Tulwar handles on e-bay

Mercenary · 21st January 2017, 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jens Nordlunde

I feel sure, that had it been general, people like Egerton, Hendley, Kipling and others, living there and commenting on armouries would have mentioned it, as the habit, as far as I know, is very far form the European way to do it - and so, such a habit, must have been very strange to them.

Are you sure that Lord Egerton ever been in India?

Jim McDougall · 21st January 2017, 05:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mercenary

Are you sure that Lord Egerton ever been in India?

HUH????

"...while in India Lord Egerton collected, studied and observed with the inspired interest of a student collector. The odd arms of India were fast becoming obsolete and he seized the opportunity to record all be could.."
from the foreward in his 1880 book.

Are you suggesting he was not?

Mercenary · 21st January 2017, 07:20 PM

"there was none available, nor any information about Indian weapons and their manufacture, except that which was to be found in books of travel, or in the noticed scattered through Oriental magazines" - in India in 1855?
Where was Lord Egerton? How long? Was he doing any research except through "books of travel" and "Oriental magazines"? I can not find anything about his life in India. I will try more...

Jim McDougall · 21st January 2017, 08:03 PM

Actually it is good to question our resources, and I like the notion of pursuing it together. So while you check further so will I, and it would be great if others out there might add their views and findings if they choose to join. I don't think anyone I know has the exposure to resources on Indian history that Jens has thoroughly perused through the many years Ive known him.
Meanwhile, might I know the source of the quote you cite on the paucity of material on Indian weapons c. 1855? I do not doubt that being the case, as in Great Britain's conquest and occupation of Indian regions with the advent of the East India Co., it seems the weapons were perceived more as curiosities and not seriously studied nor catalogued prior to Egerton's work.

Apparantly, according to the reference from Egerton's book, this was intended to be a catalog for collections at the museum at South Kensington.
It seems that some of the other subsequent references like Hendley, the items were observed at durbars and other major events in India.

Mercenary · 21st January 2017, 08:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Meanwhile, might I know the source of the quote you cite on the paucity of material on Indian weapons c. 1855?

It is in the beginning of the Introduction of his book: "When in 1855 I began to form a collection of arms in India I found the want of a book to assist me; there was none...".
In India in 1855 there was a lot of opportunities to collect not only collections of arms but a plenty very adequate information about it. I think he was not travelling across India for years ... to put it mildly.

Jim McDougall · 21st January 2017, 10:19 PM

Thank you Mercenary, and as you note, that is written by Lord Egerton in his book .
It does seem that Lord Wilbrahim Egerton (1832-1909) was a conservative politician in England and in the House of Commons 1858-1883.
As noted he did assemble his collection from 1855 through 1880, and it is now apparently in the Queens Park Art Gallery in Manchester.

As also noted, the situation for the collection and study of Indian arms and antiquities was dire in the 19th century, The museum (as it were) was primarily artifacts and various arms and curiosities crammed into areas and rooms next to East India House and library on Leadenhall St in South Kensington. It was more a warehouse accepting gifts and bequests and more stored than displayed. There was no particular order and a guidebook to London in 1851 described the place as squalid and crammed.

Coincidentally, the Great Exhibition of 1851 in London stirred new interest in India's culture in aspects such as material culture and ethnographica beyond the exotica seen in the old 'museum' which had been regarded as macabre and vulgar.

The holdings of the museum became essentially 'homeless' when East India House was demolished in 1863, and finally were placed in cramped quarters in the India office and by 1875 housed in rooms in South Kensington (now Victoria & Albert Museum). There had been misgivings however as England had become disenchanted with India, and the India office wished to dispose
of its collections, finally dissolving them and dispersing in 1879.*
* He notes this his introduction.

Robert Elgood (2004, p.11) notes the dearth of information on Indian arms in these times except the article by Walhouse ("The Old Tanjore Armoury" M.J.Walhouse, 'The Indian Antiquary' Aug. 1879, pp192-96) and that Walhouse had observed the removal of items there in 1863. He notes further that later arms writers such as Egerton (1880) and Holstein (1931) drew their information from this single source .

In the Egerton reprint of 1968, curiously the introduction written by the oriental armour sage H. Russell Robinson is the source in which it is stated , "...while in India", noting Egerton's enthusiasm and observation.
However, in the same publication, notes by Col. Yule describe his editing of the spellings and transliterations at the request of Lord Egerton, reveal that the Egerton's entries describing names of weapons and places they were from came from entries in the records of the INDIA MUSEUM.
Egerton himself notes that he was relying on collections in England in his study in his introduction.

When looking into Richard Burton's "Book of the Sword" (1884) I was surprised to find little mention of weapons of India, nor of Egerton, Walhouse other than some notes on metallurgy.

It would appear that Egerton's interest in Indian arms was more anomalous than realized, and at the time he compiled his venerable work, he indeed took from sources in the diminished and dispersing collections from this 'museum'. He also apparently relied on the Walhouse material and probably other items from journals such as The Indian Antiquary.

While he seems not to have actually gone to India, it does seem he had considerable contact with many who had, and it would seem accurately described notations in his sources. His compiled classifications and notes certainly have for the most part stood the test of time and profound new research over a century since.

stenoyab · 22nd January 2017, 09:51 AM

Interesting thread, I am most happy that I was not the only one to find the hilts interesting in their own right. And in some ways easier to display, forming quiet an aesthetically pleasing display.

On the whole I find the hilts and blades to be untouched, I think some with a freshly cut short blade are where they have shortened them to sell/ship, as its easier to sell/ship the stub of a blade, then sell/ship a rusty old broken 2/3 length blade.

Sadly they are making new tulwar hilts, they also sometimes heavily restore old hilts or make them up from parts of several donor hilts. As with any collecting its always buyer beware.

21st January 2017, 10:19 PM	#6
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,191	Thank you Mercenary, and as you note, that is written by Lord Egerton in his book . It does seem that Lord Wilbrahim Egerton (1832-1909) was a conservative politician in England and in the House of Commons 1858-1883. As noted he did assemble his collection from 1855 through 1880, and it is now apparently in the Queens Park Art Gallery in Manchester. As also noted, the situation for the collection and study of Indian arms and antiquities was dire in the 19th century, The museum (as it were) was primarily artifacts and various arms and curiosities crammed into areas and rooms next to East India House and library on Leadenhall St in South Kensington. It was more a warehouse accepting gifts and bequests and more stored than displayed. There was no particular order and a guidebook to London in 1851 described the place as squalid and crammed. Coincidentally, the Great Exhibition of 1851 in London stirred new interest in India's culture in aspects such as material culture and ethnographica beyond the exotica seen in the old 'museum' which had been regarded as macabre and vulgar. The holdings of the museum became essentially 'homeless' when East India House was demolished in 1863, and finally were placed in cramped quarters in the India office and by 1875 housed in rooms in South Kensington (now Victoria & Albert Museum). There had been misgivings however as England had become disenchanted with India, and the India office wished to dispose of its collections, finally dissolving them and dispersing in 1879.* * He notes this his introduction. Robert Elgood (2004, p.11) notes the dearth of information on Indian arms in these times except the article by Walhouse ("The Old Tanjore Armoury" M.J.Walhouse, 'The Indian Antiquary' Aug. 1879, pp192-96) and that Walhouse had observed the removal of items there in 1863. He notes further that later arms writers such as Egerton (1880) and Holstein (1931) drew their information from this single source . In the Egerton reprint of 1968, curiously the introduction written by the oriental armour sage H. Russell Robinson is the source in which it is stated , "...while in India", noting Egerton's enthusiasm and observation. However, in the same publication, notes by Col. Yule describe his editing of the spellings and transliterations at the request of Lord Egerton, reveal that the Egerton's entries describing names of weapons and places they were from came from entries in the records of the INDIA MUSEUM. Egerton himself notes that he was relying on collections in England in his study in his introduction. When looking into Richard Burton's "Book of the Sword" (1884) I was surprised to find little mention of weapons of India, nor of Egerton, Walhouse other than some notes on metallurgy. It would appear that Egerton's interest in Indian arms was more anomalous than realized, and at the time he compiled his venerable work, he indeed took from sources in the diminished and dispersing collections from this 'museum'. He also apparently relied on the Walhouse material and probably other items from journals such as The Indian Antiquary. While he seems not to have actually gone to India, it does seem he had considerable contact with many who had, and it would seem accurately described notations in his sources. His compiled classifications and notes certainly have for the most part stood the test of time and profound new research over a century since. Last edited by Jim McDougall; 21st January 2017 at 10:48 PM.

22nd January 2017, 09:51 AM	#7
stenoyab Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 43	Interesting thread, I am most happy that I was not the only one to find the hilts interesting in their own right. And in some ways easier to display, forming quiet an aesthetically pleasing display. On the whole I find the hilts and blades to be untouched, I think some with a freshly cut short blade are where they have shortened them to sell/ship, as its easier to sell/ship the stub of a blade, then sell/ship a rusty old broken 2/3 length blade. Sadly they are making new tulwar hilts, they also sometimes heavily restore old hilts or make them up from parts of several donor hilts. As with any collecting its always buyer beware. Attached Images

21st January 2017, 07:20 PM	#3
Mercenary Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Moscow, Russia Posts: 426	"there was none available, nor any information about Indian weapons and their manufacture, except that which was to be found in books of travel, or in the noticed scattered through Oriental magazines" - in India in 1855? Where was Lord Egerton? How long? Was he doing any research except through "books of travel" and "Oriental magazines"? I can not find anything about his life in India. I will try more...

21st January 2017, 08:03 PM	#4
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,191	Actually it is good to question our resources, and I like the notion of pursuing it together. So while you check further so will I, and it would be great if others out there might add their views and findings if they choose to join. I don't think anyone I know has the exposure to resources on Indian history that Jens has thoroughly perused through the many years Ive known him. Meanwhile, might I know the source of the quote you cite on the paucity of material on Indian weapons c. 1855? I do not doubt that being the case, as in Great Britain's conquest and occupation of Indian regions with the advent of the East India Co., it seems the weapons were perceived more as curiosities and not seriously studied nor catalogued prior to Egerton's work. Apparantly, according to the reference from Egerton's book, this was intended to be a catalog for collections at the museum at South Kensington. It seems that some of the other subsequent references like Hendley, the items were observed at durbars and other major events in India.