Enamel hilt - age and place

[Jens Nordlunde]

How old do you think this hilt is, and from where in India do you think it origins?
Its is silver with enamel, and as you can see the enamel is very fine, but before you answer watch the colours.
I am not quite sure myself, but I would like to hear other oppinions.

[Tim Simmons]

Exquisite.

[Tim Simmons]

I will have a stab at it; Deccan Plateau, Hyderabad? No idea about the age could be brand new. Go on put us out of our misery.

[B.I]

jens,
one day you will surprise us all by asking an easy question!!
however, i wont hold my breath just in case
the colours in enammelling has been studied but i have yet to read anything convincing, or anyone that is willing to commit past jaipur or lucknow.
the colours within your hilt seem lucknow to me, but i have never really looked deeply into the subject.
manuel keene wrote an interesting article called 'the enamel road, from siena,paris,london and lisbon leads to lucknow' which attempts to route the history of this style back through european sources. he does cote other places with similar colours, including tim's hyderabad offer.
i must guiltily admit i have only skimmed through the article, but did note that he puts a question mark after his regions, and also uses the 'mughal/deccan' description which is a little vague for an apparantely in-depth article. he also included the 'hyderabad' enammelled archers rings in the al-sabah collection. i have never believed these authentic and the insertion of them in his article put me off reading much further. its also interesting to note that the article itself was in a book that was partly sponsored by al-sabah!!
so, i should read the article and offer more, but i know you have it as well so shall continue to lazilly state 'lucknow' but remain open to other theories.
the hilt itself offers little clues, as the shape was widely used in both the deccan and the mughal north. i would happily give it a late 18thC date, but refuse to back it up academically (i'm just a collector, i dont need to!)
you obviously have an opinion, mr nordlunde, so come clean

[Jens Nordlunde]

Hi Tim,
It is most likely 19th century, but I think you are wrong when you say Deccan, Hyderabad. I think it is more likely Rajasthan/Mewar, due to the colours the different districts were specializing in, mentioned in Jacob and Hendley’s book ‘Jeypore Enamels’, and due to the fact that the finest centres for enamel lay to the north.
There are a few interesting things about this hilt. Mostly when you see a tulwar hilt it has the same decoration all over, but not this one, as the hilt, the top of the disc and the dome have the same decorations and colours, but under the disc the decoration and the colours are quite different, here it is clearly a water plant, single petal lotus’s most likely, with butterflies. I have often wondered when I saw a different decoration on the underside of the disc. Why was it made differently, so only the owner could see it, and then only when he turned the tulwar upside down? It must have been more expensive due to the bigger number of colours, as it would have to go more time into the oven for the melting process, so it must have had a special meaning to the owner. You now and again see the same change in decoration on hilts decorated in koft gari.

Hi Brian,
Another thing, which makes me say north India, is the transparency and the way the colours are fating, this was very difficult to make, and I think it was only made in the north. For a long time the enamellers could not make the past themselves, so they got it from Lucknow – but it was the furnace job which made the difference.

[Tim Simmons]

Beautiful work. I do not know anything about the colours or enameling centers. I was just guessing on the form of the decoration which is very different from the Northern/Kashmir enameled kard you post for discussion some time ago. Wonderful condition on the handle anyway.

[B.I]

hi jens
am happy to defer to your theories, especially the date on seeing the pommel underside. i know the sword of course, but have a bad memory :-)
hendleys book is great (all of them, but the jeypore enamels that you refer to especially) but like egerton, he must be taken cautiosly. both he and egerton spent much time in india, studying a subject they were both obviously very passionate about, but neither spent much time in the south. also, both studied mainly the arts of the time, of course delving into the past where applicable. the south was never studied properly and only recently have many theories of the past been brough to task.
still, in saying that i am still happy to defer to your opinion, but would like to know where the rajesthan colours information came from (was this hendley?)

[Jens Nordlunde]

Hi Brian,

I don’t only have it from Hendley and Egerton. I have the book ‘Indian Art at Delhi 1903’ by George Watt which is the official catalogue and guide to the exhibition held at Delhi. As any kind of art from all over India was represented at the exhibition, this should give us an idea of how frequent the different types of art were represented in the different regions. That a region was not represented with enamel work at the exhibition does not mean that enamel work could not have been made there, I would however think that if nice enamel work had been made in a region it would have been sent it to the exhibition.

Here are the names he mentions in the index. ‘Bernares, Bhawalpur, Bhuj, Bombay (school of art), Chamba, Delhi, Hazara, Jaipur, Jhalawar, Jodhpur, Kach, Kangra, Kashmir, Lahore, Lucknow and Multan.’

I won’t say that enamel was not made in south India, as I don’t know, but it seems as if, at least most of it was made in Punjab and Rajasthan, and I agree with you that Hendley was very fond of the northern part of India, so it is likely that he would prefer to write about enamel and other works from this area. With Watt it was somewhat different, as he was the author of the official catalogue for the 1903 exhibition, he had to deal with everything sent to the exhibition. It would however be interesting, as you suggest, to dig into enamels from the south, to see what is to be found – V&A would be a good place to start.

There is one more thing I should mention about the hilt, and that is that the dome can be removed and underneath it are two initials and a name written in the roman alphabet, it says “Made by V. J. & . Nathdwara”. Who or what V. J. is, is unknown, Nathdwara is an Indian surname and the name of an old town in Rajasthan about 100 km south of Jodhpur.

[Tim Simmons]

This information is very interesting. The use of English to describe the manufacturer seems to suggest this was made under the auspices of the British, some trade council or the like, as a display or presentation piece.

[Jens Nordlunde]

Hi Tim,

It could be like you write, but I doubt it very much. Had it been so, I think they would have made a greater effort when writing the letters. There is another reason why I don’t think so, a reason which you could not know, and that is the blade, it has a chevron pattern but the pattern is a bit uneven, and I don’t think you would used such a blade for presentation. Remember that the hilt and the blade do not necessarily come from the same place – they could have, but not necessarily. Here is the whole tulwar, notice that the chevron pattern does not start until a bit down the blade.
One other thing, the blade has an armoury mark at the back - the mark (meaning K/Ka/Kha) and the number 33.

[Tim Simmons]

Yes indeed, very nice. I have made handles and the blades have been made in another country even quite recently.

[B.I]

i think tim is right in a way. the hand is indian, but it could well have been made for an english patron. jens, please bear with me but i am on to something that could be of great use for some of your particular line of questioning. there was a serious of drawings bought recently for a very large sum. these were thought to be 17thC mughal but both i, and a friend am sure they are 19thC and an artists portfolio of hilt forms. in it, he offers examples of hilts, with different pommels according to taste. i think this was to show a patron who chose his particular style and design of hilt before it was made. the style is very similar to the one that you show. there is no writing, nor names unfortunately but the information is important none the less.

back to your hilt. the main colours and design still scream (actually, scream is too strong, more whispers) lucknow, but the pommel shows different colours which is a little confusing. the colours on the pommel do not say lucknow, but they are also different enough to the rest of the hilt to beg other questions.

i agree with the usefulness of george watts book, in that it recorded and very important time and event in the history of late indian decorative arts. however, it too cannot be taken as a complete list of the time as it was more of a competition than an exhibition. it was a great event (dehli durbar) and although the arts were mostly from the north, the maharajas all over india contributed to the exhibition of decorative arts (including a fabulous loan collection from tanjore). the hyderabad link was not mine, but i cannot argue its presence as a decorative arts centre. how much it was contributing in the 19thC i do not know.

[Jens Nordlunde]

Hi Brian,
Interesting what you write about the drawings although it would be more interesting had they been from the 17th century – but still interesting.
T.H. Hendley’s ‘Damascening on Steel and Iron, as Practised in India, London 1892, also shows drawing of different types of hilts, but is does not show a hilt of this form. Hendley also mentions leaf ‘book’s of great ancients showing, not hilt forms, but decorations. The drawings you refer to could have had the use you describe, or maybe another, it is hard to say to day. If you hear more about the drawings, please let me know.
None of those who has written about enamel decoration has done it in such detail when it comes to the design or to the colours, that we can be sure of, from where a piece origins. They have however given some indications as which colours some of the centres were famous for using, and I agree that Lucknow is a possibility, but so is Jodhpur, Udaipur and Bhuj just to mention a few of them. Bhuj was famous for the way they faded the colours on petals, although they could not make the colours as deep and transparent as they could in Jodhpur (Watt). Another thing we must keep in mind, and which makes it more difficult to tell from where a piece origins is, that it may have been made in Lucknow but sold in Jodhpur. This would mean that if a museum has hilt labelled ‘Jodhpur’ we can’t be sure that it was also made there. To me this suggests that the most reliable source we have are books like Hendley’s, Watt’s and others written at the time, and for good measure, the pieces the museums have should be used for comparison.

[Jens Nordlunde]

Come to think of it, there are a few other things, which disturbs me about the theory about an Englishman ordering the hilt. The hilt is mounted on a blade with an armoury mark and number. I have no doubt that it could be done (getting a tulwar out of an armoury), but would this be ‘normal’ procedure? Would the blade and hilt, in such a case – ‘export’, not be ordered without armoury stamps? Don’t forget that both blades and hilts were made at a great number in the 19th century. Another thing, which bothers me about this theory, is, the blade, although with chevron pattern, has a very uneven chevron pattern. Would the ‘English’ buyer not have wanted a more even pattern, when showing it off, in to of his friends, in front of the open fireplace after having returned to England, while telling about this strange country?

[Tim Simmons]

My thoughts of British patronage were not on the lines of a purchase to show your friends by the fireside. I was thinking of the many trade/arts and crafts/industrial conventions held to showcase products of the empire. Not necessarily the big events like the "great exhibition" More one of the many shows that must have been held as the British attempted to stimulate Indian labours for thier advantage.

[B.I]

hi jens,
there is always a chance that this could be a makers mark and not an armoury mark. if we are placing this in the latter part of the 19thC, which i feel is a safe bet, then it is the time of the exhibitions (london, paris and the many durbars which displayed the arts of the time to the british 'visitors'). so, there is no reason why the bladesmith would not sign his work in the same manner as you hilt maker (ie a hidden mark). earlier makers marks were more substantial but maybe towards the latter days, the blades were indeed showpieces and so were signed in a different way. i think this is as plausable a theory as an armouries mark. yes, we do have a benchmark for armouries signing their inventory in such a way (marks along the spine) but maybe we shouldnt assume so quickly. also, your blade is only uneven because your are comparing it to even examples (which we can do nowadays). its still a fantastic bit of work that would have really impressed the buyer at the time, whether he was english or a local.

quote
' if a museum has hilt labelled ‘Jodhpur’ we can’t be sure that it was also made there. To me this suggests that the most reliable source we have are books like Hendley’s, Watt’s and others written at the time, and for good measure, the pieces the museums have should be used for comparison.,

i am sure you are aware that i take both museum descriptions and book references as leads, and never as reliable sources. i question absolutely everything, sometimes a little too much. in the end, there can be no real proof, just opinion and so both our opinions are based on speculation and so either can be right (or both can be wrong). the world of firearms has been studied to a higher level than that of white arms and claude martin's legacy left in lucknow has been well documented. pieces do exist with 'typical' lucknow decoration that are believed to come from his vast personal armoury. again, you can argue that these may have been assembled in lucknow but enamelled elsewhere but you have to draw the line somewhere, otherwise you can never move on to further discussion. i am happy to label all my arguments as speculation, as i am not an academic and dont feel the need to justify my opinion. your hilt seems of lucknow style to me, except the pommel (which is completely 'un-lucknow'). this means that you may well be right, and the artist may have taken his influence from lucknow, as well as other places.
you can try and pigeon-hole certain style (especially jeypore and lucknow) or enamelling but as you say, there can always be an argument that it could hail from a different region. I am not convinced your hilt is lucknow at all, due to the pommel.
Question – if you look at the pommel and scrutinise it well, can you say it is 100% made by the same hand as the rest of the hilt? (in your opinion of course). I say this because those drawings I mentioned hinted at a collection of parts that an artist assembled as a portfolio, which allowed the patron to choose a hilt and choose the pommel as well (maybe) what if the hilt was already made and the pommel was chosen due to personal taste. Just a wild guess.
also, you cannot take watt too literally, nor hendley as, although they are as reliable an argument as you can find, i am convinced there is more to be found. the 'faded in' colours was not predominately bhuj, as this came from the basse taille technique learnt from the europeans. they stepped the thickness of enamelling to give a distinct contrast. this was perfected in lucknow and it is believed to have been brought in by martin and his european influence.
zebrowski shows a large hookah base on pg 85 of his book on decorative arts. the picture doesnt show it, but this is 18thC enamelling at its best and the petals are faded out in the manner that you mention. maybe this isnt clear from the photo (i know you have the book) but it is so, as the piece is owned by a friend of mine and i know it well. this piece is more than likely lucknow and if you ignore the apparent lucknow range of colours, and compare it to the other pieces shown in that chapter, you will see a strong similarity in the style of decoration, the flowers, the way the animals are drawn, their slender necks and small heads etc.
again, you can still argue that all these pieces came from the same place but maybe not lucknow but the evidence lends itself towards there and so my opinon sways that way.
again, your hilt may be different as the pommel begs other questions but i have always found that the answers (to my questions anyway) tend to lie in comparative iconography, and not in an event written near the time. remember, you only know what was written, and not what was omiitted. i wish egerton wrote down everything he knew (and hendley for that matter) but they didnt. they wrote a book and included material that was relevent for that particular study.
i am helping a friend with a quest of his own with lord kitchener. he never wrote a book at all, but was around at the same time as the giants mentioned above. however, he was a collector with a particular passion for high quality wootz. his collection remains and both you an i know that his taste was high and we have seen his pieces, and so we can imagine his knowledge was good as well (no one could have formed that collection without knowledge).
we have recently found that he did actually make a lengthy study of wootz, which included replicating the process to perfection himself. he must have written this down, even if for his own use and so we now have a potential thorough study of wootz, written in the late 19thC by an man who spend a large part of his life in india studying it from those that made it. we are tracing all routes to find this study and are hoping that it does actually exist.
all i am saying is that watt, egerton, irving and hendley are all fabulous reference, but we can never assume there wasnt more. also, i am aware of hendley and egertons passion for indian decorative arts, and irvings passion for military history, but what about watt. we know he headed an exhibition in 1903, with hendley on the commitee, but did he know his stuff? the book is well written, but as an exhibition guide. i have a number of exhibition guides that are very basic, and there is always a possibility that the book was written by lifting information from various sources and compiling it into the catalogue. i know hendley spent his life researching but i know nothing of watt. i am not knocking him, as its a great book but......

or, maybe i am just going into one as you hinted i take museum references too literally
reality check and time to climb down off my stage!

[Tim Simmons]

It ain't necessarily so, the things that you read in bible ~~~~

[Jens Nordlunde]

Hi Tim,
Thank you for the explanation in post #15, I see what you mean and agree that something like that could have happened, although it is difficult to tell.

Hi Brian,
Thank you for your post, which must have taken you some time to write .
I do, as you well know, agree with you a long way down the road. I also agree that a big part of the enamel must have been made in Lucknow, and either sold there or somewhere else, as Lucknow was famous for their enamel work and was a centre for enamel making – although not the only one. You know, that I don’t believe in everything I read, and that I believe in comparison, like I believe in the fact that there must be ‘unknown’ sources out there somewhere, which, when they are found should be used.

[B.I]

hi jens,
my server kept crashing so i tried to send the post on a number of occasions, each time with slightly expanded text. by the time i had finally sent it, i had created a monster and had completely forgotten what i was talking about

do you fee that there is a remote chance the pommel saucer was decorated by either another hand or at another date?
only you can tell as this can never be seen in a photo. just asking because i find the difference in style (compared to the rest of the hilt) confusing.

[Jens Nordlunde]

Hi Brian,

The computer is your friend, until it starts a life of its own. When it does, don’t shout at it, and don’t kick it – you should speak nicely and comforting to it, to make it at ease – like ‘don’t worry you will get a biscuit when I have finished’ – works wonders with the dogs, so why not try it with the computer?

It is hard to say if it decorated at another date, my knowledge about enamel is too fundamental to be able to tell. I would, however not think so. I think the decoration on the hilt and disc must have been made at the same time. When did you ever see a hilt and the top of the disc decorated – with a blank underside of the disc, ready to be decorated? Had they done it like that, there must be a few hilts still not decorated at the underside.

The two names are a puzzle, and it could be, that V. J. decorated the hilt and the top of the disc, whilst Nathdwara decorated the underside. This is a possibility, as I don’t think the same man did both decorations – although you can never know, as some artists can draw/decorate in different styles – but the decorations are very different, besides from the colours. Another possibility could be that one of the names is of the one who made the cutting in the silver and the other name of the one who made the enamel – only this would mean, that the same man made all the decorations. I have a feeling that the good Indian artists could decorate in many different ways – but I have yet to prove it.

[Battara]

Originally Posted by Jens Nordlunde

Hi Brian,

The computer is your friend, until it starts a life of its own. When it does, don’t shout at it, and don’t kick it – you should speak nicely and comforting to it, to make it at ease – like ‘don’t worry you will get a biscuit when I have finished’ – works wonders with the dogs, so why not try it with the computer?

I use a wooden mallet.

[Jim McDougall]

I think Jens has brought up a very fascinating element of decoration on ethnographic weapons that is, as noted, seriously underresearched and seldom discussed in thier study. This would account for general lack of response on this topic, as the few resources available are extremely difficult to acquire and decidely vague as well as often conflicting in the data found.
I had wanted to respond to this post earlier, but must admit that I claim virtually no specific knowledge nor understanding of enamel decoration thus could not add to the discussion at the time.

It is important to say that one of the things key to Jens' posts is that he always presents magnificent examples of Indian edged weapons, and knows distinctly what questions need to be considered. Not only has he specialized in acquiring great examples but has tenaciously sought to discover the subtle meanings and reasons for the often breathtaking decoration found on them.

As I mentioned, upon reading this post initially I had not actually realized how little I knew about enamelling, but became fascinated when reading the brilliant discourse posted by both Jens and Brian on the subject and decided to try to find what I could here.

I found some helpful data in a book titled "Arts and Crafts of India" by Cooper & Gillow (London, 1996) and wanted to add some thoughts in observing the tulwar Jens has posted based on what information I reviewed.

The aspect noting the variation in the style and coloration of the enamels is interesting and as Jens has noted, may be associated with some auspicious or talismanic meaning applicable to the client or recipient of this piece. It seems that it would be incredibly difficult to assign this piece or its components to specific regions as when the Mughal Empire began its decline at the end of the 18th c. the craftsmen diffused to other princely states, especially Rajasthan. Also skilled enamellers were the Hindu Punjabis who went to Jaipur from Lahore, later adopting Sikhism. It should be noted that many of the enamellers noted as the most skilled in Pant were apparantly Sikhs.
The center at Jaipur is one key location noted, along with Nathdwara, bringing us to the block lettered inscription inside the pommel. I tend to agree with Tim, that this marking suggests that the weapon was made by an Indian craftsman possibly employed at a shop under British supervision, which were considerable during the Raj. This is further suggested by the Sansrit characters on the blade, indicating initials k,l,l (?) but I do not believe to be armoury related. By the latter 19th century, work was probably logged in such establishments and the shop initials probably were VJ (British assoc. further suggested by the ampersand reflecting many British firms cf. Bourne & sons etc. ..the letters copied and the ampersand inadvertantly included ), and the shop in Nathdwara.

It would seem that the green and blue (and I agreed with Brian in his thoughts of Lucknow) were prevalent in high quality enamelling, as the vitreous glazes vary in the fuzing temperature, with red being of the lowest. The white, and translucent glazes require the highest, thus opague forms probably suggest the most skilled craftsmen. As noted by Jens, such skills seem most likely in the north, where key Persian influence also effected enamelling ( one of the ancient enamelling practioners was Assyria).

I would consider the tulwar an extremely fine example probably produced in traditional hilt style by a firm in Rajasthan in the latter 19th century, and by craftsmen likely using techniques varying somewhat as comprehensively acquired. The blade may well have been produced locally by similar trade firm craftsman in the highly desirable chevron form reflecting the earlier examples. It seems early examples were pieced together and not necessarily suited for combat, with the symbolism being key to the blade.

I am not sure what to consider as far as the variations in coloring and the decoration overall vs. the underside of the pommel, but it may have to do with certain auspicious application. In the use of gems on decoration in India it seems that there are variations in external and internal (i.e.obverse and reverse) application. Possibly some subtle symbolism intended for very personal awareness? But then we need to get back to the ongoing search into the vastly encrypted secrets of the decoration of these weapons.

As usual...I too have posted an epic, but wanted to add some thoughts that may have some bearing on this fascinating topic.

Thank you Jens for posting this! I very much appreciate you and Brian taking the time to write in depth sharing the information on enamelling, its great to learn more on this very esoteric topic !!

All the best,
Jim

[B.I]

hi jim,
i like it when you claim ignorance of a sunject, and then post a lengthy and well-thought contribution :-)
like you, i claim ignorance to any in-depth knowledge of enammelling. it has always been much closer to jens' collective taste than mine, and so it is a subject that he has stepped in to a further degree than i. i have brielfy skimmed through hendleys fantastic book, but always looking for clues that are closer to my own area of study.
there is something i forgot to mention to jens, which may be of great interest. i remember reading, some years back, baden powells book on indian decorative arts, which was mainly based on that of the punjab. baden powell had diverse subjects of interest, and not just the woggles and knee-length shorts to which he was famous for (an english joke that i hope at least tim will get :-)
he spent much time in india studying the decorative arts and he did write a relatively basic, but none the less important book. i will try and re-visit it in the near future to see if it does indeed have relevance to this post. i do have a strong feeling there will be some useful information there as he wrote at the same time as hendley.

also, i completely agree that the '&' could have been a translation error, which hints at an indian writing for the benefit of a foreigner (english). given the time and the style of sword, i feel that rather than an indian working under engligh supervision, the hilt could have been made as part of a durbar. these were competitions for local craftsmen, judged by an english (mostly) committee and with attractive cash prizes. just my theory.

[Battara]

I must thank you Jim for your exposition. I have considered going a little into enameling (I'm getting a jeweler's oven) and this makes sense and is quite helpful. My newer area is India and the more Jens and the others post the better. BTW - Jens, I'm quite envious of your India collection.

[Tim Simmons]

Hmm, I think he wrote " scouting for boys" sounds like good clean fun.

I am sure some of the old chaps everyone mentions were fairly learned in thier time but to continue there opinions into the 21 century is surely folly.
Just look at the background of these people, there education was largely the "classics" yes they could see pretty things for there class however I wonder is they could really recognise anything creative even if it hit them between the eyes.

[B.I]

hi tim,
yes, he did indeed write the scouting book.
hendley (maybe more than others) was very much involved with the indian decorative arts and it wasnt just a passing interest. he wrote and published many volumes for the time and he opened up many eyes to an artform that was dismissed as being 'native'. i put him in the same category as the royal asiatic society, going back to william jones and the legacies (the good ones) that the british left behind. yes, it can be seen as dated, but can never be dismissed as its all we have to start from. i think its easy to forget they spent much of their adult lives in india at the time we are trying to study (albeit at the latter end of).
i agree it is wrong to end any discussion with their writings, but i strongly feel it is a great place to start.

[Jim McDougall]

Thanks very much guys for the kind words, and thanks for posting as I kind of wanted to keep this thread going!! I had never really paid much attention to the enamel decoration as it was so far out of my league I never really saw purpose in trying to study it. Thats why I am glad that Jens sparked this interesting subject, and now I can at least understand cloissone vs. champleve, up to now just fancy terms to me!

Brian & Tim,
I have heard of the Baden-Powell book long ago, but pretty much gave up trying to find it. It did seem to have distinct promise as he was as noted contemporary with Hendley et al. I have long said that while these early writers' works have obviously been considerably superceded by many recent discoveries and more recent research, they serve as valuable benchmarks as examples of opinions and observations of the times. One can never underestimate original research that often may inadvertantly hold clues to completely forgotten lines of investigation.
BTW, I was once a Boy Scout too!!! On my honor I did my best!!! I was incredibly pleased when years later I found that Baden-Powell the India researcher and Baden-Powell the Scouts founder were one in the same.

Battara,
I'm glad you're planning to approach the enamelling process, it really does sound exciting and challenging! I found lots of key information far too technical for me to comprehend in the Encyclopedia Brittanica. Perhaps checking into that resource might offer some insight that could be helpful in your project....I hope you'll keep us up to date on progress!! I always envy you guys with these crafting skills!!!
All the best,
Jim

[Jens Nordlunde]

Hi Jim, thank you for your answer. The Sanskrit letter on the back of the blade stands for Kha, Ka or K. The reason why I think it could come from an armoury is, that I have seen another blade with the same mark but with number 67 on it, and I doubt that a weapon smith would have numbered the blades he made.

The enamel work as such is fascinating, when you imagine the crude tools they had, the furnaces they used, and the fantastic work they made. The fact that many could not make the past they used, and had to buy it from Luchnow, without getting the same results must be due to the heating – or maybe to what they used for heating, so maybe the smoke could make a difference how the colours showed in the end.

The underside of the disc is a puzzle, and although I am no specialist I don’t think it has been made by the same one who made the rest, not only due to the colours, but I think the whole design looks different. But why was this very nice, but different, decoration ‘hidden’ under the disc, a place where no one but the owner would see it?

Battara - all the best wishes with the owen, and please let us know how it turns out. Maybe, like I wrote, that what you use for heating could make a difference on the colours, but I expect that you will only have one possibility - right?

[Jens Nordlunde]

I have decided to open an old thread, as I have found some new pieces of information, which maybe can be of interest.

It seems as if the enamel hilted tulwar is not the only one marked with a KA and a number. I have seen another one marked in the same way, but here the number is 76. The hilt is slim, diamond shaped, and with a hand guard. Decorated in a thick gold koft gari floral decoration. The blade is watered on one side with one big fuller, but on the other side it is plain steel with two narrow fullers.

The number ‘3’ is interesting. It took me some time before I realised, that the numbers used in Sanskrit, Gujarati, Kutch and Devanagri, although many of them look alike, some differs a little. In only one of the four numerals the no ‘3’ looks like the one on the blade shown in an earlier post, and in Kutch, and only in Kutch, there is a little stroke under the number. The text on the disc has been discussed in other posts, but it is interesting to note, that towns Nathdwara and Udaipur are only about 400 km away from Bhuj, the capital of Kutch. Udaipur was known for its fine enamel work, and as Nathdwara is only about 60 km away from Udaipur, there is a possibility that the hilt was made in Nathdwara.

But back to the second tulwar I described. The number ‘6’ in Kutchi looks like the number ‘3’ on the blade turned vertically, also with a small stroke under, but the numerals used, when using the three other languages, number ‘6’ looks differently, but no ‘7’ looks alike in all four languages. This means that the enamelled tulwar and the one described must have come from the same armoury in Kutch. If they were made there is an open question, but to my opinion they must have come from the same place.

There is one other language where the no ‘3’ and ‘7’ looks like the one used in Kutch, and that is in Nepalese, but I think we can rule Nepal out.

[Tim Simmons]

How funny. It is obvious now it is written on the hilt