![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 | |
Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: England
Posts: 373
|
![]()
I find it hard to believe that British Officers would have had these made, generally British Officers brought back the real thing, it doesn't seem correct to me IMHO. To me its almost like a bazar piece, that made it into export for the west.
Quote:
Cheers Simon |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 | |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,281
|
![]() Quote:
Thank you for the note. What I was observing is that in previous discussions (its been some time), the examples I have seen of these seemed to have come from regions contiguous with the lower borders of Nepal, that is Bengal and East Indian areas. As with most collected Indian weapons, the 19th century denominator is most common as during the height of the British Raj was when most of these were acquired. Without actual handling of the weapon being discussed, it is hard to determine the age and other detail as these traditional forms remained in use for so long. The origins of the tulwar hilt, the kukri blade and kora form are topics that have remained inconclusive as far as when and where. I imagine that the combining of the forms into hybrid weapons would have probably been in the 19th century as colonization and geopolitical activity would have actively promoted such diffusion. Interesting topics though.....need to find my notes !!! ![]() All the best, Jim |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: England
Posts: 373
|
![]()
Hello Jim,
Many thanks for your reply, Tulwar hilted kukri were certainley in use in Nepal before the Anglo Nepali war of 1814-1816, captured versions in 1806 came from Palpa in the Palpa war Nepal, pic below; ![]() So I would say they were almost certainley in use in the 18th century in Nepal as well. Tulwar had long been in use in Nepal before 18th century, so I would think it was more than likely that it was a natural Nepalese development, and these styles were quite common in Nepalese households at one time; ![]() ![]() Cheers Simon |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,281
|
![]()
Hi Simon,
Now thats what I'm talkin' about! Excellent information and thank you for you great photos. Its been quite a while since we've had any discussions on these interesting hybrids, so Im really glad to see this thread, and especially glad to review the topic. It seems I have often heard of the incredible diversity of weaponry in Nepal, and friends I have known who visited there noted the longstanding presence of many Indian weapons, including the tulwar as you have observed. Nice call, and the supported information very much appreciated...now when I find those notes I can get them updated ![]() All the very best, Jim |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: England
Posts: 373
|
![]()
Glad to be of help Jim, last time I was in Nepal, I was able to get interviews with some of Nepal's top historians whilst doing re-search for the book, I'm co-writing with Captain Indra Gurung, I was a very lucky man
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 | |
Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,818
|
![]() Quote:
Not my field of collecting but aren't all but the bottom image presented above Kora hilt Kukri not Tulwar? The bottom one is of Tulwar form but to my eyes it looks wrong, it is also expressed to me by a learned kukri collector that this one presents itself as more of a "put together" as the langet/cross guard is not in the correct place one would expect it to be on a piece made with care. I have seen another tulwar hilted kukri where the cross guard is central rather than offset as this one is, perhaps another can supply images of the way it should look, also please look at the original image in the first posting. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: England
Posts: 373
|
![]()
From a Western definition point of view you are quite correct, however in Nepal they don't quite have those defintions on handle types and weapons as a whole, and that's pretty much the mind set I now have when talking about Nepalese weaponry.
However regarding Kora, in Nepal they are not called that, they are called Khuda, so perhaps it should be khuda style handle when refering to Nepalese weapons? If one wants to be definitave in a Western collector type way? With the Bottom kukri, there were two main ways of attaching khuda/kora/tulwar style hilts for the not so rich, the way you see in the picture or to have them melted on, is the only way I can descibe it, as per examples in other museums outside of the National Museum in Nepal, which has the very best of the best kukri and swords left in Nepal. Most Nepalese were not rich enough to have them done to the standard of high caste Rana', Shah's, Thapa's etc. and certainley throughout Nepalese history, kukri have been re-handled as and when necessary, with whatever was available, or desired at that time, in the cheapest possible way! Cheers Simon Last edited by sirupate; 11th April 2009 at 11:50 AM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,281
|
![]()
Good observation Gav, I hadnt noticed that langet way off!!!
More outstanding information Simon, and its really great to have some insight and informative input on these weapons. We have really missed the depth and esoterica that we used to get from John Powell, who steadily researched on these weapons with incredible tenacity. We seem to have lost touch with him several years ago, and I hope he is well wherever he is now. I'm really interested to hear more about the book you are co-authoring, and look forward to new published material on these topics. Excellent note on the local term used for the kukri, and this subject of terminology and semantics has come up often around here. It seems that not only are ethnographic weapons often called by terms that are distinct only in western collectors parlance, but terms locally can vary widely by region and language variation of course. Certain weapons in Indonesian regions, I have been told ,can almost be called by different terms almost village to village. Then we have changes in terms from earlier times as dialects develop, the use of improper terms in contemporary narratives, transliteration of these earlier records, colloquial and metaphorical or poetical descriptions etc etc. The detective work in linguistics is but one aspect that makes all of this so fascinating. All the best, Jim |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Nothern Mexico
Posts: 458
|
![]()
Although, most of the tulwar handled khukris I have seen are from indian provenance. Since the khukris have an uncertain lineage as weapons and appeared coincidently around the same time of the rajput invasion to Nepal, I donīt how much of the design of the blade owes to the indian weapons. It has been said that the real authentic weapon from the gurkas is the kora, and not the khukri. I would like to read more opinions on this point. Mutual influences are evident, and tulwar handled khukris seems more natural development for an indian than for a nepalese. Besides, the hilts are usually the part of the sword which is "adapted" by the late owners to their cultural preferences. I also find relevant the comment from Freebooter.
Regards |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 | ||
Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,818
|
![]() Quote:
I cannot claim full credit for observation, I had noticed it and thought it odd when initially reading this posting but through conversations with another collector about this thread, it reinforced my views. Quote:
Could you please elaborate on this history of the possible kukri origins and that of the Kora if it is also from this point in time? I would also like to know more on the large Kora hilted kukri's you presented originally and their origins as they are indeed Kora hilted not tulwar hilted. Gav |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|