Tulwar-hilted kukri information

Gonzalo G · 15th April 2009, 07:20 AM

Pukka, Jim, I take your responses as mine. I agree with your comments.

But I also would like to have more information about this older presence of the khukri, and to have an aproximate date of the first mentions about it in the nepali literature. Is there a date of this writtings-stories-traditions? Is it an oral or a writting tradition, in the first place? This point would add interesting information, if there is any valid and accessible source on this subject. I mean, some references we can see or check personally.

Jim, I think the problem is to demonstrate the material possibility those influences could arrive from the transitory passing of Alexander´s troops in the northwest India, as far as to Ajanta or to south India. I do not doubt there are such representations there, but it seems nobody who I have some contact with of some kind, knows of this representations but from the same literary references. And I would like to see this representations and check the possible relationship among them (the kopis and the indian down curved weapons). Your mention of the mesopotamic weapon is a good point.
Regards

Gonzalo

sirupate · 15th April 2009, 11:09 AM

Hello Jim,

Quote:

It may have been from Brian, or perhaps Rawson, who notes on p.52, "...the kora is the battle sabre of the Gurkhas", and cites as his reference Mill & Wilsons "History of India", describing the Gurkha defense of the Tamta stockade in the 1814-16 war (Egerton. p.38).

The only problem with that is that there is no mention of the word kora! pg.38 in Egerton's book says 'using their heavy semi-circular ended swords with great effect'! British military accounts only refer to the use of the kukri, especialy with regard to the much written about battle of Kalunga. Also the kukri has historically been referred to as sword by many people as long as I can rememeber. An example of that is in the 1992 published book 'Quartered Safe Out Here' by the late George MacDonald Fraser describes them in this way 'the other essential sidearm was the kukri, the curved short sword of the Gurkha', sound similar? Keeping in mind IA issue kukri of WWII were generaly a lot shorter than the fighting kukri of old.
Also from 'The travels of India and Nepal' by Rev. Wood 1896 he talks about the kukri but no mention of the khunda being used against our troops!

'heavy semi-circular ended swords' could esily be these;

Quote:

Some very good information was posted on this forum on November 21st, 2007 in an article titled "The Origins of the Kukri" by V.K.Kunwor

A prominent Nepalese historian has discounted the articule

Quote:

From what I have understood, again primarily from Rawson (p.54) the kukri type blade was among Hindu type weapons brought into the Nepali regions by Rajput ruling class in medieval times.

I very much doubt it, if they were one would have thought that the early fighting kukri of Nepal would have had Rajput style handles? They don't.

Hello Gonzalo,

This currentley being re-searched, and of course I have to leave some info for the book!

Cheers Simon

Jim McDougall · 15th April 2009, 07:07 PM

Thanks for the responses Gonzalo and Simon.

Gonzalo, you note very good courses for research in this, and my knowledge of the routes and history of Alexanders incursions into northern India, Bactria and Central Asia are far from adequate to respond. Most of the representations of these early Indian weapons are iconographical and seen in friezes in a number of temples and architecture in Ajanta, as mentioned, as well as Barabudur, Khiching and on the Begur stone. Of these, the only ones I can claim any familiarity with are Ajanta and Barabadur, and illustrations of the sculptured illustrations are seen in numerous references of Indian art.

As has been mentioned, the accuracy of artistic representations must be in some degree suspect, as it is known in many instances that traditional weapons from periods often out of context sometimes are emplaced. It does seem however, that these architectural and static references, which can usually be fairly accurately dated by scholars, often also seem to carry accurate contemporary representation.

The illustrations in Rawson showing profiles in drawing of the weapons shown in these various iconographic sources are used in a number of later references including Pant ("Indian Arms and Armour") and it seems various other articles and references. Elgood's "Hindu Arms and Ritual" shows good illustrations of a number of the architectural sculpture's.

As with most ancient and very early weaponry, it is unusual for find surviving examples of the actual weapons, while the iconography of course, remains in the remnants of these structures, and often quite intact.

Going to the subject of terminology and descriptions of weapons and thier forms in contemporary sources, it seems that reliance on these resources in the study of them is probably the most confounding of all. Since the problem of semantics, transliteration and often licentious narrative is so often prevalent with these sources, it is very difficult to rely on them to significant degree. It seems that often, contemporary accounts can sometimes be clouded by emotional or heightened perception, and when recounted to subsequent writers, even becoming more distorted or embellished .
The consequence of this is probably of magnitude for a Ph.D study, but for note here only to recognize the problem in relying too much on such material, and to maintain cautious approach in its application.

With the earliest kukris, it is suggested that this style weapon was brought into Nepal by Rajputs, but that if this was the case, the earliest ones would have had Rajput style handles. Since these incursions were of medieval period, and the earliest known kukri example is believed that of 17th century owned by the King of Gorkha, how can we know what type of weapons were used by the medieval Rajputs? We do know of the khanda, which still has representation in Nepal, and is known from the weapons seen in iconography from the south in India, but the kukri remains unclear.

It seems that in trying to study and understand ethnographic weapons, especially in trying to find chronological and geographic trends in thier development is plagued by the same problems in the majority of cases.
The development of the sabre, the origins of the kastane, the flyssa, the kaskara and takouba, the yataghan, the katar, the tulwar, the kampilan etc etc etc. all are matters of ongoing and relatively unresolved discussion. There is profound speculation and often wonderfully plausible and compelling evidence presented throughout weapons literature, but truly, all we can do is to continue the research and responsibly collect and cull through the material to gather the most applicable data.

This is what I see with the observations and material discussed here, and I look forward to the book Simon is working on. It seems that whoever dares to publish material on ay depth on any weapon form will face the scrutiny inevitable in the academic community, so I wish him well. I think than any true scholar however, welcomes supported rebuttal or criticism that will advance the knowledge on the subject. Hopefully that will be the case, rather than arbitrary discounting of work based on subjective or biased opinion rather than supported argument.

All best regards,
Jim

15th April 2009, 07:20 AM	#1
Gonzalo G Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Nothern Mexico Posts: 458	Pukka, Jim, I take your responses as mine. I agree with your comments. But I also would like to have more information about this older presence of the khukri, and to have an aproximate date of the first mentions about it in the nepali literature. Is there a date of this writtings-stories-traditions? Is it an oral or a writting tradition, in the first place? This point would add interesting information, if there is any valid and accessible source on this subject. I mean, some references we can see or check personally. Jim, I think the problem is to demonstrate the material possibility those influences could arrive from the transitory passing of Alexander´s troops in the northwest India, as far as to Ajanta or to south India. I do not doubt there are such representations there, but it seems nobody who I have some contact with of some kind, knows of this representations but from the same literary references. And I would like to see this representations and check the possible relationship among them (the kopis and the indian down curved weapons). Your mention of the mesopotamic weapon is a good point. Regards Gonzalo Last edited by Gonzalo G; 15th April 2009 at 07:57 AM.

15th April 2009, 07:07 PM	#3
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,193	Thanks for the responses Gonzalo and Simon. Gonzalo, you note very good courses for research in this, and my knowledge of the routes and history of Alexanders incursions into northern India, Bactria and Central Asia are far from adequate to respond. Most of the representations of these early Indian weapons are iconographical and seen in friezes in a number of temples and architecture in Ajanta, as mentioned, as well as Barabudur, Khiching and on the Begur stone. Of these, the only ones I can claim any familiarity with are Ajanta and Barabadur, and illustrations of the sculptured illustrations are seen in numerous references of Indian art. As has been mentioned, the accuracy of artistic representations must be in some degree suspect, as it is known in many instances that traditional weapons from periods often out of context sometimes are emplaced. It does seem however, that these architectural and static references, which can usually be fairly accurately dated by scholars, often also seem to carry accurate contemporary representation. The illustrations in Rawson showing profiles in drawing of the weapons shown in these various iconographic sources are used in a number of later references including Pant ("Indian Arms and Armour") and it seems various other articles and references. Elgood's "Hindu Arms and Ritual" shows good illustrations of a number of the architectural sculpture's. As with most ancient and very early weaponry, it is unusual for find surviving examples of the actual weapons, while the iconography of course, remains in the remnants of these structures, and often quite intact. Going to the subject of terminology and descriptions of weapons and thier forms in contemporary sources, it seems that reliance on these resources in the study of them is probably the most confounding of all. Since the problem of semantics, transliteration and often licentious narrative is so often prevalent with these sources, it is very difficult to rely on them to significant degree. It seems that often, contemporary accounts can sometimes be clouded by emotional or heightened perception, and when recounted to subsequent writers, even becoming more distorted or embellished . The consequence of this is probably of magnitude for a Ph.D study, but for note here only to recognize the problem in relying too much on such material, and to maintain cautious approach in its application. With the earliest kukris, it is suggested that this style weapon was brought into Nepal by Rajputs, but that if this was the case, the earliest ones would have had Rajput style handles. Since these incursions were of medieval period, and the earliest known kukri example is believed that of 17th century owned by the King of Gorkha, how can we know what type of weapons were used by the medieval Rajputs? We do know of the khanda, which still has representation in Nepal, and is known from the weapons seen in iconography from the south in India, but the kukri remains unclear. It seems that in trying to study and understand ethnographic weapons, especially in trying to find chronological and geographic trends in thier development is plagued by the same problems in the majority of cases. The development of the sabre, the origins of the kastane, the flyssa, the kaskara and takouba, the yataghan, the katar, the tulwar, the kampilan etc etc etc. all are matters of ongoing and relatively unresolved discussion. There is profound speculation and often wonderfully plausible and compelling evidence presented throughout weapons literature, but truly, all we can do is to continue the research and responsibly collect and cull through the material to gather the most applicable data. This is what I see with the observations and material discussed here, and I look forward to the book Simon is working on. It seems that whoever dares to publish material on ay depth on any weapon form will face the scrutiny inevitable in the academic community, so I wish him well. I think than any true scholar however, welcomes supported rebuttal or criticism that will advance the knowledge on the subject. Hopefully that will be the case, rather than arbitrary discounting of work based on subjective or biased opinion rather than supported argument. All best regards, Jim