| kronckew |
14th July 2018 09:02 AM |
The pattern on the hilt of the talwar only is like a random laminate Damascus, not birdseye, birdseye is something that is modern, very seldom did rigid patterns get used on old swords like this and I perhaps should have put random laminate, because its clearly a folded laminate but not necessarily is Damascus, to clarify it's laminated, the blade is an old one without a single doubt and is likely wootz but because of its age and that he is unable to polish it because of the etched area along it he can not etch to show the wootz, but it is there, none of these are modern swords in any way and, blades have been etched since early times and there is no reason to think then not old or modern because they have etched designs on them, I misunderstood what he was saying and that it could well be wootz blade, laminated steel hilt, and that the hilt has silver ring shapes inlaid into it. And with a steel pin through it to keep the blade in, is unlike most indian talwars.
My thoughts are that as it may be afghan made, and not as was said captured or traded, if you look at the hilt cross guard section you will see something here that no one yet has noticed, the ball ends of the cross guard are pointing down in a curve towards the blade, unlike Indian Tulwars which all are straight, and if you look at the Pulwar from Afghanistan they to curve down much more, so. I am wondering if this is not a Shamshir and made in Afghanistan,and the whole sword now cleaned certainly looks a lot older than both of the others, in fact dating of it would not be 19thc it would likely be 100 years earlier at 18thc, maybe it is an older type of the swords that were from Afghanistan, it is also marked, and someone might know the mark.
He's also acknowledged the salawar's scabbard is newer than the weapon and likely a later 'upgrade' replacement.
|
