Sword for ID on SFI

Andy Davis · 9th June 2005, 02:17 PM

Right lets, see I've had the thing under a magnifying glass and I still cant see any sign of brazing and all brass, still seems to be one section. I have had a probe in the hole at the base and it certainly is hollow there but cant get further into the body of the handle as those two holes in the side form a tube within the handle. It might be an extra clue, if not obvious from the handle but the knuckle guard is hollow on the underside.
I will have a friend of mine, with experience of metal working & casting, have a look at it tomorrow, in person, to see what he thinks.
By the way, a few people seem to think this is very heavy, not really, its exactly 2lbs and feels very useful and practical in the hand.
And when I bought it, I thought it was only myself and the dealer who didn't know what it was!
Cheers
Andy

Jens Nordlunde · 9th June 2005, 04:38 PM

When we start to guess from where a weapon origins, there is one thing which many seem to forget, that many foreigners lived, and often got high positions at the court, in India, although they came from far away, like Ibn Battuta (first half of the 14th century) who came from Tangier, or Bernier (last half of the 17th century). One coming from N or NE Africa could very well have ordered a sword like the one discussed, with Indian decoration. I agree that it is likely to origin from Afghanistan or NW India.

You can actually cast an item in lost wax and get it hollow inside. What you do is to make a core of wet sand and cover it with wax, decorate the wax, cover the wax with clay, but to make sure that the distance between the clay and the wet sand will be the same during the process you will need to put small nails through the clay into the wet sand. If this method has been used there will be rests of sand on the inside of the hilt.

tom hyle · 10th June 2005, 12:35 AM

Bagobo and T'boli hilts are lost wax cast in one piece, and have a hollow, tapered cave inside for the tang and often a hollowed butt, too.
Are you saying the butt plate appears to be of one piece with the rest of the hilt? On old work, solder that exactly matches the colour/alloy of the joined pieces is rare, if not nonexistent; if there are soldered seams as on a tulwar hilt, they should be visible to close inspection in person. Down the edges of both grip and bolster, as well as around the butt and at the ends of the knucklebow, are good places to look. The little projection on the hand edge of the bolster appears to be all brass and decorative in nature. It would not be unusual to cast an object to achieve the general shape, or to cast parts to be soldered together, and then decorate the item by other processes. A bolster is a (metal) structure at the base of a blade that in modern Western thought is spoken of as bolstering (strengthening) the blade and/or the joint of blade and handle. Bolsters are integral (forged in, of a piece with the blade) or applied in a variety of ways; soldered, pinned, or with a hole thru the middle of the bolster for the tang/blade. Integral spear/chisel/arrow type bolsters and flat pinchy bolsters that may hark back to tangless daggers/swords seem to me to be two seperable threads of development, as perhaps does the habiki and other E Asian sheath tensioners, but there is a good deal of crossover. on bichaq and yataghan, the flat overlay that sometimes extends out over the base of the blade, much as seen with this piece, is usually spoken of as being part of the bolster, which structurally is usually true; ie it is an extension of the same piece of metal.

Jim McDougall · 10th June 2005, 04:01 AM

In examining this sword, I think most of the emphasis on my observations have been toward the very interesting hilt, which appears distinctly fashioned for chopping cuts. My mention of the dusack referred to the similarity to the woodcut illustrations described by Tom, but of course did not intend to suggest any lineage to these, as mentioned, 'training weapons'. What seemed most apparant to me is the gestalt of the hilt, which is strikingly similar to the example of kopis that appears as referenced. Again, these hilts seem designed for pronounced chopping cuts, which of course were the distinct dynamic of these unique blades.
I agree with Tom in noting the form of the bolster, characteristic of the Khyber/Afghan/Uzbek weapons, and suggesting as noted, northwest regions of India/Khyber.
While it is tempting to note the brasswork as suggesting North African possibilities, it would seem that this sword is from the regions discussed.
As I have noted previously, the 'sickle marks' along the back of the blade have been seen on blades of certain other unique native Indian blades. I actually have never seen these on North African blades, and would be very interested to know of examples if anyone has seen them.

The reference to the 'salawar yataghan' linked was noting the distinct similarity to the positioning of the grip and guard to the blade in the 'chopping' form that is apparant in the hilt of the sword we are discussing.The hilt on the salawar yataghan is actually an Anglo-Afghan form which was mounted on heavy straight sabres used by the Afghan army in the 1880's through 1890's....many of them as late as the campaigns of 1919.
This example is somewhat unique in being mounted with the typical Khyber blade, interestingly in somewhat the same fashion as our discussion sword.
The knuckleguard on these, while the hilt was departing from traditional hilt forms, still carries the curled back form seen on many tulwars.
The same feature occurs on this knuckleguard.

I think the reference to Arabian influence in this hilt with similarities to certain forms of sa'if is sound, while agree the 'nimcha' has less to do with what we are discussing. Such influence was profound in the Mughal sphere, and seems well placed in the regions of Northwest India where this sword might have originated.

tom hyle · 10th June 2005, 02:17 PM

The sickle marks (Moons?) on Berber work are seen on a lot of the modern decorator stuff; the curved double-edgers and newer flatter versions of the short sword I'm coming to think of as closer to flyssa (and to kodme) than to the nimchas it's usually thought of as a decayed form of; I think some of us know the type I mean? But I'm not sure it's seen on old Berbese work.
In terms of shape and other artistic concerns, there may be some resemblance to Arab swords/art; I was more thinking of the structure of the thing (which remains somewhat mysterious), but even looking at the overall shape, the big difference I see from nimcha is that the hook is a forward curve in the handle, with the back of the handle curving as well as the front, so it is more a curved/crooked handle than a hooked pommel, if you follow what I'm saying; contrast to nimcha, where the back of the handle stays straight(ish), while the hook is a block that extends from the front edge of the handle, with a matching nook in the hilt. Some Arabian swords, and Persian swords have a very similarly curved hook, but never with the finger nook, I think? Just rambling, I guess; trying to anylize this shape. Wasn't there a link to a pic of that salwar yataghan? It seems that its European-based hilt is one of which I've heard/read that the hilt (and I think sheath covering fabric) were the regulated part, and the blade was private issue?

Andrew · 10th June 2005, 05:09 PM

In light of the discussions here, I revisited my initial rejection of any relation to the khyber knife linked from Oriental-Arms in the SFI thread.

I will concede that there are similarities between that form and the subject sword, particularly in the general handle construction and knuckle-guard. However, the blades are too dissimilar to my eye for me to assign much significance to the handle similarites.

I submit the noted similarities are only the consequence of mounting a handle to the base of a wide blade, and I'm inclined to explore the differences between the blade forms more closely.

It is my understanding that khyber knives (and their smaller relations) are not "choppers", as the subject sword appears to be. Instead, they are better suited in form to stabbing and, perhaps, slashing.

Just some random thoughts, as I'm short on time and away from my references.

9th June 2005, 02:17 PM	#1
Andy Davis Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: England, Northumberland Posts: 85	Andys observation Right lets, see I've had the thing under a magnifying glass and I still cant see any sign of brazing and all brass, still seems to be one section. I have had a probe in the hole at the base and it certainly is hollow there but cant get further into the body of the handle as those two holes in the side form a tube within the handle. It might be an extra clue, if not obvious from the handle but the knuckle guard is hollow on the underside. I will have a friend of mine, with experience of metal working & casting, have a look at it tomorrow, in person, to see what he thinks. By the way, a few people seem to think this is very heavy, not really, its exactly 2lbs and feels very useful and practical in the hand. And when I bought it, I thought it was only myself and the dealer who didn't know what it was! Cheers Andy

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

9th June 2005, 04:38 PM	#2
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	When we start to guess from where a weapon origins, there is one thing which many seem to forget, that many foreigners lived, and often got high positions at the court, in India, although they came from far away, like Ibn Battuta (first half of the 14th century) who came from Tangier, or Bernier (last half of the 17th century). One coming from N or NE Africa could very well have ordered a sword like the one discussed, with Indian decoration. I agree that it is likely to origin from Afghanistan or NW India. You can actually cast an item in lost wax and get it hollow inside. What you do is to make a core of wet sand and cover it with wax, decorate the wax, cover the wax with clay, but to make sure that the distance between the clay and the wet sand will be the same during the process you will need to put small nails through the clay into the wet sand. If this method has been used there will be rests of sand on the inside of the hilt.

10th June 2005, 12:35 AM	#3
tom hyle Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 1,254	Bagobo and T'boli hilts are lost wax cast in one piece, and have a hollow, tapered cave inside for the tang and often a hollowed butt, too. Are you saying the butt plate appears to be of one piece with the rest of the hilt? On old work, solder that exactly matches the colour/alloy of the joined pieces is rare, if not nonexistent; if there are soldered seams as on a tulwar hilt, they should be visible to close inspection in person. Down the edges of both grip and bolster, as well as around the butt and at the ends of the knucklebow, are good places to look. The little projection on the hand edge of the bolster appears to be all brass and decorative in nature. It would not be unusual to cast an object to achieve the general shape, or to cast parts to be soldered together, and then decorate the item by other processes. A bolster is a (metal) structure at the base of a blade that in modern Western thought is spoken of as bolstering (strengthening) the blade and/or the joint of blade and handle. Bolsters are integral (forged in, of a piece with the blade) or applied in a variety of ways; soldered, pinned, or with a hole thru the middle of the bolster for the tang/blade. Integral spear/chisel/arrow type bolsters and flat pinchy bolsters that may hark back to tangless daggers/swords seem to me to be two seperable threads of development, as perhaps does the habiki and other E Asian sheath tensioners, but there is a good deal of crossover. on bichaq and yataghan, the flat overlay that sometimes extends out over the base of the blade, much as seen with this piece, is usually spoken of as being part of the bolster, which structurally is usually true; ie it is an extension of the same piece of metal.

10th June 2005, 04:01 AM	#4
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,192	In examining this sword, I think most of the emphasis on my observations have been toward the very interesting hilt, which appears distinctly fashioned for chopping cuts. My mention of the dusack referred to the similarity to the woodcut illustrations described by Tom, but of course did not intend to suggest any lineage to these, as mentioned, 'training weapons'. What seemed most apparant to me is the gestalt of the hilt, which is strikingly similar to the example of kopis that appears as referenced. Again, these hilts seem designed for pronounced chopping cuts, which of course were the distinct dynamic of these unique blades. I agree with Tom in noting the form of the bolster, characteristic of the Khyber/Afghan/Uzbek weapons, and suggesting as noted, northwest regions of India/Khyber. While it is tempting to note the brasswork as suggesting North African possibilities, it would seem that this sword is from the regions discussed. As I have noted previously, the 'sickle marks' along the back of the blade have been seen on blades of certain other unique native Indian blades. I actually have never seen these on North African blades, and would be very interested to know of examples if anyone has seen them. The reference to the 'salawar yataghan' linked was noting the distinct similarity to the positioning of the grip and guard to the blade in the 'chopping' form that is apparant in the hilt of the sword we are discussing.The hilt on the salawar yataghan is actually an Anglo-Afghan form which was mounted on heavy straight sabres used by the Afghan army in the 1880's through 1890's....many of them as late as the campaigns of 1919. This example is somewhat unique in being mounted with the typical Khyber blade, interestingly in somewhat the same fashion as our discussion sword. The knuckleguard on these, while the hilt was departing from traditional hilt forms, still carries the curled back form seen on many tulwars. The same feature occurs on this knuckleguard. I think the reference to Arabian influence in this hilt with similarities to certain forms of sa'if is sound, while agree the 'nimcha' has less to do with what we are discussing. Such influence was profound in the Mughal sphere, and seems well placed in the regions of Northwest India where this sword might have originated.

10th June 2005, 02:17 PM	#5
tom hyle Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 1,254	The sickle marks (Moons?) on Berber work are seen on a lot of the modern decorator stuff; the curved double-edgers and newer flatter versions of the short sword I'm coming to think of as closer to flyssa (and to kodme) than to the nimchas it's usually thought of as a decayed form of; I think some of us know the type I mean? But I'm not sure it's seen on old Berbese work. In terms of shape and other artistic concerns, there may be some resemblance to Arab swords/art; I was more thinking of the structure of the thing (which remains somewhat mysterious), but even looking at the overall shape, the big difference I see from nimcha is that the hook is a forward curve in the handle, with the back of the handle curving as well as the front, so it is more a curved/crooked handle than a hooked pommel, if you follow what I'm saying; contrast to nimcha, where the back of the handle stays straight(ish), while the hook is a block that extends from the front edge of the handle, with a matching nook in the hilt. Some Arabian swords, and Persian swords have a very similarly curved hook, but never with the finger nook, I think? Just rambling, I guess; trying to anylize this shape. Wasn't there a link to a pic of that salwar yataghan? It seems that its European-based hilt is one of which I've heard/read that the hilt (and I think sheath covering fabric) were the regulated part, and the blade was private issue?

10th June 2005, 05:09 PM	#6
Andrew Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: USA Posts: 1,725	In light of the discussions here, I revisited my initial rejection of any relation to the khyber knife linked from Oriental-Arms in the SFI thread. I will concede that there are similarities between that form and the subject sword, particularly in the general handle construction and knuckle-guard. However, the blades are too dissimilar to my eye for me to assign much significance to the handle similarites. I submit the noted similarities are only the consequence of mounting a handle to the base of a wide blade, and I'm inclined to explore the differences between the blade forms more closely. It is my understanding that khyber knives (and their smaller relations) are not "choppers", as the subject sword appears to be. Instead, they are better suited in form to stabbing and, perhaps, slashing. Just some random thoughts, as I'm short on time and away from my references.