A wonderful example of what appears to be a tulwar from northwest India regions that is quite likely end of 18th century. It is so hard to really say the age on these, especially from photos, but the sheer simplicity of this piece in the hilt, and the very heavy blade suggests it is indeed a fighting example.
The extremely widening of the blade back is of course what we term the yalman (though it seems there is a degree of dispute on the term), but does reflect influences from much earlier sabre development with nomadic Central Asian tribes. It seems that the feature did not typically stay with most blades found on talwars in the 19th century (there are of course exceptions, especially in very high quality and specially made pieces).
The deep pitting that shows evidence of non uniform pock marking would suggest the integrity of the patination on this sword, but I would defer on that to the more highly trained eyes that often gratefully comment on such matters here. By form itself however, this would seem a good solid example.
It looks wonderful as is Fernando!
Please resist the common desire to shine it all up! While there have been some fantastic examples of swords restored here that have endured grinding wheels and terrible overcleaning that were incredibly restored to beautiful condition, this is the one exeption that in my opinion would allow for such measures.
In my opinion, such sound examples of these earlier weapons deserve to wear the patination and darkening they have so honestly earned over so many years (to me it represents a physical manifestation of history
but its the romantic in me!).
One thing I always notice on so many talwars is the position of the langet often seems canted to one side and off center. Would this be from the remounting or reworking the weapon? Naturally checking the patination and discolorations etc. for a match would tell more on the age of such work, but could such positioning come from the reseating of the hilt carelessly, or could the position sometimes have been intended? Could striking action cause the hilt to shift later?
Another question, many talwars of the 'standard Indian form hilt' such as this of course exist without knuckleguard. It seems the terms used in Pant may be a bit difficult to apply to particular hilts of specific regions, despite the obvious existence of 'variants' since there was such wide diffusion of components in production. The concept of progressive development does not seem to work either, as the open hilt forms and examples with knuckleguards appear to have existed concurrently and often in common regions.
It has often been suggested, and compellingly, that the addition of the knuckleguard reflected European influence. Since most fighting with the tulwar seems to have been slashing with parrying received by the shield, what would be the purpose of the guard?