Quote:
Originally Posted by Kubur
Hi my friend
I disagree with Jim, this is not modern.
It is a very nice Afghan pulwar.
The blade is old and scabbard too (19th).
I have to admit that the hilt is a bit weird, maybe it is the reason why Jim wrote that.
I have a pulwar with the same kind of blade, but without the inscription... damnit!
One forum member is an expert and wrote a book about Afghan weapons, I have to find the book...
Kubur |
I think I best qualify what I mean, 'modern' suggests perhaps end of 19th c.
The hilt is indeed unusual with the quillons being this close in, a characteristic which in many ways reminds me of Arab sabers with these narrow quillons.
The paluoar was used into the 19th century, residually, and they became less often present, so a later made version may well have been in this unusual character. The 'eyelash' marks are not as well executed as on earlier examples where they seem invariably present.
Compare this example which I believe is possibly late 18th-early 19th c. and the differences, especially the 'sickle marks'.
These are more in line with the actual Genoan/Styrian types with the triple dots etc.
The hilt here seems notably different, but is smooth rather than the fluting and quadrangular design (which is indeed correct but absent on mine), the fluted scabbard (I do not have one) which is absolutely correct as well.
I think it is important to remember they were using these weapons in varying cases tribally into the third Afghan War (1919) and beyond. There were battles and warfare well into the 1930s. The blade on Francotolins is of the type made late 18th into 19th in Rajasthani regions and I have seen the cartouche (usually in Urdu) in that quadrant of the forte on tulwar blades.
It is the markings which seem 'modern' and the hilt seems made 'in the style of' in the manner of both tulwars and some paluoars of these northern regions. In my opinion it is an authentically made example but somewhat recomposed.