[QUOTE=Kubur;262367]Well I agree but this statment applies to at least of 80% of ethno swords, not only Indian ones...
From Takouba to Katana[/QUOTE
Very well noted, in the ethnographic spheres, blades were inclined to circulate note only for generations, but even centuries. In the Sahara, we know that numbers of medieval blades entered trade networks centuries ago, and it would be impossible to know how many incarnations they experienced before finally collected into European hands.
It is pretty standard traditionally to remount blades as they were handed down, and if traded into new region, of course the locally favored styling would be adapted.
Udaipur was but one of the numerous Rajasthan centers for blades, and the Pant reference suggests that this 'peaked' style grip came from that location. However it seems this 'style' could have been broader in use and applied to occurrence in other of the Rajasthan centers as well.
Defining these hilts as to which denomination used would be difficult as well but these seem more inclined to Rajputs and Sikhs, and others. These pyramid/triangle shape marks on blades and materials were in use much later, as noted after the 'Sepoy Rebellion' (1857) and more into 1870s+ The old East India Co. standing lion marking was used on gun locks into 1840s.
East India Company prior to these type government marks never placed bale marks on their sword blades (as told to me by David Harding, "Small Arms of the East India Company" many years ago.
Regarding the pairing of blades and hilts, there was a standing supposition some years ago that hilts and blades were deliberately kept disconnected in storage in armories to defeat ready arming of insurrections, but this was I believe disproven. It was more a matter of imported hilts being paired with stocks of blades in arsenals as required by the princely states and principalities outside those being outfitted by British suppliers by the 1870s.