Decoration on Indian blades

[B.I]

hi,
jens sword has all the remnants of a mid to late 19thC piece. the style of the hilt and the decoration seem to confirm this. during this period, the decorative arts of india progressed into an 'exhibition' standard. the great exhibition of 1851 kick started this, to be followed on by the parisian exhibition and the many durbars back in india. it was during this time, that the artists were brought forward and their art was recognised. they left their marks like the more traditional artist, even signing their work (in rare circumstance). its strange as before this period, it was the bladesmith that took all the glory.
i wonder if it was the british that could take the credit for this, recognising the pure artistry of the time. most tend to think of the british as the raj, and forget the legacy they left in people like hendley, watt and going back to william jones and the asiatic society. these outstanding individuals all became heavily involved in the local arts, and in many cases became patrons and promoted them amongst the locals, as well as their fellow countrymen back home.
the dehli exhibition of 1903 (catalogued by watt) is a good example of this, as it gave these artists from all over india a chance to come forth and take a bow.
i believe jens sword to be of this period, and one where the artist is showing off his art to a captive public.
only jens can decide whether the knuckle guard is en suite. the scroll design (where the quillions should be) seems complete and you would think that one side would 'reach out' to incorporate a knuckle guard. however, i would be inclined to assume it was of the same period and not later. if the colour of gold and style of decoration match, i would think it right. i wouldnt be detered by the screw thread. this did exist, expecially in pieces of this period. i have seen pommels unsrew and in one case, hold a maker signature under the pommel disc (hidden from view). other exampes of screw thread appear commonly on axes and on sword canes, crutches, combination weapons etc.
jeffs missing knuckle guard could be for different reasons, all speculative. i do know one thing, that the knuckle guard itself, being a 'thin' protrusion is prone to 'metal fatigue' when it has been bent, then straightened a few times. this seems to the most obvious reason for its disappearance, although intentional removal can also be an option.
also, i hope the desription of a similar hilt in the polish book doesnt lead any people astray. the book itself is notoriously mis-described and i done believe this to be persian for a second. i suppose, for once, the term 'indo-persian' can be justified as it is indeed indian with a persian influence.

[Jeff D]

Thanks B.I. for the reply. I think Dr. Zygulski may have been thrown off by the Assadulla cartouche and the shamshir style blade. My sword is more obviously a Indian tulwar with a riccasso even though mine has the Assadulla cartouche as well.
BTW what do you think the eyes were made of?

Jeff

[Jens Nordlunde]

B.I. very well described – thank you. Are you looking into the ‘eyes’, or should I do it?
I think you did a very fine, and interesting research, which all of us can learn from.
On this forum, it should not be so much guessing, as research and knowning.

Jens

[B.I]

hi jens/jeff,
i'm afraid the eyes are up to you guys
i've never had much interest in stones, prescious or otherwise. as my collective taste go early, rather than decorative, i rarely need to unearth any real information on this. i did have a deccani dagger with a stone hilt which was a nightmare to research. it seems that everyone is an expert and everyone disagrees. i think the closest i got was jasper, but i still wasnt convinced. i know the stone predated the 17thC (or sat comfortably within it)but the islamic 'experts' all had opinions that i could tear apart which but a few simple questions. its funny how people tend to fall apart when you hit them with a totally unreasonable and completely unexpected 'why?'
so i bow out gracefully. give me a piece of indian metal and i'll ramble on way past desertion (i am by own best audience) but jewellery is out of my sphere.

[Jens Nordlunde]

Well Jeff, I think B.I. has taken a step back, and left the scene to the experts – the two of us (lol).
I have mailed to a friend in Poland, to ask what kind of stones the eyes, on the sword shown in Persian Arms and Armour are made of. When I have an answer I will let you know.
Should I start guessing I would say, that you most probable can use any colour of stone, as stones on a hilt are likely to fall out, and would be replaced with what ever stone was at hand – I think.
Before I forget it, remember that the colours have a symbolic value and meaning - so maybe 'any colour' is not correct.

If you have a look at the picture, you will notice something strange about the ‘stones’. Some of them are ‘dead’ and some have a nice colour. These are not stones; these are glass/crystal, with coloured metal foil behind, which gives the colour. The fittings are lead with rests of gold foil. When the dagger was new, it must have looked very nice. Even when they used gemstones, they often used metal foil behind the stones to make the light reflect better if the hilt was Jade. Was the hilt gold or silver they made sure that the surface behind the stone was scratched, to get the same effect.

[Jens Nordlunde]

Come to think of it, I remember to have seen red (ruby), green (emerald), white (diamond) and black (onyx?) eyes, but I don’t remember to have seen yellow, or pink eyes for that matter.
The symbolic meaning is important, just like with any form of decoration used on the Indian weapons.

Jens

[Jeff D]

Thank you Jens, for all your effort. I really do appreciate it!

Jeff