I think it is entirely an interpretive weapon, that is, loosely devised to have resemblance to existing arms but not requiring the quality nor the key features normally emplaced for protective or combative use.
As Ian has noted, this was an acquisition which must have had pertinence for the museum to have used benefactors funds to purchase.
This does not seem at all to be a 'souvenier' which would have been more produced to look like the weapons known in India, while this is as noted, not even trying to imitate such arms faithfully.
Elgood does a great job of describing the kinds of rituals and ceremonial uses of weaponry in temples and with religious groups of key Faiths in South India. Reading there on more of these complexities would give better understanding of this type of 'weapons'.
|