seems to be incontestable. The analysis of actual pieces and the points why they should be attributable to the 19th century is more complicated, and I would love to see a separate chapter summarizing distinguishing characteristics in an organized and systematic fashion. Otherwise, I have no doubt that Dr. Elgood himself can date the objects admirably well, but he did not teach me how to repeat the feat:-)

Well...
What was the price of "good" objects made and sold at the end of the 19th?

There are 3 damascened katars ( ##68,70,71) valued Rs 40, 50,and 150.
A bunch of tulwar hilts, similarly damascened , Rs.20-150
Shamshir Shikargah with true damascening, Rs.137
P.23 quotes "...swords, shields, daggers etc. from Agra, prices up to Rs.200"

These prices are in remarkable agreement with Prince Saltykov's acquisition at Lahori bazaar of "....2 metal shields, straight-bladed sword ( khanda?) and two curved daggers for a total of Rs.750..."

It seems likely that Saltykov bought cheap and newly-made objects: compare with #95, Afghani or Sindhi sword belonging to Mir Ibrahim ( Rs. 3,095),steel shield from Alwar armoury ( see #118) bought in 1830 for Rs. 1000, 2 swords presented by Aurangzeb to Raja Ram Singh ( Rs.2,000 and 3,000 respectively) or Ranjit Singh's sword at Rs. 10,000, half of which was for the blade alone. This were likely the "high-end" weapons he encountered at the Lahore Court and dismissed as having "no taste" ( or something like that.) Instead he went to the bazaar with predictable consequences...

In the book by Obraztsov about Oriental arms and armour in the Hermitage Museum I was able to find a single Indian example from the "Saltykov Collection": a lavishly damascened metal shield with no evidence of wear and tear , but with multiple forging defects, cracks masked by golden decorations. I wonder whether it could have been acquired in Lahore as part of the Rs.750 deal...

All his stuff ended in the Hermitage Museum and it might be interesting for the Museum poobahs to ask Dr. Elgood to re-evaluate Saltykov Collection: it may consist largely of late 19th century objects made for "those who travel" :-)

The same may apply to other major museums if the date of acquisition is " second half of the 19th century" .

Elgood attributes quite a few objects in the Jaipur Armory to the same group, but I do not think that local Rajah were victims of deception: they themselves happily redecorated their new acquisitions, were more familiar with bazaar practices and ... well, an attempt to swindle an Indian Raja was rather dangerous for one's health:-)

On the other hand, tourists ( like Saltykov) or British officers and administrators were very legitimate targets.The wealth was thus redistributed in accordance with Karl Marx slogan " Exploit the exploiters!"

Personally, I am surely glad for not having lavishly adorned, damascened and artistically-decorated Indian swords:-)))

Ariel, why write so many words? Why give an example of a book Hermitage that shows the arms and armor not only of India but also of other countries?
(Although, I'm sorry about this. I'd really like to see a book, in which I want to read about such items:
http://www.hermitagemuseum.org/wps/p...518781/?lng=en
)

Probably better to listen to what respected people wrote? For example, lord Egerton:

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by ariel

The whole idea of the Forum is to exchange objective information ( interspersed, of course, with personal but objective interpretation of the content).

As to prince Saltykov, my opinion about him plummeted down after his badmouthing his host who invited him into his house. Kind of " The food was terrible, and the portions were too small". This is not something I find acceptable.

Ariel, I agree with you as far as exchanging information etc. Sometimes peoples opinions are completely different, in this case it is good to discuss the various sources/references that have formed these opinions. As long as it is an intelligent inquiry and not a personal attack this is an important feature of any forum, the ability to question someones sources, references and personal opinions.

On the matter of Prince Aleksei Dmitrievich Saltykov, I was under the impression that he was writing letters to his brother that were later published into what we are now reading (Lettres sur l'Inde, Author: Soltykoff, Prince Alexis, 1848). Was he actually "bad mouthing" his host or were his original letters just a clear picture of his observations that were not meant for publication. Maybe when published he should have edited what he wrote and removed any offensive remarks, it is hard to second guess now. The various versions of this book do contain some very good images that were supposedly made from his drawing.

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by estcrh

The various versions of this book do contain some very good images that were supposedly made from his drawing.

Yes, Saltykov made a lot of watercolors and pencil drawings while traveling in India. If you are wondering tonight when I'm at home, I can show you some of them.

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by mahratt

Yes, Saltykov made a lot of watercolors and pencil drawings while traveling in India. If you are wondering tonight when I'm at home, I can show you some of them.

If you have images of the painting/drawings that would be great.

[mahratt]

Originally Posted by estcrh

If you have images of the painting/drawings that would be great.

I think it would be correct to create a separate topic on the trip to India Prince Saltykov.

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=21033

[mahratt]

Now back in the exhibition:

[harrywagner]

Thanks for posting this. I love these virtual museum tours. Beautiful work.