A Civil War khukuri??!! You gotta see it to believe it! Take a look.

Bill Martino

Bill Martino

Joined
Mar 5, 1999
Messages
34,096
View


Guys, take a look at this Civil War picture! See what is inside the red rectangle? I can't believe it!

This picture was sent to me by Ben Lee, a dyed in the wool southerner who is a student of the Civil War among other things. If you recall Ben was the guy who helped me set up my website when I was so new I had to call him to find out how to turn the computer on.

Ben, many thanks. If I hadn't seen it with my own eyes I'd have never believed it!

------------------
Uncle Bill
Himalayan Imports Website
http://members.aol.com/himimp/index.html
 
That would stump about 99.9% of history buffs. British and Gorkhas had been serving together for about 50 years.

[This message has been edited by Big Bob (edited 04 November 1999).]
 
Now wait a sec...British troops serving in India could indeed have got ahold of Khukuris or somewhat similar Indian variants. If one of them immigrated stateside and brought it, then ya...it could have happened.

Damn.

Jim
 
Incredible! I'm going to start digging into some of my Civil War resource material to try to explore this further. Thanks for sharing this with us, Uncle Bill.

This is what makes this forum so great -- the ongoing education!
 
It looks like a pana butta to me... does anybody else think they can see rivets on the handle?

------------------
Namaste,
Jeff Paulsen

"Oh, a magic khukuri. Why didn't you say so?"
 
I think it is a pana butta or as our kamis like to call it a Chiruwa. The scabbard looks very Indian to me.

And, Bob, you're right. A khukuri against grapeshot is no good.

------------------
Uncle Bill
Himalayan Imports Website
http://members.aol.com/himimp/index.html


[This message has been edited by Bill Martino (edited 03 November 1999).]
 
Yea. This photo blew my mind when I saw it. Matter of fact, I can still barely believe it. To believe that someone had a khukuri during the War of Northern Aggresion is nuts. Hell, I've seen crazier stuff than this so, why not? They way I figure it is that it is someone from maybe one of the Irish Brigades that served in India before Antietam. This picture is from Antietam, BTW. Maybe it's a converted bayonet....NAH!

------------------
-------------------------
MISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITY
-------------------------
Fear the man that owns only one rifle,
he likely knows how to use it.
- Anonymous
-------------------------
Ben Lee
Computer Science
Yahoo Msgr: mississippi_rifleman
www2.netdoor.com/~rifleman
www2.msstate.edu/~brl2
-------------------------

 
Incredible, Uncle Bill.

This one I had to print out.

I know little history and am wondering whether I am seeing northern or southern soldiers in the photo?

Amazing.

-Dave

------------------
"I'm not a complete idiot; some parts are missing."


 
*Probably* Northern. Lemme think here...Antiem was late enough in that most Southern troops wore standard uniforms. Especially among Lee's bunch who were the best equipped versus the more western-operating armies that were a lot more informal, uniform-wise.

So if that's Antiem, the uniforms are too dark for "Rebs". That's part of what puzzles me; Britain informally took the South's side due to textiles trade and cotton so it wasn't part of any British shipment, not if those are "Yanks". That's why I think it was an individual Limey immigrant who served with the British in India that just might have hauled it to Antiem or sold/traded/gave it to whoever died there.

Jim
 
Ain't that somthing, would have never thought it but there it is. Tried to think what else it could be but it seems to be clear as day, brass tip and every thing. Sure not impossible.What with British immigrants and exsailors there quite well may have been khukuri floating around. I'm sure if there were they would have seen what a good weapon they were.
 
I think this may be a first and where did you see it?

Great job, Ben. I hope we can find out more about this.

The class goes on! If somebody had asked me yesterday if khukuris were used in the Civil War I'd have laughed. Not today.

------------------
Uncle Bill
Himalayan Imports Website
http://members.aol.com/himimp/index.html


[This message has been edited by Bill Martino (edited 03 November 1999).]
 
To me, it looks like the grip doesn't have as much of a "pommel flare" as we're used to seeing? If so, could that make it some sort of "Indian variant"? Especially since I don't see a "grip-groove"? Errr...wait...I'm looking again, and it *might* be there? A higher-res scan would be nice!

The grip still has enough pommel-bulge that the "Bayonette" theory is suspect?

Jim
 
Seems pretty clear it's a khukuri to me. The handle, the sheath, the way it's worn, all seems very distinctive of khukuris.

But are you sure that's a picture of the American Civil War? Not British soldiers in Afghanistan for instance.

The reason I say this is because cameras at the time could not take snap shots like that. All photos from the Civil War were either staged or taken as a still shot. The soldier would have to hold still for several minutes for the film to take an image.

That picture didn't look staged, notice the soldier walking in the background in poor lighting. So I'm thinking this maybe from a later war.

[This message has been edited by tallwingedgoat (edited 03 November 1999).]

Read the above messages more carefully, seems the origin of the picture was well established. Still seems odd though. I thought for sure they couldn't take pictures like that back then.

[This message has been edited by tallwingedgoat (edited 03 November 1999).]
 
I looks very much like a Khukuri to me!

Hey ... what a pity! ... it seems the owner didn't have enough time to unsheath his Khukuri ... another victim of a war!
 
mohd, I agree with you, what a pity, and what a loss!

If he had unsheathed his khukuri, we could have sent the pic to kamis...

------------------
\(^o^)/ Mizutani Satoshi \(^o^)/
 
Goat, your point about Civil-War era cameras is most significant. I have a number of books on the Civil War, including the complete Time-Life series, and I went through them looking for a comparable "action" photo and saw not a one. Even the unposed "camp" photos, in which the figures were photographed from a distance as they casually went about their daily chores, were blurry.
 
That is wild!!

Respectfully,

Dave.



[This message has been edited by Dave Fulton (edited 04 November 1999).]
 
why can't this picture be a modern one?

there are a few people out there that play at civil war battling out there

from the moire pattern it appears it is a scan from a book

dZ
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top