![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
|
![]()
The majority of sabers from that area were used by mounted warriors.
Their blade length was calculated to be: a). sufficient to cover the entire body against a blow, be it vertical, horizontal or diagonal; b). sufficient for the mounted warrior to reach an enemy laying on the ground. Usually, to achieve both goals the blade of a cavalry sword was ~30-33 " long. Here are Indo-Afghani swords that pose a question. The upper two are standard Indian tulwars. Blades 30-31". They are given just to provide a reference point. The " swords of interest" (lower 3) all have blades 25-26" Two of them are typical Afghani, one ( the upper one) is uncertain to me , with a Damascus blade, and I shall be grateful for a more precise attribution. One Afghani and the " uncertain one" have blades wide enough to be defined as Teghas. Dating of all is welcome. My big question: what were they used for? Unless their owners were riding donkeys, they are not long enough to reach the ground without the rider bending over. Were they infantry weapons? European grenadiers were often equipped with shorter and massive swords. This is a rather feeble argument, but it may suggest some parallelism. Sorry, the order of pics is reversed:-( |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 421
|
![]()
IMHO
The normal length of talwar is when a standing person keeps saber lowered and its point does not reach the ground a bit. For average men growth, this is talwar about 90 cm length. If a person is shorter (or Indian horses, which were almost like donkeys), then the saber length accordingly is less, but the mass of the saber must be sustained (about 1-1.3 kg), therefore they are more massive. Infantry talwars should have been less curved than cavalry ones. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
|
![]()
The overall length of tulwar was about 90 cm, i.e. 35". But that includes the handle. I was talking about the blades. Over the past ~10 years average height of an urban Indian man was 174 cm, the rural one 161.5 cm, all-country 166 cm. 200-300 years ago they must have been shorter ( secular trend). Thus, a tulwar with ~30" blade would not fit your criterion for a standing Indian.
Indians imported horses from Arabia and Persia. Those were definitely not " donkey-sized":-). As to the configuration of infantry swords, please see H. Withers "World swords 1400-1945". Both infantry and cavalry European regulation swords were either straight or curved. Last edited by ariel; 21st May 2020 at 05:34 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |||
Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 421
|
![]() Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
|
![]()
1.You do not have to believe, just Google
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Averag...ght_by_country 2. As to Indian horse height: Arabian 57-61"; Akhal-Teke 58-64"; Marwari ( Malani) , the quintessential Indian horse 56-64". Most horses in India stem from Arabian and Central Asian breeds, they were imported en masse. 3. See famous miniature " Sivaji on the march" ( you can find it in Egerton, Plate II, between pp.26-27). Half of infantry escort carries curved sabers. I did not even mention weights. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 | |||
Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 421
|
![]() Quote:
Tamils, Khonds, hill tribes, nomads, Rajputs, Jains, Gujaratis, Turks, Mughals, Afghans, Tajiks, Iranians, Nepalese, Arabs, Africans and more.... All of them were and are Indian.... the average value ... ![]() Quote:
Quote:
The criterion may be as follows: a more straightened talwar would be primarily a weapon of a foot warrior, and a shorter curved saber (and heavier) is a weapon of a rider. There may be other assumptions, I do not argue, but I am ready to justify my own, but not here. |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|