Deccani handles?

[Jens Nordlunde]

Ariel, there are a few things, which should be taken into consideration when comparing these hilts. The different parts is India were influenced from different parts of the outside World - but from where?

During the Deccan Sultanates there was a heavy influence from Turkey, while the Mughals were influenced from Persia, and I dont think these two areas changed their fashion, in this case the looks of the hilts, with the same speed.
It is likely that Deccan was more conservative when it came to changes. But diring wars and trade different hilt types did 'travel' over very big distances, and this could also have been part of the change of fashion.

The hilt (no 4 from left) you show in the first picture is interesting.
Have a look at the way the hand guard ends, no animal head and no flower bud - it just ends, which is quite unusual, although it has been seen before. This could be a Deccani hilt, but the strange thing is, that I have a hilt where the hand guard ends in the same way, and I am convinced that my hilt is Mughal, wwith a very fine gold inlay of the decoration.
One could ask if this way of ending the hand guard is Deccani or is it Mughal. I dont know, and I have not yet researched these hilts, but as they are not so common I find it, untill I have learned some more about them, likely that they come from the area.

[ariel]

Jens,
I see now what you meant in your PM.

But I do not see a particular problem here as related to the "mix".
The winglike guard and the wide D-guard are unquestionably inspired by Vijayanagara; the general configuration of the hilt and the quillons are unquestionably are just Mughal. The ending of the D-guard might have been a newly-formed Deccani or a purely Mughal feature.

No matter how many additional "Southern" or "Northern" features we find, the very idea of the "mix" remains intact.


Ian,
I also do not see much difference between the temporal and geographical transitions: of course they occured together. Any external influence penetrates a particular geographical region gradually. From there the hybrid product may even spread elsewhere (and be further modified there) , but it will also take time. Thus, both transitions occur in unison and often in waves.

In a way, it may be similar to the relative syncretism of Islam/Hinduism in Deccan.


Overall, my point is that this particular hilt pattern combines both Vijayanagara and Mughal elements, i.e. the postulated mixed form that would be expected in Deccan, at a point of clash between the two traditions.

Of course, actual, attributable examples of Deccani weapons with such hilt are needed to substantiate the hypothesis. In this regard Elgood's Tegha may serve as one example. Are there others?

[Jens Nordlunde]

Yes there was a 'mix', especially after the Mughals had taken DEccan and posted soldiers and rulers to represent them, but I think the 'development' went slower in Deccan than in other parts of India - although I can prove this yet.

[ariel]

I seem to see your point: military victors imposing their weapons on the vanquished. Fully agree: that would be the expected chain of events everywhere.

But it is rather difficult to obliterate the local traditions and fully replace them with distinctly foreign elements ( see Jim's post above). The Hindu elements would still stubbornly survive the attempt.. So, the two were subsumed.

[Jens Nordlunde]

To my opinion the two cultures were 'fighting' each other. Dont forget that the Hindus had their deities, theit gods and their superstition, and the Muslims, although Musilms, were fighting each other.

[ariel]

Jens,
I am not trying to be stubborn, but I was asking just about the "mix" handles: are they, in your opinion of plausible Deccani origin or not?

If you think I am wrong, just say so: I am not invested in this hypothesis and do not plan to make a publication out of it. This was just an amuzing thought on a lazy evening:-) I just wanted to ran it by some friends who know more about Indian arms than I do.
Sock it to me, Bro! :-)))))

[Jim McDougall]

So...Ariel......you discover the phenomenon of hybridization after some 'Slivovitz' ? Not sure what this stuff is, nor, more important ..how much you had....but, .uh, I'm in Texas, and its Lone Star not that ale you mentioned for me.

I try not to indulge in alcohol and sword studies.......at least not since the Drambuie, tulwar......and ceiling fan!!

Now that you have piqued our interest........no paper? so I guess the movie is out if the question.

What is remarkable is that out of this Slivovitz addled query.......some brilliant observations by Jens and Ian seem more than worthy of serious consideration.
As Ian has noted, hybridization is far more complex than simple categorization to period or region. Also as Jens has pointed out, and as you agree, development and transition is typically subtle and gradual.

As I have learned, mostly from Jens, the definition of Deccani or the Deccan itself is actually more complex than can be explained readily, and as in Ian's observation, the factors being considered take that even further.

As always, these discussions are not about being right or wrong, nor I would hope, not debates, just fact finding missions or sharing of ideas.

It would seem that your idea of probable Deccani provenance is quite plausible, but as with most Indian arms, there remains the possibility of other provenance with the constant diffusion of weapons.

By 'the numbers' and Occams Razor, my feeling is they probably are Deccani. As to finite region in that rather broad spectrum, the jury is still out!

[Likhari]

Originally Posted by Jens Nordlunde

Ariel, there are a few things, which should be taken into consideration when comparing these hilts. The different parts is India were influenced from different parts of the outside World - but from where?

During the Deccan Sultanates there was a heavy influence from Turkey, while the Mughals were influenced from Persia, and I dont think these two areas changed their fashion, in this case the looks of the hilts, with the same speed.
It is likely that Deccan was more conservative when it came to changes. But diring wars and trade different hilt types did 'travel' over very big distances, and this could also have been part of the change of fashion.

The hilt (no 4 from left) you show in the first picture is interesting.
Have a look at the way the hand guard ends, no animal head and no flower bud - it just ends, which is quite unusual, although it has been seen before. This could be a Deccani hilt, but the strange thing is, that I have a hilt where the hand guard ends in the same way, and I am convinced that my hilt is Mughal, wwith a very fine gold inlay of the decoration.
One could ask if this way of ending the hand guard is Deccani or is it Mughal. I dont know, and I have not yet researched these hilts, but as they are not so common I find it, untill I have learned some more about them, likely that they come from the area.

A hilt with a guard similar to your from the Prince of Wales Museum in Bombay.

[Jens Nordlunde]

Hi Kikhari,

Yes you are right. Do you know wat the text says to the hilt you shows?
Mine is Mughal 17th century.

[Likhari]

Originally Posted by Jens Nordlunde

Hi Kikhari,

Yes you are right. Do you know wat the text says to the hilt you shows?
Mine is Mughal 17th century.

It is a Quranic text starting with the word Bismillah.

[Jens Nordlunde]

Likhari,
Thank you, and I am sorry I spelled your name wrongly.