|
12th November 2022, 06:07 PM | #1 | |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
|
Quote:
Can somebody clarify it? |
|
13th November 2022, 01:59 AM | #2 | |
Member
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 87
|
Quote:
In regards to their use, assuming they are legitimate and not mistranslated or anything, I agree with Rumpel's suggestion of "arapusta tulwar". In other words, I believe arapusta/aradam should be used as adjectives, not standalone terms. "Arapusta tulwar" can basically translate to "serrated sword" in the generic sense, but then something like "aradam khanda" or "arapusta firangi" can be used for specific examples as they appear. Using the more common word/sword type (tulwar) along with a more esoteric word should also make the term more approachable for beginners IMO, so they can know that the sword being referred to is a subtype, and not a separate specialized type of sword. Indeed, to my knowledge, more often than not these serrated blades are demonstrations of an artisan's skill rather than intended for battlefield use, which makes them a subtype to me. |
|
13th November 2022, 10:33 AM | #3 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 66
|
I remembered another one of my Indian swords, which can serve as an illustration or a subject of discussion. Can we call him katti?
|
13th November 2022, 07:34 PM | #4 | |
Member
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 87
|
Quote:
This sword also has a rather unusual construction. While the blade is quite long, it has the handle of a typical 19th century indian knife (kard/chaku/etc.), making this sword rather similar in construction to a european messer (in that its a sword built like a knife). Overall, I'd be more inclined to call it a "civilian sword" than anything else. It lacks a more serious "military style" tulwar hilt, and the blade by itself isn't really out of the ordinary for 19th century manufacturing. Last edited by Lee; 13th November 2022 at 10:23 PM. Reason: Removed link to commercial site |
|
14th November 2022, 02:53 PM | #5 |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,503
|
It reminds me of Selawa, popularly known as Khyber Knife, modified by Indian bladesmiths. Zira Bouk tip, is something that real Afghani Selawas never had: they were used as purely chopping weapons as per British military surgeons.
Can we use any Indian name? I am not sure: IMHO, it is outside any Indian tradition . I would call it “modified Afghani Selawa” and run for cover . |
17th March 2023, 05:58 PM | #6 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 66
|
Finally, I did receive my long-standing purchase - an Indian sword, which I assumed could be called katti. Below you can see the photos. As Nihl pointed out quite correctly, the blade of this sword is made in the style of a Khyber knife. This sword can hardly be called katty.
But it is unlikely that this is the blade of a Khyber knife, with an Indian handle. The length of the blade is 73.5 cm . And at the base there is a brand - an Indian sign (by the way, no one knows what this sign means?). How do you think this sword can be classified? |
18th March 2023, 07:06 AM | #7 |
Vikingsword Staff
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: The Aussie Bush
Posts: 4,068
|
rumpel9,
You have touched on a very big topic and Nihl has discussed the complexities and difficulties of trying to generalize classifications across the Asian sub-continent. There are so many cultural variants, language differences, and individual geographical variations, that it is impossible to arrive at a comprehensive classification system. We have varying degrees of scholarship in English to help those who do not speak the languages of the sub-continent. The books of Ellgood, Rawson, and Pant come to mind immediately, and there are others. Some have tried to do what you are attempting, to provide descriptions and classifications for major Indian weapons, and have mostly come up well short of the mark. It's just a very hard task and, with all respect, one that needs to be done based on extensive experience within the respective cultures, and an understanding of the complicated history of weapons, in the sub-continent. Those qualities are unlikely to be found in one person. Most likely, it will need a team of dedicated individuals to achieve the goal. As collectors, we want to have a name for everything so we can classify and catalogue what we have. This is perfectly understandable. However, the longer I do this, the more I see of the "naming game" and the less convinced I become of its usefulness. I'm quite content with a descriptive classification, such as "Khanda with tulwar-style hilt, probably 18th-19th C, Sikh." To me that's an honest appraisal that says 90% about the sword and avoids too much speculation. |
19th March 2023, 03:25 PM | #8 | |
Member
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 87
|
Quote:
In regards to its name, I very much agree with Ian's assessment of the situation. Too often people want a simple "name tag", of sorts, that they can apply to their items. In all reality, particularly with Indian swords, this approach rarely works, and a more descriptive name is required; one that gives a name to both the blade and the hilt. As such, I would personally deem your new acquisition to (still) have a khyber knife style blade, but a standard tulwar hilt. It is somewhat tempting to categorize the blade as being sosun patta in style, given that, like a turkish yataghan, in the 19th century some sosun patta were made with t-back blades, however your example doesn't really have enough recurvature to warrant the name change IMO. Also keep in mind, the tulwar hilt requires this sword to be used in a draw cutting fashion, so in function this sword would basically "work" the same as a standard tulwar, albeit maybe slightly better at thrusting. Both components likely date to the 19th century. |
|
|
|