Enfield made Afghani Pulwar

[Marcus]

I have this sword on order; it is an Afghani version of the Indian tulwar. The blade is marked “Enfield”, so I would assume that it was made from a sword captured during one of the Anglo-Afghani wars. To the best of my knowledge, Enfield did not make sword blades for general export. There might be a date that has been obscured by the new hilt. My question to the group is what was the original British pattern for which this blade was made?

[Jim McDougall]

Very interesting paluoar!!!
First one Ive ever seen with a British military blade, but this does not seem an unlikely combination. After the Treaty of Gandamak (1879) and end of 2nd Afghan War, the British installed Abdur Rahman Khan as Emir and they continued a nominal occupation of Afghanistan. This included the creation of the Mashin Khana state armoury in Kabul, which produced British military rifles for Afghan army as well as some other arms. This seems to have taken place around 1886, but production seems to have faltered around 1905.
While I cannot recall for certain, it seems the small arms produced were Enfields.

While the forte on this blade is partially obscured by the langets, it appears to be either an 1885 or 1890 pattern British cavalry blade, although there were earlier ENFIELD production blades. The earlier blades usually had the year after the Enfield stamp.
There should be WD and arrow mkgs on the blade.

Enfield began producing sword blades after 1820, but as noted, like other British makers, blades were not made for export.
Rather than suspecting this blade may have been captured, I believe it more likely to be from the British occupation period, with an Afghan armourer using it for mount in a traditional hilt, probably around turn of the century or later.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Great information Jim, We had a real go at Mashin Khana where at http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=21677 it can be seen in the sketch of one of the Kabul works the write up in miniscule print under says Martini Henry and solid brass drawn cartridges were made there... Mashin Khana was an attempt to finance a state industrial revolution...it failed! They also made Bayonets and such was the fervour to replicate foreign weapons that they scooped up other items of war including their own long daggers and stamped them for good measure... Indeed stamping everything with the Mashin Khana stamp seemed to a sort of sport... to the very detriment of skilled artesans who were sucked into the system thereby forgetting their age old crafts in favour of mechanical automation and the dreaded Mashin Khana. Bayonets for MH were turned out though quality was suspect ..See the bayonets at reference also.

I am checking for other weapons made there also...and I see at https://www.google.com/search?q=mash...utf-8&oe=utf-8 pictures of rifles and stamps often with the Kabul Jangalak factory but no Enfield marks...just MH. We are all aware of the home made versions made in Afghanistan with all sorts of spelling mistakes but I cannot find Enfields having been made in the Mashin Khana. factories..

Regarding Enfield Sword Blades please see http://antiqueswordsforsale.com/brit...t-issue-marks/ for some of the marks applied throughout the 19th C.

[fernando]

Interesting pulwar, Marcus .
Perhaps this topic is best placed in the Ethnographic section .

[Marcus]

I posted in Europeanin the hopes that a member of that forum might recognize the blade type and identify the original sword.

[fernando]

Let's place it in both sections, then .

[Jim McDougall]

Good call Fernando. I was surprised to see this in European but well understand Marcus' reasoning which was well placed in that perspective.
As far as I have known, it is most unusual to see these blades, which included M1853, M1885 and M1890 British cavalry swords , used in ethnographic edged weapons intact. There may have been cut down examples however, but unclear on cases offhand.

Excellent input Ibrahiim, and I agree, the Martini-Henry was most likely but Sniders (actually Enfield muskets converted to breech load with Snider patent) were also produced.

[broadaxe]

I believe this was made entirely in England:
http://www.oriental-arms.co.il/item.php?id=2823

[Marcus]

I don't see the relationship.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by broadaxe

I believe this was made entirely in England:
http://www.oriental-arms.co.il/item.php?id=2823

Robert Mole & Sons of Birmingham was a well known supplier of blades and these kinds of fully made tulwars for native Indian regiments. They were subcontractors for Wilkinson along with at least one or more others, I believe it was J Bourne & Son.
Enfield was a military small arms factory and did not produce swords in this manner for colonial purposes.

The paluoar is a traditional sword in Afghanistan but was not produced in the manner of these tulwars and colonial sabres for India by makers and suppliers in England.

This is a hilt FROM Afghan maker joined with a British cavalry blade from an Enfield produced sword.

[Marcus]

I got the sword in and offer some more pictures. I have been told that the Arabic translates as “In the name of Allah the Entirely Merciful, the Especially Merciful”

There is no English broad arrow or date associated with the Enfield mark. In fact the ENFIELD is rather poorly struck so that it looks more like ENFIELT.

In any case, it is really a solid and impressive sword.

[eftihis]

Hi, the sword is wonderfull! However is clearly marked "ENFIELT" and not poorly marked "Enfield".
My guess is that is a locally made blade that marked as a european one in order to show quality and to be sold more expensive. Something like the case in this saudi saif sword that is made in... "Egland"(!)

[Roland_M]

Originally Posted by Marcus

My question to the group is what was the original British pattern for which this blade was made?

Hello,

the 1853 Cavalry Trooper Sabre looks pretty similar (90cm blade length). Dimensions would be useful.
http://www.nam.ac.uk/online-collecti...cc=1975-05-9-1

Roland

[Marcus]

The blade is 36 inches long.

I am inclined to believe that it is in fact a faked mark. However, that does not necessarily mean it was made in country. The mark could have been added to any previously unmarked blade, even one from England.

[Marcus]

Comparison to the Tulwar-like hilt of my Soussan Pata.

[Roland_M]

Originally Posted by Marcus

The blade is 36 inches long.

I am inclined to believe that it is in fact a faked mark. However, that does not necessarily mean it was made in country. The mark could have been added to any previously unmarked blade, even one from England.

If I watch the inscription carefully, it is probably a mutilated "D" not "T".

35" * 2.54 = 91.4 cm, it is pretty sure the pattern I mentioned.

Roland

[Jim McDougall]

While without notes or references at moment, the 1853 as noted was somewhat in line with the later examples previously noted of regulation British blades.
The font and position of the ENFIELD stamp seems in line as well with correct British stamping. While not in character without year or government stamps, it does not seem the blade is not authentically British.

[Marcus]

Granted that the blade resembles that of an 1853 Cavalry Trooper Saber, but the marks aren’t right to permit that it was ever installed as such. Afghanistan being as it was the chessboard of the Great Game, is it reasonable to speculate that the British might have made a gift of a small batch of blades to one of their candidates for the throne for them to have hilted as pulwars for members of their retinue? This is where the plausible deniability comes in. It might have been politically indelicate to have such a donation, or any overt sign of support, become public. If the blades were deliberately struck with a flawed stamp, what might pass as a British blade with casual inspection, could also be repudiated as such with a closer look.

[Marcus]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

While not in character without year or government stamps, it does not seem the blade is not authentically British.

Parsing the sentence I think you believe it is British.

[Jim McDougall]

In retrospect, the sentence looks awkward
I think your thoughts are well reasoned Marcus, and there was considerable traffic of materials, including blades, outside government sanctioned means. Many blades etc for example are supposed to be marked ISD (India Stores Dept) but many are not.
I think this is a British blade .

[Will M]

Yes an Enfield blade from a 1821 pattern British light or heavy cavalry sword. latest dates I've seen on these is 1848. The Enfield stampings are not perfect.
This photo the "Enfield" has been dinged. Photo of a British 1821p HC sword.
Possibly be a 1853p blade with unstopped fuller. Most 1853p swords were made by Mole, Reeves and early ones made in Germany and inspected at Liege with a crown/L/# on the ricasso. Enfield could not make enough swords at the time with the Crimean War in full gear.

[Jim McDougall]

As far as I have known, the M1821 light and heavy cavalry trooper blades have a block ricasso and hollow ground blade, as seen in the picture. The blade OP in the paluoar seems to have the elliptical fuller which terminates at the ricasso area.
This elliptical fuller I believe is typical of M1853 blades and some of the later blades on British cavalry swords.
However, the M1853 cavalry sabre was the first to have the full tang (patented by Charles Reeves but Wilkinson also produced some under license from him). What was different about this tang was that rather than being inserted into grip, the grips were individual pieces sandwiched onto the tang.

This type of blade tang does not seem in accord with the hilt on this paluoar leaving a bit of a puzzle. The first of these type hilts by Wilkinson (1854) with Reeves also producing.
I have seen M1821 blades by Reeves which must have been about 1840s so the 1848 date seems possible for these as noted. The Reeves blades I saw were of the 'old' type block ricasso.

In a reference (Journal of Royal United Service Museum, Vol.42 #2, 1898, p.1148) it is noted that Enfield did not make swords around the time of Crimean War but that did begin producing some then. There were a good number from Germany (most I have seen were Kirschbaum) but Mole (also working with Wilkinson) produced some.
The problem with sword production in these times was mostly the stringent protocols on testing blades per regulations.

So my question is, why does this blade of apparent 1853 type have the old form tang (as it appears) and why the Enfield stamp? Could this be one of the prototypes of the M1853 produced at Enfield prior to the production using the new tang?
Then, why is this unusual blade on a paluoar?
The British were heavily involved in Afghanistan after the 1879 war in trying to maintain their strategic presence there, and were of course not only subsidizing the development of industry and military but certainly bringing in British materials and quite likely often covertly. When they began the creation of the factory in Kabul the idea was to produce British weapons with Afghan workers.
In discussions here over the years and with the research and paper done by Mahratt, some of the weapons created there are addressed. It does not seem implausible that an ENFIELD stamp might have been in use in Kabul in these endeavors, and that an imitation of the M1853 blade with old style tang might have resulted.

Perhaps this might explain this anomaly, and I hope my suggestion makes sense.

[Marcus]

This is going to be an interesting and challenging piece to write up.

[kronckew]

will's sword's spine tarted up a bit so you can read it a bit better...

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by Marcus

This is going to be an interesting and challenging piece to write up.

Indeed it will.
The history of British regulation swords is tumultuous enough, without the complexity of Afghanistan and 'The Great Game' (highly recommend Peter Hopkirks book by this title) thrown into the mix.
That is what makes this paluoar so unique, with a blade in transitional circumstances either a prototype from Enfield just as the Crimean War loomed or a blade copied in British subsidized Afghan factory in Kabul.
As I mentioned, the font on this stamp seems correct for markings on blades of 19th c . as is placement. It may be a worn stamp supplied to these projects accounting for the degraded letter at the end.

Naturally these are just speculations on my part, but hopefully they might provide some ideas for further research toward a more accurately detailed account of this sword.

The use of British blades in native hilts is far from unusual, and the favor of the British light cavalry M1796 became legion in India. As a result of these blades being used remarkably successfully in native tulwars, the 'hatchet point' type blades remained in production for Indian cavalry sabres through the 19th century (long after superceded by the M1821 series) In fact even the stirrup hilt also remained in use as long.

[Marcus]

On page 142, reading more between flights in Paris airport.

[Marcus]

Picked up this more native style pulwar today. Comments welcome.

[Marcus]

Let’s assume that this blade was made by the Enfield armory, as if for an1853 pattern Cavalry Trooper Saber. Since Enfield was not an exporter per se, I think that it is reasonable to guess that the blade was diverted to British India through some official channel. Britain was certainly interested in courting the favor of local leaders both inside and outside of Kabul, so I would speculate that either the blade or the complete sword was intended as a gift. Of course a complete sword would make the better gift, so the question then is where was the blade assembled with the hilt. The three choices I imagine would be England, British India, or Afghanistan. I doubt if this workmanship, with such a nice rendition of the local style and an Arabic invocation, originated in England, so I would guess either British India, or Afghanistan. I would lean toward the former.

One could also ask whether the scabbard was adapted from a British military scabbard. The standard scabbards were steel and this scabbard appears to have a leather cover glued on top of a rigid core, which could easily have been adapted from the original steel scabbard with the drag removed.

[Jim McDougall]

Hi Marcus,
Well reasoned as always, and these puluaors of yours are fascinating. It seems you have been reading 'The Great Game' by Hopkirk, as I recall you noted. These regions were a hotbed of intrigue in those days just as they remain today.
In the 19th century into the early 20th, Afghanistan was actually considered part of India as its Northwest Frontier. It is true that a great deal of diplomatic effort was centered there and Great Britain was subsidizing the development of industry, infrastructure and many military considerations.
The introduction of British weaponry and uniform into the assemblage of Afghan army units was sometimes curious, which included instances of 'Albert' metal helmets and kilts.

As previously mentioned, the Machin Khana factory in Kabul, was engaged in producing British arms under their subsidy and direction. There were likely other workshops and venues also involved in supplying forces there which were outside official channels. These naturally were unrecorded officially so difficult to verify.

This was a situation long well established in the Raj, and many arms came into India without government marks or the ISD (India Stores Dept) stamps. Also, makers indeed produced blades intended to appear to be of British origin (post #12, 'made in EGland, misspell).

The scabbard was no doubt in imitation of British military style, and the carry rings are positioned accordingly, with the chape sleeve tooled with openwork as in many cases of this Afghan style preference. The scabbards of the Afghan military style swords have different carry systems.

There is also no doubt that this hilt was fashioned in these Afghan regions (part of British India) in accordance with traditional motif and design, based on the Persian/Ottoman decorative styles present in Central Asia for over two centuries.

The blade remains the anomaly in whether it was produced in the Enfield factory in England, or indeed produced in one of the quasi-British enterprises using an acquired 'Enfield' stamp, which does not seem far fetched.
The officers and appointed officials would of course have been likely to carry these kinds of amalgamated arms of British military and traditional style in this climate of development and British intervention.

The numbers of British blades mounted in Indian swords is well known, and many of the M1796 blades were indeed captured as mentioned previously resulting in Indian preference for this pattern blade. Most of these instances were many years earlier during the Sikh wars etc. In later times however, as probably in instances such as these later examples, it seems that more commercial venues would be the case.

[Marcus]

“I was unable to show my friendship publicly, because my people were ignorant and fanatical. If I showed any inclination toward the English, my people would call me an infidel for joining hands with infidels.”*

* quote attributed to Abdur Rahman, the Emir of Afghanistan who made peace with the British at the end of the second Anglo-Afghan war. Reported in “the Great Game” by Peter Hopkirk