![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 | |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 936
|
![]() Quote:
It really depends. There's no single rule. However, the blade is usually gets re-hilted, not the hilt gets re-bladed ![]() Last edited by ALEX; 21st October 2015 at 01:17 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 | |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 2,145
|
![]() Quote:
But I don't agree at all. Let me give you another example: - a pistol or a long gun made in the Balkans during the Ottoman rule with an Italian barrel and a French lock. What is it for you? For me, it's an Ottoman pistol or a pistol from the Balkans. It's the same for the swords, if your tulwar is reused and re-hilted by the Ottomans, it's an Ottoman sword. ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 936
|
![]() Quote:
The tulwar blade on Ottoman sword would not be as such.... but Persian blade would. Ottomans used Persian blades on some of their swords by design. This is why there are general terms such as trade blade, as well as Indo-Persian, Indo-Arab, multi-cultural, etc. it was a mix, but the blade would (generally) come or considered first, by design! As I said, the blades were re-hilted, not hilts re-bladed. and this was my point ![]() If tulwar is occasionally rehilted by the Ottomans, i.e. with Ottoman hilt (which would be quite uncommon, and I think does not even exist), that would be a composite, Indo-Ottoman piece, not by design but by accident ![]() Last edited by ALEX; 21st October 2015 at 03:28 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|