A 19th century Afghan warrior’s opinion on European blades compared to his own

Jim McDougall · 29th September 2025, 06:05 PM

For me the understanding of metallurgical matters is perplexing, but what I have gathered on 'soft steel' is that it dulls and deforms quickly. This suggests that while Afghan swords described in the excerpt might have been deadly sharp, the durability sounds questionable.

I dont think wootz is part of the equation here, as the rank and file warriors would not have likely had swords with wootz blades. I am not sure that Afghans might likely see British or European blades as 'exotic' but as I noted, they did seem to have some affinity for blades with the 'Genoan' sickle marks.
One of the highly favored blade forms in the Deccan were the 'alemani' (German) examples.

The notion of 'exotica' however was very much favored by British officers during the Raj, and in the native cavalry regiments, they fashionably wore Indian style uniforms complete with turbans. In many cases they had regulation style hilts with Indian or Persian blades, while as shown previously there were many Indian swords with British or other blades.

It seems most of these exchanges had more to do with diplomatic and cultural exchanges rather than combat durability.

Regarding wootz, it does seem that the British made notable efforts to eliminate the materials, shops and all related to its production. Presumably this was due to its potential as a deadly weapon element. Much of this effort indeed contributed to the loss of the art of the forging of wootz in the early years of the British Raj.

Again, not sure of that impact of that concerning the Afghan swords, but seemed salient enough to mention.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Threaded Mode

29th September 2025, 06:05 PM	#5
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,687	For me the understanding of metallurgical matters is perplexing, but what I have gathered on 'soft steel' is that it dulls and deforms quickly. This suggests that while Afghan swords described in the excerpt might have been deadly sharp, the durability sounds questionable. I dont think wootz is part of the equation here, as the rank and file warriors would not have likely had swords with wootz blades. I am not sure that Afghans might likely see British or European blades as 'exotic' but as I noted, they did seem to have some affinity for blades with the 'Genoan' sickle marks. One of the highly favored blade forms in the Deccan were the 'alemani' (German) examples. The notion of 'exotica' however was very much favored by British officers during the Raj, and in the native cavalry regiments, they fashionably wore Indian style uniforms complete with turbans. In many cases they had regulation style hilts with Indian or Persian blades, while as shown previously there were many Indian swords with British or other blades. It seems most of these exchanges had more to do with diplomatic and cultural exchanges rather than combat durability. Regarding wootz, it does seem that the British made notable efforts to eliminate the materials, shops and all related to its production. Presumably this was due to its potential as a deadly weapon element. Much of this effort indeed contributed to the loss of the art of the forging of wootz in the early years of the British Raj. Again, not sure of that impact of that concerning the Afghan swords, but seemed salient enough to mention.