Cut steel decorations on Indian arms

ariel · 5th November 2019, 01:47 AM

Marius,
See Rawson’s pics of Madras swords in the V&A museum. Also, chapter 8 in Elgood. They do look “spear-y”, but they are constructed in a manner of Tatar-Circassian sabers: bayonnet-like tip and the rest is for slashing. See Pant, vol.2: there was a special name for such swords in Sanskrit, shulagra, i. e. Spear- pointed sword.

The tip of the blade is sharp on both edges usable for cutting, and below it there is a perfect double-edged blade fully suitable for classical cutting. Tips of the sword blades were not used for real cutting: see Turkish Palas with a sign 8-10” inches off the tip, indicating the desired point of impact.
The blade is almost 27”; I have several Tulwar/pulwars with blades of such length and shorter.

But let’s assume for a moment that you are correct, and the blade is from a spear. Still, it is not a recent marriage: patination is old, including the rivets.

Kronckew is right: weapons were expensive and every usable part was “...fixed, recycled, rehilted, reshaped, resharpened, rebladed, repurposed, repaired ...until there was nothing left.”

I would love it to be like that.

mahratt · 5th November 2019, 04:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ariel

The blade is almost 27”

I would love it to be like that.

Unfortunately, our desires and reality do not always coincide.
It was not by chance that I asked about the size of the blade ... If we look at the spear tip from the site of Artzi Yarom, which I posted in the subject, and read its description, we will see that the dimensions of the spear tip blade coincide perfectly with the blade of Ariel's "unique sword":
http://www.oriental-arms.com/item.php?id=246
"Old rivets" is a very serious argument. That is why I said that this "unique sword" could be assembled in the first half of the 20th century, and not the day before yesterday.

It’s not very correct to link to some books, but do not post illustrations from these books. Perhaps not everyone who reads this topic has the books of Rawson’s, Elgood, and Pant. And these people will not be able to find out that you are a little distorting reality. I have books that you have named. Unfortunately, in none of the books you have mentioned is there an Indian sword with a blade like that on your “unique sword”.

You can continue to fantasize about the "uniqueness" of your "sword". But you can once again analyze provided by information about spear heads from India and remember that in India dealers of antique weapons for the "white sahibs" have been selling "unique rarities" since the end of the 19th century.

Kubur · 5th November 2019, 10:11 AM

I agree with Mahrat and Marius, it's a spear.
I agree with Ariel made with two old parts.
I agree with Mahrat probably done during the early to mid 20th c for connoisseurs tourists.
It's very decorative anyway.

ariel · 5th November 2019, 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kubur

I agree with Ariel made with two old parts.

Good for me!
As to when: see my earlier post: “When, - is another question :-), but historically they might have been married 300-400 years ago. And still holding strong:-)”
Thanks Kubur!

Kubur · 5th November 2019, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ariel

Good for me!
As to when: see my earlier post: “When, - is another question :-), but historically they might have been married 300-400 years ago. And still holding strong:-)”
Thanks Kubur!

Hi Ariel
If the two pieces are late 18th or early 19th (for the hilt).
It's true that we don't know when they were connected together.
However - and it's just my opinion - (not supported by facts):
the whole piece doesnt look very practical, it's the reason why I think the piece is late 19th or even first part of 20thc.

ariel · 5th November 2019, 07:55 PM

Kubur,
So many Indian weapons do not look "practical" to us: pata, aradam/arapusta, bank, all those snake-like swords, supermassive teghas, old South Indian swords ( see Rawson), Nayar swords etc, etc.
This one, in comparison to many of them, looks eminently practical: it can stab easily and slash without problems. Moreover, switching fro the original " old Indian" handle to the " basket" one provided good hand protection. The length of the blade is entirely within the range of the " very practical" tulwars/pulwars. So, we just cannot exclude the possibility that it was created with a perfectly fighting purpose in mind. Or, if we are " criticisers", that it is a souvenir one. Go figure...
On top of that, many of the " non-practical" ones had hidden religious meanings that we just do not understand.

I honestly have no idea how old this one is: it can date from early 18th century or from the end of 19th. The unnerving thing is that we just do not have any objective parameters except for the physical conditions of the blade and the handle. Brazing could have been done at any time within this period. Handles were replaced left and right. Gut feelings can, and far too often are, deceptive and prejudiced one way or another.

Whether we like it or not, we have to accept it as it is.

mahratt · 5th November 2019, 08:57 PM

Dear Ariel, I understand that it is very unpleasant to be disappointed in a item that you considered "rare" and "unique." But obviously, That this is a “unique” souvenir. May be he is combined the early 20th century, maybe even the late 19th century. Nevertheless, this a souvenir.
And do not try to come up for this souvenir "practicality" or "religious meaning". Otherwise, you can run to extremes and start looking for the "sacred" and "combat" meaning of the forks or spoons ... After all, we understand that a plug can be stuck in the eye and kill a person.

5th November 2019, 01:47 AM	#1
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Marius, See Rawson’s pics of Madras swords in the V&A museum. Also, chapter 8 in Elgood. They do look “spear-y”, but they are constructed in a manner of Tatar-Circassian sabers: bayonnet-like tip and the rest is for slashing. See Pant, vol.2: there was a special name for such swords in Sanskrit, shulagra, i. e. Spear- pointed sword. The tip of the blade is sharp on both edges usable for cutting, and below it there is a perfect double-edged blade fully suitable for classical cutting. Tips of the sword blades were not used for real cutting: see Turkish Palas with a sign 8-10” inches off the tip, indicating the desired point of impact. The blade is almost 27”; I have several Tulwar/pulwars with blades of such length and shorter. But let’s assume for a moment that you are correct, and the blade is from a spear. Still, it is not a recent marriage: patination is old, including the rivets. Kronckew is right: weapons were expensive and every usable part was “...fixed, recycled, rehilted, reshaped, resharpened, rebladed, repurposed, repaired ...until there was nothing left.” I would love it to be like that. Last edited by ariel; 5th November 2019 at 02:03 AM.

5th November 2019, 10:11 AM	#3
Kubur Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 2,145	I agree with Mahrat and Marius, it's a spear. I agree with Ariel made with two old parts. I agree with Mahrat probably done during the early to mid 20th c for connoisseurs tourists. It's very decorative anyway.

5th November 2019, 07:55 PM	#6
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	Kubur, So many Indian weapons do not look "practical" to us: pata, aradam/arapusta, bank, all those snake-like swords, supermassive teghas, old South Indian swords ( see Rawson), Nayar swords etc, etc. This one, in comparison to many of them, looks eminently practical: it can stab easily and slash without problems. Moreover, switching fro the original " old Indian" handle to the " basket" one provided good hand protection. The length of the blade is entirely within the range of the " very practical" tulwars/pulwars. So, we just cannot exclude the possibility that it was created with a perfectly fighting purpose in mind. Or, if we are " criticisers", that it is a souvenir one. Go figure... On top of that, many of the " non-practical" ones had hidden religious meanings that we just do not understand. I honestly have no idea how old this one is: it can date from early 18th century or from the end of 19th. The unnerving thing is that we just do not have any objective parameters except for the physical conditions of the blade and the handle. Brazing could have been done at any time within this period. Handles were replaced left and right. Gut feelings can, and far too often are, deceptive and prejudiced one way or another. Whether we like it or not, we have to accept it as it is.

5th November 2019, 08:57 PM	#7
mahratt Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Russia Posts: 1,042	Dear Ariel, I understand that it is very unpleasant to be disappointed in a item that you considered "rare" and "unique." But obviously, That this is a “unique” souvenir. May be he is combined the early 20th century, maybe even the late 19th century. Nevertheless, this a souvenir. And do not try to come up for this souvenir "practicality" or "religious meaning". Otherwise, you can run to extremes and start looking for the "sacred" and "combat" meaning of the forks or spoons ... After all, we understand that a plug can be stuck in the eye and kill a person.