An interesting article that raises some questions about the Afghan Pulwar

[Sakalord364]

This article claims that Pulwar hilts were being produced in India during the 18th century- I always assumed that the Pulwar was an Afghan modification of the Indian Tulwar, With the Afghans mating the downturned Dragon’s head quillons to the Indian grip/pommel, thus creating the Pulwar.

If Pulwar hilts were infact being produced in India during the 18th century then either:

1. Afghan Pulwars managed to travel south into Northern India where they were copied on a small scale, not having gained much popularity

2. The entire “Pulwar” hilt design, quillons and all, was actually created in India but never really gained popularity there, however it managed to become extremely popular and widespread in Afghanistan.

Or these were simply Afghan made pulwars that managed to find their way into India, and Indians didn’t copy them at all, this explaining their extreme rarity in India.


https://www.researchgate.net/publica...s_conservation

[Turkoman.khan]

Originally Posted by Sakalord364

This article claims that Pulwar hilts were being produced in India during the 18th century- I always assumed that the Pulwar was an Afghan modification of the Indian Tulwar, With the Afghans mating the downturned Dragon’s head quillons to the Indian grip/pommel, thus creating the Pulwar.

If Pulwar hilts were infact being produced in India during the 18th century then either:

1. Afghan Pulwars managed to travel south into Northern India where they were copied on a small scale, not having gained much popularity

2. The entire “Pulwar” hilt design, quillons and all, was actually created in India but never really gained popularity there, however it managed to become extremely popular and widespread in Afghanistan.

Or these were simply Afghan made pulwars that managed to find their way into India, and Indians didn’t copy them at all, this explaining their extreme rarity in India.


https://www.researchgate.net/publica...s_conservation

Thanks for the link to the article. It was interesting.
The truth is a little difficult to read, as in my opinion there is a lot of unnecessary information.
As a result of studying the article, the following questions arose.
1. How can you draw any conclusions by studying one sword?
2. Does the author know that in India the hilt could easily be replaced with a new one?
3. Does the author know that the use of a rivet on a handle is not typical in India, but is common in Afghanistan
4. How can it be argued that the sword is from India, if it is known that Indian blades and traditional Afghan hilts were used in Afghanistan?

[werecow]

Small note: there is a (19th c?) piso podang misidentified as a 16th-17th century talwar in figure 13.

[Turkoman.khan]

Originally Posted by werecow

Small note: there is a (19th c?) piso podang misidentified as a 16th-17th century talwar in figure 13.

Absolutely right. Also noticed it.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by Turkoman.khan

Thanks for the link to the article. It was interesting.
The truth is a little difficult to read, as in my opinion there is a lot of unnecessary information.
As a result of studying the article, the following questions arose.
1. How can you draw any conclusions by studying one sword?
2. Does the author know that in India the hilt could easily be replaced with a new one?
3. Does the author know that the use of a rivet on a handle is not typical in India, but is common in Afghanistan
4. How can it be argued that the sword is from India, if it is known that Indian blades and traditional Afghan hilts were used in Afghanistan?

This is a wonderfully written article, and with comprehensive coverage of most of the particulars and overview of the swords of this broad cultural sphere of Northern India, Afghanistan and Central Asia. As well noted, however, these are most salient points in that while associated with the example shown and conserved, no conclusions can be attributed to its provenance.

The 'cintamani' device is not a craftsmans mark but a symbol used in various possible manners in imbuing the blade with either ancestral or traditional note to Timurid association (often on swords of Central Asia) or the trimurti which is more talismanic in character. These three dots are often seen on tulwar blades, sometimes several, and seemingly placed strategically in key blade locations. It does not seem this convention was to any particular region and as noted, blades were typically sent to various areas to be mounted in preferred hilts in those locations.

As noted, the centrally placed rivet in the hilt crossguard is a feature that appears to have been characteristic of tulwars in Northwest India and Afghan regions.

While there are notable associations in the hilt styling of the paluoar to Deccani hilt features in various cases, as well as the distinct Persian influences, it has, as far as I have known, not been any conclusion on origins of these hilts to either the Deccan or Afghan regions. There was of course well established Afghan presence in the Deccan, and the diffusion might have moved either way, whichever the case, there was certainly a connection.
We have discussed here previously just how old the hilt form is (from iconic sources) but that remains inconclusive as well.

This example of a report on a conserved item in such empirical context is quite characteristic in those I have seen, and do lean toward using profoundly thorough data to support conclusions as a matter of form. However for those of us studying these weapons independently, we are familiar with the many exceptions and variations which often quickly defeat many assertions deemed as conclusive.

I would note here that the pommel is not the characteristic 'bowl' type typical of the paluoar, but more in character indeed of the Indo-Persian tulwar form. The blade also is in character with the stepped distal section (yelman) of many tulwar blades.

Still, an outstanding, beautifully researched and written report on one of these intriguing swords of Afghanistan. I very much appreciate the inclusion of the material on Nuristan, which is seldom included with study of these.

In the attached:
Typical Afghan paluoar, note blade and pommel
the so called 'sickle' marks commonly seen on blades of Afghan paluoar, these coped 'Genoan' markings typically had three dots at terminus of each arc....the THREE DOTS added superfluously may be cintamani associated? The wider blade root is known as the 'Indian ricasso' and typical of Indian produced tulwar blades.

The typical Indo Persian tulwar, note the widening at tip section (yelman).

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

This is a wonderfully written article, and with comprehensive coverage of most of the particulars and overview of the swords of this broad cultural sphere of Northern India, Afghanistan and Central Asia. As well noted, however, these are most salient points in that while associated with the example shown and conserved, no conclusions can be attributed to its provenance.

The 'cintamani' device is not a craftsmans mark but a symbol used in various possible manners in imbuing the blade with either ancestral or traditional note to Timurid association (often on swords of Central Asia) or the trimurti which is more talismanic in character. These three dots are often seen on tulwar blades, sometimes several, and seemingly placed strategically in key blade locations. It does not seem this convention was to any particular region and as noted, blades were typically sent to various areas to be mounted in preferred hilts in those locations.

As noted, the centrally placed rivet in the hilt crossguard is a feature that appears to have been characteristic of tulwars in Northwest India and Afghan regions.

While there are notable associations in the hilt styling of the paluoar to Deccani hilt features in various cases, as well as the distinct Persian influences, it has, as far as I have known, not been any conclusion on origins of these hilts to either the Deccan or Afghan regions. There was of course well established Afghan presence in the Deccan, and the diffusion might have moved either way, whichever the case, there was certainly a connection.
We have discussed here previously just how old the hilt form is (from iconic sources) but that remains inconclusive as well.

This example of a report on a conserved item in such empirical context is quite characteristic in those I have seen, and do lean toward using profoundly thorough data to support conclusions as a matter of form. However for those of us studying these weapons independently, we are familiar with the many exceptions and variations which often quickly defeat many assertions deemed as conclusive.

I would note here that the pommel is not the characteristic 'bowl' type typical of the paluoar, but more in character indeed of the Indo-Persian tulwar form. The blade also is in character with the stepped distal section (yelman) of many tulwar blades.

Still, an outstanding, beautifully researched and written report on one of these intriguing swords of Afghanistan. I very much appreciate the inclusion of the material on Nuristan, which is seldom included with study of these.

In the attached:
Typical Afghan paluoar, note blade and pommel
the so called 'sickle' marks commonly seen on blades of Afghan paluoar, these coped 'Genoan' markings typically had three dots at terminus of each arc....the THREE DOTS added superfluously may be cintamani associated? The wider blade root is known as the 'Indian ricasso' and typical of Indian produced tulwar blades.

The typical Indo Persian tulwar, note the widening at tip section (yelman).

*****finis*******