![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Austria
Posts: 1,906
|
![]()
Firangi. 19th century with an older blade....
My two cents. Happy new year! ![]() Marius |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
|
![]()
When we had only Rawson, Egerton and Stone the answer would have been much easier: straight blade without widened tip, lack of retaining plates = Firangi when the blade is European or Dhup when the blade is local. With all of the above = Khanda.
Elgood’s book ( the Jodhpur one) threw a monkey wrench into this simple approach: he calls Khanda both straight and curved blades, both with and a without retaining plates, both spoon-like and straight tips, with either basket or Tulwar handles. And all combinations thereof. I am sure he has a reason for it, but I am still at a loss..... |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |
Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Austria
Posts: 1,906
|
![]() Quote:
Maybe Elgood had a reason to call this Khanda, but what if his reason was wrong?! ![]() |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 2,145
|
![]()
Happy new year all
i think Elgood call them khanda because the hilt is a khanda style. Firangi means only Franks, Crusaders or strangers Because the blades were imported from Europe. But like you Marius I would call this sword a firangi. Ken your sword is very very beautiful, please send us a zoom on the ricasso and also the marks... The hole was used to fix a previous hilt...I'm just kidding. Kubur ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Member
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Ireland
Posts: 543
|
![]()
Hi All
Thanks for information I will hopefully turn up a spatulated tip sword to get a definite Khanda But these have eluded me so far in my hunting. I am v happy all round with this find though and the Indian weaponry collection is expanding nicely. I need more Dhals though here again are in short supply in Ireland I have attached some further pictures but I am unable to get any improvement on the blade markings you will see more of the remenant gold on these images Kind regards Ken |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 | |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 422
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Austria
Posts: 1,906
|
![]()
Hello Ken,
After seeing the detailed photos, I would estimate both the hilt and the blade to be 18th century. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
|
![]()
Among many examples there is one with the word “khanda” in the inscription.
But only one. There are several non-spatulated blades without handles, there are several non-spatulated ones with Tulwar handle etc. Can Elgood be wrong? Sure. But he spent years researching the topic and is not exactly a superficial guy:-) I would like to know the reason and the way of his thinking before I disagree with him. Wouldn’t you? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: AUCKLAND,NEW ZEALAND
Posts: 624
|
![]()
HERE ARE 2 KHANDAS IN MY COLLECTION
KIND REGARDS RAJESH |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 | |
Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Austria
Posts: 1,906
|
![]() Quote:
![]() I believe the blade, not the hilt defines the sword, and a typical Khanda is considered as having a straight blade with wide, spoon or diamond shaped tip. Based on this, I consider the second sword shown by Rajesh a Tulwar. If it weren't like this, then all the swords/knives below would be Tulwars but I would rather call them "Firangi, Tegha, Indian Kukri, and again Tegha." Last edited by mariusgmioc; 2nd January 2018 at 11:45 AM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 | |
Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 426
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
Member
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Ireland
Posts: 543
|
![]()
Hi All,
Thanks very much for all the information. I have 4 swords with this hilt type 2 with straight and 2 with curved blades I must get them all out and compare the nuances and complexity. One is a foreign curved blade so is it a Firangi Tulwar ![]() I have come across to the world of ethnic Indian arms from the world of British swords and Imperial German bayonets because of the complexity of finding out what you have and the fun of research that goes with such pursuits so I can't complain! I am off to the shop on Saturday as seemingly more items have arrived in which might be of interest. Pity it is January when funds run low but I will just have to grin and bear it. Regards Ken Last edited by Kmaddock; 2nd January 2018 at 08:35 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
|
![]()
Marius,
You obviously do not belong to the Polish school of classification of swords:-) They consider a handle as the crucial element because it determines the manner of fencing. Indeed, we have a Karabela that is defined as such by a semi- abstract “eagle head” handle but may have very different blades. As per Elgood’s Glossary for the Jodhpur catalogue ( p. 953) ” The khanda is the ancient form of straight heavy sword , the blade swelling toward the point, often with a strengthening strip on the blade”. I am confused by the discrepancy between his own definition and the actual examples. It is possible that different ethnic groups in India might have used the word “khanda” for different swords, each in their own language. Would be interesting to know whether this hypothesis is true. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#14 | |
Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Austria
Posts: 1,906
|
![]() Quote:
Indeed I do not belong "Polish school," neither do I belong any other school, as schools tend to be rigid and dogmatic. Like for example according to the "Polish School" all swords from my previous posting would be Tulwars. Maybe at the other end is another "school" that refrains from using specific terms for swords and instead calls them all "swords" or "sabres" followed by a long and detailed description of the shape. So you end up reading half page of description and still not being certain whar type of sword it is. Therefore, I prefer very much the rule of logic, simplicity and clarity over any school. Ultimately, naming swords would serve absolutely no practical purpose if by naming it, we wouldn't know exactly what it is. We call a sword "Tulwar" in order to know what type of sword it is, otherwise we might simply call it "sword." However, if we start calling "Tulwar" all the swords (like the original meaning of the word "Tulwar" is), then this specific term will loose completely its purpose becoming nothing more than a synonim to "sword." We call a knife "Karud" in order to know exactly what type of knife it is, otherwise we may simply call it "knife" (or if you prefer "Kard"). Regarding the contradiction in Elgood's books, it is called "inconsistency" and I see it as a proof that nobody, not even Elgood, is infailible. Regards, Marius |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|