Watering on a tulwar blade

[Jens Nordlunde]

Hi Jeff,

Can you possible show me pictures of blades like this one?
If you can, pleas do.
I was very much surprised when I saw a picture of a blade like mine two years ago. I would like to learn more about these blades, typical Indian, and very beautiful.

Jens

[Jeff D]

Hi Jen,

Here are a couple of Photo's I have on hand.

This is from Egerton Plate V.

[Jeff D]

Here are a couple in Figiel's On Damascus Steel. There are more in his catalogue which I don't have with me.

[Jeff D]

and of Course Rawson (always Rawson) The Indian Sword . Plate 2.

[Jens Nordlunde]

Yes you are right, but the perforatet yelman?
The picture I saw had a blade exactly like mine, the only thing was, that it was not decorated. The hilt was different in the design, but that could be due to two men buying the same type of blade, from the same smith, the one being richer than the other, so the decoration would be different.
I have Figiels book, the auction catalogue - and the prices the swords fetched:-( - chocking reading for collectors.

Regards

Jens

[Jim McDougall]

This is one of the most incredible tulwar blades I have seen, and now that I have recovered from being completely overwhelmed, I think I can try to place some thoughts on it....this sabre is magnificent!!! gasp, onward......

The extraordinary flamboyant blade on this example naturally brings to mind the typically Timurid influenced yelman which evolved as a distinct Central Asian blade feature often seen on early Indian blades of Mughal India. This widened distal with sharpened false edge remains profoundly on the well known Turkish kilic, and is featured on the tulwar examples shown on this thread from Rawson and Figiel. It seems that in India,the yelman began to give way to the gradually radiused blade point late in the 18th c. although this cannot be assumed to be universally the case.

While this blade clearly is radically widened in the flamboyant style that is often associated with the 'scimitars' of early literature and art, and the form is typically regarded as 'oriental' , I think the influence of this blade has other origins.

The trade presence of Italy, in particular Venice, is well known not only in India, but many key ports of call in the Dar al Islam. In a concurrent discussion pertaining to development of the sabre, we have given important reference to the medieval European form of heavy blade sabre known as the falchion. These heavy blade sabres, often with widened distal and false edge, much like our example here, were commonly known as 'storta' in Italy in the 16th and 17th centuries, and Venetian examples have surprisingly similar characteristics ("Armi Bianchi Italiene" , Boccia & Coelho, fig.501/502/503)

Another key Venetian edged weapon was the polearm with widened curved blade known as the 'fauchard' (Stone, p.280, figs 2,6,7), used typically by palace guards. On the back of the blade is an unusual decorative feature which appears as a symmetrical hook or horned profile. The same feature is seen in more elaborate and ostentatious form on one of these from the Doges palace in Venice ("Weapons" Diagram Group, p.62,#7). It is important to note that this curious affectation seems to be important on processional or palace weapons of this period in Venice, in varying form.

It would seem plausible that Italian weapons of such importance may have been known to Indian armourers through diplomatic or trade situations with important court officials, and may have influenced interpretations of such weapons. The pierced and distinctly placed feature at the choil of the false edge may be a subtle interpretation of the horned or hooked feature on the back of the palacially associated Venetian weapons.*

* it is interesting to note that a similar hooked feature appears near the hilt on the back of the blade on the Dayak 'parang' of Borneo (the feature is termed locally 'krowit' or 'kundieng'). This element apparantly serves as a finger guard, and while no direct association to the Venetian weapons is at this point suggested, it remains an interesting idea for further research.
The Venetian traders account for wide diffusion of material culture as has been often described.

Although it is clear that this example as noted, is probably from Rajasthan regions (especially as evidenced by this particular hilt), and may be related aesthetically to the sosun pattah with Hindu basket hilt, at least in blade profile (Pant. p.211)....the radically widened blade and the curious pierced feature may have distinct Venetian influence as described.

It also appears that it is an extremely rare and important example, thus not surprising others are not well known. It would be most interesting to know if anyone has seen a similar blade and would share it here.

Fantastic tulwar Jens!!! Thank you for posting it here.

With best regards,
Jim

[Rivkin]

Unbelievable.

Btw, is it my ignorance, or the koftgari here seems to obey the rule of thirds ?

[B.I]

yes jens, a piece that truly demands respect.
jim, a great assessment as always. the piece harbours all the asthetics of northern india in the 18thC, and yet the blade shape seems to be remeniscent of an much earlier period. the late 16thC miniatures lavishly depict the 'transitional' tulwar, developed from the infusion of the persianised, turkic culture of the moghul inheritance with the raw, earthy hindu culture. these blades seemed to mostly hold long blades with a pronounced curve and a definate yemen. these were shown alongside the clearer 'persian' hilt and the influence is very apparant (ie the blades were almost the same). although the moghul emperor gathered the best artisans of the time (norht and south), whether from his own culture or of the one one existed in the lands he conquered, the development was different in the south. the late 16thC deccani miniatures, which clearly ignore the moghul influence, clearly show the curved tulwar with the 'common' tulwar blade, dating as early as the mid 16thC.
the moghul blade seemed to develop into the tulwar we know more commonly throughout the next few hundred years. and yet this piece seems to hail more from this earlier period and i wonder if it was a meant as a 'revival' sword. a blade made to show the history of the culture, rather than show the fashion of the times. just a guess. either way, its clearly obvious that the blade is of high quality. the hilt and inscription seem of a slightly later date. the pics attached here aid this supposition, as its clear the blade is of the same workshop, but the gold work is a lot thinner and not of the same quality. nor is the hilt. i do not mean modern, but not of the same time (possible late 18th/early 19th redecoration).
i have seen a third a few years ago in a friends shop, with the same blade. this piece was better overall than the one i show here, but still not upto jens' piece. the blade was of quality but the hilt was not as good.
without a doubt jens, made for a very important person and now in very good hands