Indian pseudoshashka

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Thank you Ibrahiim for that link! Now I recall these interesting sabres which were in my view after rereading the posts and evidence, clearly from the Baluch-Sind regions and probably Hyderabad. It has always been confusing that there is a Hyderabad in these northern (now Pakistan) regions.....as well as the notable part of the Deccan further south.
Many references denote 'Hyderabad' without specifying which is meant.

For me a most telling feature in these Baluch-Sind sabres is the ring or loop in the pommel. As noted in the discussion, these are as far as known, not an affectation on Arab swords. Interesting comparison was pointing out the groups of rings present on Omani khanjhar scabbards,

Returning to the original topic, again it is most interesting to see the wider spectrum of these type sabres, which seem to have been prevalent quite extensively in the south, that is Deccan. However, there appear to be some compelling similarities in hilts further south, which have features, , many zoomorphic, even as far as those featured on the familiar kastane.

Zoomorphics in ethnographic weapons are of course often highly stylized, and debate on what particular creature is represented are often the case with western perceptions.

Regarding the elephant as such a feature intended in these hilts is as far as I can imagine, not likely. Primarily the elephant is represented zoomorphically only in the regions of Gujerat and Bhuj in notable degree. I believe that representation had to do more with regal or dynastic leitmotif with the elephant in rather exalted standing.
Zoomorphic features were not intended as insignia denoting weapons to certain groups of military or other functions in any notable instance I am aware of.
While the 'gooseneck' feature did represent the swan in cases where the head was represented fully, and the serpentine Makara or dragon head as well.....the elephant trunk I don't believe was a part of such motif.

Hello Jim, The ring in the Sinde Hilt is interesting although nothing to do with the Omani Khanjar rings which are double the size and involved in the way the Omani Khanjar is constructed. The clue to what these terminal rings on the Sinde swords is for is at #18, second picture, of the Sinde sword thread where it can be seen that it is for a wrist strap.

What is also interesting, however, is the wire wrap which terminates in a special knot...Perhaps "The Omani Knot"... present in all Omani Shamshiir including the presentation sword to Stanley by Sultan Bargash and covered at Omani Shamshiir on Forum...of the same style of silver wire used on Omani Khanjars.

I looked at the knuckle guard and perceived the elephant trunk as clearly visible emanating from a raised shoulder geometry like an arch, I thought was an elephantine head... most noticeable in the Bling birdhead example though present in others to lesser degree... Pushing the envelope I point to the Kastane as illustrative of mixed Zoomorphic form often showing elephants partial trunk folded back over the head in short form and illustrating the multiple animalistic form of the hilt; part land and part sea creature with a peacocks tail and feet of a pig, head of a sea Makara / elephant, body and occasionally head of a crocodile and several other ancient creatures.

Either way and ignoring my brilliant idea for the Elephant crew sword I see similar form...the appearance of the knuckleguard shaped like an elephants trunk as emanating from some sort of creatures mouth...possibly a variant of the Yali concept... and ending as a bud design...

In respect of the links between Deccan, Afghanistan and Central Asia; Clear involvement was direct between the Deccan and Central Asia as well as between the Deccan and Afghan regions..though my 1920 involvement between the last ruler of Bukhara and his exile to Afghanistan should not be taken out of context...as the whole melting pot including Turkomen, Tajic and Hazzara (the 1,000 men left behind in Afghanistan by Ghengis Khan) illustrates. Bukhara at the centre of Central Asia and the ancient city of Kabul in Afghanistan were of course also astride one of the greatest trade routes in history; The Silk Road. Thus, they were all trading with each other and/or politically entangled for several centuries.

[Tatyana Dianova]

One more of the type, sold recently in the UK. The auction description:
"Unusual Indian Sword, 17th Century, fitted with a European rapier type double edge blade flared towards the hilt, iron flange and tang, two-piece ivory grips with pointed pommel. Blade 33"

[Jim McDougall]

Extremely unusual to see this type hilt, faceted bolster in Central Asian/ Khyber/Afghan style with a European rapier blade. By the photos it would seem of course a far more modern fabrication than 17th c., though the blade likely is that.
It seems hilts of this style, even with the anomalous 'tunkou' feature, occur in Southern India in Karnataka and even as far as Tanjore according to what has been shared earlier in this discussion

It does seem that with the volume of European blades arriving with Mahratta traders in these 17th c and earlier times, there were quite a few rapier blades, and many of these were mounted in khanda and patas as well as in cut down use in other weapons.

As far as I have known, there has never been any particular favor toward the narrow rapier blades in the northern, Central Asian regions, so this may be a traditional anomaly in the south.

[Tatyana Dianova]

I agree with Jim that the whole type have most probably a South Indian origin.
Of course, one cannot tell when the "rapier" sword was mounted, but it isn't a modern combination either, judging by the wear and the overall codition.

[kai]

Hello Jim,

OTOH, this apparently well-aged hilt seems to be of genuine northern (rather than southern) Indian form including the minute notch at the underside of the gripping area. Thus, I'd be inclined to believe that this piece originates from the Mughal sphere of influence.

Not my area of expertise though, just my 2 rupees...

Regards,
Kai

[Tatyana Dianova]

I have heard many times following: when an item has North and South Indian features, it can originate from Deccan.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Although I have covered the subject at #51 I will place the main detail again since \I think we have a clear idea where this weapon comes from viz;

(The additional sword above is very interesting although I cannot be certain if the blade is European or an old Indian blade ground down? It is a fascinating development.)

Considering the previous posts I think the form is probably Deccani but similar forms developed or were influenced further north and variants based on a generally Bukharan style may be found in a greater area in Central Asia.

The origin of form, however, I think is placed at post #51 and on the reference http://www.ashokaarts.com/shop/rare-...om-vijayanagar a Deccani weapon Quote "An unusual and rare form of South Indian sword from the Vijayanagar Empire Karnataka".Unquote.

Pictures below.

[Tatyana Dianova]

Yes Ibrahiim, you are right about the Deccani origin! I have found an interesting article from a very knowledgeable person on a 18thC Deccani dagger.

“This dagger could easily be Northern, but the decoration definitely hints to the Deccan. Most people tend to think anything with silver, or anything not typically Mughal is Deccani, but this style of decoration definitely veers South.
I have always thought that generally (and I do mean generally, as this cannot be used as a rule of thumb) that Persian influenced Indian work tends to be Mughal and Northern, and pieces that link more to early Ottoman work tend to be Deccani.
On this particular dagger, the style of splayed floral work, with jagged edges is seen quite often on early Deccani work, and even earlier Ottoman textiles and art. The decoration on the dagger is not exactly this kind of work, but the similarities are definitely there. The dagger is cruder in style, so definitely not of the earlier period (but, decoration aside, the dagger form itself is not too early). Also, if you look at the line that runs down the inside handle, and has a squiggly decoration inside. This kind of work, thinly laid onto crude cross-hatching had always been reminiscent of later northern (Punjabi) work, but it also annoyingly kept cropping up on early Ottoman work (some armour, and a few examples of maces). ”

[Tatyana Dianova]

The following pictures illustrate the text above.
"First image is Ottoman, and an almost edible textile of the late 16th/early 17thC. You can clearly see the influences of the later Deccani blazons which decorated all art, but most especially the bidri work. The other 4 images are Deccani, and mostly of the 17thC. Last one is a jade hilt. the rest are bidriware."

[kai]

Hello Tatyana,

Your pics are out of sync with the text. You can determine the order by separately uploading them one by one! (No need to close the attachment window - just hit upload after selecting each pic...)

BTW, I'd also suggest to also give the name of the person you're quoting for future reference.

Regards,
Kai

[Tatyana Dianova]

This one is Ottoman, the rest are Deccani.
The quote is from a private communication, and I am not sure if I should give the name without the author's permission...

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Forum Library References;
A. http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/search...earchid=843812
B. http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...hlight=SHASHKA
C. http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...hlight=SHASHKA
D. http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...hlight=SHASHKA
E. Or simply type in Shashka to Search for a full list of threads and select.

Originally Posted by Tatyana Dianova

I have heard many times following: when an item has North and South Indian features, it can originate from Deccan.

Salaams Tatyana Dianova ~ I agree entirely with that. As a side issue however, I am unsure if your straight bladed weapon is a South Indian derivative or a replaced blade on a Northern style ...if it in fact is a replacement and not simply a worn down blade. Nonetheless it is a fascinating subject.

In this regard I wish to play "The Devils Advocate" and speak for the weapon in what I believe is its correct role as a South Indian Sword. In this respect I invite comments.

A South Indian project sword shown below comprises a few simple parts viz; Hilt, Knuckleguard, Knuckleguard base, Tunkou and Blade. Taking each part separately I will describe how each item belongs to a South Indian form. For this exercise I omit significant blade detail since it is impossible when trying to close in on a typography of regional description as Indian sword blades migrate all over the spectrum but base my assumptions on the other parts, however, I add a photo showing what I believe could have been the technique in broad terms of using this thin cyclic technique slashing blade behind a Buckler ...The technique is present in South Indian martial arts today.

Thus I describe ~

1. Hilt I select a similar hilt from the arsenal of South Indian weapons for comparison; The Pichangeti Dagger... See Picture below. This hilt is unlike Shashka form since it is birdhead or pistol grip form and although Mughal weapons with similar hilts were purchased by Othmanli court buyers the form was never transmitted to Shashka or other swords to the North...and since the Shashka hilt never went the other way....we are looking at a regional Southern Indian form only.

Note that great power can be transmitted through the weighted hilt with a heavy pommel counterbalance to a thin curved blade in the downward strike and naturally the weapon was not effective in the thrust particularly against armour..I assume that great speed was essential and that slashing cuts were the order of the day where moves were enacted around the Buckler style shield underlining the speed factor of this technique.

2. Knuckleguard No sword of the Shashka type has one..but that typically the finial being Lotus bud form is Indianwhich means that when sheathed, this weapon sits differently in the scabbard whereas the Shashka embeds right up to its pommel ... The project weapon has a knuckleguard thus sits differently in its scabbard.

3. Knuckleguard and base See below photos showing the elephant zoomorphology WITH ears, teeth and a trunk !! The basic shape may be present in other regions hilt base designs but no other region shows the foundation as an elephant head which would point to this being not only Indian but regional Indian....and certainly not absorbed out of Ottoman Bukharan or Afghan theatres.

4. Tunkou Relations with China were ongoing in many regions of India indicating that the transition of Tunkou to this weapon happened through trade and showing that other southern weapons also may have Tunkou design transfer such as on Kastane etc.

5. Blade showing a simple picture of how flimsy bladed weapons were used ...of this nature... behind a Buckler..

😎 In conclusion; the project sword is neither Pseudo nor Shashka but is a specific South Indian Sword design which evolved solely in Southern India and is unrelated to Afghan, Bukharan, Caucasian, Persian or other miscellaneous Shashka types except distantly by vague and unrelated accidental look alike factors not attributable or traceable to this weapon.

Pictures Below are~

1. Pichangeti showing both the rounded Pistol grip and Birdhead variety of South India.
2. Shashka Form Hilt.
3. A highly ornate gold and black South Indian example showing the zoomorphic elephant head; ears and mouth with trunk (as the knuckleguard) and missing Lotus bud finial.
4. A Project Sword; from Ashok Arts.
5. High speed sword work with flimsy curved blades and knuckleguards behind Buckler Shields.
6. Map showing regions of South India.
7. How the Shashka sits in its scabbard.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[Jim McDougall]

Beautifully formatted, illustrated and linked entry Ibrahim! and presents a fascinating array of considerations as we look more into these curious anomalies.

Before continuing I would like to address the intriguing but unfortunate title on this thread, which refers to the sword of the original post, and as I believe has been mentioned, has nothing to do with the 'shashka' type sabre. The term 'psuedo' as has been discussed is even more misplaced and seems has been tempting us 'down the garden path'.

The examples you have posted with the guardless character and similar features, most expressly the 'tunkou', offer keen insight into others which seem to fall into this spectrum, and appear to have southern India provenance.

I would suggest that this feature on the blade of the weapon of the OP, is not actually a tunkou at all, but more aligned with the decorative lobed palmette cuffs seen on many Deccani daggers, which extend in the manner of a langet over the blade root under the guard or base of hilt.

The shape of this hilt, seems primarily to align with the Mughal daggers, often of kard form, of the northern areas, and typically have the faceted bolster at the base of the grip and are guardless. These have the same lobed or flueret style cuff extending over the back of the blade across and in the same asymmetrical diagonal configuration basically as the 'tunkou' of earlier swords and many Chinese dao.

What is interesting in Tatyana's example posted, is that this feature exists below the faceted bolster, essentially an incongruent blend of 'north and south'! The faceted bolster of Persian and Central Asian Mughal north, and the palmette type cuff of Deccani south, hybridized with a rapier blade.

It is important here to note that the 'tunkou' or for that matter, even the palmette type cuff or langet Mughal items, much in the manner of the tunkou on yataghans or Ottoman weapons, seems to have had stylistic importance beyond any pragmatic purpose.

In many weapons, koftgari applications are added to blades in exactly the same shapes, decoration and location at the blade root or ricasso to vestigially represent this key feature. I recall a M1788 British cavalry sabre blade mounted on a Deccani tulwar (shamshir type hilt) which had this vestigial tunkou koftgari applied in exactly this manner.

The idea of rapier blades is not new to the southern regions in India, in fact such type blades are seen on early iconography. However, the use and popularizing of the European rapier blades seems to have become most notable during the British presence in the 18th c.
It is tempting to consider this may be an atavistic piece which follows the accord with the daggers of the north and in degree the south, using a blade repurposed to the rapier form in traditional interpretation.

With the other examples of these types, as Ibrahiim has well posted, there are great opportunities to examine the climate of their development. While the scrolled knuckleguard is well present in many hilts to the north, in some reading it does seem that Welch does consider this style to have moved to the north from southern origins (noted in 'Arms of the Muslim Knight' p.201).

[Tatyana Dianova]

Interesting insightes Jim - as usual from your side!

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

By Jim McDougall It is important here to note that the 'tunkou' or for that matter, even the palmette type cuff or langet Mughal items, much in the manner of the tunkou on yataghans or Ottoman weapons, seems to have had stylistic importance beyond any pragmatic purpose.

Salaams Jim, It could be that regarding Tunkou we are looking at a Red Herring. My take on the wrap is that it adds more weight to the power end of the blade and that it secures the weapon in the scabbard far better preventing it from rattling around or falling out.
Thanks for your informative reply..

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[Gonzalo G]

Interesting thread!

In my humble opinion, the "tunkou" also helps much in reducing the nasty vibrations of the blade when you hit in the wrong manner. This protects the hand and the blade. But I can be wrong. If you don´t want to risk an old sword to test it, try it with a long machete.
Regards

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Salaams, I refer to #17 and its main reference when equating Indian swords to Chinese. I would temper that with what Jim has said about Tunkou.
My main reference is http://thomaschen.freewebspace.com/custom3.html

The article notes a fashion in Chinese swords and close ties with sword influence going both ways. Swords made in Beijing were exported to India after 1761 . Further ..a common description amongst Chinese sword design was the pistol grip which is essentially the same as the bird head or parrot head hilt. Note also the practice of cutting grooves in the blade and inserting pearls which roll up and down the grooves; This is a direct copy from Indian blades of that form; Tears of the wounded (afflicted)

Shown in addition is the trend in Indian blades; both sword and dagger, of decorating the throat with a cartouche done in Koftgari form but that in the project sword this is of Tunkou style essentially a reinforcement plate giving support to the hilt and enabling a tighter fit for the blade into the scabbard....something koftgari design does not do...nor was it designed to.

I accept as Gonzalo points out that the wrap would also have reduced heavy vibration through to the sword hand and as I point out the practical idea that the blade would fit better and more snugly into the scabbard...also noted in #17.

Given that in the late 1700s Chinese swords were exported to India it stands to reason that the Tunkou was in fact part of this design imported on these weapons but turned the other way...perhaps to satisfy Indian taste from purely an aesthetic viewpoint as it looked better? Whilst it seems logical it is understood that nothing is certain in this regard and that it may be down to simple design drift and this is simply parallel development or pure chance...and may be how some swords in the South were designed...Kastane often have a similar wrap.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[Jens Nordlunde]

Hello Ibrahiim,
Could you please give us a few references to the Chinese export of blades/weapons to India?
Jens

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by Jens Nordlunde

Hello Ibrahiim,
Could you please give us a few references to the Chinese export of blades/weapons to India?
Jens

Whilst I search for that please see https://books.google.com.om/books?id...XPORTS&f=false which outlines the goods including sword blades that were exported to China from India in 1793.


* Ho & Bronson 2004 p111
"... the [Qianlong] emperor appears to have been quite fond of non-traditional curved sabers of the Indian and Middle Eastern type, often furnished with jade hilts carved in the Indian Mughal style. Some were imitations made in the imperial armory in Beijing."

* Ho & Bronson 2004 p114 f127
"Qianlong ordered a total of sixty ceremonial curved swords on five occasions, in 1748, 1757, 1779, 1793, and 1795. Each sword was named and numbered, and all were identical in length, weight, and basic design. The scabbards were made either of red or green stingray skin and or patterned bark. The swords differed in terms of their inlaid details and the style of the hilts. Hilts made after completion of the 1757 batch were mostly in Mughal style, often with gold and inlaid gems."Unquote.

[Jens Nordlunde]

Thank you very much, and it is quite interesting that the trade went both ways - from very early times.
I know of three dagger blades all with the same decoration, one at a museum in China, one in the MET and one in my collection.
Of these two have a pistol grip, and the one in the MET has a grip with a horse head - but all have a stone hilt.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

I have looked at the hilt situation on the project sword and feel that the entire hilt question is critical to the overall answer to this phenomena. Thus I turn to Stuart Carey Welsh . INDIA. Arts and Culture. 1300 to 1900. for The Met Museum . page 270. however, I note that the front outside cover has a magnificent piece of artwork which was painted in India in about 1620 and is lavishly adorned in Chinese influence. Part of the story is present in that picture as not only were the Chinese merchants on the Indian coast and active in securing South African gold etc. from Indian traders but the Chinese artisans were active also in influencing Indian ateliers and no doubt in the transfer both ways of fine art techniques and subject matter. This must have included the types and decorations of weapons probably both ways.

Please note the Pistol grip dagger described and pictured at page 270; from Stuart Carey Welsh. INDIA. Arts and Culture. 1300 to 1900. for The Met Museum says;

Quote''That presumably this was carved for Aurangzeb. The origin of the form can be traced to the Deccan where it must have been admired by Aurangzeb and adapted for his use during his years there as Viceroy. In the early stages of their evolution which probably began in the Southern Deccan, pistol grips terminated not in the round abstract shape but in Parrot heads, complete with beaks and eyes. Deccani examples of the 17th C. already incorporate this change. After Aurangzeb created a vogue for them, pistol grips became common at the Mughal Court during the late 17th and 18th C. some of them repeat the original parrot design.''Unquote.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[Jim McDougall]

This has been a most provocative thread!! and brought out some very interesting aspects of Indian arms as related to Chinese influence and vive versa. I must say Ibrahiim, you are truly an intrepid and tenacious researcher!!! Great links and resources, thank you!

I have tried to follow in kind, and it does seem that there must have been a degree of arms which entered the Indian sphere, as there was a great deal of trade activity with China via the varied East India companies from late 17th and into the 18th century.

It does seem that the Dutch had a factory in Peking (Beijing) in the late 17th but seem to have closed it early in the 18th. In these times most of the interest and reciprocity seem to have been the export of china and textiles, but around early 18th an interest developed in the decoration of sword hilts (known as Tonquinese, for those regions of N. Vietnam), but apparently thought to have been made in China.

While strong export of mercantile commodities seem well known, it does not seem that any export of arms took place in any sort of capacity as the Chinese had a very restrictive attitude toward foreign presence there and the exports seem to have filtered into the Philippines in various channels.

I have not been able to find more on the noted Beijing export in 1761, and by this period it seems that the Chinese courts while intrigued by outside styles, such as the Indian influence in some Qianlong hilts, had little to do with exporting arms. Though not exporting arms proper, they did however exert considerable influence in the arms of Europe, particularly the decoration forms known as chinoserie, Tonquinese and Japan had its shakudo.

Still it would be hard to imagine that a power such as China would not be involved in certain trade and export outside the direct control of the realm, and as Ibrahiim has noted, the quest for gold in remote ports and centers operated briskly in operations unlikely to be officially recorded.
We know that Chinese river pirates were present in regions of SE asia contiguous to India, and other regions in proximity.
The exchange and diffusion of all manner of materials of course must have been considerable in such circumstances, and while not technically supportable, it does seem to be reasonably plausible.

Returning to the matter of the 'tunkou' feature, I am more inclined to think of it entering these spheres from Ottoman influence rather than Chinese, despite its prevalence on many Qing swords. Many features of Central Asian and Indian weapons carry Ottoman influence from various sources, all of which were prevalent throughout the development of these arms.
As for its purpose, I tend to follow the thoughts of Philip Tom, as described in his "Military Sabres of the Qing Dynasty", that they were to stabilize the guard and secure the blade in the scabbard.

These were clearly not consistent on these Chinese sabres, whether in yuanshi or fangshi mounts regardless, and were not as far as I have seen ever on jian.

Still, the feature clearly became a vestigial notion on a number of weapons in other context ,and as seen on the sword here, and on daggers as discussed, whether physically represented or decoratively applied in koftgari or other means.

[ariel]

Well, the earliest "tunkous" are seen on the nomadic swords dating to at least 8-9 centuries. Subsequent tunkou-like elements are seen on a multitude of blades , all coming from the areas dominated by, or at least in contact with nomadic cultures. Their forms varied : from the " along the edge" in early examples to the "along the spine" in the latter ones, from massive plates to purely symbolic, decorative koftgari or incised outlines, from traditional triangular to "shell-like" in North African yataghans etc. Ottomans were not the originators of tunkou: they got it from their Seljuk and Oghuz ancestors, but due to their exclusive Western location, they were a vehicle of spreading it over the Mediterranean basin. Seljuk Empire had its epicenter in modern Iran, Indian Moghuls came from Central Asia etc.
The earliest European one I know (1321AD)can be seen on the fresco of St. Nikita in the Gracanica church in Serbia, perhaps as a result of Batu Khan invasion half a century earlier. I may go on a limb here, but the so-called Indian ricasso might be a direct descendant of the archaic Nomadic ones.
Both Khudyakov and Phillip Tom commented on their original purpose, and suggested purely utilitarian mechanical reasons: plugging the mouth of the scabbard, isolating the edge, or just secure seating of blades within their scabbards. Phillip Tom thinks that Japanese Habaki is unrelated to tunkou, but looking at the origin of Japanese people and their contacts with Koreans, Chinese and Mongols, this assertion may be modified.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Salaams All , Despite not being able to open Philip Toms brilliant works noted above I eventually got a clean copy at http://hawaiihistoricarms.com/milita...il-tom-part-1/ where notes indicate the Chinese influence and Indian influence the other way. Combined with the notes already here at thread I think we have the subject cornered although idiosyncrasies and variable translations of how it transpired ...and from several directions almost simultaneously makes this a fascinating if not occasionally a (little) baffling subject.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

Whilst I search for that please see https://books.google.com.om/books?id...XPORTS&f=false which outlines the goods including sword blades that were exported to China from India in 1793.


* Ho & Bronson 2004 p111
"... the [Qianlong] emperor appears to have been quite fond of non-traditional curved sabers of the Indian and Middle Eastern type, often furnished with jade hilts carved in the Indian Mughal style. Some were imitations made in the imperial armory in Beijing."

* Ho & Bronson 2004 p114 f127
"Qianlong ordered a total of sixty ceremonial curved swords on five occasions, in 1748, 1757, 1779, 1793, and 1795. Each sword was named and numbered, and all were identical in length, weight, and basic design. The scabbards were made either of red or green stingray skin and or patterned bark. The swords differed in terms of their inlaid details and the style of the hilts. Hilts made after completion of the 1757 batch were mostly in Mughal style, often with gold and inlaid gems."Unquote.

It seems that this trade network bringing China and India together as far as exchange of blades went even earlier:

"...blades from China and India were highly sought after in the Middle East, which seems to have been the hub of an astonishing international trade in sword blades, amongst many other items".
* during 14th and through 15th centuries and later

"The Medieval Swords of Leeds Castle"
-Clive Thomas
"London Park Lane Arms Fair, 2005" p.26

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

It seems that this trade network bringing China and India together as far as exchange of blades went even earlier:

"...blades from China and India were highly sought after in the Middle East, which seems to have been the hub of an astonishing international trade in sword blades, amongst many other items".
* during 14th and through 15th centuries and later

"The Medieval Swords of Leeds Castle"
-Clive Thomas
"London Park Lane Arms Fair, 2005" p.26

Salaams Jim, In addition I note from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_swords

Early Three Kingdoms period to late Sui dynasty (220–618)
Introduction of the Sassanian/Persian style suspension mounts on Chinese daos.
Probable introduction of Damascus wootz steel (for use in jians) from India or the Middle East.

In addition the Hudud al alam (10th C Persian) https://books.google.com.om/books?id...istory&f=false it is noted that swords and slaves amongst others were exported from Gujerat.
Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[kai]

And another example that might possibly be related: http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=26861

The knuckle guard seems to be unique with (now missing) scales attached to it originally. Were these possibly crafted from brass?

Regards,
Kai