Indian pseudoshashka

[ariel]

We are all familiar with the so-called Afghani pseudoshashkas ( as per Lebedinsky): Afghani blade, stamp of Mazar-i-Sharif mosque, no guard, pommel with elongated ears.
Here is an unusual variant that just ended on e-bay.
Indian blade ( even with Indian ricasso), no stamps, steel fittings a la tunkou, D-guard, round and solid pommel.

In short, as many differences as one can imagine.
My guess it is from the India/Afghan border area, exhibiting a curious amalgam of both traditions. Likely a tribal manufacture.

It looks even older than the usual Afghani ones, although who knows..

[Kubur]

Hi Ariel,
I think it's a crapmix of everything, it's also a pseudo yatagan, look at the Turkish ricasso added to hide the combinaison of different elements...
Best,

[ariel]

If you think it is a recent work, I disagree: all parts look genuine , old and worn. Yes, there are signs of recent repair ( glue under the cheeks), but my guess the wood has shrunk. The D-guard is integral to the bolster:


If you think it is a crazy old mixture of styles, we are on the same page.


And I would not call it Turkish ricasso: similar motive is seen on old Persian examples, just as a quick example.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

In my view this is genuine. I would be surprised if this was a one off morphed example but moreover a style of sword earlier than expected... an earlier variant of Shaska . Ariel over to you on the possibilities but I am looking for suitable swords to compare it with... Showing below the treatment given to Yatagan throats of blades... I begin to think this form was an earlier style of Shashka?... :shrug:

[Jim McDougall]

Ibrahiim, nicely done finding that example and noting the comparative prospects with yataghan gestalt. It is truly a weapon worth discussing and evaluating further rather than dismissing it as some sort of hodgepodge. I know I have seen something similar but have yet to find it, and it seems there are is a group of sabre types which look as if they are typical sabre hilts sans their guards.

I am with Ariel in his assessments on this being a genuinely fabricated older (certainly 19th c) weapon. These kinds of hybrids have always had some degree of presence in ethnographic weapons, as innovative armorers often used whatever materials and components they had at hand.

The use of 'pseudo' in terming these weapons or for that matter any weapon form is not really in my opinion acceptable, as it implies direct connection between forms which may not have any direct or linear connection. For example, in the case of the Bukharen sabres without guard, according to well informed authorities are not at all developed from shashkas, which has sometimes been suggested. This carries into the Afghan/Uzbek case as well though obviously there must be some degree of influence present.

I think that Russian presence in these Central Asian regions certainly must have had certain impacts, if only temporal, and of course in the latter part of the century, Caucasian shashkas were known in Russian forces.

What is interesting in this example is the clearly fashioned tunkou, which compellingly recalls yataghan or Ottoman influence also very much present in degree. The ricasso recalls Indian blade forms coupled with the sweeping radius of the shamshir

Interesting weapon, and perfect for sword forum discussion!!!

[ariel]

Ibrahiim,

Here is my version of your request:
IMHO, Bukharan ( not Afghani, as per Lebedinsky!) pseudoshashkas ( sorry for a totally inappropriate term, but for want of a better one...) derive their origin not from the shashkas of Russian invaders and subsequent occupants, but from Khybers or their earlier analogs. Here is the series of graded modifications: classical Khyber at the top, early Bukharan " shashka" in the middle ( straight blade, almost triangular geometry) and classical Bukharan "shashka" ( slightly curved blade, almost "hatchet" point). The last two swords are attributed to Bukhara ( more precisely Central Asia) partly by the characteristic feature of 5 rivets ( 2x1X2).

Jim,

In a little while a paper one of my Russian colleagues and I have written together will appear in a major arms history journal. It will be dealing with the origin of yataghan blades and a large part of it will be referring to tunkou, the heretofore forgotten or neglected element of Ottoman yataghans.
Just in brief, it is not an inherently Ottoman, but a Turkic element, tracing back to nomads, Seljuks and Mongols included. This is why we see it or its renditions on some Persian and Indo-Persian blades and even in some very early European iconographic sources.

And I completely agree with Ibrahiim's point: the eared pommel of Caucasian shashka likely stems from the same element of the Ottoman yataghans.

[ariel]

For those who assumed that this bizarre hodge-podge of different styles was a unique example, here is another one, just ended on Dan Morphy's auction.

We seem to be talking about a rare pattern.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

For those who assumed that this bizarre hodge-podge of different styles was a unique example, here is another one, just ended on Dan Morphy's auction.

We seem to be talking about a rare pattern.



Keep it coming Ariel ... This is an amazing thread. :shrug:

[ariel]

How funny: the same pattern is discussed here


http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?p=203006&posted=1#post203006


Perhaps, merging the threads might be in order?

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

How funny: the same pattern is discussed here


http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?p=203006&posted=1#post203006


Perhaps, merging the threads might be in order?


I agree Ariel... These are surely the same form....or am I losing the plot??

[kai]

Hello Ariel,

Thanks for bringing these up! Did you won the first example?

I agree that the hilt of both sabres seem to be of the same type and possibly related to the hilt type in the other thread. A probable third example got posted there and I'm attaching it below for reference (with the brass fittings and apparently different workmanship it may be more recent).

Do the blades and the single scabbard allow any attribution? Any feature that doesn't fit with a Deccani origin?

All hilts are fastened with 3 rivets and seem to be of full tang construction. It is interesting that the first example seems to represent a bird's head while the third is much more abstract and the second one seems to approach the more bulbous pommel style. The langet-like feature seems to be separate from the bolster+guard in the first example.

I'm not sure that merging both threads is going to help our ongoing discussion; especially, since we haven't yet established that these really share the same origin. The cross-referencing should do for directing attention to the possibly related threads, I guess.

Regards,
Kai

[kai]

Hello Ariel,

The inversed-tunkou(-like) feature of yataghans as well as the tunkou of East Asian blades will both originate from the langet-like construction utilised to secure South Indian blades. In the swords discussed here and in the companion thread, this feature is very similar to yataghan, indeed. If this isn't a surviving older Indian or central Asian element and really a Turk influence, would the time line make an Ottoman-Deccani or a Turk-"Afghan" cultural transfer more likely?

Regards,
Kai

[ariel]

I have already expressed my opinion on that on the "other" thread.
Again, IMHO, the "tunkou" has nothing to do with the S.Indian technique of attaching the blade to the handle.
Was the "tunkou" brought by the ancient nomads through their successors ( Babur in India, for example, Seljuks in Iran and Turkey) or later on by the Ottoman influences, I do not know for now, and this is an immensely important question.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

I have already expressed my opinion on that on the "other" thread.
Again, IMHO, the "tunkou" has nothing to do with the S.Indian technique of attaching the blade to the handle.
Was the "tunkou" brought by the ancient nomads through their successors ( Babur in India, for example, Seljuks in Iran and Turkey) or later on by the Ottoman influences, I do not know for now, and this is an immensely important question.

Salaams Ariel, I continue to suggest that the two threads be amalgamated...My questions are; from where does this blade style including the decoration at the throat originate and in fact what is the name of this weapon and where is it from? The use of the term Tunkou is as you say not Indian however, we may not need to get hung up on that as it is only a term which I have used rather cross pollinated from another countries form...I think we just mean the design at the throat ...but one never can tell!

In the case of this sword which I think could be a hybrid or even formed of different regional weapons and possibly a European blade we know very little of its origins but influence seems to be broad based including Pesh Kabz, Kard, Patta, and several others regarding throat decoration and from a lot of weapons with the peculiar hand guard including even Sri Lankan Kastane.... It may be nothing to do with the Yatagan or Shashka. It is for this reason...in wanting to focus on its origin that I have asked for a joining of the threads...so that the full weight of Forum can be brought to bare on this problem.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

I find a small reference to the Chinese potential nature of such weapons... Quote "
Kouming Dao

* Ho & Bronson 2004 p111
"... the [Qianlong] emperor appears to have been quite fond of non-traditional curved sabers of the Indian and Middle Eastern type, often furnished with jade hilts carved in the Indian Mughal style. Some were imitations made in the imperial armory in Beijing."

* Ho & Bronson 2004 p114 f127
"Qianlong ordered a total of sixty ceremonial curved swords on five occasions, in 1748, 1757, 1779, 1793, and 1795. Each sword was named and numbered, and all were identical in length, weight, and basic design. The scabbards were made either of red or green stingray skin and or patterned bark. The swords differed in terms of their inlaid details and the style of the hilts. Hilts made after completion of the 1757 batch were mostly in Mughal style, often with gold and inlaid gems."Unquote.

I can find not much in the way of pictures but I saw a good parrot or bird head pommel dagger in the Mughal style and place here below for reference...Regarding the Chinese connection it is interesting that a sister Chinese sword has the bolstering at the throat but reversed...more on that later...

I think it wise enough ...to consider the bolstered throat rather than just the decorative often koftgari technique in comparing the weapon and that this is where the direction of research seems to point...even though the decorative similarities may be compelling. I place some decorative reference and some knuckle guard comparison etc below...in addition. In adding the peculiar s bend blade inh an Indian style of ceremonial sword I do so to illustrate bolstering and note that many Indian weapons have something similar in their design. I say this to caution against too much emphasis on comparison to the Yatagan...although they may be related ...so may be many others.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Blade. In comparing blades ...and again the Yatagan springs to mind however, the Sosun Pata is Indias take on blades of that shape https://indiansforguns.com/viewtopic.php?t=20125#p193554 refers to blade shape and the general high class nature of the weapon in question ...possibly as a court sword...etc

With an eye on the Chinese potential
Pei Dao illustrate how the bolstering at the the throat or Tunkou is actually the reverse format of the Indian type...Shown below with the red hilt.

The Kouming Du however is known to have been influenced by Moghul form...many having been exported to India ...Shown below with the white Hilt and greenish scabbard.

Below top... are 3 swords; The top one of which may fall into the Sosun Pata blade category which was taken from Yatagan style..but is Indian. Given a high class jade or crystal hilt (for VIP/court sword use) I suggest that this is the same family ... Are we therefor looking at an amalgam of Chinese/Indian style perhaps further complicated in some having European blades added later?

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

PLEASE NOTE http://thomaschen.freewebspace.com/custom3.html where much of the groundbreaking research was carried out by Mr Philip Tom. The article notes a fashion in Chinese swords and close ties with sword influence going both ways. Swords made in Beijing were exported to India after 1761 . Further ..a common description amongst Chinese sword design was the pistol grip which is essentially the same as the bird head or parrot head hilt. Note also the practice of cutting grooves in the blade and inserting pearls which roll up and down the grooves; This is a direct copy from Indian blades of that form.

Shown in addition below is the trend in Indian blades; both sword and dagger, of decorating the throat with a cartouche done in Koftgari form but that in the project sword this is of Tunkou style essentially a reinforcement plate giving support to the hilt and enabling a tighter fit for the blade into the scabbard....something koftgari design does not do...nor was it designed to.

Given that in the late 1700s Chinese swords were exported to India it stands to reason that the Tunkou was in fact part of this design imported on these weapons but turned the other way...perhaps to satisfy Indian taste from purely an aesthetic viewpoint as it looked better? See thye Chinese form below.

Regarding the pistol grip hilt which was a Chinese ingredient it is commonly seen in Indian hiltsb although the6y a4re no slouch when it comes to
Zoomorphic hilts...The Indian parrot hilt may by now be a mixed and morphed design though birdhead hilts may go back further in Indian style and it ma6y be simply co incidental. Non the less Chinese pistol grip hilts were common during the period and as a note to the margin of this interesting design.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

It occurred to me to consider the Turkic influence and to address the very pertinent questions earlier in this thread as to the major design fashion/highlight of the project sword at the throat illustrating how India absorbed both the Koftgari and Tunkou aspects but more importantly where its own source of such style is present. Bolstered blades are common to Indian style as are koftgari decorations at the throat. Chinese weapons were quite late in the 17th C...and of a reversed Tunkou style not common in Indian swords. The time scale of Turkic cross pollination of style seems to better fit the picture moreover Hindu and Buddhist decorative style seems to indicate a far earlier transition in Indian sword decoration. See the Tibetan form below. Common to Indian, Ottoman and Chinese hilt style are the birdheads or Parrot form hilts...Zoomorphic hilts developed as a consequence of artistic and cultural style thus pistol grip design cannot be attributed specific to either except that the timeline would indicate favouring the Ottoman influence going back to Turkic influence. The knuckle guard can be seen across India and neighboring regions including the Sri Lankan Kastane but also in mainline weapons such as Tulvar etc...On blade style it is noted that Indian Sosun Pata form derived from the Ottoman Yatagan.

Thus having compared the weapon at 1 and its derivatives I conclude that this weapon probably originated in Turkic fashion spreading through Ottoman style into Indian via the influence of the Yatagan as well as additions from Indian home grown design. Although interesting the Chinese influence appears too late in proceedings and has the added hurdle of a Tunkou reversed in design placement on Chinese swords...

To compare the way influence flowed from India to China and vice versa...see Thomas chens detail at http://thomaschen.freewebspace.com/photo2.html where he notes Quote" Chinese and Islamic sabers, owing to both having a common ancestor (the Turko-Mongol saber), and also due to mutual cross-pollination and interaction, have several common features" Unquote.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Having said all that... I am acutely aware of similar form and style seeping into Afghanistan sword form...and have prepared a picture to support that below. Meanwhile your comments are invited on the discussion so far... :shrug:

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Forum Library Reference.

In a separate development I also note for readers the following thread http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2411 which is from 2006 and examines Chirkas which is another close form .. :shrug:

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

In coming to an almost full circle..I observe the style of sword in Shashka form sweeping in from the periphery of India, Turkey, Afghanistan, China Persia...and from far flung Russian form, Uzbekistan, and the Caucasus et al....

As a general comment I feel the entire blend of this style shrouded in the mists of time and though similarities abound no one form seems to have its nose in front... It appears that over the hundreds of years of flow, influence and design both from North Asian sectors and Chinese derivatives and in fact from all points of the compass with India at the centre that no one area can claim this weapon absolutely...We cannot rule out the early design flow of Turko/ Mongol style and the obvious tribal tectonic plate movement into Anatolia etc...The ear pommel Yatagan designs seem compelling with bolstered throats and where crossover copying is difficult to rule out.

The Shashka form; Below I have poured the entire shashka selection or close relatives into the same pot. My thought is that whilst there may be a common thread tying them all that in many cases this is virtually impossible to absolutely confirm but that as a general rule these weapons are similar though on the periphery and of the Shashka type.

More research is needed on the knuckle guard and pistol grip hilt although it is known that Shah Jehan designed his own Jade and Neophrite versions around the bird head theme on both swords and daggers. Meanwhile your comments are requested..

[Jim McDougall]

I have to say these are wonderful panoplies of this spectrum of amazing and exotic sword examples!
In reading through these discussions, I think it is important to remember that the word 'shashka' is simply a Russian word for sword, not otherwise specified, much in the way that the words tulwar in India; kilij in Turkey; and sa'if in Arabic are.
While these terms have become associated with specific forms in the glossaries of collectors, their use can often create semantics issues in narratives and discussions.

I would note here that while the feature known as tunkou, or the collar or sleeve at blade root of many edged weapons in Turkey, China and Central Asia is interesting as a key feature reflecting distinct influences between cultures, it is subordinate to trying to find connections with these curious sabres with knuckle guard and no other supporting cross guard.

As far as I have known, the 'tunkou' seems to have evolved in Altaic regions with nomadic steppes tribes sometime in the span of 6th-12th centuries. It seems most known exemplars are from 9th-10th ("Arms of the Yenesai Khirghiz 6-12th C", Y.S.Khudyakov, 1980, as cited in "The Mongol Warlords", David Nicolle, 1988).
In these cases these sleeves or collars were placed on the blade edge near the hilt, and according to Nicolle as others, typically are regarded as to offer more secure fit in scabbard. In other respects, it is thought to function as a sort of Indian ricasso to protect finger if over guard or perhaps drawing sword from scabbard.

It is interesting that this feature took a different placement with the Turkish application, being on the back of the blade and diagonally across seemingly as a seating for the crossguard and again to secure the hilt in scabbard.
On the Chinese examples by the 17th century, this feature again is seen.
Later it would seem that the feature became vestigially represented in koftgari on various weapons.

In "Arms and Armour of the Crusading Era 1050-1350" , David Nicolle, 1988, in example 37 A-D it is noted that asymmetrical guards occur on both edge and back of blade in swords of 9th-13th c. in regions of Kursk and Kiev in Ukraine. It is mentioned that such guards are seen in art of Afghan and Indian regions in depictions of arms.

It would seem that the influences of the arms of these various cultures and ethnic groups are profoundly confluenced over many centuries which would make specific or definitive assertions connecting these difficult at best.

With the curious examples of this thread with pistol grip, knuckle guard with recurved terminal at pommel and tunkou, it does seem they comprise a certain group of similar form. It seems there have been sabres of either shamshir or other sabre forms with the guard notably absent in Ottoman and sometimes it seems East European or 'Cossack' context, I believe Zaparozhian.

Given these possibilities, it seems to lend more compelling look toward Afghanistan and India's northern regions, further owing to the Central Asian and Russian denominators mentioned.

The recurve on the knuckle guard terminals of many northern Indian swords is often regarded as having been from Ottoman influence, just as the quillon terminals on many tulwars. The pistol grip form seems Ottoman as well.
To consider the open form of the shashka hilt, the Ottoman recurve on the guard and the Turkic tunkou of Central Asia to me seems a compelling confluence of features suggesting North India and Afghan regions for these sabres.

The images are an excavated sabre blade believed 9th century from Nishapur regions and the other an Altaic (S. Siberia) sabre of 10thc.

[ariel]

Ibrahiim,
With all due respect it seems to me that you are "lumping" different and unrelated weapons into one happy family.

This may be a necessary and inavoidable step at the beginning of any scientific inquiry, but it should be followed by a more advanced stage, I.e. "splitting".

Regretfully, we do not have actual examples of Caucasian shashkas dating to before the very beginning of 19th century. Iconographically, there are portraits of Cossack chieftains dating to the 18th century with fully developed Circassian shashkas ( to the point of that there are Russian "patriots" claiming that shashka was an originally Cossack weapon, an that Caucasians just stole the idea from them). Similarly, I am unaware of any "Bukharan" examples before the 19th century. This is not dissimilar to our ignorance of Turkish weapons prior to Mehmet II. In that part of the world weapons were actually used non-stop, the idea of museum conservation was unheard of and nobody cared enough to leave a detailed treatise with illustrations and historical analysis.

Thus, the genealogy of shashka-like sabers can only be observed "... Through a glass darkly".....

[Jim McDougall]

I have long very much admired the scholars among us who have had the tenacity and endurance to deeply study the complex histories of Central Asia, the Caucusus and the Steppes into China. Even those descriptive areas cannot possibly approach the incredible anthropological and cultural elements comprehensively.

I agree with Ibrahiim in observing the futility of trying to find distinct connection between this number of weapons having certain degree of similarity and often subtle influences and from such broad sources ethnically as well as geographically over long periods of time.

The genealogy analogy is well placed, as I personally discovered in the years I tried to accomplish my own. While often dead ends and misperceptions plagued the search, it helped to place all possibilities together in order to comprehensively keep them in perspective.

While the tunkou element is a subject unto itself, and I brought what I could discover in my earlier post......the subject of these swords as a form remains quite clouded. By collectively putting our research and ideas together however, who knows what me might discover!!!

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Ibrahiim,
With all due respect it seems to me that you are "lumping" different and unrelated weapons into one happy family.

This may be a necessary and inavoidable step at the beginning of any scientific inquiry, but it should be followed by a more advanced stage, I.e. "splitting".

Regretfully, we do not have actual examples of Caucasian shashkas dating to before the very beginning of 19th century. Iconographically, there are portraits of Cossack chieftains dating to the 18th century with fully developed Circassian shashkas ( to the point of that there are Russian "patriots" claiming that shashka was an originally Cossack weapon, an that Caucasians just stole the idea from them). Similarly, I am unaware of any "Bukharan" examples before the 19th century. This is not dissimilar to our ignorance of Turkish weapons prior to Mehmet II. In that part of the world weapons were actually used non-stop, the idea of museum conservation was unheard of and nobody cared enough to leave a detailed treatise with illustrations and historical analysis.

Thus, the genealogy of shashka-like sabers can only be observed "... Through a glass darkly".....


Salaams Ariel, Thank you for your post in which you describe the situation of my posts as being .."Through a glass darkly"... which I am sure you will agree is a far better state than "looking through mud" at a subject long ignored.
I am glad you noted my lumping all the possibilities together which is exactly what my aim was ..and since we are at the beginning (almost) on this quite peculiar form I did indeed deliberately group as many of the variants together and it can be seen what is potentially link-able and more importantly what is not. It also serves I hope, to illustrate to other readers how diverse this form may be...and in grouping together form from different points of the compass it may be seen what a vast subject this is...

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

[QUOTE=Jim McDougall]I have to say these are wonderful panoplies of this spectrum of amazing and exotic sword examples!
In reading through these discussions, I think it is important to remember that the word 'shashka' is simply a Russian word for sword, not otherwise specified, much in the way that the words tulwar in India; kilij in Turkey; and sa'if in Arabic are.
While these terms have become associated with specific forms in the glossaries of collectors, their use can often create semantics issues in narratives and discussions.

I would note here that while the feature known as tunkou, or the collar or sleeve at blade root of many edged weapons in Turkey, China and Central Asia is interesting as a key feature reflecting distinct influences between cultures, it is subordinate to trying to find connections with these curious sabres with knuckle guard and no other supporting cross guard.

As far as I have known, the 'tunkou' seems to have evolved in Altaic regions with nomadic steppes tribes sometime in the span of 6th-12th centuries. It seems most known exemplars are from 9th-10th ("Arms of the Yenesai Khirghiz 6-12th C", Y.S.Khudyakov, 1980, as cited in "The Mongol Warlords", David Nicolle, 1988).
In these cases these sleeves or collars were placed on the blade edge near the hilt, and according to Nicolle as others, typically are regarded as to offer more secure fit in scabbard. In other respects, it is thought to function as a sort of Indian ricasso to protect finger if over guard or perhaps drawing sword from scabbard.

It is interesting that this feature took a different placement with the Turkish application, being on the back of the blade and diagonally across seemingly as a seating for the crossguard and again to secure the hilt in scabbard.
On the Chinese examples by the 17th century, this feature again is seen.
Later it would seem that the feature became vestigially represented in koftgari on various weapons.

In "Arms and Armour of the Crusading Era 1050-1350" , David Nicolle, 1988, in example 37 A-D it is noted that asymmetrical guards occur on both edge and back of blade in swords of 9th-13th c. in regions of Kursk and Kiev in Ukraine. It is mentioned that such guards are seen in art of Afghan and Indian regions in depictions of arms.

It would seem that the influences of the arms of these various cultures and ethnic groups are profoundly confluenced over many centuries which would make specific or definitive assertions connecting these difficult at best.

With the curious examples of this thread with pistol grip, knuckle guard with recurved terminal at pommel and tunkou, it does seem they comprise a certain group of similar form. It seems there have been sabres of either shamshir or other sabre forms with the guard notably absent in Ottoman and sometimes it seems East European or 'Cossack' context, I believe Zaparozhian.

Given these possibilities, it seems to lend more compelling look toward Afghanistan and India's northern regions, further owing to the Central Asian and Russian denominators mentioned.

The recurve on the knuckle guard terminals of many northern Indian swords is often regarded as having been from Ottoman influence, just as the quillon terminals on many tulwars. The pistol grip form seems Ottoman as well.
To consider the open form of the shashka hilt, the Ottoman recurve on the guard and the Turkic tunkou of Central Asia to me seems a compelling confluence of features suggesting North India and Afghan regions for these sabres.

The images are an excavated sabre blade believed 9th century from Nishapur regions and the other an Altaic (S. Siberia) sabre of 10thc.[/QUOTE

Thank you very much Jim and your explanation of Tunkou is appreciated. I see a different way of engineering the knuckle guard in both examples below perhaps indicative of different regional methods of engineering the hilt/guard/Tunkou.

I thought when observing the references that it would be a good idea to have the Tunkou on the cutting edge "Chinese style" rather than the back blade since mounted it would act as a more secure fit and the safety factor of drawing swords at the gallop with a protective Tunkou would indeed save cut fingers (see red hilt Chinese sword below). Having the Tunkou on the cutting edge is probably the reason it is reversed so that more blade is covered..

I must say the knuckle guard is indeed difficult to source...as so many Indian weapons have it whilst other weapons in the same family do not...Tulvar springs to mind...I also assumed therefor that attaching a knuckle guard would be relatively easy though I puzzled at the lack of Shashka with knuckle guards ...

It seemed to me that we were looking at just that... A shashka form with knuckle guard and Tunkou.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Salaams all...I wonder what Forum makes of this? ...Said to be from Afghanistan...? Are we looking at Turko/Mongolian mounted cavalry aspects... with the Tunkou and Knuckle Guard...? :shrug:

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

It would seem logical in considering the bolstered throat arrangement that hurtling along at great speed on horseback some danger to the rider would be encountered on drawing or placing the sword back in the scabbard...to the hand and fingers. It may be why the design of the Tunkou appears on daggers...in Koftgari only (not the full Tunkou form) :) since the Warrior would almost never draw a dagger on horseback ... but would certainly draw the sword pictured above. :shrug: Actually when imagining the draw; it is the thumb which assists the backblade out of the scabbard and of course the hand.

Secondly and I favour this;...the sword would fit much more tightly in the scabbard with this bolstering ...Thus the Tunkou as noted earlier has a dual purpose.

[kai]

Hello Ibrahiim,

Thanks, that's a good find! Link?


Said to be from Afghanistan...? Are we looking at Turko/Mongolian mounted cavalry aspects... with the Tunkou and Knuckle Guard...?
The 2 examples from the other thread are too short to be cavalry swords.

Regards,
Kai

[kai]

Hello Ibrahiim,

It would seem logical in considering the bolstered throat arrangement that hurtling along at great speed on horseback some danger to the rider would be encountered on drawing or placing the sword back in the scabbard...to the hand and fingers. It may be why the design of the Tunkou appears on daggers...in Koftgari only (not the full Tunkou form) :) since the Warrior would almost never draw a dagger on horseback ... but would certainly draw the sword pictured above. :shrug: Actually when imagining the draw; it is the thumb which assists the backblade out of the scabbard and of course the hand.
I don't see how this would assist the draw. (BTW, the thumb or rather the whole hand would be in a glove, at least in war time.)

Short of very unfavourable circumstances, one would expect the blade to be cleaned before it being returned into the scabbard...


Secondly and I favour this;...the sword would fit much more tightly in the scabbard with this bolstering ...Thus the Tunkou as noted earlier has a dual purpose.
This seems to be more of an issue of workmanship (regarding the scabbard) to me. The vast majority of cavalry swords never had this feature (or functionally similar ones).

Regards,
Kai

[Jim McDougall]

Ibrahiim,
The horsehead (in India termed 'hayamukhi') is a popular motif, it seems most often found on dagger hilts from Jaipur and Rajasthan (Pant,1980, C, CCXXIII, CCI ). While Rajput favor would be presumed, this form was also known to be used by Mughals in richly carved jade, nephrite and crystal.
A full length sword with horsehead hilt and ganga yumuni (chevron) blade is also found dated 1750 from Jaipur.

It seems that the crossing of well known dagger form hilts and longer or full length sword blades is not unusual, in fact the lighter profile of this hilt with the knuckleguard brings to mind the Indian bichwa and chilanum.

The presence of the tunkou on this is notable, and would seem indeed to recall Central Asian and perhaps Ottoman influence. We have seen that the tunkou feature is well diffused through Turkic spheres, it is not as commonly seen in this style in Afghanistan and India, though similar koftgari applications are of course known.

The tunkou it seems according to scholars such as David Nicolle and Philip Tom, was indeed most likely intended for securing the sword in its scabbard. In the case of numbers of Chinese sword and others with the feature on the edge rather than back near the guard, it is presumed to have acted as an added ricasso for finger protection.

In most cases, swords without the tunkou seem to rely on the langet for placement and securing the sword in its scabbard.

This particular horsehead sword does seem to resemble those bring discussed with knuckleguard and recurved terminal as well as tunkou, and I would be inclined to agree with North India, Afghan regions.

[kai]

Hello Jim,

Thanks a lot for bearing with us ;) and your additional thoughts!

The presence of the tunkou on this is notable, and would seem indeed to recall Central Asian and perhaps Ottoman influence. We have seen that the tunkou feature is well diffused through Turkic spheres, it is not as commonly seen in this style in Afghanistan and India, though similar koftgari applications are of course known.
BTW, is there any scholarly study linking the koftgari with the real tunkou-like elements?

The tunkou it seems according to scholars such as David Nicolle and Philip Tom, was indeed most likely intended for securing the sword in its scabbard. In the case of numbers of Chinese sword and others with the feature on the edge rather than back near the guard, it is presumed to have acted as an added ricasso for finger protection.
I agree that this may be the reason for the original and later Chinese take on this (with the main element along the cutting edge). The ricasso of Indian blades will pretty much fulfil the same functions though.

I can also see that thickening the blade along the edge may help to make an easier fitting scabbard and, especially, help avoiding wear from heavy use.

However, I don't see any advantage for scabbard construction if pretty much only the back of the sword blade is thickened. For wootz blades as in the other thread this feature certainly is important to securely attach the hilt (short of functional alternatives found in Indian swords).


In most cases, swords without the tunkou seem to rely on the langet for placement and securing the sword in its scabbard.
The langet is certainly another good approach. However, a global comparison shows the majority of swords without any dedicated "locking" mechanism and good workmanship seems to go a long way in crafting scabbards with excellent fit and secure carrying/wear as well as nice draw characteristics.

Regards,
Kai

[ariel]

Tunkou was created for a particular function explained above.
Subsequently, it became a purely decorative element, largely presenting as just a decorated triangular (mostly) part of the root of the blade.
The technique of decoration varied from place to place and koftgari was used for that purpose in the places where koftgari was a popular decorative technique in general. Some examples of tunkou used magnificent combinations of gold inlay, gems etc: see yataghans of Bayazet and Suleiman. Some had massive tri-dimensional plates: Greek for example. Cheap Turkish yataghan had just an outline of tunkou scraped into the body of the blade. North African Yataghans often carried miniature crenellated round all-metal plates. And you are right: the "Indian ricasso" was quite likely a distant descendant of the original nomadic wide and blunt root.

The "orientation " of tunkou also changed: originally , the long arm of it went along the edge, but already in the 14 century we can see it going along the back of the blade.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Ibrahiim,
The horsehead (in India termed 'hayamukhi') is a popular motif, it seems most often found on dagger hilts from Jaipur and Rajasthan (Pant,1980, C, CCXXIII, CCI ). While Rajput favor would be presumed, this form was also known to be used by Mughals in richly carved jade, nephrite and crystal.
A full length sword with horsehead hilt and ganga yumuni (chevron) blade is also found dated 1750 from Jaipur.

It seems that the crossing of well known dagger form hilts and longer or full length sword blades is not unusual, in fact the lighter profile of this hilt with the knuckleguard brings to mind the Indian bichwa and chilanum.

The presence of the tunkou on this is notable, and would seem indeed to recall Central Asian and perhaps Ottoman influence. We have seen that the tunkou feature is well diffused through Turkic spheres, it is not as commonly seen in this style in Afghanistan and India, though similar koftgari applications are of course known.

The tunkou it seems according to scholars such as David Nicolle and Philip Tom, was indeed most likely intended for securing the sword in its scabbard. In the case of numbers of Chinese sword and others with the feature on the edge rather than back near the guard, it is presumed to have acted as an added ricasso for finger protection.

In most cases, swords without the tunkou seem to rely on the langet for placement and securing the sword in its scabbard.

This particular horsehead sword does seem to resemble those bring discussed with knuckleguard and recurved terminal as well as tunkou, and I would be inclined to agree with North India, Afghan regions.

Salaams Jim and thank you for the summary...It is interesting that the blades so far shown before the horses head were short or shorter than a cavalry weapon though no evidence exists that they were shortened blades...The Horses head or 'hayamukhi' which means horses face in Sanskrit...is certainly a long cavalry blade..and is possibly an inch or two shorter at the tip seemingly through wear.

What is remarkable about the hayamukhi is that all pointers seem to tick the box of "cavalry"... The Tunkou, the blade length, the knuckle guard, and of course the horses head itself...all characteristics of a cavalry weapon.

It may be early days yet to distinguish which area or areas this weapon was used in... and in what capacity. I suspect for India that the Mughal court style of shorter blade and ornate Neophrite / Crystal or other highly bling hilt form is possible especially as Jehangir was an avid hilt designer. The advent of a fighting weapon could easily be attributed to the warrior class or Rajput whilst continued reference to Afghanistan for these swords cannot be ignored.
Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[ariel]

Ibrahiim,
I think you are veering too much off into the fantasy land.
We have only recently realized that there is an Indian sword pattern we had no idea about. We still have divergent opinions whether it is North or South Indian. We have no idea of its name. Even our dedicated "indologists" are mum about any even circumstantial descriptions in the literature. In short, we have several very real examples, but no information.

Let' s take a deep breath and wait for some.

It will come, sooner or later. This forum has long memory: Kai posted the very first example in 2005, and it took us 11 years of silence to recognize that it was not a fluke.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Ibrahiim,
I think you are veering too much off into the fantasy land.
We have only recently realized that there is an Indian sword pattern we had no idea about. We still have divergent opinions whether it is North or South Indian. We have no idea of its name. Even our dedicated "indologists" are mum about any even circumstantial descriptions in the literature. In short, we have several very real examples, but no information.

Let' s take a deep breath and wait for some.

It will come, sooner or later. This forum has long memory: Kai posted the very first example in 2005, and it took us 11 years of silence to recognize that it was not a fluke.

On the contrary Ariel; I think a lot of the content places Forum on the same page... We have realized the Indian style and the Afghanistan type... We have joined the form to Chinese influence and we know the Turkic Mongolian link...

I see no fantasy land here... and if this form has been swimming about for 11 years do we not owe it a better look?... I think what you mean is that the scent went cold 11 years ago...but you have to admit it aint cold now!!

Granted we have no name yet... and the puzzle looks drawn out potentially across several countries which is understandable considering the development and influence over time...

As to Northern or Southern Indian the pointer indicates Northern with accents of Afghanistan loud and clear... Indian Court Swords may have sprung up in other Indian regions independently ...The Cavalry clues seem clearly of Northern regions...influenced probably from the Ottomans..

Putting on the hand brake is not the way we work...From a cautious start up there are now several more examples to consider.. It develops reasonably. Clues lead us on... Get digging !! :)

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

By pure fluke I note that at http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?p=203680&posted=1#post203680 there is a more modern style of Afghan sword with a very similar gooseneck finial at the top of the knuckleguard . This is very similar to the Afghan Pulouir which in turn is similar to the sword being discussed here. This leads me to suggest that the style of weapon we are looking at in this thread may, in fact, originate in that region. Afghanistan. :shrug:

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

I found another sword hilt to comply with the design being looked at. In this example it appears I think, as Moghul form but with a broken knuckle guard and it is a Birdhead with knuckle guard and Tunkou...

Illustrated as a museum exhibit it reads; Quote"Indian sword hilt from the collection of Arms and Armour in the Prince of Wales Museum, now known as Chattrapati Shivaji Maharaj Vastu Sanghrahalaya, Mumbai India.'' Unquote.

See https://www.pinterest.com/pin/397372367093427700/

[ariel]

Wow!!!

Up until now, all examples were very modest, kinda " village-like".
This one is high class.
Man, this pattern was not only for "unwashed masses":-)
Fascinating.
Many thanks.

[Jim McDougall]

I will second that WOW!!
It sure looks like bringing this subject sword type up again has really panned out!
Thank you guys!

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

I will second that WOW!!
It sure looks like bringing this subject sword type up again has really panned out!
Thank you guys!


Thank You Jim... and also thanks to Ariel. I thought to compose a quick baseline of where I think we are in regard to this weapon; Looking across the broad Bukharan connection and bearing in mind tribal flow and the Chinese linkages it seems to me that the transmission and influence is from the Bukharan sphere touching Afghanistan, India and Turkey for a variety of reasons but that the sword is in fact not of any of the nations where it has appeared.

The linkage with Mughal swords for the Turkish market is through the Ottoman preference in Bling form Mughal hilts from such centres affected by Jahangir and other Indian rulers thus a purely fashionable weapon to wear at Court...

It can be seen that no two swords shown as examples in basic form have the same construction in the hilt with dramatic differences in how the knuckle guard is fixed, leaving me to believe that these were never a commonly turned out, professional sword workshop item....more an accidental hybrid. This and the fact that actually there are only a few available to compare suggests the weapon was more a chance encounter with a forge master than a common user item.

Whilst not saying out loud that the subject may be an innocent red herring or chasing wild geese, I find topics like these fascinating as far as they go...and once in a while "tilting at windmills" is no bad thing but I think for now the topic may be somewhat exhausted and therefor as far as this, as yet, nameless sword is concerned, we are on hold, though always ready to take up the pen should fresh evidence surface.

Here is a very interesting note that I also applied to another Indian thread ..This links the influence of Mughal Court swords lavishly done in Jade and Nephrite with added precious stones in pure Jahangir "Bling" form to Ottoman fashion;
Please see https://books.google.com.om/books?i...20hilts&f=false

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

If I may round off by indicating where I mean by Bukhara...below. The map on the right illustrating the vast network of silk road "tributaries" ... :)

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

I stumbled upon this at http://www.aljantiques.com/a-bronze-sward-hilt-south-india-tanjor-early-17th-century.html Just the hilt... Amazing!!

[ariel]

Indeed.

Looks very South Indian to me.
Perhaps I might have been wrong insisting on Nortwest Frontier? :-)

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Indeed.

Looks very South Indian to me.
Perhaps I might have been wrong insisting on Nortwest Frontier? :-)


On a specific area I wouldn't like to say...It does seem to lend itself to the Shashka blade... however, it seems to me that any number of sword making schools could present a similar hilt... I think that is what makes Indian sword style so difficult to crack... and we have to date only a handful of examples... but the Tunkou and knuckle guard are a fascinating combination. :)

[Jim McDougall]

Indeed.

Looks very South Indian to me.
Perhaps I might have been wrong insisting on Nortwest Frontier? :-)


Not too sure Ariel....it seems there have long been somewhat unclear and indeterminate in many cases ties between the Northwest and the Deccan.
It does not seem hard to imagine cross diffusion , making as Ibrahiim notes, pretty tough classification challenges.

[ariel]

When it rains, it pours...

Two more. No doubt: we are talking about a real , but heretofore non-described pattern

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

When it rains, it pours...

Two more. No doubt: we are talking about a real , but heretofore non-described pattern

I only see one weapon as the other is at #1 ...

[ariel]

Black handle, white handle... :-)

[Jim McDougall]

This is an intriguing scenario, these compellingly similar sabres sans guard and with the 'swans neck' type knuckleguard, along with vestigial tunkou.
However it begs the question, are these effectively a 'form' or simply a number of cross influenced variant examples.

The cases of swords which are seemingly a particular form except certain components are missing, may be intended as such, or possibly examples with have lost these components.

We have seen shamshirs and various 'Ottoman bulbous hilt' sabres which have no crossguard and have asked, were there occasions where individuals preferred a sword without a crossguard? As clearly many Central Asian sabres such as shashka have been in notable favor and use without guard, would that character be chosen in altering other sword forms? Why?

We have seen the cases of tulwars with the characteristic disc pommel missing, and asked, was it deliberately removed, or simply broken or lost?
It has seemed there have been numbers of such tulwars in Afghan regions and suggestions that these discs impaired the swordsmans hand in its use.

These sabres add another page to these curious anomalies, but in their case they are clearly made in their form deliberately. The vestigial tunkou seems to me a clear nod toward Ottoman influences; the swans neck guard reflects northern India tulwars of Rajasthan and of course Afghan paluoars; and the hilts themselves the shashka and like Central Asian types.

Rather than a distinct form of sword type, this seems more a case of variant which has occurred in some number and reflecting compiled influences. It will require more instances of examples with regional provenance to establish enough consistency to declare a unique category .

Obviously, an intriguing conundrum and interesting type worthy of continued research.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

TRY THIS!!

Deccan
sword
from
Vijayanagar

An unusual and rare form of South Indian sword from the Vijayanagar Empire Karnataka. The long sword blade fullered and slightly curved, possibly of European manufacture, a small makers stamp visible near the forte. Long steel blade mounts with fretted and pierced borders, the hilt of 'pistol grip' shape, steel furniture chiselled with geometric decoration(worn) and brass inlay, the ivory grips showing the great age of this sword. Dating to the 17th century.

(THE TECHNIQUE IN ENGINEERING THE KNUCKLE GUARD TO THE HILT SIMILAR TO #38 AND #43 ABOVE)

For more pictures see http://www.ashokaarts.com/shop/rare-deccan-sword-from-vijayanagar

For The Vijayanagar Empire SEE https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vijayanagara_Empire

[Jim McDougall]

Well done Ibrahiim!!!
Somehow does the faceted bolster remind you of a 'Khyber knife' (Siliwar) ??

[Jim McDougall]

Continued research= Ibrahiim!!! :)
Noticed in your last entry, then revisited your post #43.......compelling!!!
In 43, this example is intriguing as it clearly has the 'sinha' or lion head which we associate with the hilt of the kastane. While the 17th century date is in my opinion somewhat optimistic as we remain unclear on the earliest occurrence of the sinha hilt on the kastane, this coupled with the example from Karnataka, does seem to place these in Deccani context.

The diplomatic and general tribal ties between the Deccan and northern India (Afghan) regions are well established, and as seen with certain hilt features such as with the paluoar, the cross influences between these regions also seem understandable.

Is it possible that the sinha/lion head became vestigially stylized in the knob like pommel of these northern versions? We might tenuously observe that line defining the lower outline of the 'knob' being almost a jaw line! in considering such zoomorphic context.

Also found in Pant (1980, p.113, fig. 293) the tulwar hilt known as 'Marwari'. In Pant's 'system' of hilt classifications, this one is claimed to be similar overall to the 'Delhishahi' and 'Aurengzebi' forms except in the case of the knuckleguard.
In the Marwari hilt, there is a distinctly represented swans head which has a dramatic turn back form.
While Marwar was a highly commercial region in Rajasthan, it would seem that its commerce would be well known in northern areas of India (incl Afghan regions).
These Marwar hilts, in addition to the turn back swans neck, had the knuckleguard with split or cut in the center.

I would note the 'Afghan military sword' which has its distinctive split guard also with turn back of this style, and similar to that seen on these curious hilts of OP.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Continued research= Ibrahiim!!! :)
Noticed in your last entry, then revisited your post #43.......compelling!!!
In 43, this example is intriguing as it clearly has the 'sinha' or lion head which we associate with the hilt of the kastane. While the 17th century date is in my opinion somewhat optimistic as we remain unclear on the earliest occurrence of the sinha hilt on the kastane, this coupled with the example from Karnataka, does seem to place these in Deccani context.

The diplomatic and general tribal ties between the Deccan and northern India (Afghan) regions are well established, and as seen with certain hilt features such as with the paluoar, the cross influences between these regions also seem understandable.

Is it possible that the sinha/lion head became vestigially stylized in the knob like pommel of these northern versions? We might tenuously observe that line defining the lower outline of the 'knob' being almost a jaw line! in considering such zoomorphic context.

Also found in Pant (1980, p.113, fig. 293) the tulwar hilt known as 'Marwari'. In Pant's 'system' of hilt classifications, this one is claimed to be similar overall to the 'Delhishahi' and 'Aurengzebi' forms except in the case of the knuckleguard.
In the Marwari hilt, there is a distinctly represented swans head which has a dramatic turn back form.
While Marwar was a highly commercial region in Rajasthan, it would seem that its commerce would be well known in northern areas of India (incl Afghan regions).
These Marwar hilts, in addition to the turn back swans neck, had the knuckleguard with split or cut in the center.

I would note the 'Afghan military sword' which has its distinctive split guard also with turn back of this style, and similar to that seen on these curious hilts of OP.

Hello Jim, indeed the hilt at #43 is interesting since it is Southern Indian from Tanjore. I am not sure we are looking at one form or several splinters of one form. It seems every court sword producer could and did make a variety of bling variants although in the Southern style there seems to be a constant in the way the knuckle guard joined the hilt...It does almost appear to be a zoomorphic, perhaps Yali form, or I thought possibly elephant apparently breathing out the knuckleguard and this is mirrored or at least similar in the way the Kastane is engineered.

I have identified several southern form weapons curiously similar in appearance to the shashqa and with the same join engineering knuckle guard to hilt...The trade proof is apparent across strata although one could be forgiven for making it up !! The Deccan was instrumental in the Poulouar form and coincidentally the Central Asian Bukharan exodus caused by the Russians in 1920 may have also pushed the Shashqa into Afghan areas thus fusing or influencing hilt style...Eastern style may also have entered Southern Indian design from the many trips by the Chinese to the region when Tipu Sultan was in power. Being awash with mercenaries from everywhere (including Central Asia) it need not be surprising that hybrids and variants sprang up in the Deccan.

Notwithstanding that confusion I am aware that two of the weapons although similar are called different names... The one is a bird head but the other is a pistol grip...therefor neither are technically Shashqa...because of the shape of the hilts and because they have knuckle guards. Could they both be court swords? This would possibly place them in the category ("Bling") Court Swords ...Southern India.

[Jim McDougall]

Superb comparisons!
I think what is most interesting here is becoming aware of the distinct link between the Afghan northwest and the Deccan, which may well account for the connection in weapon forms and styling in many cases.

Kurnool in India, now the State of Anhdra Pradesh, is situated in central India in proximity with the key locations of Hyderabad, Mysore, Bijapur, Adoni which are prevalent in Indian history. Our awareness of the Deccan has been remarkably advanced in recent times through the tenacity of the study of Indian arms scholars who have been able to define many arms within that designation.

Kurnool was once ruled by the Vijayanagara kings and later Pathan with Mughal rule through Aurengazeb from 1686. The incursions and subsequent rule of Pathans and the Afghan character of Kurnool as a princely state in the Deccan is reflected in virtually all of its rulers titled 'Khan'. This is of course the Turkic title used in Central Asia and Afghanistan.

The conduit between this Deccani state and Afghan regions to the northwest was Rajasthan in a loose geopolitical chart which would note the Mughal rule combined with Afghan elements. This may well account for the long stated instances of arms from the siege of Adoni removed to Bikaner in Rajasthan (1689), as well as the fact that Tipu Sultan of Mysore spoke Urdu, a language from the northwest, and his father ruled Hyderabad .

These are some of the factors which we may consider as we examine the curious similarities of these sabres with knuckleguard, shashka profile hilts and tunkou with Deccani attributed examples.

I must admit my understanding of the complex connections and history of these regions is admittedly not the strongest, and I would beg for corrections and input in that regard. However, I felt it important to bring these to attention here in the thread for further review.

[ariel]

.... the Central Asian Bukharan exodus caused by the Russians in 1920 may have also pushed the Shashqa into Afghan areas thus fusing or influencing hilt style... Court Swords ...Southern India.

Undoubtedly the influx of the so-called : "basmatch" fighters from Central Asia into Afghanistan brought with it a quantity of local weapons.

But even before that, and for centuries, the border between the two was symbolic only. The entire North Afghanistan was and still is populated by Uzbeks and Tajiks, entire families happily resided both here and there, and caravans crossed Pyandj back and forth as often than Greyhound buses between Michigan and Ohio:-)

The so-called "Afghani military pseudoshashkas" appeared well before Russian Civil War and the ensuing communist takeover of Central Asia, and the "Bukharan pseudoshashkas" even earlier.

The above examples are even older.

I am just trying to hammer in the idea that we are talking about a distinct pattern and not a hodge-podge of random features accidentally thrown together, and Ibrahiim's examples just increase the critical mass above which that conclusion will be inescapable.

Clearly, this sword pattern existed in the South, but the inspiration must have come from the North ( tunkou). I suspect we are seeing here actual examples from both locations, but just do not have enough information on how to separate their individual origins...

We will, eventually. We have witnessed enough examples of total mysteries that were eventually solved in a span of 2-3 days. Remember Baluch/Sindh sabers with a peculiar pommel and wire-wrapped langet? :-)))

[Jim McDougall]

Well noted Ariel, and it seems pretty clear that swords of this type certainly date much farther back than these geopolitical events of the 20th century.
We have been discussing the weapons of Central Asia for so many years now, and your knowledge on these and the history of these regions has been quite nearly legion here, so your input is extremely important.

I think however, that the inclusion of numbers of weapons types and from various contexts with similar key features is helpful in investigating the many possibilities which present themselves in these conundrums. The examples Ibrahiim has been presenting give us good perspective as we consider many potential scenarios.
Not all discovery in such matters is entirely empirical, as was well expressed by Dr. Albert Szent-Gyorgyi;
" ...discovery is seeing what everybody else has seen,
and thinking what nobody else has thought".

I know that many times over the years, I have been taken to task for many of my ideas and theories in similar queries in discussions, often seen as fanciful or 'fantasy'. However I believe in testing every possibility regardless, and have always welcomed supported rebuttal which would remove them as required from material compiled toward effective resolution in these queries.

Indeed, some of our 'mysteries' here have been solved in a few days, many took years, and you and I have been here through most all of them! I often marvel at how much has been accomplished here in learning on these arms, and it is exciting to keep going.

We indeed will conquer this one as well.
On another note, on the Baluch/Sindh sabres.....which were these ?

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

In considering the Zoomorphic Elephant head and trunk forming the knuckleguard and how it is joined to the hilt ...I propose that the sword may be linked to those directly involved in the war elephant role... The sword is lightweight but effective perhaps as a secondary weapon thus it may be an Archers sword... or that of a pike-man seen on the elephants back... An Elephant Crew members sword !

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Well noted Ariel, and it seems pretty clear that swords of this type certainly date much farther back than these geopolitical events of the 20th century.
We have been discussing the weapons of Central Asia for so many years now, and your knowledge on these and the history of these regions has been quite nearly legion here, so your input is extremely important.

I think however, that the inclusion of numbers of weapons types and from various contexts with similar key features is helpful in investigating the many possibilities which present themselves in these conundrums. The examples Ibrahiim has been presenting give us good perspective as we consider many potential scenarios.
Not all discovery in such matters is entirely empirical, as was well expressed by Dr. Albert Szent-Gyorgyi;
" ...discovery is seeing what everybody else has seen,
and thinking what nobody else has thought".

I know that many times over the years, I have been taken to task for many of my ideas and theories in similar queries in discussions, often seen as fanciful or 'fantasy'. However I believe in testing every possibility regardless, and have always welcomed supported rebuttal which would remove them as required from material compiled toward effective resolution in these queries.

Indeed, some of our 'mysteries' here have been solved in a few days, many took years, and you and I have been here through most all of them! I often marvel at how much has been accomplished here in learning on these arms, and it is exciting to keep going.

We indeed will conquer this one as well.
On another note, on the Baluch/Sindh sabres.....which were these ?

Hello Jim, Sindh Hyderabad ... I was just looking for the same detail ....Please see http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=21555

[Jim McDougall]

Thank you Ibrahiim for that link! Now I recall these interesting sabres which were in my view after rereading the posts and evidence, clearly from the Baluch-Sind regions and probably Hyderabad. It has always been confusing that there is a Hyderabad in these northern (now Pakistan) regions.....as well as the notable part of the Deccan further south.
Many references denote 'Hyderabad' without specifying which is meant.

For me a most telling feature in these Baluch-Sind sabres is the ring or loop in the pommel. As noted in the discussion, these are as far as known, not an affectation on Arab swords. Interesting comparison was pointing out the groups of rings present on Omani khanjhar scabbards,

Returning to the original topic, again it is most interesting to see the wider spectrum of these type sabres, which seem to have been prevalent quite extensively in the south, that is Deccan. However, there appear to be some compelling similarities in hilts further south, which have features, , many zoomorphic, even as far as those featured on the familiar kastane.

Zoomorphics in ethnographic weapons are of course often highly stylized, and debate on what particular creature is represented are often the case with western perceptions.

Regarding the elephant as such a feature intended in these hilts is as far as I can imagine, not likely. Primarily the elephant is represented zoomorphically only in the regions of Gujerat and Bhuj in notable degree. I believe that representation had to do more with regal or dynastic leitmotif with the elephant in rather exalted standing.
Zoomorphic features were not intended as insignia denoting weapons to certain groups of military or other functions in any notable instance I am aware of.
While the 'gooseneck' feature did represent the swan in cases where the head was represented fully, and the serpentine Makara or dragon head as well.....the elephant trunk I don't believe was a part of such motif.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Thank you Ibrahiim for that link! Now I recall these interesting sabres which were in my view after rereading the posts and evidence, clearly from the Baluch-Sind regions and probably Hyderabad. It has always been confusing that there is a Hyderabad in these northern (now Pakistan) regions.....as well as the notable part of the Deccan further south.
Many references denote 'Hyderabad' without specifying which is meant.

For me a most telling feature in these Baluch-Sind sabres is the ring or loop in the pommel. As noted in the discussion, these are as far as known, not an affectation on Arab swords. Interesting comparison was pointing out the groups of rings present on Omani khanjhar scabbards,

Returning to the original topic, again it is most interesting to see the wider spectrum of these type sabres, which seem to have been prevalent quite extensively in the south, that is Deccan. However, there appear to be some compelling similarities in hilts further south, which have features, , many zoomorphic, even as far as those featured on the familiar kastane.

Zoomorphics in ethnographic weapons are of course often highly stylized, and debate on what particular creature is represented are often the case with western perceptions.

Regarding the elephant as such a feature intended in these hilts is as far as I can imagine, not likely. Primarily the elephant is represented zoomorphically only in the regions of Gujerat and Bhuj in notable degree. I believe that representation had to do more with regal or dynastic leitmotif with the elephant in rather exalted standing.
Zoomorphic features were not intended as insignia denoting weapons to certain groups of military or other functions in any notable instance I am aware of.
While the 'gooseneck' feature did represent the swan in cases where the head was represented fully, and the serpentine Makara or dragon head as well.....the elephant trunk I don't believe was a part of such motif.


Hello Jim, The ring in the Sinde Hilt is interesting although nothing to do with the Omani Khanjar rings which are double the size and involved in the way the Omani Khanjar is constructed. The clue to what these terminal rings on the Sinde swords is for is at #18, second picture, of the Sinde sword thread where it can be seen that it is for a wrist strap.

What is also interesting, however, is the wire wrap which terminates in a special knot...Perhaps "The Omani Knot"... present in all Omani Shamshiir including the presentation sword to Stanley by Sultan Bargash and covered at Omani Shamshiir on Forum...of the same style of silver wire used on Omani Khanjars.

I looked at the knuckle guard and perceived the elephant trunk as clearly visible emanating from a raised shoulder geometry like an arch, I thought was an elephantine head... most noticeable in the Bling birdhead example though present in others to lesser degree... Pushing the envelope I point to the Kastane as illustrative of mixed Zoomorphic form often showing elephants partial trunk folded back over the head in short form and illustrating the multiple animalistic form of the hilt; part land and part sea creature with a peacocks tail and feet of a pig, head of a sea Makara / elephant, body and occasionally head of a crocodile and several other ancient creatures.

Either way and ignoring my brilliant idea for the Elephant crew sword :) I see similar form...the appearance of the knuckleguard shaped like an elephants trunk as emanating from some sort of creatures mouth...possibly a variant of the Yali concept... and ending as a bud design...

In respect of the links between Deccan, Afghanistan and Central Asia; Clear involvement was direct between the Deccan and Central Asia as well as between the Deccan and Afghan regions..though my 1920 involvement between the last ruler of Bukhara and his exile to Afghanistan should not be taken out of context...as the whole melting pot including Turkomen, Tajic and Hazzara (the 1,000 men left behind in Afghanistan by Ghengis Khan) illustrates. Bukhara at the centre of Central Asia and the ancient city of Kabul in Afghanistan were of course also astride one of the greatest trade routes in history; The Silk Road. Thus, they were all trading with each other and/or politically entangled for several centuries.

[Tatyana Dianova]

One more of the type, sold recently in the UK. The auction description:
"Unusual Indian Sword, 17th Century, fitted with a European rapier type double edge blade flared towards the hilt, iron flange and tang, two-piece ivory grips with pointed pommel. Blade 33"

[Jim McDougall]

Extremely unusual to see this type hilt, faceted bolster in Central Asian/ Khyber/Afghan style with a European rapier blade. By the photos it would seem of course a far more modern fabrication than 17th c., though the blade likely is that.
It seems hilts of this style, even with the anomalous 'tunkou' feature, occur in Southern India in Karnataka and even as far as Tanjore according to what has been shared earlier in this discussion

It does seem that with the volume of European blades arriving with Mahratta traders in these 17th c and earlier times, there were quite a few rapier blades, and many of these were mounted in khanda and patas as well as in cut down use in other weapons.

As far as I have known, there has never been any particular favor toward the narrow rapier blades in the northern, Central Asian regions, so this may be a traditional anomaly in the south.

[Tatyana Dianova]

I agree with Jim that the whole type have most probably a South Indian origin.
Of course, one cannot tell when the "rapier" sword was mounted, but it isn't a modern combination either, judging by the wear and the overall codition.

[kai]

Hello Jim,

OTOH, this apparently well-aged hilt seems to be of genuine northern (rather than southern) Indian form including the minute notch at the underside of the gripping area. Thus, I'd be inclined to believe that this piece originates from the Mughal sphere of influence.

Not my area of expertise though, just my 2 rupees...

Regards,
Kai

[Tatyana Dianova]

I have heard many times following: when an item has North and South Indian features, it can originate from Deccan.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Although I have covered the subject at #51 I will place the main detail again since \I think we have a clear idea where this weapon comes from viz;

(The additional sword above is very interesting although I cannot be certain if the blade is European or an old Indian blade ground down? It is a fascinating development.)

Considering the previous posts I think the form is probably Deccani but similar forms developed or were influenced further north and variants based on a generally Bukharan style may be found in a greater area in Central Asia.

The origin of form, however, I think is placed at post #51 and on the reference http://www.ashokaarts.com/shop/rare-deccan-sword-from-vijayanagar a Deccani weapon Quote "An unusual and rare form of South Indian sword from the Vijayanagar Empire Karnataka".Unquote.

Pictures below. :shrug:

[Tatyana Dianova]

Yes Ibrahiim, you are right about the Deccani origin! I have found an interesting article from a very knowledgeable person on a 18thC Deccani dagger.

“This dagger could easily be Northern, but the decoration definitely hints to the Deccan. Most people tend to think anything with silver, or anything not typically Mughal is Deccani, but this style of decoration definitely veers South.
I have always thought that generally (and I do mean generally, as this cannot be used as a rule of thumb) that Persian influenced Indian work tends to be Mughal and Northern, and pieces that link more to early Ottoman work tend to be Deccani.
On this particular dagger, the style of splayed floral work, with jagged edges is seen quite often on early Deccani work, and even earlier Ottoman textiles and art. The decoration on the dagger is not exactly this kind of work, but the similarities are definitely there. The dagger is cruder in style, so definitely not of the earlier period (but, decoration aside, the dagger form itself is not too early). Also, if you look at the line that runs down the inside handle, and has a squiggly decoration inside. This kind of work, thinly laid onto crude cross-hatching had always been reminiscent of later northern (Punjabi) work, but it also annoyingly kept cropping up on early Ottoman work (some armour, and a few examples of maces). ”

[Tatyana Dianova]

The following pictures illustrate the text above.
"First image is Ottoman, and an almost edible textile of the late 16th/early 17thC. You can clearly see the influences of the later Deccani blazons which decorated all art, but most especially the bidri work. The other 4 images are Deccani, and mostly of the 17thC. Last one is a jade hilt. the rest are bidriware."

[kai]

Hello Tatyana,

Your pics are out of sync with the text. You can determine the order by separately uploading them one by one! (No need to close the attachment window - just hit upload after selecting each pic...)

BTW, I'd also suggest to also give the name of the person you're quoting for future reference.

Regards,
Kai

[Tatyana Dianova]

This one is Ottoman, the rest are Deccani.
The quote is from a private communication, and I am not sure if I should give the name without the author's permission...

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Forum Library References;
A. http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/search.php?searchid=843812
B. http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=14093&highlight=SHASHKA
C. http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=911&page=2&pp=30&highlight=SHASHKA
D. http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=38&highlight=SHASHKA
E. Or simply type in Shashka to Search for a full list of threads and select.



I have heard many times following: when an item has North and South Indian features, it can originate from Deccan.


Salaams Tatyana Dianova ~ I agree entirely with that. As a side issue however, I am unsure if your straight bladed weapon is a South Indian derivative or a replaced blade on a Northern style ...if it in fact is a replacement and not simply a worn down blade. Nonetheless it is a fascinating subject.

In this regard I wish to play "The Devils Advocate" and speak for the weapon in what I believe is its correct role as a South Indian Sword. In this respect I invite comments.

A South Indian project sword shown below comprises a few simple parts viz; Hilt, Knuckleguard, Knuckleguard base, Tunkou and Blade. Taking each part separately I will describe how each item belongs to a South Indian form. For this exercise I omit significant blade detail since it is impossible when trying to close in on a typography of regional description as Indian sword blades migrate all over the spectrum but base my assumptions on the other parts, however, I add a photo showing what I believe could have been the technique in broad terms of using this thin cyclic technique slashing blade behind a Buckler ...The technique is present in South Indian martial arts today.

Thus I describe ~

1. Hilt I select a similar hilt from the arsenal of South Indian weapons for comparison; The Pichangeti Dagger... See Picture below. This hilt is unlike Shashka form since it is birdhead or pistol grip form and although Mughal weapons with similar hilts were purchased by Othmanli court buyers the form was never transmitted to Shashka or other swords to the North...and since the Shashka hilt never went the other way....we are looking at a regional Southern Indian form only.

Note that great power can be transmitted through the weighted hilt with a heavy pommel counterbalance to a thin curved blade in the downward strike and naturally the weapon was not effective in the thrust particularly against armour..I assume that great speed was essential and that slashing cuts were the order of the day where moves were enacted around the Buckler style shield underlining the speed factor of this technique.

2. Knuckleguard No sword of the Shashka type has one..but that typically the finial being Lotus bud form is Indianwhich means that when sheathed, this weapon sits differently in the scabbard whereas the Shashka embeds right up to its pommel ... The project weapon has a knuckleguard thus sits differently in its scabbard.

3. Knuckleguard and base See below photos showing the elephant zoomorphology WITH ears, teeth and a trunk !! The basic shape may be present in other regions hilt base designs but no other region shows the foundation as an elephant head which would point to this being not only Indian but regional Indian....and certainly not absorbed out of Ottoman Bukharan or Afghan theatres.

4. Tunkou Relations with China were ongoing in many regions of India indicating that the transition of Tunkou to this weapon happened through trade and showing that other southern weapons also may have Tunkou design transfer such as on Kastane etc.

5. Blade showing a simple picture of how flimsy bladed weapons were used ...of this nature... behind a Buckler..

😎 In conclusion; the project sword is neither Pseudo nor Shashka but is a specific South Indian Sword design which evolved solely in Southern India and is unrelated to Afghan, Bukharan, Caucasian, Persian or other miscellaneous Shashka types except distantly by vague and unrelated accidental look alike factors not attributable or traceable to this weapon.

Pictures Below are~

1. Pichangeti showing both the rounded Pistol grip and Birdhead variety of South India.
2. Shashka Form Hilt.
3. A highly ornate gold and black South Indian example showing the zoomorphic elephant head; ears and mouth with trunk (as the knuckleguard) and missing Lotus bud finial.
4. A Project Sword; from Ashok Arts.
5. High speed sword work with flimsy curved blades and knuckleguards behind Buckler Shields.
6. Map showing regions of South India.
7. How the Shashka sits in its scabbard.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[Jim McDougall]

Beautifully formatted, illustrated and linked entry Ibrahim! and presents a fascinating array of considerations as we look more into these curious anomalies.

Before continuing I would like to address the intriguing but unfortunate title on this thread, which refers to the sword of the original post, and as I believe has been mentioned, has nothing to do with the 'shashka' type sabre. The term 'psuedo' as has been discussed is even more misplaced and seems has been tempting us 'down the garden path'.

The examples you have posted with the guardless character and similar features, most expressly the 'tunkou', offer keen insight into others which seem to fall into this spectrum, and appear to have southern India provenance.

I would suggest that this feature on the blade of the weapon of the OP, is not actually a tunkou at all, but more aligned with the decorative lobed palmette cuffs seen on many Deccani daggers, which extend in the manner of a langet over the blade root under the guard or base of hilt.

The shape of this hilt, seems primarily to align with the Mughal daggers, often of kard form, of the northern areas, and typically have the faceted bolster at the base of the grip and are guardless. These have the same lobed or flueret style cuff extending over the back of the blade across and in the same asymmetrical diagonal configuration basically as the 'tunkou' of earlier swords and many Chinese dao.

What is interesting in Tatyana's example posted, is that this feature exists below the faceted bolster, essentially an incongruent blend of 'north and south'! The faceted bolster of Persian and Central Asian Mughal north, and the palmette type cuff of Deccani south, hybridized with a rapier blade.

It is important here to note that the 'tunkou' or for that matter, even the palmette type cuff or langet Mughal items, much in the manner of the tunkou on yataghans or Ottoman weapons, seems to have had stylistic importance beyond any pragmatic purpose.

In many weapons, koftgari applications are added to blades in exactly the same shapes, decoration and location at the blade root or ricasso to vestigially represent this key feature. I recall a M1788 British cavalry sabre blade mounted on a Deccani tulwar (shamshir type hilt) which had this vestigial tunkou koftgari applied in exactly this manner.

The idea of rapier blades is not new to the southern regions in India, in fact such type blades are seen on early iconography. However, the use and popularizing of the European rapier blades seems to have become most notable during the British presence in the 18th c.
It is tempting to consider this may be an atavistic piece which follows the accord with the daggers of the north and in degree the south, using a blade repurposed to the rapier form in traditional interpretation.

With the other examples of these types, as Ibrahiim has well posted, there are great opportunities to examine the climate of their development. While the scrolled knuckleguard is well present in many hilts to the north, in some reading it does seem that Welch does consider this style to have moved to the north from southern origins (noted in 'Arms of the Muslim Knight' p.201).

[Tatyana Dianova]

Interesting insightes Jim - as usual from your side!

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

By Jim McDougall It is important here to note that the 'tunkou' or for that matter, even the palmette type cuff or langet Mughal items, much in the manner of the tunkou on yataghans or Ottoman weapons, seems to have had stylistic importance beyond any pragmatic purpose.

Salaams Jim, It could be that regarding Tunkou we are looking at a Red Herring. My take on the wrap is that it adds more weight to the power end of the blade and that it secures the weapon in the scabbard far better preventing it from rattling around or falling out.
Thanks for your informative reply..

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[Gonzalo G]

Interesting thread!

In my humble opinion, the "tunkou" also helps much in reducing the nasty vibrations of the blade when you hit in the wrong manner. This protects the hand and the blade. But I can be wrong. If you don´t want to risk an old sword to test it, try it with a long machete.
Regards

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Salaams, I refer to #17 and its main reference when equating Indian swords to Chinese. I would temper that with what Jim has said about Tunkou.
My main reference is http://thomaschen.freewebspace.com/custom3.html

The article notes a fashion in Chinese swords and close ties with sword influence going both ways. Swords made in Beijing were exported to India after 1761 . Further ..a common description amongst Chinese sword design was the pistol grip which is essentially the same as the bird head or parrot head hilt. Note also the practice of cutting grooves in the blade and inserting pearls which roll up and down the grooves; This is a direct copy from Indian blades of that form; Tears of the wounded (afflicted)

Shown in addition is the trend in Indian blades; both sword and dagger, of decorating the throat with a cartouche done in Koftgari form but that in the project sword this is of Tunkou style essentially a reinforcement plate giving support to the hilt and enabling a tighter fit for the blade into the scabbard....something koftgari design does not do...nor was it designed to.

I accept as Gonzalo points out that the wrap would also have reduced heavy vibration through to the sword hand and as I point out the practical idea that the blade would fit better and more snugly into the scabbard...also noted in #17.

Given that in the late 1700s Chinese swords were exported to India it stands to reason that the Tunkou was in fact part of this design imported on these weapons but turned the other way...perhaps to satisfy Indian taste from purely an aesthetic viewpoint as it looked better? Whilst it seems logical it is understood that nothing is certain in this regard and that it may be down to simple design drift and this is simply parallel development or pure chance...and may be how some swords in the South were designed...Kastane often have a similar wrap.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[Jens Nordlunde]

Hello Ibrahiim,
Could you please give us a few references to the Chinese export of blades/weapons to India?
Jens

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Hello Ibrahiim,
Could you please give us a few references to the Chinese export of blades/weapons to India?
Jens

Whilst I search for that please see https://books.google.com.om/books?id=DMFRAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA27&lpg=PA27&dq=ANCIENT+CHINESE+INDIAN+SWORD+EXPORTS&source=bl&ots=rkdtu1YXdZ&sig=JBwMW3sU0mm63yPdba0cPEvPr-w&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=ANCIENT%20CHINESE%20INDIAN%20SWORD%20EXPORTS&f=false which outlines the goods including sword blades that were exported to China from India in 1793.


* Ho & Bronson 2004 p111
"... the [Qianlong] emperor appears to have been quite fond of non-traditional curved sabers of the Indian and Middle Eastern type, often furnished with jade hilts carved in the Indian Mughal style. Some were imitations made in the imperial armory in Beijing."

* Ho & Bronson 2004 p114 f127
"Qianlong ordered a total of sixty ceremonial curved swords on five occasions, in 1748, 1757, 1779, 1793, and 1795. Each sword was named and numbered, and all were identical in length, weight, and basic design. The scabbards were made either of red or green stingray skin and or patterned bark. The swords differed in terms of their inlaid details and the style of the hilts. Hilts made after completion of the 1757 batch were mostly in Mughal style, often with gold and inlaid gems."Unquote.

[Jens Nordlunde]

Thank you very much, and it is quite interesting that the trade went both ways - from very early times.
I know of three dagger blades all with the same decoration, one at a museum in China, one in the MET and one in my collection.
Of these two have a pistol grip, and the one in the MET has a grip with a horse head - but all have a stone hilt.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

I have looked at the hilt situation on the project sword and feel that the entire hilt question is critical to the overall answer to this phenomena. Thus I turn to Stuart Carey Welsh . INDIA. Arts and Culture. 1300 to 1900. for The Met Museum . page 270. however, I note that the front outside cover has a magnificent piece of artwork which was painted in India in about 1620 and is lavishly adorned in Chinese influence. Part of the story is present in that picture as not only were the Chinese merchants on the Indian coast and active in securing South African gold etc. from Indian traders but the Chinese artisans were active also in influencing Indian ateliers and no doubt in the transfer both ways of fine art techniques and subject matter. This must have included the types and decorations of weapons probably both ways.

Please note the Pistol grip dagger described and pictured at page 270; from Stuart Carey Welsh. INDIA. Arts and Culture. 1300 to 1900. for The Met Museum says;

Quote''That presumably this was carved for Aurangzeb. The origin of the form can be traced to the Deccan where it must have been admired by Aurangzeb and adapted for his use during his years there as Viceroy. In the early stages of their evolution which probably began in the Southern Deccan, pistol grips terminated not in the round abstract shape but in Parrot heads, complete with beaks and eyes. Deccani examples of the 17th C. already incorporate this change. After Aurangzeb created a vogue for them, pistol grips became common at the Mughal Court during the late 17th and 18th C. some of them repeat the original parrot design.''Unquote.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[Jim McDougall]

This has been a most provocative thread!! and brought out some very interesting aspects of Indian arms as related to Chinese influence and vive versa. I must say Ibrahiim, you are truly an intrepid and tenacious researcher!!! Great links and resources, thank you!

I have tried to follow in kind, and it does seem that there must have been a degree of arms which entered the Indian sphere, as there was a great deal of trade activity with China via the varied East India companies from late 17th and into the 18th century.

It does seem that the Dutch had a factory in Peking (Beijing) in the late 17th but seem to have closed it early in the 18th. In these times most of the interest and reciprocity seem to have been the export of china and textiles, but around early 18th an interest developed in the decoration of sword hilts (known as Tonquinese, for those regions of N. Vietnam), but apparently thought to have been made in China.

While strong export of mercantile commodities seem well known, it does not seem that any export of arms took place in any sort of capacity as the Chinese had a very restrictive attitude toward foreign presence there and the exports seem to have filtered into the Philippines in various channels.

I have not been able to find more on the noted Beijing export in 1761, and by this period it seems that the Chinese courts while intrigued by outside styles, such as the Indian influence in some Qianlong hilts, had little to do with exporting arms. Though not exporting arms proper, they did however exert considerable influence in the arms of Europe, particularly the decoration forms known as chinoserie, Tonquinese and Japan had its shakudo.

Still it would be hard to imagine that a power such as China would not be involved in certain trade and export outside the direct control of the realm, and as Ibrahiim has noted, the quest for gold in remote ports and centers operated briskly in operations unlikely to be officially recorded.
We know that Chinese river pirates were present in regions of SE asia contiguous to India, and other regions in proximity.
The exchange and diffusion of all manner of materials of course must have been considerable in such circumstances, and while not technically supportable, it does seem to be reasonably plausible.

Returning to the matter of the 'tunkou' feature, I am more inclined to think of it entering these spheres from Ottoman influence rather than Chinese, despite its prevalence on many Qing swords. Many features of Central Asian and Indian weapons carry Ottoman influence from various sources, all of which were prevalent throughout the development of these arms.
As for its purpose, I tend to follow the thoughts of Philip Tom, as described in his "Military Sabres of the Qing Dynasty", that they were to stabilize the guard and secure the blade in the scabbard.

These were clearly not consistent on these Chinese sabres, whether in yuanshi or fangshi mounts regardless, and were not as far as I have seen ever on jian.

Still, the feature clearly became a vestigial notion on a number of weapons in other context ,and as seen on the sword here, and on daggers as discussed, whether physically represented or decoratively applied in koftgari or other means.

[ariel]

Well, the earliest "tunkous" are seen on the nomadic swords dating to at least 8-9 centuries. Subsequent tunkou-like elements are seen on a multitude of blades , all coming from the areas dominated by, or at least in contact with nomadic cultures. Their forms varied : from the " along the edge" in early examples to the "along the spine" in the latter ones, from massive plates to purely symbolic, decorative koftgari or incised outlines, from traditional triangular to "shell-like" in North African yataghans etc. Ottomans were not the originators of tunkou: they got it from their Seljuk and Oghuz ancestors, but due to their exclusive Western location, they were a vehicle of spreading it over the Mediterranean basin. Seljuk Empire had its epicenter in modern Iran, Indian Moghuls came from Central Asia etc.
The earliest European one I know (1321AD)can be seen on the fresco of St. Nikita in the Gracanica church in Serbia, perhaps as a result of Batu Khan invasion half a century earlier. I may go on a limb here, but the so-called Indian ricasso might be a direct descendant of the archaic Nomadic ones.
Both Khudyakov and Phillip Tom commented on their original purpose, and suggested purely utilitarian mechanical reasons: plugging the mouth of the scabbard, isolating the edge, or just secure seating of blades within their scabbards. Phillip Tom thinks that Japanese Habaki is unrelated to tunkou, but looking at the origin of Japanese people and their contacts with Koreans, Chinese and Mongols, this assertion may be modified.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Salaams All , Despite not being able to open Philip Toms brilliant works noted above I eventually got a clean copy at http://hawaiihistoricarms.com/military-sabers-of-the-qing-dynasty-by-phil-tom-part-1/ where notes indicate the Chinese influence and Indian influence the other way. Combined with the notes already here at thread I think we have the subject cornered although idiosyncrasies and variable translations of how it transpired ...and from several directions almost simultaneously makes this a fascinating if not occasionally a (little) baffling subject. :shrug:

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[Jim McDougall]

Whilst I search for that please see https://books.google.com.om/books?id=DMFRAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA27&lpg=PA27&dq=ANCIENT+CHINESE+INDIAN+SWORD+EXPORTS&source=bl&ots=rkdtu1YXdZ&sig=JBwMW3sU0mm63yPdba0cPEvPr-w&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=ANCIENT%20CHINESE%20INDIAN%20SWORD%20EXPORTS&f=false which outlines the goods including sword blades that were exported to China from India in 1793.


* Ho & Bronson 2004 p111
"... the [Qianlong] emperor appears to have been quite fond of non-traditional curved sabers of the Indian and Middle Eastern type, often furnished with jade hilts carved in the Indian Mughal style. Some were imitations made in the imperial armory in Beijing."

* Ho & Bronson 2004 p114 f127
"Qianlong ordered a total of sixty ceremonial curved swords on five occasions, in 1748, 1757, 1779, 1793, and 1795. Each sword was named and numbered, and all were identical in length, weight, and basic design. The scabbards were made either of red or green stingray skin and or patterned bark. The swords differed in terms of their inlaid details and the style of the hilts. Hilts made after completion of the 1757 batch were mostly in Mughal style, often with gold and inlaid gems."Unquote.

It seems that this trade network bringing China and India together as far as exchange of blades went even earlier:

"...blades from China and India were highly sought after in the Middle East, which seems to have been the hub of an astonishing international trade in sword blades, amongst many other items".
* during 14th and through 15th centuries and later

"The Medieval Swords of Leeds Castle"
-Clive Thomas
"London Park Lane Arms Fair, 2005" p.26

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

It seems that this trade network bringing China and India together as far as exchange of blades went even earlier:

"...blades from China and India were highly sought after in the Middle East, which seems to have been the hub of an astonishing international trade in sword blades, amongst many other items".
* during 14th and through 15th centuries and later

"The Medieval Swords of Leeds Castle"
-Clive Thomas
"London Park Lane Arms Fair, 2005" p.26


Salaams Jim, In addition I note from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_swords

Early Three Kingdoms period to late Sui dynasty (220–618)
Introduction of the Sassanian/Persian style suspension mounts on Chinese daos.
Probable introduction of Damascus wootz steel (for use in jians) from India or the Middle East.

In addition the Hudud al alam (10th C Persian) https://books.google.com.om/books?id=nzpYb5UOeiwC&pg=PA409&lpg=PA409&dq=chinese+and+indian+export+swords+in+history&source=bl&ots=uzGwO3dS9B&sig=pNxzYHPa3nmBkJZpy42ib2HyOwk&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=chinese%20and%20indian%20export%20swords%20in%20 history&f=false it is noted that swords and slaves amongst others were exported from Gujerat.
Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[kai]

And another example that might possibly be related: http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=26861

The knuckle guard seems to be unique with (now missing) scales attached to it originally. Were these possibly crafted from brass?

Regards,
Kai