Firangi, khanda what do I call it?

[Timo Nieminen]

Originally Posted by ariel

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.....

Local usage? After all, terms like this (khanda, tulwar, shamshir, gladius, kilij, etc.) mean, generically, "sword" in their languages of origin. It's only in foreign languages (like English) that they come to mean specific types of swords.

[mariusgmioc]

Hello Ken,

After seeing the detailed photos, I would estimate both the hilt and the blade to be 18th century.

[ariel]

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?

[BANDOOK]

HERE ARE 2 KHANDAS IN MY COLLECTION
KIND REGARDS
RAJESH

[mariusgmioc]

Originally Posted by ariel

I would like to know the reason and the way of his thinking before I disagree with him. Wouldn’t you?

And I would like to know the reason and the way of his thinking BEFORE I AGREE with him!

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."

[Mercenary]

Originally Posted by Timo Nieminen

Local usage? After all, terms like this (khanda, tulwar, shamshir, gladius, kilij, etc.) mean, generically, "sword" in their languages of origin. It's only in foreign languages (like English) that they come to mean specific types of swords.

Excellent!

[Kmaddock]

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 , pictures below

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

[ariel]

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.

[mariusgmioc]

Originally Posted by ariel

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.

Hello Ariel,

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

[Mercenary]

Actually words "khanda" and "tulwar" (as well "kirch" and a few more) are just synonyms. The reason is in what time the word was using. "Khanda" is a word from old sanscrit and meant "sword" in that time when all swords were stright. "Tulwar" is a word from new Indian languages and was using in the time when sabers begun spread in India.
We can use in the purposes of classification any of these words, but we have to take into account historical and linguistic circumstances without pay a lot of attention how Indians, Egerton or someone else in modern time prefer to use it.

[NavdeepBal]

Originally Posted by Mercenary

Actually words "khanda" and "tulwar" (as well "kirch" and a few more) are just synonyms. The reason is in what time the word was using. "Khanda" is a word from old sanscrit and meant "sword" in that time when all swords were stright. "Tulwar" is a word from new Indian languages and was using in the time when sabers begun spread in India.
We can use in the purposes of classification any of these words, but we have to take into account historical and linguistic circumstances without pay a lot of attention how Indians, Egerton or someone else in modern time prefer to use it.

Yes, but it is believed Khanda is a very ancient weapon, and during those times, before the muslim invasions, in India swords were mostly straight and broad. Khanda is considered a holy weapon and in mythology is used by many deities. Just lik a Salwar meant trousers, but now is a type of trouser of south Asia, Khanda jus meant a holy sword but after many other sword types came into being it became a weapon of its own.