Indian weapons in the US Metropolitan Museum (part of 4)

It would be very cool to study history material culture on the basis of various kinds of museum exhibits posted on the Internet. Just a list of topics and a list of museums. You can go to the topic, you can from the museum, and you can from the era, country. The main thing is that there would be one, and a high, quality standard. The same style of description, photos with a specific resolution and with a certain background. And so that access to them and downloading would be free. Today, alas, not so. In our regional museums, there is simply no money for shooting and digitizing artifacts. If you want to take a photo in the Penza Museum of Local History, pay 100 rubles, and moreover, for a photo without a tripod. In museums of higher rank, the price for a photo that you order from them comes to 200 and higher. But the same is observed in India. Shooting in museums - as much as you want, but like that “for beautiful eyes” you will not be given high-quality photos, but there is no money to shoot yourself. It turns out that such an approach is affordable only for very rich and advanced museums, like the Tokyo National Museum, the regional museum in Los Angeles, and, of course, the Metropolitan Museum in New York. The latter in this regard is a cut above the rest. And the navigation is simple and photos, with the same quality and with very detailed descriptions, posted a lot. Only by arms their something about 1450 pieces! True, there is one interesting feature. When you look through these photos, grouped in several dozens on the page, you see that many of the “pictures” are missing, although there is a signature. But after a while they arise, with the result that you have to look, look and look! And not the fact that the photo that is now will be on your page tomorrow. Such a strange "roulette"! However, in any case, this is better than in other places, so here it is from whom you should take an example of those museums that want to go this route.

So with respect to Indian weapons, the Metropolitan Museum has collected not only an impressive collection of Indian weapons (as well as Japanese, Tibetan, Chinese, knightly armor ...), but also very skillfully laid out his photographs. Of course, it would be more interesting and more useful to write in detail when this or that type of weapon appeared, how it was used, but ... agree that this is work for a whole multi-page monograph. Therefore, let's start by simply looking at what this museum has (and not only it, for the sake of completing the disclosure of the topic), and then ... maybe someone “young” will be engaged in this later ?!
Well, it’s best to start with sabers, because they ... are truly beautiful!

1. Here is the Shemshire saber of the Indo-Iranian pattern, the blade of which dates from 1748 – 1749 or 1750 – 1751. The blade of Iran, the scabbard and sling - Indian.

2. Shemshir from Persia (about 1800), but could well be used in India, especially since it was made from Indian Bulat. Absolutely luxurious thing: small pearls are inserted into the slot, the finish is made with enamel, gold, emeralds, “fish skin”, ivory handle.

3. Turkish Klych or Kylych. The blade dates from 1550 – 1551. Again, the range of such blades was very wide, they are in the Kremlin Armory (the sword of Prince Mstislavsky), there are in museums in India.

4.Sword from Tibet, XVIII - XIX centuries. Moreover, it was from Tibet, where “real knights” were seen back in 1935 and even later.

5. Pat XVIII century. - a very interesting Indian sword, the blade of which was a continuation of the steel "gloves". "Capacity" for a fist is framed in the form of the head of a toothy monster, whose head in turn protrudes an elephant's head. His tusks serve to prevent the blade of the enemy from slipping off his arm. How they fought with such "swords", because at the same time completely different muscle groups were straining, it is not easy to imagine. One thing can be said with certainty: it needed a lot to learn. The one who used to fight with a saber, he just couldn’t go on a stalemate!

6. The sword of Bhutan - the kingdom near Nepal, XVIII - XIX centuries.

7. 18th century Turkish saber with a secret - sheathed dart tank. Finish: silver, black, leather. The length of the blade 58.42, see. Very popular in the East weapon.

8. Turkish Sinzhal with a “flaming blade” in the Malay kris style and onyx handle decorated with gold and rubies. The scabbard is decorated with a silver filigree and large emeralds. XIX century. Length 56.5 cm. Total weight 396.9 g.

9. Double coutar from the 19th century British Wallace collection The British, too, as you can see, give their artifacts well, but the Americans have almost more of them! The length of the blades 18.4 cm.

10. L-shaped cutar with two blades and hand guard, XVIII century Weight 575.5

11. T-shaped cutar with three blades, XVI - XVII centuries. Weight 802.3

12. Kutar from South India with three blades of European production. Length 53.7 cm. Weight 677.6 g.

13. Coutar with sliding blades of the “scissors” type, XVIII - XIX centuries Length 48.9 cm. Weight 864.7 g.

14. Jambia. Turkey, XIX century. Weight 507.5 g .; 229.6 sheath weight

15.Indian dagger XIX century. 46.7 length cm. Weight 430.9 g .; 280.7 sheath weight

16. Indian dagger XVIII. Finishing: shark skin, gold, silver, emeralds, rubies, sapphires.

17. Indian dagger Hajarli XVII - XVIII centuries. Length 29.2 cm. Weight 266.5 g.

18. Indian or Nepali kukri XVIII - XIX centuries. Length 44.1 cm. Weight 396.9 g.

19. Indian ax from the Royal Arsenal from Leeds in England.

20. Indian battle ax Tabar, XIX century A blade is inserted into the handle, which, if necessary, can be removed and put into operation. 56 length cm; dagger length xnumx see

21. Zagnol "raven beak" XVIII - XIX centuries. Length 70, 5 cm. Blade length 13, 5 cm.

22. Charayna - “four mirrors”, XVIII century. Appeared in Persia in the XVI century.

23. Mughal helmet, India, XVIII century. Victoria and Albert Museum, London.

24. Indian musket 1835 g., Castle British. Caliber 13.97-mm. Weight 4366 d. Length 149.86 cm. Length barrel 108.59 cm. Twisted Damascus barrel.

25. XVIII century Indian musket Length xnumx see

26. For comparison, our musket from Dagestan, Kubachi work approx. 1800 –1850 Caliber 14.22-mm. The length of 132.08, see the Arabic inscription on the trunk says: "Belongs to Abu Muslim Khan Shamhal."

27. And this is a visible example of the interpenetration of cultures: the blade from the Turkish klych, and the handle from the Indian talvar.

Well, here we touched, and very superficially, the theme of the national Indian weapons and one conclusion: if you understand it thoroughly, then it will need to spend a lot of effort, time and money! After all, even only one talvaram information sea. Different blades, different handles, depending on time, region — more barrel-shaped or less, with or without a shackle, design styles — to study and study in one word. Even to view them in the collection of the Metropolitan Museum, and then you need a lot of time, and yet there are museums in New Delhi, Hyderabad, Mumbai. That is, it is desirable to know English and ... at least Hindi, well, to visit India is also very desirable. So this is an interesting thing, but difficult and expensive!

Comments

[lilian]

It was probably a great honor to be chopped off with weapons trimmed with gold, pearls, rubies.

Thanks for the pictures, just recently, out of boredom, I re-read V. Yan, Genghis Khan, Batu. There, such khans weapons are mentioned.

[Turkir]

Wonderful photos. Amazing beauty and quality of cold steel products.
Indeed, the life of its owner depended on its quality.
Thank you.

[Bashibuzuk]

Delight, just delight!
You look at these products and forget that this is a weapon.
More reminiscent of Christmas tree decorations.
Or just decorations, hang on the wall and admire. Hold sometimes.
Well, imagine that with such muskets you ride through the mountains of Dagestan, in the spring, let’s say, during the melting of snow.
Or shy away through the jungle during the monsoon season.
It is impossible.
And simply, on the carpet with a pillow under the elbow, a musallas bowl and a hookah in your hand, you look at these products.
And bastard!
...
Thank you, Vyacheslav, for the amazing selection.

[kalibr]

I am glad that you liked it. I contacted D. Nikol in England and he sent me his book about the military affairs of the Great Mughals of India. So I’ll try to make advanced material with very beautiful pictures on its basis.

[martin-159]

I would like to elaborate on weapons specifically to India.

[Riv]

Pata (the blade of which is a continuation of the bracer) is also called "puddha". Initially, it was a dual weapon and comes from one of the oldest weapons - a double brass knuckle made from antelope horns. The cutars pictured below have the same origin, only the forearm is open, or half open. They fought with such brass knuckles in ritual duels, and to the death of one of the fighters. The cult of Shiva is harsh ...

Obviously, as an infantry weapon, the pata is not very effective, since it primarily involves striking and thrusting techniques. Cutting strikes are difficult. Moreover, it is inconvenient for the rider. Try to mount a horse with such a weapon in your hand. In Japan it was transformed into a brass knuckle-jawara, and in China into paired "deer horns". Those who want to google.

[kalibr]

That's right, the weapon is completely inconvenient for the rider. But, apparently, it was somehow used by infantrymen and not only for ritual fights.

[Riv]

It is uncomfortable for the infantryman. The cross hilt of the sword has never been used by anyone, because although it makes a very sharp stab, it completely turns the forearm off. Fencing becomes impossible. The only place she meets is short daggers and brass knuckles. And at the garda guard, protecting the forearm, it also fetters him additionally.

In the paired version, such a weapon can be used very much. But this implies a duel, not a battle in formation. But it was used for religious fights. Shiva, according to Indian beliefs, is the creator of the martial arts. The weapon used for such fights was generally called "vajra". These could be sharpened discs, clubs, or such brass knuckles. They could fight without weapons. All the martial arts of the kshatra eventually grew out of unarmed combat, vajra-mushti.

Curiously, "mushti" can also mean "dance" or "ecstasy" ...

[saygon66]

- I don’t presume to assert ... but, in a closed formation, I will not cut it in a sweep ... but to "stick" under the shield, or on the side of the shield, stabbing is quite.

[kalibr]

Well, in terms of practice, I, of course, am not strong ...

[saygon66]

- A similar technique was used by Roman legionaries ... Coming together with the enemy "shield in shield", they tried to squeeze the enemy's shield, opening his side, or forcing him to "fall out" out of order ... after which they stabbed the exposed part of the body. The following tool was used for this. Pictured: Gladius from Mainz.
- Kutar or "the language of the god of death" was used as a weapon for the left hand - hence the double and triple blade (opening identity), which made it possible to take the enemy's blade "for a break."

[Riv]

Well, where is the transverse hilt of the gladius? After all, there are no such instances. Simply no.
However ... If five hundred years of practice prove nothing to a person, then what else can be proved to him?

[saygon66]

Yes, I’m not talking about the structural differences between these types of weapons, but about possible similar methods of use ...

[Turkir]

Some translations give a different interpretation of "vajra mushti" lightning fist, diamond fist. It is curious that in the Georgian language - "mushti" is also ... a fist.

[saygon66]

- Oh godaato! But there are no indications, weapons - military or ceremonial? With such receptions, it’s not shameful to show off, show generic wealth, and if taken from the battle, then valor ...

[kalibr]

In Europe it’s quite easy to distinguish. And in the East and especially in India - oh!

[Reptiloid]

Thank you, Vyacheslav, for the FOURTH ARTICLE, for meeting the requests of the workers and not limiting yourself to a cycle of 3 articles !!! Wonderful photos you have chosen for us!
I think that the use of some and the non-use of others (metals, technological advances, etc.) is not a criterion for classifying the stages of the development of Mankind. For example, in Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, artifacts-models (children's toys) of carts with wheels created by in the pre-Columbian era. perhaps the Aztecs and Mayans knew about the wheel and understood its benefits, but did not use it for religious reasons (salt cult?). The same can be said about why the Hindus and Celts used IRON, and many other peoples deliberately refused it.
Source:
A.Yu. Sklyarov. Ancient Mexico without crooked mirrors. M. Veche 2009 (in the wake of the Gods).

[Reptiloid]

Instead of "salt cult" one should read S.О.L.Ya.R.N.Y.Y. CULT.

[brn521]

Quote: Reptiloid

A.Yu. Sklyarov. Ancient Mexico without crooked mirrors.

It is unlikely that an official scientist can afford to seriously consider someone’s work that runs counter to the official canon. As practice shows, this is fraught with trouble. An anathema will betray you a lump-historian and that’s all, you are almost completely isolated. No reports, no dissertations, no professorship, no publications in scientific journals.

[Reptiloid]

Yes, of course, it often happens that a hypothesis goes a long way until it is accepted. OR vice versa --- irrevocably destroyed. Therefore, I wrote "I think", not "I decided." I try to read more books and on the net. I have vision problems, it does not happen so quickly. It is interesting that Sklyarov approach antiquities from the point of view of technical performance, materials science.

[Reptiloid]

I want to add that since life in other eras was very different from ours, it is also inconceivable for us to motivate.

[brn521]

Quote: Reptiloid

It is interesting that Sklyarov approach approaches to antiquities in terms of technical performance and material science.

Well, here even antiquity is optional. In fact, we somehow decently represent the history of the 20th century, and the problems begin with the 19th. Take the same monuments and buildings of St. Petersburg. Lack of evidence, or serious contradictions in them, technology inconsistencies, etc. More details here, for example, http://levhudoi.blogspot.co.il/2013/06/blog-post.html. The objects themselves are almost at hand, while there are a lot of historical documents that touch on the topic, which you can even dig up just on the Internet. Thanks to this, for many history buffs, a similar topic may seem even more interesting.

[Reptiloid]

Dear Ivan, I am glad that you are talking about St. Petersburg, a huge and beloved topic for me and my acquaintances. And about India, here's another thing - there was an article about the Indian Trotsky, not so long ago. The plot shows that "Russian bread is do not rush ". That is. so, but not so. And this is modernity. I will try to find today when it was.

[Reptiloid]

An article about Indian Trotsky - October 28