Firangi

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by David R

Thanks for showing off such a nice sword, for some reason we don't see many around.

I was at one Militaria fair and a dealer had a box full of these style hilts, I bought a number of them off him. Most of them battered and mutilated, some better than others, and I still have the best two of the bunch.

I think the "problem" with the European bladed ones is that the blades are often taken out, and then fitted up with Western hilts to sell as original 16th and 17th century rapiers and basket hilts.

The same is also done with good 1796 light cavalry blades in Tulwar hilts.......

These are excellent observations in my opinion, and the constant refurbishing and re-assembly of hilts, whether contemporary in working life of the weapons, or more modern production of industrious sellers is hard to say.

We know that the movement of blades in trade networks has been a most standard commodity, and so much so that viable identification of a weapon is complicated and typically relies mostly on hilt style.

The note on removal of European blades from ethnographic weapons is well placed, and Oakeshott commented on how many 'kaskara' from Sudan in early 20th c. were dismantled to have such blades remounted in European medieval style hilts for obvious reasons.

I have seen many Indian tulwars sporting British blades, and authentically as it was noted by Nolan (famed for his part in Light Brigade charge) that the British were intrigued by the effectively deadly use of sabers by Indian warriors in Sikh wars. They were horrified when they discovered that the blades were actually from earlier British M1796 sabers, but honed to razor sharpness and held in wood scabbards.

Thus the penchant for European and often British blades ( despite some derisive regard for British ones) was well established in India, with German blades most preferred. Much of the attraction seems to have been status oriented, particularly obvious with rapier blades, which of course were designed for sword play not characteristic of Indian versions (the thrust was not much favored in India).

The trade and use of blades, regardless of original source, was vaguely defined at best, and alliances, agreements (?) and exchange could not be accurately observed. Commodities, including blades, often exchanged through various entrepots and intermediaries making distinct attribution difficult if not nearly impossible.

I would say the markings on the Indian 'firangi' in the OP, which is what I would consider a handsome example, resemble many of the combinations used on North Italian blades, and these were produced for schiavona and other swords typically like this in early 17th c. +
The application of the 'star' by Indian artisans would typically not be added to the familiar 'eyelash'/'sickle mark, but was well known on true Italian blades (see Boccia & Coelho, "Armi Bianchi Italiene").

The term 'firangi' , as well 'beaten to death' by collectors, is simply the term used to describe a European(or foreign) blade in an Indian hilt form.
This style sword shown in OP was the 'Hindu basket hilt' which derived from the old Indian sword known dialectically as 'khanda'.

Technically even tulwars with European or British blades might be considered 'firangi'. However, even the term tulwar is a broad term used not only to describe the familiar Indo-Persian hilt version, but 'shamshir' hilted versions or even actual shamshirs in Indian context. In the British Raj, regulation British sabers for native regiments were called tulwars!

[fernando]

Just trying to defend my Dame .
For those not within the picture, saltpeter is a nuclear component of gunpowder ...


.

[Kubur]

Originally Posted by fernando

Just trying to defend my Dame .
For those not within the picture, saltpeter is a nuclear component of gunpowder ...


.

Hi Fernando,

This is very interesting.
I wonder if they changed the term of their agreement after 1498...

then a bit later

In 1504, the Venetians, who shared common interests with the Mamluks in the spice trade and desired to eliminate the Portuguese challenge if possible, sent envoy Francesco Teldi to Cairo.[4] Teldi tried to find a level of cooperation between the two realms, encouraging the Mamluks to block Portuguese navigations.[4] The Venetians claimed they could not intervene directly, and encouraged the Mamluk Sultan Qansuh al-Ghuri to take action by getting into contact with Indian princes at Cochin and Cananor to entice them not to trade with the Portuguese, and the Sultans of Calicut and Cambay to fight against them.[4] Some sort of alliance was thus concluded between the Venetians and the Mamluks against the Portuguese.[5] There were claims, voiced during the War of the League of Cambrai, that the Venetians had supplied the Mamluks with weapons and skilled shipwrights.[1]

The Mamluks however had little inclination for naval operations: "The war against the Portuguese, being mainly a naval war, was entirely alien to the Mamluk and little to his taste. The navy and everything connected with it was despised by the land-minded Mamluk horsemen".[6]

The Mamluks again attempted to secure the help of the Venetians against the Portuguese, and they did intervene by pleading their case with the Pope.[9]

The Venetians, who had been at peace with the Ottomans since the signature of the 1503 Peace Treaty by Andrea Gritti after the Ottoman–Venetian War, continued to secure peace with the Ottomans, and renewed their peace treaty in 1511, leading them to encourage the Ottomans to participate on the Mamluk side in the conflict against the Portuguese.[13]
Venetian embassy to the Mamluk Governor in Damascus in 1511, workshop of Giovanni Bellini.

The rapprochement was such that Venice authorized Ottoman provisioning in its Mediterranean ports such as Cyprus.[13] Venice also requested Ottoman support in the War of the League of Cambrai, but in vain.[13]

A Mamluk-Venetian commercial treaty was signed by the ambassador to Cairo Domenico Trevisan in 1513.[13] After that point however, and the reverses of the Mamluks and the Persians against the Ottomans, Venice increasingly favoured a rapprochement with the Ottoman Empire.[13]

[Jim McDougall]

Aside from the detail on Venetian/Portuguese trade, and the dreaded saltpetre which is of course pretty fascinating, I wanted to add a note on the 'sickle marks;.
Just to add to the conundrums here on terms, blade origins etc....I would point out that these paired and typically dentated arcs with triple dots at each end....were not necessarily Genoese.....
They became associated with Genoa as it was a major trade/export center where blades were exported, though many of these blades came from other North Italian centers as well.

These appeared in variation and in multiples as well.

What is interesting here with the detail on the trade issues is to see just how extraordinarily important the historical context is with the study of these arms.
It is great to see the deeper and overall view of what was going on in these regions in these times.

[ariel]

Kubur,
One must always remember that strategical political alliances usually take second seats to commercial machinations. Even in your example, the reason why Venice sought military help from Mamluks was ... spice trade. I do not think we know for sure whether the blade of my Firangi was made in Venice, Genoa , Ferrara or some other Italian sword- making place. Popular markings were forged all over. But even if the Doges banned selling of swords to the Portuguese, any Venetian or some other master was free to sell them to the Genoese, and what happened to them from that moment on was nobody’s business.

Even now, industries world- wide deliver forbidden goodies to countries under strict embargoes. All they need to do it is to sell them to some intermediary for an artificially inflated price and who will then recoup the “loss” by charging the final buyer extra. That’s all.

Money talks, bulls..t walks.

On top of that, see Elgood’s chapter in the “Sultans of the South” in which he cites Tome Pires who in 1514, just 4 years after Portuguese capture of Goa, reported importation of Venetian goods there, including swords. This is as direct evidence as one can find.

[Kubur]

Ariel,
I agree with all the points that you developed above.
My points were:
Portuguese and Venetians were not friends and not business partners.
The 16th c. trade is much more complicated than the 19th c. colonial trade.
It was not White Europeans and the others.
BTW you have a very nice Indian sword!
As it was said by Jim these marks are not necessarily Italians.

[Lee]

I have shown this firangi in previous threads, noting that I believed the blade to be of European origin on the basis of its flexibility, presence of 'blisters' (forging flaws) and marks in the fuller (unfortunately rubbed beyond being deciphered).

Since then I have had the opportunity to make a few elemental evaluations by XRF and found that the blade proper shows measurable traces of manganese and sulfur, while the stiffener (presumably of 'local' Indian origin) does not show detectable traces of these two elements. Lesser distinctions were seen for some other elements.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Kubur

... My points were:
Portuguese and Venetians were not friends and not business partners.
The 16th c. trade is much more complicated than the 19th c. colonial trade.
It was not White Europeans and the others...

You are right in that the competition was dealt in a different mode; but not necessarily tougher or trickier than in the XIX century. Money rules remain in privilege... and merchants have a blind sight for politics. You will read that many a time both adversaries fought (and fight) with weapons of same provenance.
Still your source is not far from the truth in that:

" Initially, after the arrival of Vasco da Gama in Calicut in 1498, the Portuguese only intended to establish their economic dominance, having created several factories in Cochin, Cananor, Coulão, Cranganor, Tanor and Calecute. However, feeling the hostility on the part of several Indian kingdoms and other potentates (the Grand Sultan of Cairo, the Republic of Venice, the Sultan of Cambaia and the Samorin of Calicut), who allied themselves to expel them from India, ended up for making Portuguese rule official, strengthening the factories and creating a sovereign state (Goa, 1512)".

And we can add that the dance of power was in favor of Genoese long before that:

" In 1317 D. Dinis made an agreement with the navigator and Genoese merchant Manuel Pessanha (Emanuele Pessagno), appointing him the first admiral of the royal fleet with commercial privileges with his country, in exchange for twenty ships and their crews, in order to defend the country's coasts against (Muslim) piracy attacks, laying the foundations of the Portuguese Navy and for the establishment of a Genoese merchant community in Portugal. Forced to reduce their activities in the Black Sea, merchants in the Republic of Genoa had turned to the North African trade for wheat, oil (also a source of energy) and gold - sailing to the ports of Bruges (Flanders) and England. The Genoese and Florentines then settled in Portugal, which profited from the initiative and financial experience of these rivals of the Republic of Venice."
In 1453, with the taking of Constantinople by the Ottomans, trade in the Mediterranean between Venice and Genoa was very low. The benefit of an alternative commercial route proved to be rewarding. Portugal would directly link the spice-producing regions to its markets in Europe. When the project for the discovery of the sea route to India was signed, Portuguese expansion without forgetting the religious aspect is also dominated by commercial interest ...