Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post

Jim McDougall · 10th January 2016, 10:14 PM

Richard, I know you do, that is one thing I appreciate most about you!!!!

Concerning the quality of Indian blades, as always there are varying aspects which derive from period, region and many other factors . In my last post I tried to include some published notations on the favor of European blades, but also found these comments:

I had noted the so called alemani swords as representing the powerful number of German blades in the Deccan with the mercenary forces there.
In Rawson (p.48) it states that "...Hyder and Tipu seem not to have relied much on the import of foreign blades , though some were in use in their armies",
It does note further that, "..the quality, particularly the aesthetic quality of swords of this period are not high". Indicating that the locally produced swords were as he describes, clumsy and of variable proportion.

Also, I had presumed that the term 'alemani' in the manner of 'firangi' meant this was a German bladed sword. Stone (1934, p.6) describes as :...an Indian sabre LIKE the old German hussar sword".
Here it seems the term refers to a sabre of like form, not necessarily with German blade.

Turning to the derogatory comment from Grose in the original post here which includes British blades and I checked the reference in Pant (p43).
Re: dhup sukhela and firangi blades.
"...There is no doubt that the English blades were bought by the Marathas, the factory correspondence shows they were highly unsatisfactory and were progressively in less demand" (Rawson p.87).

This is somewhat curious as Elgood (p.202) notes:
"...Terry describes in 1612 how the Indian swords are very sharp, but far for want of skill in those who temper them, will break rather than bend".
"..DeLaet comments that local shamshirs were often badly tempered and that therefore was a demand for European swords".

* this seems to apply further north as shamshirs are mentioned

Further p202 (Elgood)
"Bronson has argued that Indian blades were brittle and unstatisfactory, finding confirmation in the numerous European blades sold in India and fitted to India hilts".
"..long firangi blades became a STATUS SYMBOL in the 17th century and ENGLISH swords would bow an become straight again. In 1660s Thevenot remarks that Indian blades are too brittle and the good ones come from England".

Interesting perspective revealing the many points of view held by historians and contemporaries and recounted by the most known writers on the topic .

10th January 2016, 10:14 PM	#37
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 9,770	Richard, I know you do, that is one thing I appreciate most about you!!!! Concerning the quality of Indian blades, as always there are varying aspects which derive from period, region and many other factors . In my last post I tried to include some published notations on the favor of European blades, but also found these comments: I had noted the so called alemani swords as representing the powerful number of German blades in the Deccan with the mercenary forces there. In Rawson (p.48) it states that "...Hyder and Tipu seem not to have relied much on the import of foreign blades , though some were in use in their armies", It does note further that, "..the quality, particularly the aesthetic quality of swords of this period are not high". Indicating that the locally produced swords were as he describes, clumsy and of variable proportion. Also, I had presumed that the term 'alemani' in the manner of 'firangi' meant this was a German bladed sword. Stone (1934, p.6) describes as :...an Indian sabre LIKE the old German hussar sword". Here it seems the term refers to a sabre of like form, not necessarily with German blade. Turning to the derogatory comment from Grose in the original post here which includes British blades and I checked the reference in Pant (p43). Re: dhup sukhela and firangi blades. "...There is no doubt that the English blades were bought by the Marathas, the factory correspondence shows they were highly unsatisfactory and were progressively in less demand" (Rawson p.87). This is somewhat curious as Elgood (p.202) notes: "...Terry describes in 1612 how the Indian swords are very sharp, but far for want of skill in those who temper them, will break rather than bend". "..DeLaet comments that local shamshirs were often badly tempered and that therefore was a demand for European swords". * this seems to apply further north as shamshirs are mentioned Further p202 (Elgood) "Bronson has argued that Indian blades were brittle and unstatisfactory, finding confirmation in the numerous European blades sold in India and fitted to India hilts". "..long firangi blades became a STATUS SYMBOL in the 17th century and ENGLISH swords would bow an become straight again. In 1660s Thevenot remarks that Indian blades are too brittle and the good ones come from England". Interesting perspective revealing the many points of view held by historians and contemporaries and recounted by the most known writers on the topic .