i think tim is right in a way. the hand is indian, but it could well have been made for an english patron. jens, please bear with me but i am on to something that could be of great use for some of your particular line of questioning. there was a serious of drawings bought recently for a very large sum. these were thought to be 17thC mughal but both i, and a friend am sure they are 19thC and an artists portfolio of hilt forms. in it, he offers examples of hilts, with different pommels according to taste. i think this was to show a patron who chose his particular style and design of hilt before it was made. the style is very similar to the one that you show. there is no writing, nor names unfortunately but the information is important none the less.
back to your hilt. the main colours and design still scream (actually, scream is too strong, more whispers) lucknow, but the pommel shows different colours which is a little confusing. the colours on the pommel do not say lucknow, but they are also different enough to the rest of the hilt to beg other questions.
i agree with the usefulness of george watts book, in that it recorded and very important time and event in the history of late indian decorative arts. however, it too cannot be taken as a complete list of the time as it was more of a competition than an exhibition. it was a great event (dehli durbar) and although the arts were mostly from the north, the maharajas all over india contributed to the exhibition of decorative arts (including a fabulous loan collection from tanjore). the hyderabad link was not mine, but i cannot argue its presence as a decorative arts centre. how much it was contributing in the 19thC i do not know.
|