New Tulwar

ariel · 19th December 2007, 01:48 AM

Just arrived. I bought it on a "gut feeling" because it was covered with superficial rust. Gently cleaned, it revealed a very powerful mechanical damascus pattern. There is a stamp. What do you think? How much effort should I exert to polish and etch it?
Any idea about the stamp?

Lew · 19th December 2007, 03:41 AM

Ariel

600 grit wet dry paper and etch. You know it's not really a new tulwar

Lew

fernando · 20th December 2007, 07:21 PM

Hi Ariel,
A pitty the stamp picture is not so accurate; not that i could decipher it ... by no means. But maybe others could ... while i could apreciate it and learn with it

.
I notice the hilt is brass. Do you have the age of this piece estimated ... both hilt and blade ?
Thanks
Fernando

BBJW · 22nd December 2007, 10:55 PM

The brass hilt is much newer. Beware of brass, but the blade I believe is old. There are so many fakes out there now that I prefer to see them in person.

bbjw

ALEX · 23rd December 2007, 01:24 AM

Ariel, here is the picture of similarly shaped brass hilt of late 19th Cent.
Also, it is very nice of you, as an expert, to be asking us for advice on how to clean and etch the blade:-) It makes us feel a bit superior:-)

RSWORD · 23rd December 2007, 04:08 AM

Ariel,

Good snag. I noticed that one also and could see even from the poor pictures provided that the blade had a nice pattern welded blade. Also, I do not believe the hilt to be brass. Look closely. It appears to be an old gold leaf on a steel or iron hilt. I can see a bit of the leaf wearing out in spots. 19th century is the safest estimation of age but I wouldn't be surprised if it was late 18th century. Just a gut thing though.

Jim McDougall · 23rd December 2007, 04:45 AM

I'm with you Rick on this tulwar, that hilt does look like gilt metal, which would likely correspond to this apparantly higher end blade. The stamp in the area seen here seems to be the location preferred for what appear to be these markings which I believe may be in Urdu. At least some of the tulwars I have seen with heavy blades were stamped in the same location which proved to be Urdu, and the blades were of late 18th century.

I think you're right on the blade BJ, and it would seem quite likely that a blade of this quality might be a heirloom and mounted with what appears a 19th century gilt metal hilt.

All best regards,
Jim

ariel · 23rd December 2007, 05:07 PM

Thanks for the responses.
I was remiss in not mentioning that the hilt is NOT brass: it is iron with rather crudish gold paint. There are some traces of "gold" on the adhesive under the langets.
But the handle is iron, no argument here. The blade is superb: massive, no nicks, no damage at all and still fully sharp. I suspect it must be pretty old and not a regulation weapon :-)
Any more precise ideas about the mark?

19th December 2007, 01:48 AM	#1
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	New Tulwar Just arrived. I bought it on a "gut feeling" because it was covered with superficial rust. Gently cleaned, it revealed a very powerful mechanical damascus pattern. There is a stamp. What do you think? How much effort should I exert to polish and etch it? Any idea about the stamp? Attached Images

23rd December 2007, 01:24 AM	#5
ALEX Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 936	Ariel, here is the picture of similarly shaped brass hilt of late 19th Cent. Also, it is very nice of you, as an expert, to be asking us for advice on how to clean and etch the blade:-) It makes us feel a bit superior:-) Attached Images

19th December 2007, 03:41 AM	#2
Lew (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: East Coast USA Posts: 3,191	Ariel 600 grit wet dry paper and etch. You know it's not really a new tulwar Lew

20th December 2007, 07:21 PM	#3
fernando (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,694	Hi Ariel, A pitty the stamp picture is not so accurate; not that i could decipher it ... by no means. But maybe others could ... while i could apreciate it and learn with it . I notice the hilt is brass. Do you have the age of this piece estimated ... both hilt and blade ? Thanks Fernando

22nd December 2007, 10:55 PM	#4
BBJW Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Idaho, USA Posts: 228	The brass hilt is much newer. Beware of brass, but the blade I believe is old. There are so many fakes out there now that I prefer to see them in person. bbjw

23rd December 2007, 04:08 AM	#6
RSWORD Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Greensboro, NC Posts: 1,083	Ariel, Good snag. I noticed that one also and could see even from the poor pictures provided that the blade had a nice pattern welded blade. Also, I do not believe the hilt to be brass. Look closely. It appears to be an old gold leaf on a steel or iron hilt. I can see a bit of the leaf wearing out in spots. 19th century is the safest estimation of age but I wouldn't be surprised if it was late 18th century. Just a gut thing though.

23rd December 2007, 04:45 AM	#7
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 9,944	I'm with you Rick on this tulwar, that hilt does look like gilt metal, which would likely correspond to this apparantly higher end blade. The stamp in the area seen here seems to be the location preferred for what appear to be these markings which I believe may be in Urdu. At least some of the tulwars I have seen with heavy blades were stamped in the same location which proved to be Urdu, and the blades were of late 18th century. I think you're right on the blade BJ, and it would seem quite likely that a blade of this quality might be a heirloom and mounted with what appears a 19th century gilt metal hilt. All best regards, Jim

23rd December 2007, 05:07 PM	#8
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Thanks for the responses. I was remiss in not mentioning that the hilt is NOT brass: it is iron with rather crudish gold paint. There are some traces of "gold" on the adhesive under the langets. But the handle is iron, no argument here. The blade is superb: massive, no nicks, no damage at all and still fully sharp. I suspect it must be pretty old and not a regulation weapon :-) Any more precise ideas about the mark?