[Jim McDougall]

Very well said comments gentlemen.

Gonzalo, as always good points of contention. So far the evidence I have seen, and discovered in the years I have researched these markings, show them occurring on 15th century European weapons, as seen in the page David has shown from "Armi Bianchi Italiene" . In this book there are numerous other examples with variations of these markings.

India does not reflect European influences until the Portuguese arrivals, and then slowly began to use European blades with Mahratta trade. This is of course the origin of the so called phirangi blade. I'm not sure of you have read any of the trademarks thread discussions or my previous post here, but virtually all references concerning weapons and thier markings hold the European origins of these sickle marks. It would take some time to add the cites and references for all the research that has been done from the 19th century arms writers including Baron DeCosson, Archibald Campbell, and the later Bashford Dean, Sir Guy Laking,Sir James Mann and later Dr. Lloyd Cabot Briggs, to name a few, who have made profound studies of blade markings on European swords. The Wallace Collection, catalogued by Sir James Mann in 1962 has numerous examples of German and Italian blades with variations of these sickle marks from a time span of several centuries.

It is not a question of 'needing' the European blades, as much as a matter of convenience and interest in European trade, primarily brought on by the Mahratta merchants. In Central India, Hyder Ali brought in European weapons and forces so was quite familiar with these blades from Germany in the late 18th century.

I think we have seen a preponderance of evidence for these markings being European, and as I have tried to present on many occasions the details of this proof. I think one of the things that presents difficulty is when the content of what is presented is not read before questions are asked or contentions made, agreed as what has been noted by Jens.

I have yet to see any evidence of these markings appearing in any of the cultural mediums described, India, Afghanistan or the Caucusus, before the 18th century, though the markings are known in European regions as noted from the 15th, appearing in Styria and Solingen by the mid to late 17th.

The appearance of the sickle marks on Nepalese weapons, in this case the kukris shown here by Spiral is actually quite surprising. I honestly have not seen these appearing on kukris before, and would suggest that this is most likely an affectation added well into the British Raj period and long after the famed Gurkha units were formed. While these are 'antique' weapons from these Nepalese regiments, they are certainly 19th century if not later and do not suggest any ancient existence nor particular Nepalese symbolism that would indicate origins of these sickle marks in Nepal nor India.

In short, there is nothing Eurocentric about the fact that these sickle marks have origins on European blades, and as I have previously emphasized, were originally likely guild marks, much as other such 'trade guild' markings used in medieval times in Europe. This is not speculation, but documented fact.
While it is well known that there are numerous myths in earlier writings on weapons, most of this derives from popular collectors lore and typically not from scholars, though there admittedly are exceptions and certain errors inevitable. I firmly believe that documented evidence from well provenanced weapons and supported literature from the scholars, some of whom I have mentioned, stands as evidence rather than myth.

The idea that these markings might have originated in India or Nepal as shown by thier presence on weapons that are typically not known prior to at least the 17th century such as the tulwar, whose earlier origins remain unclear, or the kukri, which was virtually unknown until the conflicts of the late 18th century however, does seem speculative. The only examples of these sickle marks on these weapons of the Subcontinent, Central Asia, the Caucusus, Nepal or any other native weapons I am aware of are primarily of the 19th century, with perhaps a few occasions in the 18th.


Best regards,
Jim