My first Tulwar

[fernando]

I hope i didn't fall into a junky business.
Would the engraving on the blade be somehow an usual design?
Could this piece have some age?
The blade is 67 cms.long and 4 cms. wide at forte. Still bright in some areas, all single edged, quite sharp, with bevel ( this the term? ).
Coments would be so much welcome.
Thanks in advance
fernando

[ariel]

OK, I'll take a stab
Based on my limited knowledge, the handle is Delhishani style, the quillons are slanted downward, suggesting older example ( 18th cen?), the blade is of local manufacture and seems to be shorter than usual cavalry weapons. The heavily incised blade was often a hunting one, but those had mostly animal figures. This one may not be a Tulwar Shikargar, but rather a fighting one. Look for damascus pattern.
Hey, Indian specialists, do I get a "gentleman's C"?

[Battara]

Ariel, I agree in that I think there is a damascus or wootz pattern under the patina.

I was first thinking hunting - did military have incised work like this too?

[fernando]

Thank you Ariel,
Thank you Battara,
You just caught me trying to digest Ariel's kind coments, as i wasn't familiar with some of the terms. I now found " Shikargaha" in Tirris's Islamic Weapons, and as for "Delhishani", i wonder if it derives from Delhi .
I am happy, for a start, that this piece isn't some kind of a knock off. Also its probable age is a great score for me.
As for possible patterns on the blade, i can see none, with my unexperienced eyes. I am posting a picture of the other side, which is less oxided, and looking apparently of plain steel.
What i can see are a few traces of silver on the hilt, remnants of some koftgari.
I wish the engravings, not being animals, could still be decodeable.
What do you gentlemen think of it ?
Thanks again
fernando

[ariel]

Try to polish it with 600-800 grit and then etch it.
You may be pleasantly surprised

[fernando]

I don't know if i have the guts to embark onto such adventure
Naturally i would like to see the result, but i am afraid for limitations .

[Lew]

Fernando

I would just leave it be. My limited experience with these types of swords is that they are usually regular steel and looking at yours I see no reason to risk screwing up the patina. It is a very lovely example.


Congrats

Lew

[Jim McDougall]

I think you have done well again Fernando!
I would give Ariel a high grade in his assessment of this tulwar (if I were an Indian specialist The term 'Delhishahi' if I am not mistaken derives from the Pant typology on Indian hilts ("Indian Arms & Armour" Dr. G.N.Pant, 1980)and this hilt may be considered by that term using that reference. While the term may suggest Delhi as the region for the origins of the hilt form, the actual categorization of tulwar hilt forms by region remains unresolved, and Dr.Pant's work remains an important benchmark for future studies. The book itself I still consider a most valuable resource for the comprehensive data it contains on Indian weaponry.

I would agree that this is likely a late 18th-early 19th c. tulwar probably Rajput and most likely from Rajasthan regions. I am inclined to doubt that the blade is wootz, and agree completely with Lew, leave the patination alone.
The incised motif is indeed often seen on hunting weapons (shikargaha) with images of animals , and figures of the Hindu pantheon are often on blades in low relief on sacrificial weapons. While this does not appear to be such a weapon it may have been intended as a court or parade weapon, but the floral /vegetal motif is unclear. Botanical symbolism was key in varying application in Hindu symbolism and is beautifully described in Robert Elgood's "Hindu Arms and Ritual" , so perhaps closer analysis of the depictions on this blade might reveal more.

Does the motif only appear on one side of the blade Fernando?

Best regards,
Jim

[Jens Nordlunde]

Hi Fernando,

Congratulations with your tulwar. It is a nice one. I doubt very much that the blade is wootz, so I would leave it as it is. It can be, but that is seldom, so if you don’t see any trace of wootz, it is not likely to be wootz. I would be somewhat surprised if the decoration is not on both sides – is it Fernando? I have a feeling, but it is a gut feeling mind you that the tulwar, maybe could be pushed a wee further back. How about mid 1800 to beginning of 1900?

Please let us see some picture with neutral background; the yellow gives too much ‘colour’ to the tulwar.

The size is interesting, as it is fairly small, and many of the hunting tulwars ad the same size of the fighting tulwars – no reason to come closer to a lion or a tiger than you had to, so I don’t think it is a hunting tulwar. Not that it could not have been used for hunting, but I don’t think it was made for this reason. You must remember that when they went to war, they often had two tulwars and three to four daggers in their belt, so maybe one of the tulwars was smaller than the other.

Jens

[Battara]

I do see possible pattern welding in the other blade side - without out what doing what Ariel mentioned it would be more difficult to be certain.

Jens - that many weapons? Now I know - Vielen Dank!

[Lew]

Originally Posted by Battara

I do see possible pattern welding in the other blade side - without out what doing what Ariel mentioned it would be more difficult to be certain.

Jens - that many weapons? Now I know - Vielen Dank!

Battara

I think that what you may be seeing is just some left over oxidation pattern I tried to fix the picture up but did not see anything.

Lew

[fernando]

Originally Posted by LOUIEBLADES

Battara

I think that what you may be seeing is just some left over oxidation pattern I tried to fix the picture up but did not see anything.

Lew

Thanks for both your postings Lew, i think you ( and Jim and Jens ) are quite right. I am unexperienced in the area, but looking at this blade steel i don't discern any activity, except for oxidation and or patination. I am posting a bit more enhanced picture, for confirmation.
fernando

[fernando]

Hi Jim,
Much obliged for your comprehensive input. It will take me some time to absorve it. I hope something further comes up on the decoration subject. Eventually this motiv is only on one side of the blade, the back side is plain.

Hi Jens,
I am glad you find this a nice piece. Here are pictures taken with different light and background. As i said above, the decoration is only on one side of the blade. Does this mean something unusual ?
It is a pitty you find the age of this tulwar as recent as 1850-1900 . Jim and Ariel's opinnion was more favourable ... i am a fan of antiquity in weapons. But against facts there are no arguments, as we say over here.

Further coments will be more than welcome. One thing i would love to reach a general consensus is whether this is a ceremonial or an action ( infantry )sword

Thanks all again

fernando

[katana]

Usually, though not always, a blade decorated on one side only.... is usually 'ceremonial'. It is a nice Tulwar, I like it , congrats Fernando

I would have thought that a coverted wootz blade would never be 'heavily engraved' with designs ....or are they

[fernando]

Thanks a lot David, for both congrats and info.
I'll bear that in mind.

I would have thought that a coverted wootz blade would never be 'heavily engraved' with designs ....or are they

This one is for the experts.

[Jim McDougall]

You are welcome Fernando, it is an interesting tulwar and it is enjoyable to discuss its possibilities. I am really glad to see Jens come in on this. He's handled more tulwars than anyone I know, so his suggestion of more into the 19th century is probably correct. It is very difficult to really estimate age on these and it is unclear whether slight variations suggest different period or regional preference and I am not aware of the chronological progression of hilt elements. I was not aware that the quillons angled downward suggested an earlier example but it is an interesting concept.

As David has noted, the motif on the face of the blade does seem to suggest a ceremonial or parade weapon. It may have been carried blade upright, face forward with the motif displayed. If this was the case, it would be interesting to know if there was particular symbolism in the motif, what sort of flower would that be?....Jens what do you think?

Best regards,
Jim

[Jens Nordlunde]

Fernando, don’t be disappointed about my dating. Dating Indian weapons is at the best a vague guess in most cases, and even blades with a date inscribed can’t always be trusted, so Ariel and Jim’s guess may be right due to the decoration and the wear. You don’t see this decoration on a blade often, so a bit of research should give you a good idea of from where in India it comes. It is interesting that the blade is only decorated on one side, but it happens now and again, probably due to cost saving I would think.

Katana, 'heavely engraved' blades can be made of wootz, but this is seldom, besides, 'if' the blade is 'only' engraved on one side due to cost saving, the blade would not be made of wootz, as this would have made the blade more expensive, but there can also have been other reasons for it being decorated on one side.
Jim/Katana, this could be a cermonial tulwar, although I am not convinsed. Tell me another thing, could/would some of the cermonial weapons have been used in war?

[katana]

Thanks for the info Jens ....I am surprised that some wootz blades are 'heavily engraved' for several reasons....the main one being that I would imagine due to wootz's 'granular construction' of harder and softer steels it would make chiseling more difficult and less predictable as the steel's hardness is not 'uniform'.

Hi Jim ,
I do agree that the motifs would probably provide a good indication as to whether it's ceremonial. It has occured to me that perhaps the design being 'one sided' is not ceremonial afterall.

In my 'mind's eye' I see the possibillity that a type of 'sword salute' displaying the engraved side could show personal or 'clan' loyalty or have religious, talismatic or cultural meaning , either directed at the enemy or your own fellow warriors/commanders

Hi Fernando ,
how does the Tulwar 'feel' ....do you think that the balance etc, would make this a good functional sword. Is the blade edged where the decorated part of the blade is ?

Regards David

[CourseEight]

Hi --

I thought I'd link to a sword on Oriental Arms that is relavent to the "Chiseled Wootz" discussion:

http://www.oriental-arms.co.il/item.php?id=1926

Not exactly a Tulwar but might be of interest. Of course, plenty not wootz too:

http://www.oriental-arms.co.il/item.php?id=1331

That's all I've got! Very nice sword, regardless.

--Radleigh

[fernando]

Hi Jim, thanks for your support.
I was also influenced by Ariel's assessment that the slanted quillons would mean an earlier specimen. I wish he would come back here to tell us more about this.
I understand that basically the decoration on one only side of the blade signifies that such swords are made for parade purposes, but the decoding of this specific motif could drive us to a different explanation, in a way as David sugests.
One thing is certain, in both cases, this one is right handed

Hi Jens, i see what you mean.
A decorated sword doesn't necessarily limit its use to ceremonies ... they may as well go into action.
I have already started some research on the decoration, but my resources are very limited and also my knowledge is not backgrounded enough to direct my search in an objective way. Nevertheless i am trying, despite my blindness on the subject.

Hi David, about the "seriousness" of this piece.
It feels well balanced, as far as i can tell when i hold it with my ( only ) left hand ... i don't have the same perception as when i had my dexterous one
It has functional characteristics, with a sharp bibevel (?) all along the cutting edge, except for the 5,5 cms.( over 2" ) ricasso.
Its thickness is 5,5 m/m ( 0,21" ) at the forte ... wouldn't pure parade blades be thinner?!
Its total length is 80 cms. ( 31 1/2" ) from the tip to the pommel button ... this to say that the point of balance is found aprox. 51 cms. ( 20" ) away from the tip.
The width being 38 m/m ( 1 1/2" ) at the forte widens 3 m/m at the curved section befores tapering towards the tip.
Its wight is 973 grams ( 2,16 pounds. ), which i would find 'too heavy' for a parade piece?!
Back to its feel and as a curiosity, i am posting pictures handing the sword. As the grip is rather short, i thaught i would hold it with the forefinger in front of the quillon, using the ricasso functionality. To have it pictured by both sides, i had to borrow my wife's right hand. She said she was busy, but i managed to convince her .

Kind regards to all
fernando

[Jim McDougall]

It is great to have some excellent observations and discussion coming in on this tulwar!
The more I look at this sword the more intriguing it becomes. It is again very difficult to accurately date these tulwars, except often by the patination, as well as the blade itself sometimes as being considered here regarding its potential for combat.
With regard to the chiseled decoration on the obverse of the blade here, I would like to note discussions several years ago concerning the trade blades with chiseled panels of Islamic calligraphy on one side. I believe the Persian lion and cartouche on the other side suggested Assad Adullah. These were widely distributed around first quarter 19th c. and are found on weapons from the shashka to I believe Piso Podang as well as in India on some Mughal tulwars. These Mughal tulwars with these blades may offer a clue.

Since the Rajputs were often Mughal allies in degree, perhaps the impressive chiseled Islamic motif inspired a Rajput interpretation carrying a florally decorated motif more in line with Hindu symbolism. This idea may be of course somewhat effected by the fact that the chiseled hunting scenes on many Indian sword blades was well established. Still it is an idea worth considering since this is clearly not a hunting sword.

It is interesting to note that with Caucasian shashkas and thier mounts, as well on many other weapons, the decoration on the outside is often more intricate and elaborate, while the reverse usually quite simple.

What I meant by the sword being carried blade upright, face forward, is indeed the salutory position. The Rajputs were Kshatria and were profoundly observant of codes of honor and protocol in battle. They were of complex clan lineages, and it would take considerable research to discover particular symbolism that might apply to these clans, however it is known that the three basic lines descend from Hindu gods of sun, moon and fire. We do know that botanical symbolism was often employed in warfare, as described in my previous note concerning "Hindu Arms and Ritual" by Elgood.

Perhaps this may be the tulwar of a proud Rajput warrior of the early 19th c. with decorative motif that he might display in salute to his foe as he entered combat. Of course, the motif may have imbued the blade symbolically with powers associated with the flower depicted, if that can be identified.

Whatever the case, I have to say again, it is really good to see the weapons of India being discussed more, there is so much more research needed!

All best regards,
Jim

[katana]

Originally Posted by fernando

Back to its feel and as a curiosity, i am posting pictures handing the sword. As the grip is rather short, i thaught i would hold it with the thumb in front of the quillon, using the ricasso functionality. To have it pictured by both sides, i had to borrow my wife's right hand. She said she was busy, but i managed to convince her .

Kind regards to all
fernando

Hi Fernando,
the size of the hilts is another 'hotly' debated subject ..there are several posts on the Forum.....here is one that I posted...

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ht=tulwar+disc

Your Tulwar certainly seems 'battle worthy' and interesting that your sword is 'handed'...I have several which also feel better in the right hand. I suspect that as the blades are 'fixed' with resin, it was easier to 'set' the blade in a way to suit the owner.

Hi CourseEight, thanks for posting the link... it does create more questions.
IMHO I thought most hunting swords were straight bladed...European ones that is. As I thought 'hunting swords' were only used to kill a captured/injured animal quickly, by piercing the spinal cord/heart/main artery. The 'actual' hunting weapons would have been the spear/arrow/firearm or traps were used. Using a curved sword as a hunting sword suggests that a slashing cut was used to despatch the captured animal (beheaded ?)

David

[fernando]

Originally Posted by katana

the size of the hilts is another 'hotly' debated subject ..there are several posts on the Forum.....here is one that I posted...

I am aware of this discussion, as i even posted some humble coments on this thread. Actually i have now brought these handling pictures in order to complement the said frequent discussion. To my poor view there is no doubt that the small Indian hilt subject is a fusion of two distinct phenomena. Among various resources, i remember Rainer Dahenhart's book HOMENS ESPADAS E TOMATES (page 191):
In the northern Indo-Portuguse territories ( Diu, Damão, Baçaim, Dadra, Nagar-Haveli ) the tulwar was used, but only in the hands of local nobility and auxiliary indigenous forces. The Portuguese weren't using this weapon, firstly because they had more confidence in their own, bu also because the majority of tulwar grips are so small that only few Portuguese hands would fit into them ( pics. 51, 52 and 100 ).
On the other hand, the acceptance of this concept might have been adultered by the introduction of the ricasso, probably brought in by Europeans with their swords. We know that in some cases the ricasso efectiveness was only virtual. In Cingalese kastanes the ricasso is there and was efectively brought by the Portuguese , but the down quillons were so withered that it only served for decoration. This because they never needed this alternative, as they didn't adopt the corresponding fencing techniques. However while i was browsing the Net to look for material on my tulwar, i have read that the majority of tulwar holders in existing pictures, are handling the sword with their forefinger out the hilt and onto the ricasso.
We remember that this system enabled for a much wider angle of sword holding, an advantage that ended up enabling the thrust, which would put the foe without this system in a very weak situation in combat.
Allow me to through some logs onto the fire and post the pages referring to this evolution, within an European perspective,from the same quoted book.

[katana]

Originally Posted by fernando

IHowever while i was browsing the Net to look for material on my tulwar, i have read that the majority of tulwar holders in existing pictures, are handling the sword with their forefinger out the hilt and onto the ricasso.
We remember that this system enabled for a much wider angle of sword holding, an advantage that ended up enabling the thrust, which would put the foe without this system in a very weak situation in combat.
.

Hi Fernando,
thanks for posting the drawings . I think the majority agree that the forefinger on the ricasso gives greater control of the Tulwar.....but there is no protection for it (the finger)..... which makes no sense .

Several of my Tulwars have a slighter larger grip and smaller disc pommels which are much more comfortable and 'easier' to use.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by katana

Your Tulwar certainly seems 'battle worthy' and interesting that your sword is 'handed'...I have several which also feel better in the right hand. I suspect that as the blades are 'fixed' with resin, it was easier to 'set' the blade in a way to suit the owner.

David

Let me quote again the same book.
The purpose for the tulwar hilts being made in one only piece ( guard, grip and pommel ), an unusual practice in other swords, was to be practical to store them. As in these regions, invasions tumults and popular mutinies were rather frequent, the Sovereigns could store the hilts in one side and the blades in another, so that it needed some time for the swords to be mounted and used. When actual wars were about to come, the Sovereigns would know that with a determined antecipation, and the swords could be mounted in time for battle.
Talking figures, amounts like 100 thousand hilts could be kept in well locked towers, and the equivalent number of blades would be kept with a confortable distance.
For the mounting, hilts were held upsidown and pitch was poured into the hollow grip, the only material that held the blades in position.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by katana

and interesting that your sword is 'handed'...I have several which also feel better in the right hand. David

You mean right handed ? I wasn't clear in my posting. I meant to say that, as the engraving is on the right side of the blade, be it ceremonial or fighter, this tulwar is is right handed in any case

[katana]

Originally Posted by fernando

You mean right handed ? I wasn't clear in my posting. I meant to say that, as the engraving is on the right side of the blade, be it ceremonial or fighter, this tulwar is is right handed in any case

Fernando, sorry I did understand you meant right handed. What I meant by 'handed' is that it is specifically for one side (right) or the other (left) side and is not ambidextrous.(could be used left and right handed)... I hope that makes sense.

Your comments on the storing of blades and hilts separately is interesting....do you know why they were never stored 'complete' ?

[spiral]

Of course most were stored complete!

Forfinger on ricaso is modern concept to improve balance on poor specimiens of swords or thier currant owners ignorance & interpritation based on never having been in a sword fight..

If your fore finger goes in front of the guard there no point in its existance, one could go Afghan sabre or Shasqua instead., with thier different vertues.

The people who made & used these would have understood that.

Spiral

[fernando]

Originally Posted by katana

Your comments on the storing of blades and hilts separately is interesting....do you know why they were never stored 'complete' ?

Again my funny english didn't make it. The idea was to avoid the sudden reaction of an internal or local rebelion. In those regions these events were taking place every now and then. Sovereigns often dyed of unatural causes, betraied by familiars and local opponents. So in case such people wanted to get hold of the King's own armament to knock him down, they would find it dificult to achieve, as swords would have to be stollen from two different spots and still had to be mounted
Was i clear now, David?

[spiral]

I may be totaly wrong, but I always presume swords decorated on one side were made as wallhangers.

Spiral