![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 | |
Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Russia
Posts: 1,042
|
![]() Quote:
Although, it seems to me that the term "combined sword" definitely sounds better, since this sword is combined from two elements. And the blade of this "sword" raises a serious question for me ... I very poorly know the ancient Indian swords until the 17th century. And I will be very grateful if they show me an ancient Indian sword with a blade of this shape. For me, the blade of this sword looks like a huge tip of the Indian spear archaic form. If Ariel kindly tells us the size of the blade of this "sword" it will undoubtedly be easier to understand whether this is so. I will be very happy if this is a truly unique sword, and not the dexterous work of antique dealers of the first half of the 20th century ... |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Austria
Posts: 1,906
|
![]()
Ariel's sword is definitely composed of a spear tip and a hilt.
The thick diamond cross-section of the "zirah-bouk" tip makes it only useable for thrusting/stabbing, no cutting capability whatsoever. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
|
![]()
Marius,
See Rawson’s pics of Madras swords in the V&A museum. Also, chapter 8 in Elgood. They do look “spear-y”, but they are constructed in a manner of Tatar-Circassian sabers: bayonnet-like tip and the rest is for slashing. See Pant, vol.2: there was a special name for such swords in Sanskrit, shulagra, i. e. Spear- pointed sword. The tip of the blade is sharp on both edges usable for cutting, and below it there is a perfect double-edged blade fully suitable for classical cutting. Tips of the sword blades were not used for real cutting: see Turkish Palas with a sign 8-10” inches off the tip, indicating the desired point of impact. The blade is almost 27”; I have several Tulwar/pulwars with blades of such length and shorter. But let’s assume for a moment that you are correct, and the blade is from a spear. Still, it is not a recent marriage: patination is old, including the rivets. Kronckew is right: weapons were expensive and every usable part was “...fixed, recycled, rehilted, reshaped, resharpened, rebladed, repurposed, repaired ...until there was nothing left.” I would love it to be like that. Last edited by ariel; 5th November 2019 at 02:03 AM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Russia
Posts: 1,042
|
![]() Quote:
Unfortunately, our desires and reality do not always coincide. It was not by chance that I asked about the size of the blade ... If we look at the spear tip from the site of Artzi Yarom, which I posted in the subject, and read its description, we will see that the dimensions of the spear tip blade coincide perfectly with the blade of Ariel's "unique sword": http://www.oriental-arms.com/item.php?id=246 "Old rivets" is a very serious argument. That is why I said that this "unique sword" could be assembled in the first half of the 20th century, and not the day before yesterday. It’s not very correct to link to some books, but do not post illustrations from these books. Perhaps not everyone who reads this topic has the books of Rawson’s, Elgood, and Pant. And these people will not be able to find out that you are a little distorting reality. I have books that you have named. Unfortunately, in none of the books you have mentioned is there an Indian sword with a blade like that on your “unique sword”. You can continue to fantasize about the "uniqueness" of your "sword". But you can once again analyze provided by information about spear heads from India and remember that in India dealers of antique weapons for the "white sahibs" have been selling "unique rarities" since the end of the 19th century. Last edited by mahratt; 5th November 2019 at 07:58 AM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 2,145
|
![]()
I agree with Mahrat and Marius, it's a spear.
I agree with Ariel made with two old parts. I agree with Mahrat probably done during the early to mid 20th c for connoisseurs tourists. It's very decorative anyway. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 | |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
|
![]() Quote:
As to when: see my earlier post: “When, - is another question :-), but historically they might have been married 300-400 years ago. And still holding strong:-)” Thanks Kubur! |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 | |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 2,145
|
![]() Quote:
If the two pieces are late 18th or early 19th (for the hilt). It's true that we don't know when they were connected together. However - and it's just my opinion - (not supported by facts): the whole piece doesnt look very practical, it's the reason why I think the piece is late 19th or even first part of 20thc. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|