Photo thread: ROYALTY SWORDS , ARMS & ARMOUR from around the world

B.I · 22nd February 2005, 10:25 PM

the sword of ranjit singh from the wallace collection. i lifted this information from a website -

'This magnificent sword or ‘shamshir’ is one of the greatest Sikh treasures in Britain. It was acquired in Paris at some time prior to 1865 by Lord Hertford, the father of Sir Richard Wallace, founder of the Wallace Collection. He exhibited it in Paris at the ‘Musée Rétrospectif’ exhibition in that year, describing it as having belonged to ‘Runjet Sing’… an attribution that has never been doubted. It is a particularly fine and rare example of its type, the mounts being of solid gold rather than gold-damascened iron as was more usually the case with such weapons; only the most important and prestigious of swords were as richly mounted as this. The condition throughout is truly wonderful; the sword even retains its original scabbard, carrying belt and straps, all similarly mounted in pure gold. The grip is carved from exotic and highly-prized walrus ivory, probably imported at vast cost from northern Europe, while the blade is of ‘watered’ steel, a cast-crystalline crucible steel highly prized for its ‘watered’ pattern, still clearly discernable on the blade’s surface.'

an interesting point to note, this sword is item 1404 in the catalogue of 1916. laking was thorough in his appraisal, using all the accession notes (what very little there was seeing as the mojority of the pieces came from a handful of parisian auctions), his own scant knowledge of oriental arms and an apparant expert from bombay. i've tried finding more info on this 'expert' but there isnt much, although i have one more good avenue to look into. from what i gather, his 'expertise' was in the languages and terminology. this is, of course, up for debate as there are many mistakes within the catalogue. as i said, besides the mistakes, laking was thorough in including all the information he had at the time. so, why was ranjit singh never mentioned in the catalogue, which described the sword as an abbasi shamshir. another point of note. in the catalogue it describes the blade as having the 'finest qara khorassan watering'. i have no interest in terminology, nor in the many names of watering. as a collector, i know the ones that reflect the price and this is the only thing that interests me. and so, the blade holds a good strong, darkened pattern, but it is colloquelly known as 'sham' watering and this is of the lowest (commercially and finantially) grade. whether anyone would agree on the term 'sham' for this type of watering is by the by. my point is that collectively, in this day and age it would not be considered too highly (in comparison to other more striking patterns). its strange how tastes and opinions change. either way, the blade is of no consequence as the solid gold mounts and a ranjit singh association is enough to bolster the esteem of this sword were it in auction.
i've no interest in sikh pieces, as they normally are relatively late but may try and find more info on this as it would be good to know when and why the ranjit singh name was attached. although widely published, not much more info has been offered on this sword, unless anyone knows differently. hertfords knowledge and interest in oriental arms was surprisingly passing and more in the line of victorian orientalism, or 'something to hang in the billiards room'. so, if he did offer the ranjit singh attribution (which i kind of doubt due to its ommision in the catalogue) he must have had the information from the sale catalogue. i've seen many of the oriental catalogues that he owned and saw nothing of note. they are not much use as they mostly describe not much more than 'a persian sword'. an interesting point, is that when lady wallace donated the collection to the nation, she sold of his library which included the original sale catalogues. these were brought back (supposedly complete) some 30 years later from a well known aniquarian bookseller in london. there is scant handwritten notes as although hertford bought from auction, in many cases he used 'buyers' like spitzer to do the bidding for him.

ksbhati · 23rd February 2005, 08:36 AM

Hi B.I.

Nice post with an interesting connection. Just a thought....The dagger in the painting does not have the top scabbard mount whereas the actual dagger does....?? Do you think the painter could have made a mistake like that considering that he was doing a painting with so much realistic detail...that too for the emperor of India...where mistakes could mean the loss of your head...?? Must admit though that it does look like the emperors dagger

.

Regards,

Karni

B.I · 23rd February 2005, 09:43 AM

hi karni,
no, i think that the dagger in the miniature just backs up the quote from jahangirs memoirs -
''to make dagger-hilts of a shape that was approved at this time''
i think that with the al saba dagger, the wallace dagger and the one displayed in the miniature which shows a slightly different form of decoration, it shows the popularity of this style of weapon during jahangirs reign. as the 3 pieces show a very high quality and a display of wealth, it would be hard to assume that the al saba piece was the one described and revered by jahangir. i would say it probably was, but who knows.
what jahangir actually said was -

''one hilt came out in such a way as to create astonishment. it turned out of all the seven colours, and some of the flowers looked as if a skillful painter had depicted them in black lines round it with a wonder-working pencil. in short, it was so delicate that i wish it never to be apart from me for a moment. of all the gems of great price that are in the treasury i consider it the most precious. on thursday i girded it auspiciously with joy around my waist, and the masters who in their completion had exercised great skill and taken pains were rewarded, Ustad Puran with the gift of an elephant, a dress of honour, and a golden bracelet for the wrist, which the people of india call kara, and Kalyan with the title of 'aja ib-dast' (wondrous hand), and increased mansab (rank), a dress of honour, and a jewelled bracelet, and in the smae way everyone according to his circumstances and skill recieved favours.''

welch says the al saba dagger could have been made by these two masters, but doesnt actually commit to it being the one described in these memoirs. maybe it was, but i am not sure what the seven colours he referred to was.
either way, i think all can be connected to the courts of jahangir, which is provenance enough.

Jens Nordlunde · 23rd February 2005, 10:46 AM

Hi Brian, have a look here, this could be the ‘seven colours’ mentioned. Here is the link. http://www.colorsystem.com/projekte/engl/66isle.htm
'In the Islamic tradition, colour is primarily seen from a metaphysical viewpoint which allows the duality of light and shadow to be recognised as the continuous possibility pervading the universe. The number seven dominates the traditional palette of colours, which are arranged in groups of three and four, with the two systems being linked. One order is based on the three colours black, white and sandlewood (related to the colour of the earth), while the other is centred on the four colours red, yellow green and blue.'

B.I · 23rd February 2005, 11:00 AM

hey jens,
where on earth do you find this information

its a very interesting concept and one i would normally steer clear of, except that i know that this would have played a significant part in the thinking of the day.
however, 'The number seven is of great cosmological significance' makes me want to start burning josticks

i think these seven colours must have been of great importance of the time, enough for jahangir to make an issue of it.
fascinating stuff!

ksbhati · 23rd February 2005, 06:02 PM

Thank you B.I.

Point well taken. Fascinating stuff really....!!

Regards,

Karni

Jens Nordlunde · 23rd February 2005, 08:45 PM

I know Brian, the numbers were very important, as were the colours, the flowers and the animals. Unfortunately many does not recognise this to day - that may be why they find it so difficult to understand it all - the few tho tries to understand!

22nd February 2005, 10:25 PM	#1
B.I Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 485	ranjit singh the sword of ranjit singh from the wallace collection. i lifted this information from a website - 'This magnificent sword or ‘shamshir’ is one of the greatest Sikh treasures in Britain. It was acquired in Paris at some time prior to 1865 by Lord Hertford, the father of Sir Richard Wallace, founder of the Wallace Collection. He exhibited it in Paris at the ‘Musée Rétrospectif’ exhibition in that year, describing it as having belonged to ‘Runjet Sing’… an attribution that has never been doubted. It is a particularly fine and rare example of its type, the mounts being of solid gold rather than gold-damascened iron as was more usually the case with such weapons; only the most important and prestigious of swords were as richly mounted as this. The condition throughout is truly wonderful; the sword even retains its original scabbard, carrying belt and straps, all similarly mounted in pure gold. The grip is carved from exotic and highly-prized walrus ivory, probably imported at vast cost from northern Europe, while the blade is of ‘watered’ steel, a cast-crystalline crucible steel highly prized for its ‘watered’ pattern, still clearly discernable on the blade’s surface.' an interesting point to note, this sword is item 1404 in the catalogue of 1916. laking was thorough in his appraisal, using all the accession notes (what very little there was seeing as the mojority of the pieces came from a handful of parisian auctions), his own scant knowledge of oriental arms and an apparant expert from bombay. i've tried finding more info on this 'expert' but there isnt much, although i have one more good avenue to look into. from what i gather, his 'expertise' was in the languages and terminology. this is, of course, up for debate as there are many mistakes within the catalogue. as i said, besides the mistakes, laking was thorough in including all the information he had at the time. so, why was ranjit singh never mentioned in the catalogue, which described the sword as an abbasi shamshir. another point of note. in the catalogue it describes the blade as having the 'finest qara khorassan watering'. i have no interest in terminology, nor in the many names of watering. as a collector, i know the ones that reflect the price and this is the only thing that interests me. and so, the blade holds a good strong, darkened pattern, but it is colloquelly known as 'sham' watering and this is of the lowest (commercially and finantially) grade. whether anyone would agree on the term 'sham' for this type of watering is by the by. my point is that collectively, in this day and age it would not be considered too highly (in comparison to other more striking patterns). its strange how tastes and opinions change. either way, the blade is of no consequence as the solid gold mounts and a ranjit singh association is enough to bolster the esteem of this sword were it in auction. i've no interest in sikh pieces, as they normally are relatively late but may try and find more info on this as it would be good to know when and why the ranjit singh name was attached. although widely published, not much more info has been offered on this sword, unless anyone knows differently. hertfords knowledge and interest in oriental arms was surprisingly passing and more in the line of victorian orientalism, or 'something to hang in the billiards room'. so, if he did offer the ranjit singh attribution (which i kind of doubt due to its ommision in the catalogue) he must have had the information from the sale catalogue. i've seen many of the oriental catalogues that he owned and saw nothing of note. they are not much use as they mostly describe not much more than 'a persian sword'. an interesting point, is that when lady wallace donated the collection to the nation, she sold of his library which included the original sale catalogues. these were brought back (supposedly complete) some 30 years later from a well known aniquarian bookseller in london. there is scant handwritten notes as although hertford bought from auction, in many cases he used 'buyers' like spitzer to do the bidding for him. Attached Images Last edited by B.I; 23rd February 2005 at 11:03 AM.

23rd February 2005, 08:36 AM	#2
ksbhati Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Rajasthan, INDIA Posts: 25	Re: Jehangirs Chilanum... Hi B.I. Nice post with an interesting connection. Just a thought....The dagger in the painting does not have the top scabbard mount whereas the actual dagger does....?? Do you think the painter could have made a mistake like that considering that he was doing a painting with so much realistic detail...that too for the emperor of India...where mistakes could mean the loss of your head...?? Must admit though that it does look like the emperors dagger . Regards, Karni

23rd February 2005, 09:43 AM	#3
B.I Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 485	hi karni, no, i think that the dagger in the miniature just backs up the quote from jahangirs memoirs - ''to make dagger-hilts of a shape that was approved at this time'' i think that with the al saba dagger, the wallace dagger and the one displayed in the miniature which shows a slightly different form of decoration, it shows the popularity of this style of weapon during jahangirs reign. as the 3 pieces show a very high quality and a display of wealth, it would be hard to assume that the al saba piece was the one described and revered by jahangir. i would say it probably was, but who knows. what jahangir actually said was - ''one hilt came out in such a way as to create astonishment. it turned out of all the seven colours, and some of the flowers looked as if a skillful painter had depicted them in black lines round it with a wonder-working pencil. in short, it was so delicate that i wish it never to be apart from me for a moment. of all the gems of great price that are in the treasury i consider it the most precious. on thursday i girded it auspiciously with joy around my waist, and the masters who in their completion had exercised great skill and taken pains were rewarded, Ustad Puran with the gift of an elephant, a dress of honour, and a golden bracelet for the wrist, which the people of india call kara, and Kalyan with the title of 'aja ib-dast' (wondrous hand), and increased mansab (rank), a dress of honour, and a jewelled bracelet, and in the smae way everyone according to his circumstances and skill recieved favours.'' welch says the al saba dagger could have been made by these two masters, but doesnt actually commit to it being the one described in these memoirs. maybe it was, but i am not sure what the seven colours he referred to was. either way, i think all can be connected to the courts of jahangir, which is provenance enough.

23rd February 2005, 10:46 AM	#4
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	Hi Brian, have a look here, this could be the ‘seven colours’ mentioned. Here is the link. http://www.colorsystem.com/projekte/engl/66isle.htm 'In the Islamic tradition, colour is primarily seen from a metaphysical viewpoint which allows the duality of light and shadow to be recognised as the continuous possibility pervading the universe. The number seven dominates the traditional palette of colours, which are arranged in groups of three and four, with the two systems being linked. One order is based on the three colours black, white and sandlewood (related to the colour of the earth), while the other is centred on the four colours red, yellow green and blue.'

23rd February 2005, 11:00 AM	#5
B.I Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 485	hey jens, where on earth do you find this information its a very interesting concept and one i would normally steer clear of, except that i know that this would have played a significant part in the thinking of the day. however, 'The number seven is of great cosmological significance' makes me want to start burning josticks i think these seven colours must have been of great importance of the time, enough for jahangir to make an issue of it. fascinating stuff!

23rd February 2005, 06:02 PM	#6
ksbhati Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Rajasthan, INDIA Posts: 25	Thank you B.I. Point well taken. Fascinating stuff really....!! Regards, Karni

23rd February 2005, 08:45 PM	#7
Jens Nordlunde Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Europe Posts: 2,718	I know Brian, the numbers were very important, as were the colours, the flowers and the animals. Unfortunately many does not recognise this to day - that may be why they find it so difficult to understand it all - the few tho tries to understand!