Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Ethnographic Weapons
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 25th April 2005, 07:49 PM   #1
Radu Transylvanicus
Member
 
Radu Transylvanicus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: 2008-2010 Bali, 1998-2008 USA
Posts: 271
Default

Wolviex, I was updating my thoughts while you already answered, see if you read it all ... as far as the one on Stibert in Firenze, wasnt that a Tartar one ? They are known for adopting the Indo-Persian helmet styles but with more grotesque forms.
Radu Transylvanicus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th April 2005, 08:00 PM   #2
wolviex
Member
 
wolviex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Poland, Krakow
Posts: 418
Default

Radu, as far as I can remember this armour was descripted just as a Sind one, but... maybe description wasn't proper... or, I admit, my memory doesn't source me well. Don't have this catalogue at the hand at the moment, so I will check it later.

Thanks for your commitment !
wolviex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th April 2005, 09:36 AM   #3
Radu Transylvanicus
Member
 
Radu Transylvanicus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: 2008-2010 Bali, 1998-2008 USA
Posts: 271
Default

Pictures 3 & 4 : Hindustani Kilij from Mysore. The hilt is of vyaghramukhi (leopard shape) and along with the tehnal ( sheath chape) it is completely covered in meenakari work (Indian style metal enameling). 18th century

The triple animal head shape 2+1 and the enamel and the hilt finish are all characteristics that point towards Mysore region but not exclude others.
Rsword mentions well Lucknow as being the heart of meenakari (Hindustani enameling) and it could be possible that enameling itself was executed there but I would not be absolutelly certain just because it remained the largest centre of such craftsmanship.
Although, many pieces of Indian or Mughal arms and armour were worked on different places like Blades from Persia, brasswork from Lahore , hilts from Tanjore or scabbards from Rajput for example but most times a certain fine pattern or a blend could be observed as being characteristic to one region.
Radu Transylvanicus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th April 2005, 10:30 AM   #4
Radu Transylvanicus
Member
 
Radu Transylvanicus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: 2008-2010 Bali, 1998-2008 USA
Posts: 271
Default

Pictures 5 & 6 : 17th – 18th century . Persian / Mughal armguard (known as dastana in India or bazouband in Persia) it has a rarely preserved zirah (chainmail) gauntlet.
The central motif is surya (Sun God) very popular in Indo-Persian armor a motif present not only on the plates of armor but bass-relief ornamented on many war shields (sipar or dhal). Mughal decoration (the blend of Hindu and Islamic is easily observed) is executed in true gold damascening or tah-nishana technique (carve and inlay), much superior to the koftgari (scratch and inlay) technique, more widespread.


In a similar manner to the Sun God motif seen here, other deities faces appear on the war maces where horned faces of devils or bulls are preferred but instead of bas-relief projection they are statuesquely carved making up the bulbous (and therefore the dangerous) part of the war mace.
Radu Transylvanicus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th April 2005, 07:45 PM   #5
wolviex
Member
 
wolviex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Poland, Krakow
Posts: 418
Default

Many thanks Radu for your help. I'm curious what informations will you bring next time

Armguards seems to be indeed from the end of the 17th century. Prof. Zygulski linking this one with armour, shield and helmet (see "Stara bron...). There is many controversy around this armour.. but this is another story. Chain mail is in great condition, and beautiful interweaved with brass rings what gives a pattern on it, visible also on my pic. Around the edges are inscriptions, not well visible here. While under the armguard is the newest (?), well preserved, violet material. Controversies around this one focused on dating. Some of the scholars claimed it is 19th century, beacause the inscription, as they said, was made in 19th century calligraphy. Prof Zygulski still maintan 17th/18th century theory. Where is the truth, I don't know.
wolviex is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:24 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.