Need help with a tulwar

TVV · 22nd September 2008, 08:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ward

It will be cheaper and easier to replace the handle.It is not a good enough handle to bother to restore it. Handles were routinely changed out so no greet loose.

Thank you for your advice - I agree with you fully. I will leave it as is until I find a suitable handle for the replacement.

Atlantia · 22nd September 2008, 09:11 PM

ward · 22nd September 2008, 09:22 PM

regarding wootz do a test section start 400 the 800 1200 2400 then feric chloride use vinegar as last etch

Atlantia · 22nd September 2008, 09:26 PM

I have to say i would keep the original hilt.
This is a fine 'fighting' sword.
Plenty of Tulwars were made primarily for 'form' rather than 'function' but this one was made to fight. The hilt is a type that you do see quite regularly, I'm sure one of the experts on Tulwar hilt styles can tell us if there is any specific area or period for these, but they are beautiful in their simplicity. In fact it was one fo the things that attracted me to my pair. they have a solid feel to the hilt, but with some elegance, and they polish up beautifully.
IMHO, the hilt is original, it deserves to stay.

ward · 22nd September 2008, 09:53 PM

Cast pieces like thise one are generally late by the time you have a form made and have a multiple cast done you would be better off paying high retail for the piece. If it belonged to your great grandfather that would be one thing but this is not the case. When restoring a piece if the cost are way over a full retail price it is foolish. I have learned hard leasons from my mistakes.

ariel · 22nd September 2008, 10:21 PM

I agree with Ward.
Brass handle, in my mind, is likely to be a late addition. Moreover, the upper disk was lost or removed, and then replaced with newly-made metal disks. Not much value in it.
The blade is wootz, no doubt, and makes it quite attractive. I would polish it with sandpaper and etch it, but not remove the handle. One day you will find a good replacement handle and get yourself a first-rate weapon. The scabbard is another story...

Atlantia · 22nd September 2008, 10:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ward

Cast pieces like thise one are generally late by the time you have a form made and have a multiple cast done you would be better off paying high retail for the piece. If it belonged to your great grandfather that would be one thing but this is not the case. When restoring a piece if the cost are way over a full retail price it is foolish. I have learned hard leasons from my mistakes.

Hi Ward,

As an alternative POV. These cast hilts are traditional and there is no evidence to suggest that this is not the original hilt to the sword. As an original piece it should be preserved not discarded.
Re-making the disk and 'bell' shaped pommel which are separate on mine, is a simple manufacturing task for any DIY fan, as they are not cast like the two hilt halves, and in fact if cast at all were heavily and roughly 'worked' afterwards meaning that simple replacements made with hand tools would be indistinguishable.
Without taking the 'bell' off of one of mine I cant say for sure if its roughly cast then worked or just cut from a lump, but for sure these 'are' the simple parts of the hilt and would be dead easy toi make, and re-polishing and etching the blade is a lot more work than remaking a couple of bits of brass.

If it were mine, I'd keep it as original as possible. Restoration isn't about whats cheapest. If you take this sword and recut the blade then re-etch it, then put a new handle with new resin in it on it.....
Well, is that restoration?

Just my opinion. Its all up to Teodore of course.

Regards
Gene

Atlantia · 22nd September 2008, 10:44 PM

Clearly Ward and I are flipsides of the coin on this one, but Ariel has a good point!
Restrore the blade then decide what to do with the hilt.

ward · 22nd September 2008, 10:56 PM

Sorry my time on restorations gets more valuable the older I get. If I like the piece a lot I will do it otherwise it goes out the door. I personally like the blade you have and have little use for the handle. I guess I am jaded. The Indians did much better work and cast items are just not my thing.

Atlantia · 22nd September 2008, 11:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ward

Sorry my time on restorations gets more valuable the older I get. If I like the piece a lot I will do it otherwise it goes out the door. I personally like the blade you have and have little use for the handle. I guess I am jaded. The Indians did much better work and cast items are just not my thing.

Thats because you have a collection that would make most museum curators cry. Its no wonder you have to ration restoration time.
If you were to donate the better half of your collection to me, then you could devote more time to restoring anything that was needed on the remainder!

;-)

TVV · 22nd September 2008, 10:44 PM

Gene, thank you very much for the pictures and measurements. It is exactly what I would need if I decide to have the pommel restored.
The questions is, is the hilt currently on the original one? This tulwar does not strike me as a fighting one - not only because it is made of wootz but also because it is narrow and looks like it cannot be used to parry blows. Even if one assumes that a dhal was used for parrying, it still looks a little, how should I call it, flimsy

. Could it be possible that this is an older blade, which was preserved thanks to its presumed quality (made of wootz) and later married to its current hilt in an arsenal?
We may never know, but if this is the case, then attaching another old hilt to this blade will not detract too much from its historical value. I will love to hear other opinions, and for now will leave the hilt as is, steel replacement pommel included, and will reconsider changing it if the right hilt ever becomes available. I do not want a new coftgaried hilt, as beautiful as they are.

Ward, thank you for the advice on polishing, I will follow your advice on polishing and if I have success, I will report my results back here.

Regards,
Teodor

Edit: Ariel,
Just saw your post. It makes perfect sense. Thank you.

22nd September 2008, 09:11 PM	#2
Atlantia Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: The Sharp end Posts: 2,928

22nd September 2008, 09:22 PM	#3
ward Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 637	regarding wootz do a test section start 400 the 800 1200 2400 then feric chloride use vinegar as last etch

22nd September 2008, 09:26 PM	#4
Atlantia Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: The Sharp end Posts: 2,928	I have to say i would keep the original hilt. This is a fine 'fighting' sword. Plenty of Tulwars were made primarily for 'form' rather than 'function' but this one was made to fight. The hilt is a type that you do see quite regularly, I'm sure one of the experts on Tulwar hilt styles can tell us if there is any specific area or period for these, but they are beautiful in their simplicity. In fact it was one fo the things that attracted me to my pair. they have a solid feel to the hilt, but with some elegance, and they polish up beautifully. IMHO, the hilt is original, it deserves to stay.

22nd September 2008, 09:53 PM	#5
ward Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 637	Cast pieces like thise one are generally late by the time you have a form made and have a multiple cast done you would be better off paying high retail for the piece. If it belonged to your great grandfather that would be one thing but this is not the case. When restoring a piece if the cost are way over a full retail price it is foolish. I have learned hard leasons from my mistakes.

22nd September 2008, 10:21 PM	#6
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	I agree with Ward. Brass handle, in my mind, is likely to be a late addition. Moreover, the upper disk was lost or removed, and then replaced with newly-made metal disks. Not much value in it. The blade is wootz, no doubt, and makes it quite attractive. I would polish it with sandpaper and etch it, but not remove the handle. One day you will find a good replacement handle and get yourself a first-rate weapon. The scabbard is another story...

22nd September 2008, 10:44 PM	#8
Atlantia Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: The Sharp end Posts: 2,928	Clearly Ward and I are flipsides of the coin on this one, but Ariel has a good point! Restrore the blade then decide what to do with the hilt.

22nd September 2008, 10:56 PM	#9
ward Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 637	Sorry my time on restorations gets more valuable the older I get. If I like the piece a lot I will do it otherwise it goes out the door. I personally like the blade you have and have little use for the handle. I guess I am jaded. The Indians did much better work and cast items are just not my thing.

22nd September 2008, 10:44 PM	#11
TVV Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Bay Area Posts: 1,664	Gene, thank you very much for the pictures and measurements. It is exactly what I would need if I decide to have the pommel restored. The questions is, is the hilt currently on the original one? This tulwar does not strike me as a fighting one - not only because it is made of wootz but also because it is narrow and looks like it cannot be used to parry blows. Even if one assumes that a dhal was used for parrying, it still looks a little, how should I call it, flimsy . Could it be possible that this is an older blade, which was preserved thanks to its presumed quality (made of wootz) and later married to its current hilt in an arsenal? We may never know, but if this is the case, then attaching another old hilt to this blade will not detract too much from its historical value. I will love to hear other opinions, and for now will leave the hilt as is, steel replacement pommel included, and will reconsider changing it if the right hilt ever becomes available. I do not want a new coftgaried hilt, as beautiful as they are. Ward, thank you for the advice on polishing, I will follow your advice on polishing and if I have success, I will report my results back here. Regards, Teodor Edit: Ariel, Just saw your post. It makes perfect sense. Thank you.