Hi Stan,
Thanks very, very much for the kind words!
I'm afraid it is difficult to really clarify the scope of classification of Indian arms in any set typology or terminology which is not likely to be debated, as the field is largely inadequately documented and these topics full of misperceptions.
The terms used for various forms of these swords in India are typically quite broadly applied, and as you have well noted, the hilts as with most ethnographic swords, are usually locally favored types. Blades were of course diffused widely, but certain types usually favored by certain groups or cultural identities. To assume that there were hard and fast rules in this would be pure folly, much as presuming that terms can be accurate in describing weapons which may be diffused cross culturally and amalgams of various hilt types and blades.
The term 'khanda' is of course a term generally applied to the 'old Indian hilt' swords of the Deccan and southern regions of the Subcontinent. The so called 'Hindu basket hilt' has been suggested to have been influenced by European form swords, however it seems actually more of a developed form of earlier khanda hilts which already had the large bilobate type shells. The primary difference is the addition of the knuckleguard connecting these to the pommel which can be perceived as from European contact but more likely already developing and encouraged by it.
The timeline for the tulwar or Indo-Muslim hilt is equally difficult to determine as these hilts also developed from extant hilt features long present among the early Indian swords such as pommel discs and cups. Typically these hilts are associated from early Mughal times, but accurate region and time of thier origins reflect only recognition of similar hilts in early miniature paintings.
There have been attempts to 'regionalize' hilt types, notably by Dr. G.N.Pant's 1980 work, but these rather arbitrary classifications are largely unfounded, despite having become widely set as a benchmark for many attempts at describing tulwar hilts. Again, the term 'tulwar' is simply the Indian term for 'sword' and is often used to describe Persian shamshirs used in the Mughal courts.
An Indo Muslim/Indo Persian hilt (tulwar type) with a forward curved blade (called yataghan in Ottoman or Balkan parlance) is termed 'sosun pattah', and with this hilt is considered a Mughal example.
These type blades with a Hindu basket hilt are still sosun pattah, but of course the Hindu version.
There are 'tulwar' hilted straight blade swords with single edge called 'kirach' rather than tulwar.....and in some cases these with heavy straight blades with khanda/Hindu type reinforces used by Rajputs can be termed khandas.
As always whenever a foreign trade blade comes into the mix, it is termed colloquiallly a 'firangi' (=foreigner with the termetymology widely debated).
The terms 'Rajasthani' or 'Orissa' type hilts like many others are typically poor use for classification, as these regions used many types of hilts. Probably one of the broadest regions and most common for production of tulwar hilts is the vast expanse of Rajasthan. Many of the varying names for hilts on a number of tulwar types such as Udaipuri for example, are simply place names, in Rajasthan. In another instance, certain swords from Rajasthan are termed Sirohi, for the much favored blades coming from that location, in Rajasthan.
Curved blades came into the subcontinent from the Central Asia tribal ancestries of the Mughals, while the broadsword with spatulate tip was well established in the south, but also in the Deccan and south were flamboyant blades often forward curved, which moved northward influencing weapons like the kukri and kora. The curved blade southward was primarily within the Mughal sphere in regions in the Deccan and south into Mysore.
In my opinion your swords are likely rehilted earlier baskethilts mounted in the Rajasthan regions with these curved blades, and the makara hilted shamshir likely produced there, which is the concise answer . The north was primary in blade and hilt production both, while in the south there was much wider use of foreign blades post contact , and hilting was well established with somewhat regional preferences...for example the established Tanjore style hilts on katars.
I hope this might be of some help, its pretty difficult to try to briefly describe the culmination of more years of trying to grasp all of this than I can say. Obviously these observations can and likely will be contested in one case or another, which is always great if it promotes discussion
All the best,
Jim