Dear participants of the forum.
Before talking about the possibility of chooras in the 19th century:
1) Can somebody of you give the image an Afghan (Waziri or someone else) with choor before 1900?
2) Does anyone of you knowledge of chooras in museum collections, which became a museum exhibit before 1900?

All other considerations, including the subjective opinions of experts - it is almost child's play "believe, do not believe," in which there is no serious evidence. For example. I ask an expert on the tree at the State Historical Museum in Moscow (Russia). I ask him, he can visually (without complex analyzes) to determine the age of a tree, exposed to the environment? He said that no one can do it for sure.

If you say so, it turns out that the number "1854" and an inscription in Farsi (or Pashtu) are written in various ink (After all, from your words it turns out that they were written by different people.)? Then it turns out the expert Ariel is not so good ... She did not tell him that there are different inks..(at least he did not mention about it in Russian forum).

When there is no picture of what to say, Ariel? :) You and I already know the alleged "Afghan knife" of the printed catalog Jacob.

The subject, which is shown in Egerton - not Afghan choora (see image). I've said many times this Ariel :) Moreover, the fact that certain items Egerton called "choora" not to say that this is the Afghan choora that we are discussing. In the 19th century the word "choora" refers to a knife (a "knife" in general and not any specific knife).

I am surprised that the English would not have any trophies from the 2nd afghan war {1878-1880} that would include chooras. I think that would be an easier date to research. As I have mentioned I do not disagree with you except with the written numbers being a date of collection or manufacture. You have done a lot of research and it is interesting. It might be worth your while to write out in a more precise paper the steps you have taken to show your premise of the dating. You have already done the work so why not. People will always disagree some using rational explanations some not. ethnic weapons are hard to date and rough estimates are mostly used, especially in this particular part of the world where the same exact motifs,materials and workmanship may still be in use.

Mahratt this statement is not realistic.

All other considerations, including the subjective opinions of experts - it is almost child's play "believe, do not believe," in which there is no serious evidence. For example. I ask an expert on the tree at the State Historical Museum in Moscow (Russia). I ask him, he can visually (without complex analyzes) to determine the age of a tree, exposed to the environment? He said that no one can do it for sure.

I started college as a archeology major and dating wood is reasonably precise. You take a section of wood from that area and look at the size of the rings and the count. you cross reference this. No he probably can't just look at the tree and tell you its age.

I apologize for my bad English. I mean, not a tree out of the forest, where you can watch the annual rings. I'm talking about the tree on the scabbard (which is exposed to the environment: wind, water, sun, and so on).

Expert (of which I spoke) works in the museum with old objects made of wood)

Technically as long as you have a section with the rings on it you could, but you would have to destroy the piece. I am sure that better methods have been advanced in 30 some years. Yes I know the next argument was that the wood could have been cut at that time and used later.

:)

Especially when you consider that the wood in Central Asia was not much.

I must say I very much admire the empirical approach taken by Ariel toward the analysis of these examples and their associated labels. However, I am not sure that findings pertaining to these labels would add to supporting the proper dating of them. As has been noted, these might refer to any number of notations or data. With the materials, again, these would not necessarily pertain ...it must be remembered, ethnographic weapons were constantly refurbished and recycled, and tags or labels may have been adjoined to the item at any point in its holding.

Then there is the red herring matter of the 'choora' itself, which lends more to a 'name game' which plagues identifying ethnographic forms. It would seem that we can establish the 'term' choora from at least the mid to third quarter 19th century as both Burton and Egerton use it loosely. When trying to link it directly to a distinct form, it remains unclear and even Egerton (pl.XIV, 624) is identified as 'pesh kabz', yet has rudimentary appearance of a 'choora' in our parlance.

In reviewing Torben Flindt's excellent work on Bukharen arms (1979) he notes this narrow straight back, T blade with radius to sharp point blade as a 'karud' (p.23). He never uses the term 'choora' in his work.

Here we enter the slippery slope of terminology with pesh kabz (typically recurved sharp point); karud (a heavier blade and hilt, rather a smaller 'Khyber' knife..but with the narrower blade also in degree per Flindt); and the 'choora' (which term is notably absent from Flindt).
Mr. Flindt also notes that neither he nor Elgood could derive the origin of the term karud, but presumed perhaps from the Persian 'kard', yet another form in this group.

It would seem to me that these various forms evolved rather concurrently in these Central Asian regions, and most likely in very similar styles from as early as latter 18th century of course through 19th. Tribal arms are of course typically not dated, nor recorded as far as form, so chronological evolution of a particular form is extremely unlikely without categoric provenance. Also is the matter of regional and often tribal preference, which means that the variations we find in these weapons is more often probably lent to those factors than to any developmental character.

In my opinion, there is really no 'debate' here, rather some very well observed discourse which offers an excellent overview of these variations of the spectrum of Central Asian daggers used from easily 19th century into the 20th.
As far as dating each item, it is more to its own merits and comparable motif and decoration than to an overall form and specific term.

I think it would be interesting to look further into the presence of the cleft in the pommel of Khyber knives (seylaawa) of the 'sword' size, their smaller counterparts 'karud' and apparently some of these 'choora' (pesh kabz).
It would seem this may derive at least partly or perhaps wholly from the distinctive Bukharen sabres (Flindt .p.23) which developed independently from the shashka form in the Caucusus though the cleft is compellingly similar. The influences of Persian arms of course notably present here, thus filtering into Afghan (N. India) regions.
I notice that the cleft is absent in some of these 'choora' etc. and perhaps we might look more to that feature in determining any consistancies.

we will just have to have a difference of opinion what will lead to a decision

Gentlemen,
We are digressing .
The entire label with 1854 was written with the same ink and nobody ever mentioned different handwritings. I do not know where did Mahratt get this info, as it was not something told to me by the examiners and I never mentioned it to you.

We are not discussing the etymology of the word Choora and its applicability to the daggers in question.

Similarly, I am not entering the fray arguing about differences and similarities of Karud and Choora ( whatever they represent).

The salient point of Dr. Baker's expert opinion was that the labels were adjoined to the scabbards sometime in the mid 19th century and started to age together with wood and leather from there on. That's it. It does not depend on the text analysis of the labels or on their content. We are talking pure papyrology or whatever we want to call it.

Can we limit our discussion to the facts we learned from the world-reknown expert in the field and ignore any extraneous issues together with our opinions, suppositions and biases?


This will be a true academic approach.

We can also recall that a similar admonition is given by any judge to any jury:-)

Mahratt, many thanks for providing a good view of the dagger #624 from the book by Egerton next to what we traditionally call Afghani Choora.

Now everybody can compare them easily.

Can you please explain what prompts you to believe these are different daggers?

I think we can agree that the 'Afghan dagger' illustrated in #624 of Egerton is of compelling similarity to those we term 'choora' despite being called a pesh kabz in Egerton's description. We know that Egerton completed much of his research long before his publication in 1885, probably as early as the 1850s.
The well examined labels on the two examples indicating dates of 1854 and 1840 certainly suggest that period hosted daggers of this form presumably in Afghan regions.

Regardless of what term is used to describe these daggers, it seems that we have established mid 19th century as a viable terminus ante quem for this form. As I suggested, the form most likely had been around some time before that as we have no indications these are prototypes.

The reason the etymology issue was mentioned is because it seemed the prime purpose in these discussions had become what the earliest date might be for this form dagger (typically termed choora). The fact that these, along with karud and pesh kabz seem to have become collectively a group of variants with the terms referring to them somewhat intermingled.
Thus the point was that establishing a distinct terminus ante quem for this specific form beyond what has been shown with these examples is unlikely unless others are found with equally documented and analyzed labeling reflecting earlier dates.

Jim,
Thank you for your well-reasoned opinion.

Read post №88 respected Ian. Or have I misunderstood his words: "All of this is in English and consistent with the Scottish auction provenance that ariel provided"?

Dear Ariel, no expert could not say exactly when the paper adjacent to the wood sheath (50 years ago or 150 years ago). Especially if used organic glue (and the fact that the organic adhesive - You told on Russian forum).

Faith - is an abstract concept. You said an expert opinion. I told her expert opinion. Maybe your expert make a mistake, maybe my expert make a mistake.
We need the facts about which I spoke earlier, rather than subjective opinions.

Please. I always prefer to discuss openly.

Ariel, I'm surprised that you do not see the difference between the shape of the blade. I do for you part of the picture is larger (see image).

I think in the case of the object Egerton we can speak of a "prototype choora", but not about "Afghan choora" that we know today.

By the way, Egerton wrote somewhere about an item №624 - "Afghan dagger"? ;)

Mahratt,
Thank you .
1. Yes, you totally misunderstood Ian's remark. Few of us are known to be fluent in multiple languages, so don't worry

2. If you can provide expert testimony of an equally-qualified individual who had an opportunity to examine these daggers personally, I will consider it very seriously. In the absence of such an examination and expertise in the history of paper products, I hesitate to take the opinion of your colleague as a professional evidence.

3.See #2

4. Please read the very first sentence of Jim's last comment.

I would also like to remind you that each and every "choora" was hand made, and there were rather significant variations in the details of each and every component: blade, handle and scabbard.

As an example, please look at the 2 "chooras" that I brought to this discussion. The bigger one has a blade that is identical to your example, but a different handle, the smaller one has a blade that is virtually identical to the Egerton's example, but a handle different from the other 3. Hope you finally agree with the images. This also gives an answer to your query in post #91:
"Does anyone of you knowledge of chooras in museum collections, which became a museum exhibit before 1900?" The answer is resounding Yes, South Kensington Exhibition of the India Museum, starting at 1880.

In a way, this entire discussion with expert testimonies, details of paper technology etc, etc. was superfluous: suffice was to consult Egerton's book and the answer was clear: " chooras" existed as far back as mid-19th century. End of story.

Ariel, thank you!

2. My expert, certainly not saw Your Afghan chooras. He answered General questions on the examination of the age of the tree and organic glue.

3. I really appreciate the opinion of Jim and he knows it. But, I do have an opinion. And in this case our opinions don't match. If we to have a possibility see was knife No. 624, and not a small picture, maybe I changed my mind.

4. The classic form of the Afghan chooras You know perfectly. Here we see some differences. If we follow the path of Your thoughts, it can be assumed that item No. 624 is short Karud. You can argue the opposite?

5. Sorry Ariel, but You do not see сhooras from South Kensington Exhibition of the India Museum, starting at 1880. So "Yes" should talk below one's breath. Or You can show all the photos of these chooras?

So very early and quickly say: "End of story.", and that "chooras" existed as far back as mid-19th century.

Another Choora with a tag. Maybe it can help...

Inscriptions:

reminds me of my youth :)

"my dad can beat up your dad!"

"no, my dad can beat up yours!"

"but - your dad IS my dad!"

fight nice, kids. ;)

my choora has aluminum spacers in the grip. aluminum became rather cheaper after the 1880's when a frenchman invented an electric method of producing aluminum (or aluminium as they say here). prior to that it was worth more than gold and used in high end jewellery.

so mine was produced after that, probably well after. thus agreeing with both.

Mahratt,
The so-called karuds have massive handles, often almost cylindrical. The so-called chooras have slender grips with beak-like pommels. One glance at #624 shows what it is.
And of course both you and I can see the Choora from the South Kensington exhibition: it is the very # 624.

Of course, everybody is entitled to his private opinion. Some people even continue maintaining their opinions despite overwhelming facts to the contrary: Flat Earth Society is still active despite satellites daily circling around :-)

Tatiana,
When my Pakistani fellow comes back from vacation I will show it to him. Yours seems more readable than mine and very nicely preserved.
Thanks for the pictures.

Ariel, but in fact at the Afghan choora blade particular form. And on the knife under the number 624, the shape does not correspond to the classic Afghan chooraa. Are not you surprised? How can we then claim that it is the Afghan choora? :) I think that you will not say that the knife show us Kurt - typical afghan choora?

You have only seen a small image given in the book and on its basis to draw conclusions. I questioned you you've seen the knife at number 624 in the museum? I think the difference is clear ...

And I think astronomy is engaged in another forum ;)

Mahratt,
Kurt showed us a dagger with a curved blade. You yourself said that the blade was in a manner of a Persian Pesh Kabz. Which I agree with.
#624 has a straight blade, like all Chooras. Thanks for enlarging the picture: it is very clear to anyone that it is a typical, classic, unequivocal, true etc, etc, - Choora.
How about "end of story" now? One can flog a dead horse only for so long:-)

Objects from S. Kensington exhibition went to V&A Museum, Tower and from there somewhere else. You can contact V&A or Leeds and inquire.

Ariel, do you not see that the blade of the knife under the number 624 is different from the blade of the classical Afghan choora ??? This is seen with the naked eye. I'm afraid you see what you want to see.

So that the "end of history" has a very long time;)

By the way, Ariel, is you're trying to bring a knife from the directory Egerton, as proof of his rightness, why do not you contact V & A or Leeds? )))

http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/d...misc/xFgKg.gif

http://australianclimatemadness.file...orse_what1.jpg

can we at least agree that y'all disagree?

Kronckew:

:-) :-)

Removed: duplicate

In the immortal words of Monty Python:

'E's not pinin'! 'E's passed on! This parrot is no more! He has ceased to be! 'E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker! 'E's a stiff! Bereft of life, 'e rests in peace! If you hadn't nailed 'im to the perch 'e'd be pushing up the daisies! 'Is metabolic processes are now 'istory! 'E's off the twig! 'E's kicked the bucket, 'e's shuffled off 'is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisibile!!He's f*ckin' snuffed it!..... THIS IS AN EX-PARROT!!


What I really admire in Mahratt, is his unwillingness to surrender despite overwhelming odds and incontrovertible facts.

Back to Monty:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKhEw7nD9C4

Here is my contribution for the discussion.
I am not sure, i think it is from Afghanistan, a very long blade (14,4" blade only), made from fine low contrast wootz.

It is not what we would call a "choora". It is rather a small khyber: they could be 14-15 inches up to 25 inches or more, ranging in their function from a dagger to a full-blown cleaver.

With wootz and ivory I would bet on India, but who knows? North-West Frontier was and still is full of ethnic Pushtuns...

Irrefutable facts - this is a very bold and hasty statement))) Do not rush, Ariel. You can slip and is in the soup :)

My opinion is that it is "karud." Khyber knives are another form of blade.

Guys:

I would really hate to see this thread shut down. Between the arguing is some really interesting stuff. Tatyana has thrown an extra piece of information into the mix, and I would like to know what comes of that. Others are trying to be helpful by showing their examples of similar weapons.

Passion is fine, but data are better.

Ian.