another purchase!!!

chevalier · 13th July 2008, 11:47 PM

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...m=270253075781

really excited about this one!

Rick · 14th July 2008, 12:03 AM

I think you did well .
Post close up pictures of the rectangular stamp at the forte when it arrives .

chevalier · 14th July 2008, 03:11 PM

will do

Jim McDougall · 14th July 2008, 04:32 PM

Nicely done Chevalier! I know you've had that check burnin' a hole in your pocket, but as earlier noted...fire for effect and this one is pretty much a bullseye

While I always enjoy ebay descriptions, "kilij tulwar" is in essence fairly well placed. The pronounced yelman is indeed like those of the Ottoman sabres known as 'kilij' , but both of those terms are general terms for sword in Turkey and in India respectively.

The style of blade reflects influence of sabres from earlier nomadic tribes from the steppes, and in my opinion the blade on this one is probably 18th century. It seems that the 19th century tulwars' blades typically did not have the yelman, however I cannot entirely discount possible Ottoman influence. The cartouche in upper ricasso area will probably carry Urdu script as many of these early blades are so marked, in fact many of these blades are even into the 17th century, as on one tulwar blade I once owned (in this case there was a trisula in blade center, check Rawson for illustration of these blades).

The hilt is clearly 19th century work and the sharp center bulge in the grip and elongated rectangular langets suggest Rajasthan, possibly latter period.
The pronounced ricasso seen on the blade is the often discussed 'Indian ricasso' characteristic of native Indian blades and has led to many spirited debates on whether it had practical functionality (whether the forefinger was wrapped around guard) or whether it was simply for sharpening terminus.

I cannot recall offhand the significance of the notably large disc, but hopefully Jens might note significance. It seems it was suggested by Pant that there might be regional preference, but many of those observations may be compromised by research and evidence contradicting in the years after publication.

Best regards,
Jim

chevalier · 15th July 2008, 01:23 AM

something i noticed right away was that the blade was shorter (only 23 inches long) than most tulwars ive seen before. perhaps this made it a better hand to hand combat weapon than the longer horseback tulwars?

maybe it was an infantry weaspon?

ariel · 15th July 2008, 01:48 AM

My understanding is that the hilt with an acute widening in the middle (almost triangular) is characteristic of Sikh Khalsa.

13th July 2008, 11:47 PM	#1
chevalier Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 119	another purchase!!! http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...m=270253075781 really excited about this one!

14th July 2008, 12:03 AM	#2
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,263	I think you did well . Post close up pictures of the rectangular stamp at the forte when it arrives .

14th July 2008, 03:11 PM	#3
chevalier Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 119	will do

14th July 2008, 04:32 PM	#4
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 9,769	Nicely done Chevalier! I know you've had that check burnin' a hole in your pocket, but as earlier noted...fire for effect and this one is pretty much a bullseye While I always enjoy ebay descriptions, "kilij tulwar" is in essence fairly well placed. The pronounced yelman is indeed like those of the Ottoman sabres known as 'kilij' , but both of those terms are general terms for sword in Turkey and in India respectively. The style of blade reflects influence of sabres from earlier nomadic tribes from the steppes, and in my opinion the blade on this one is probably 18th century. It seems that the 19th century tulwars' blades typically did not have the yelman, however I cannot entirely discount possible Ottoman influence. The cartouche in upper ricasso area will probably carry Urdu script as many of these early blades are so marked, in fact many of these blades are even into the 17th century, as on one tulwar blade I once owned (in this case there was a trisula in blade center, check Rawson for illustration of these blades). The hilt is clearly 19th century work and the sharp center bulge in the grip and elongated rectangular langets suggest Rajasthan, possibly latter period. The pronounced ricasso seen on the blade is the often discussed 'Indian ricasso' characteristic of native Indian blades and has led to many spirited debates on whether it had practical functionality (whether the forefinger was wrapped around guard) or whether it was simply for sharpening terminus. I cannot recall offhand the significance of the notably large disc, but hopefully Jens might note significance. It seems it was suggested by Pant that there might be regional preference, but many of those observations may be compromised by research and evidence contradicting in the years after publication. Best regards, Jim

15th July 2008, 01:23 AM	#5
chevalier Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 119	something i noticed right away was that the blade was shorter (only 23 inches long) than most tulwars ive seen before. perhaps this made it a better hand to hand combat weapon than the longer horseback tulwars? maybe it was an infantry weaspon?

15th July 2008, 01:48 AM	#6
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	My understanding is that the hilt with an acute widening in the middle (almost triangular) is characteristic of Sikh Khalsa.