Interesting Sword: British Piso Podang
 

In Elgood's book, among the 4 important Indian swords there is one with the European blade and Piso Podang handle . Elgood attributes it to 16th century Deccan.
Well, here is another one.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...MEWA%3AIT&rd=1
It has end of the 18th century British blade and a "Bun Penny" dated second half of the 19th century.
And, of course, a Piso Podang type handle.
Obviously, the pattern persisted much longer than we were taught to think. Another link between Hindu culture and Sumatra.

hi ariel,
the sword in roberts book has an indian hilt, which isnt a piso podang nor related. the podangs were much cruder and based on an older indian style. also, they were mainly made of brass. yes, they could have been related in style to this hilt, but the comparison has to be the other way round.
in my personal opinion, the sword in the book is not deccani but early moghul. i believe it to be a 'tulwar' of the 16thC, during the akbar period. rawson (from memory) states this style existed, but said that not a single example still exists. he obviously was not aware of this one. the grip is more 'filled' out on this hilt (like a more traditional tulwar), whereas the hilts in the hamza nama and baburnama were more bulbous (following both an early hindu and islamic concept). it is for this reason that i feel it went towards the latter part of the 16thC and preceeded a more fully transitional form of the tulwar (ie flattening the pommel to a dish shape). the 'bowl' pommel is fully evident here. again, in my personal opinion, this is the most important tulwar in existance, due to academic reasons (ie its age and rarity). the hilt is steel and fully gilt which was concurrent for the time. agreed, roberts image shows an almost pure piso form but i think this is just a bad photo.
there is a similar hilt in the danish collection book which could possibly date to the same period. i havent seen that sword and only have a poor image to go by, but i dont think it is as sculptural as the example robert shows.
for many years a transitional form of hilt was looked for and this one seems to have all the elements.
again, from memory robert leaves its origion loose (ie 16thC moghul or deccani). although the 16thC deccani miniatures showed a similar form, i dont feel its deccani as it just seems northern to me. sorry, i know its not an academic reason, just my opinion :-)
i really do love this sword!

Isn't it cool?
I do not know the background info Elgood had on his sword, but have no doubt that it was not an isolated example and that it represented a specific pattern.
This handle (with some minor variations) was brought to Sumatra by the Hindus, not Muslim Moghuls. It was THEIR pattern, most likely.
To see a similar sword preserved in the middle of the 19th century is fascinating.
I love the idea of tracing cultural contacts and exchanges through weapons (go overboard occasionally....). This sword is telling us something important; not many do that.

After almost exactly 5 years of deafening silence... here is another one.
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=13600