Jens,
You are absolutely right: the handle/blade question is somewhat akin to the chicken/egg dilemma.
Where it is important, I think, is in the attribution of the locality to a weapon.
Your own avatar shows a Khandjarli: a very, very Indian dagger.
But change the handle, and it will become a Kurdish Jambiya, a Marsh Arab Jambiya, a Persian one and so on.
We identify Piso Podangs by the handle, no matter what kind of blade is attached to it.
Under no circumstance do I intend to downgrade the role of a blade (that would be plain silly), but I more and more agree with the Polish point of view that it is the handle that defines the national origin of the sword. Handles are based on local decorating traditions, whereas a lot of blades were trade blades. They were brought in and fitted by local masters into locally-produced ( often individually-ordered) handles modeled according to local esthetic customs. So, for me the crux of the issue is not whether we call a particular sword shamshir or tulwar; it is where do we think this particular sword came from. Having decided that, we can assign to it its proper local name.
|