![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 485
|
![]()
@!!%&?//!!!!
![]() it seems like my earth-shattering piece of information is old news! where the kfc did jim find this?? oh well, i should have guessed that our mr McD would be a few steps ahead of me ![]() i think i will stick to playing with arms, and leave acedemia to academics ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 2,718
|
![]()
It seems as if Jim was tipped of by Mabagani about a thread – but which thread?
Brian, you did well in mentioning the Maustika, as I did not know the word/dagger, and the only link I got from a Google search gave the link in my other mail. So all we have to di is to wait for Jim or Mabagani to show up. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,284
|
![]()
Hi Brian and Jens,
I cant seem to display the link posted, and cant recall the specific discussion you reference, however, the data on the 'maushtika' was actually information found long ago in the venerable backbone of my library, Sir Richard Burton's "Book of the Sword" (1884, on p.215). In this single sentenced reference, Burton notes, "...the maushtika (fist sword,stiletto) is only a span long, and thus very handy for all kinds of movements". Ironically Brian, Burton's reference appears to be that of Professor Gustav Oppert, who published his "On the Weapons etc.of the Ancient Hindus" in London in 1880. It seems that Burton cited the same reference to the maushtika that you note. In checking other resources to find supporting or collaborating references to a weapon with this term, they all cite the Burton reference, without further notation or data. Since Opperts work was not illustrated and we have simply a narrative description of the 'maushtika' , it does not offer more than suggestion that implies a possible proto-katar by the note terming it a 'fist' weapon. However it does certainly present strong plausibility. It would be interesting to find this term or weapon described alternatively to its appearance in various references all borrowing from the same original source. In Burton the text suggests that Oppert may have derived the material from Book III of the Nitiprakashika (op.cit. p.214). Brian, your 'playing' with arms is where the real knowledge comes from !!! The 'academic' references are simply support when correctly applied ... so keep your observations comin'....puuullleeeze!!! ![]() All best regards, Jim |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 485
|
![]()
hi jim,
ok, so it was burton that beat me to it ![]() it was oppert's book that i read, and the book is the translation of parts of 2 hindu manuscripts (the weapons/army references), the Nitiprakashika and the Sukraniti. the former was unknown prior to his involvement and it seems it was quite a find of the day. to be honest, jim, i actually enjoy both reading and playing, and find myself researching more than collecting these days. i dont call myself academic due to a short memory span and low boredom threshold. also, most academics dont go out much, are antisocial, exceedingly dull and look like their mothers still dress them ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 2,718
|
![]()
A reprint of Gustav Oppert’s book can be had very cheaply on the net – should anyone be interested.
BTW 1 span is = 12 angulas = 1 vatasti = 9 inches. Funny are angulas not what they call the eels in Spain – or is it baby eels? I was once served a dish in Barcelona, it was baby eels boiled in oil, and I think it was called angulas. I have seen different ways of spelling the ‘knife’ in question. Maustika and Maushtika, but I have also seen another spelling, Maush Tika which is supposed to be a weighted glove with spike on the knuckles. As the dagger mentioned, is a dagger, and as Maush Tika is supposed to be a spiked glove, meant for hitting like a boxer do – meaning holding the closed hand pointing towards your opponent, this could mean that the dagger had a hilt, where the hand would have been held in the same way. What I mean is, that maybe part of the word means the way you hold it, and the other part means a pointed thing or a blade. Any comments to this postulate? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,284
|
![]()
Hi Brian,
It seems that the appellation 'scholar' and 'academic' became the topic of a number of altercations on the forums a number of years ago, leading to a lot of 'ouchy' feelings (very academic term ![]() ![]() Designations blah! Don't ever change pal!!! Jens, Got any links for the Oppert book? I think it would be excellent to know this source as forerunner of Robert Elgood's magnificent work. Uh, on your gourmet note.....eeeccchhh! Somehow I have never found myself craving a nice 'eelburger' ![]() I think you are right on the term maushtika or whatever referring mostly to the use of the weapon. It seems I recall you talking about the term referring to a spiked gauntlet ...need to find this reference. Goes back to the 'gauntlet' sword/dagger term applying to transversely gripped edged weapons. Best regards |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 2,718
|
![]()
Jim, try ABEBooks and write Gustav Oppert, it will be no 9, 13 or 15 you will be interested in, depending on if you want the cheap or expensive edition – all seems to be the same and all new
![]() Does angula mean eel in Spanish??? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|