Hunting Tulwar (Tulwar Shikargah)

[Nihl]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

"... subsequently applied commercially, quite wrongly, to 19th century decorative swords with chiselled animals down the length of the blade,also referred to as shamshir shikargah."

Hi all! Just popping in again to give what info I can here. First of all, in my opinion as someone who mainly studies indian arms, I believe this quote from Elgood (that I have quoted above from Jim's post) is the most important thing to keep in mind here. That is to say that, principally, these aren't hunting swords, or swords with some deep hunting-related symbolism behind them, but rather just swords that happen to have hunting scenes carved into the blades. Most of them were made simply as high quality tourist pieces, and indeed most seem to have succeeded to this point - even to this day westerners seem to get consistently ensnared by the concept that these swords were of deep importance, commensurate with the intensity of their carvings.

My intention here being not to tear down or disregard how cool or impressive the amount of detail in some of these swords can be, but rather just a message of warning not to conflate ultimately vapid tourist bait with those decorations that have legitimate spiritual/religious significance (ok I'll admit calling these swords "vapid" is a bit harsh, but I hope that you all get what I mean ).

Anyways, onto some new-ish information for this discussion, I'd like to point out some linguistic info. As the phrase "shamshir shikargar(h)" would imply, this phrase is likely of a persian or heavily persian-influenced origin (what with the use of the term shamshir as opposed to tulwar). Of note, however, is that even in modern hindi, the term "shikar" is most often used to refer to the action of hunting or a hunter, with "shikargar" indeed likely being an older/archaic term for the latter. The modern term in hindi for a hunter, meanwhile, is funnily enough even more persianized; "shikari". The "i" at the end serving the same purpose as the i in say, afghani, iraqi, punjabi, etc., i.e. designating that something is of/comes from that place. In the case of "shikari", this would mean they are a "person of the hunt", literally speaking. I would be willing to guess this is what the "gar(h)" at the end of "shikargar(h)" means as well.

One possible explanation for this relates to the root of the verb "to do" in hindi being "kar", which could potentially be misheard and colonially transliterated as "gar" instead, especially when spoken quickly by a native speaker (someone saying something along the lines of "(this is a) shamshir shikar kar" - a shamishir that one is to hunt with). This is also why I prefer using the spelling of "shikargar", as I feel "shikargah" is phonetically too vague and, likely, is the result of someone mishearing the last consonant of the original term.

Finally, however, I will note that all of this linguistics talk is pure speculation and conjecture. I am, compared to an actual, professional linguist, purely a "linguistic dilettante" of sorts, and though I find the area fascinating I am not at all fluent in Hindi or any other south asian language. Rather, all of this is built off of the 1 and a half years of hindi that I took while at university .

[Jim McDougall]

Nihl, thanks very much for these interesting insights. While I am far from being a linguist as well, I find these kinds of looks into etymology and transliteration fascinating.
What I found in Pant (op. cit. 1980, p.76) was the listing for SHAMSHIR SHIKARGAHA, where he notes (footnote 271) that G.C.Stone (p.553) wrongly spells it as 'shamshir shikargar'.

The Mughal courts were profoundly influenced by the Persians of course, and often did, in high station, carry shamshirs. Here I would note that the term 'shamshir' was of course quite collectively used in Persian for saber, much in the same manner that talwar was used in India for 'sword' in similar manner.
There are suggestions that the word tulwar is also of Persian root.

Many Indian tulwars (Indo-Persian hilt) are termed 'shamshir' (see my post #27 examples from Elgood), while there are shamshir style hilts (the one attached believed Deccani) which are termed tulwar.
In the Native cavalry of the Raj, even the British cavalry sabers carried by them were termed tulwars.

I take the opportunity here to correct my comment in previous post about "The Indian Sword" P.Rawson, 1969.......where I said there was no mention of shikargah......and later found this salient note on p.30;

"...all the sword forms known from the North-West, both from works of art and surviving examples,are versions of the talwar. Although during the late 18th c. the cities of the North-West passed under Sikh and Rajput rule, the sword made and used there remained the talwar.
In the ornament of the weapons however, the craftsmen returned to Hindu motives for inspiration. For example at Lahore, whereas under the Mughlas SWORD BLADES HAD BEEN CHISELED WITH ROWS OF ANIMAL AND HUMAN FIGURES IN PERSIAN STYLE, under the Sikhs the same type of chiseled work was carried on, but the figures were of Hindu origin such as avatars of Vishnu, or the planetary divinities".

This entry would suggest that swords with these chiseled scenes in the blades were indeed viable weapons as produced in these Punjabi regions under Mughal rule, and continued using Hindu motif under the Sikhs and Rajputs.

I found online an example of a 'kirach' stated from Lahore from late 18th c. with Mughal 'shikargah motif. The kirach is simply a tulwar with a straight blade which ticks forward at the tip.

Also, for further reference, which I have not yet consulted:
"Sikh Heritage: Ethos & Relics" by Bhayee Sikander Singh and Roopinder Singh, p.146
A tulwar of Guru Gobind Singh of 18th c. with hunting scenes, which seems contradictory to the previous note on Sikhs using Hindu motif.


Attached: Deccani tulwar
Lahore kirach with shikarga blade

[mariusgmioc]

A quite compelling argument that these tulwars with elaborately decorated blades were NOT actually used for hunting but were merely presentation swords is the condition of their edge.

All the blades of this kind that I have seen, as well as the examples presented here, do not show any traces of use and resharpening on their edges, but have the intact, original edge geometry.

[fernando]

Looks like is beyond doubt that hunting talwars are not meant to be an operational weapon for hunting but a 'show off' item decorated with hunting scenes.
Still one thing to figure out is, why the massive quantity of these blades depict animal versus animal hunting scenes and not animals being hunted by men, be them their chasers (shikharis and mir shikaran) or their mounted hunter lords. Would there be a motive for such strong tendency ?

[Norman McCormick]

Originally Posted by fernando

Looks like is beyond doubt that hunting talwars are not meant to be an operational weapon for hunting but a 'show off' item decorated with hunting scenes.
Still one thing to figure out is, why the massive quantity of these blades depict animal versus animal hunting scenes and not animals being hunted by men, be them their chasers (shikharis and mir shikaran) or their mounted hunter lords. Would there be a motive for such strong tendency ?

Hi Fernando,
I was wondering the same thing. In decorated hunting related European examples it either shows the quarry being hunted and/or the huntsman engaged in the hunt. The lack of evidence re edge sharpening may not be definitive but certainly points towards a more ceremonial/presentation and 19thC touristic possibility.
Regards,
Norman.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by mariusgmioc

A quite compelling argument that these tulwars with elaborately decorated blades were NOT actually used for hunting but were merely presentation swords is the condition of their edge.

All the blades of this kind that I have seen, as well as the examples presented here, do not show any traces of use and resharpening on their edges, but have the intact, original edge geometry.

I agree with this observation, in accord with the blades not being sharpened, but I cannot say that I have personally seen or handled these blades myself to concur. Mostly the suggestion that these were 'ceremonial' or diplomatic gifts in js my own opinion based on the cited material from references in my previous posts, as well as personal conversations with some of the authors of references on Indian arms who note that these were not for use in the hunt.

As I have tried to illustrate in previous posts, the use of animals in motif panels on blades in many cases were toward allegorical or metaphoric symbolism important culturally, not just representing hunting scenes.
As shown also previously, the themes changed in Lahore for example from animals and hunting with Mughal rule, to figures in Hindu deities with Rajput and Sikh takeover, but still in similar 'Persian' style.

The blades being decorated, again, as I noted earlier, the bestowal of highly ornate weapons was a keen distinction at durbars and welcoming events, and such weapons worn by courtiers signified status and regal approval (Paul, 1995).

In Europe, the custom of presenting elaborately decorated and sometimes ostentatious weapons as awards and for meritorious purposes to military officers is well known. As far as I have known, these were never carried into battle, let alone the regular dress swords worn by officers.

In European gentry, the hunting sword was often a fashionable item, which is why they have often been classified as 'court swords' (Dean, 1929). However the motifs vary and often were focused on talismanic and heraldic or regalia oriented themes.
Much as with durbars the hunt was typically associated with gathering and interacting of key figures where fashion and status were of utmost importance and weaponry was of course a means of signifying that.

With these kinds of arms, the themes and motifs are typically symbolic and decorative in my opinion, and not designs applied to a weapon to be specifically used for hunting. The themes were either toward cultural or perhaps even dynastic symbolism (Mughals) or religious as with the Hindi deities as noted. In many of the scenes depicted with animal vs. animal, these are possibly to be allegorically intended as certain animals have certain representations in ethnic cultures. In many cases, animals were trained, even to hunt, as with cheetahs in the Mughal courts.
The examples with elephants and humans tumbling obviously may represent mahouts and their matters with these, which ironically were often used in the hunt.

Tipu Sultan, who used the sobriquet, "The Tiger of Mysore", often was depicted allegorically as a fierce tiger, attacking and killing Europeans in various material work, and used 'bubris' (tiger stripes) to decorate most of his weaponry and uniforms etc.

In Persia the lion, and the mythical bird, the Simorgh, are used on blades in these stylings.

As always, the commercialism toward weaponry which seems to have originated in the Victorian period has severely clouded the history of these and many weapon forms.

[fernando]

The only part missing here is when decorated weapons, not being meant to the activity of hunting but a product of traditional culture applied in Indian swords since primordial times, were given at a contemporary (?) stage the name of "hunting (Shikargah) swords".
(Text extract and picture courtesy E. Jaiwant Paul, ARMS AND ARMOUR 2005).


.

[Cathey]

Hi Guys

Jens has suggested I look at these references but sadly I only have Volume 1, if anyone has Volume 2 of Memorials of the Jeypore Exhibition and can scan the following references I would be most obliged.

"Vol. II contains weapons, vases and other stuff. Vol. III only vases and other stuff.
Amongst the weapons in vol. II I found three of these hunting swords. The text is from vol. I.
Plate XXIII, no. 1. Hunting sword, Shikárgah. Steel. Figures of animals, birds, and foliage in high relief on both sides of the blade; hilt an knuckle guard steel. (Karauli Armoury).
Plate XXVIII, no. 4. Hunting sword, Shikárgah. The reverse of Plate XXIII, 1. (Karauli Armoury).
Plate XXIX, no. 4. Hunting sword, Shikárgah. or Sirohi gaj bail. Hunting scenes in high relief on the blade. (Ulwar Armoury).
Plate XXXIX, no. 3. Hunting sword, Shikárgah, with large curve. Covered on both sides, with figures of animals and birds in relief outlined in gold."

I have just received Fighting, Hunting, Impressing Arms and Armour from the Islamic World 1500-1850 and this does contain some information in relation to these Hunting Tulwar (Tulwar Shikargah). I still have 5 books on the way so hopefully these will asist.

Cheers Cathey

Cheers Cathey

[Cathey]

Hi Norman

Thankyou for raising the issue of European Hunting swords of which I have a growing collection. I think the point you raise is more than valid and one I will pursue in my research. If wealthy or highly ranked individuals owned and used very elaborate hunting swords in Europe, I am not sure we can preclude the same practice in the east out of hand.

Even tourist pieces are usually not created in a vacuum, they are based on something that originally had a purpose. I have also previously discarded these heavily engraved swords as mere tourist pieces until I found that they are not as prolific as you would expect and the high-quality examples in watered steel held in important collections has also caused me to rethink my position.

With regard to the sword I own, I have the advantage of being able to compare it to other high quality Tulwars in my collection and also high quality early European swords. Apart from having a serviceable edge this sword is well balanced in the hand and appears to be as functional as my other horseman’s swords. Was it used as a hunting sword or just a ceremonial piece, I have no definitive proof at this stage, and perhaps never will, however I also have no evidence to the contrary? I think the next avenue to explore will be the history of hunting in the East rather than simply relying on available arms and armour related texts.

This will certainly be an interesting area to dedicate some research to and I have been told by a far more experienced collector in this field that this has not been attempted in any detail previously and his view is that it is a gap that should be addressed.

Norman would you be so kind as to send me some high-resolution pictures of your shield, preferably on a white background. You can send these me via the Heritage Arms Society email: heritage.arms.society@gmail.com.

Jim has kindly offered to assist me with this project and I am sure his attention to detail and due diligence will keep me from going to far off track.

Cheers Cathey

[Cathey]

Hi Guys

Just to confuse things a little more, this Hunting Sword is Spanish but heavily influenced by the Moors. It was the late Claude Blair that confirmed this connection and identified SAN RoqE on the blade as Saint São Roque the Patron Saint of Dogs.

This sword is difficult to date as it is the only example I have come across, however Claude believed it to be Circa 1810.
Nationality: Probably Cordoba, Argentina?
Overall Length: 62.4 cm (24.6 inches)
Blade length: 46.5 cm (18.3 inches)
Blade widest point: 4.5 cm (1.8 inches)
Marks, etc: Blade engraved decoration to 2/3rds and the name SAN RoqE. Decoration includes dear, standing man with hat, double headed eagle and ½ man with hat as well as decorative foliage.

Description
HUNTING SWORD Hispanic origin circa 1800 (Cordoba, Argentina?). Purchased by the previous owner from an antique shop in London in 1949. Ornate silver hilt includes a carved horn dog at the top of the grip connected to the lower end of grip by a silver chain. Silver work to leather scabbard, end missing. All silver fitting very tight and well made excellent quality. Double-headed eagle is included among the complicated decoration deeply chiselled into the blade. The name SAN RoqE [San Roque] is the Spanish form of that of the French saint known in English and French as “Saint Roch”. He was very popular, and many churches and religious institutions were dedicated to, or named after him.

General Remarks
General workmanship is extremely fine and typical of European hunting swords; however its provenance is somewhat mysterious in that the design and look is Spanish, but with a distinct Moorish flavour.

When considering the name SAN RoqE on the blade it is interesting to note that there is a small city called San Roque in Colombia, and there is silver in Colombia, men with hats, deer and eagles. Regarding the dog in the hilt, this may relate to the legend of Saint São Roque which says that when São Roque was contaminated with the plague, he retired to the forest, and only survived because a dog brought him daily a piece of bread. In some countries this Saint is considered the patron of dogs.

The piece has a very strong Moorish or oriental flavour, both in the shape of the sword, as in the decoration. Acid etching (aqua forte) decoration is thoroughly used on the blade of this sword, and this technique was of common use in Toledo, were artisans were taught to use it centuries ago from the Moor invaders.

It was through correspondence with the late Claude Blair that the Spanish origin, combined with Moorish influence was confirmed. This sword despite being very ornate does show signs of period use.

Cheers Cathey

[Jim McDougall]

This is a fascinating example, and I know I have seen one either similar or perhaps this very sword in references someplace (it'll drive me nuts til I find it). The example I recall had that same SAN RoqE inscription.
I am thinking it may have been seen in "The Lore of Arms" (William Reid, 1920/1984 repr) but dont have it at hand. I know I included it in notes on Spanish weapons I was compiling.

The Moorish distinction is well noted, and what it most interesting is the 'yataghan' type forward curve, the wire wrapped grip neck (as on Islamic swords such as shamshir, and often on hangers etc. ). This feature has been seen on Spanish colonial swords in the central and south American sphere.
Note the 'karabela' hilt nimcha which is Arab but circulated throughout Mediterranean regions and into the Spanish sphere through trade routes in their colonies in Morocco.

I think the Cordoba, Argentina attribution is correct, as this resembles the machete like knife/sword known as the 'facon' in these South American regions.
The allegoric zoomorphic 'dog head' seems in accord with the San Roque legend.
Note the resemblance in the rearward extension of the blade at forte, resembling those of many facon.
Similar machete type swords with these kinds of zoomorphic pommels are known in Central American and tropical Mexican regions as well.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Cathey

... I think the next avenue to explore will be the history of hunting in the East rather than simply relying on available arms and armour related texts.

This will certainly be an interesting area to dedicate some research to and I have been told by a far more experienced collector in this field that this has not been attempted in any detail previously and his view is that it is a gap that should be addressed....

Will this one be useful ?

http://thelastwilderness.org/wp-cont...a-Chimalgi.pdf


.

[Norman McCormick]

Hi,
A relevant passage from the article that Fernando highlighted.

"The hunt was masterminded by a group of local hunters called ‘shikharis’, which was headed by a ‘mir shikaran’ or the head shikari."

An Indian painting 19thc.

An Indian steel bow.

Regards,
Norman.

[Norman McCormick]

Originally Posted by Cathey

Hi Norman

Norman would you be so kind as to send me some high-resolution pictures of your shield, preferably on a white background. You can send these me via the Heritage Arms Society email: heritage.arms.society@gmail.com.

Cheers Cathey

Hi Cathey,
No problem.
My Regards,
Norman.

[Norman McCormick]

Hi,
This should be of interest. https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/30963
Regards,
Norman.