Indian sword blades

[Jim McDougall]

This is, as always with Jens' observations and queries on arms & armour, completely fascinating! and noting the source for this material being Dr. Elgood's brilliant work "Hindu Arms and Ritual" , extremely well expected.
Robert Elgood has approached the study of Indian arms in the long overdue perspective in which they have needed to be viewed, with the understanding of the religious and ethnographic symbolism and belief that explains them.
Until this important work, most of the weapons of India have been viewed as nearly standardized forms such as the tulwar, khanda, katar and so on without any consideration for the decorative elements, motif and auspicious symbolism imbued in these weapons. The many hybrids and innovative variants of weapon forms well known from Indian armouries remain mostly unexplained curiosities which have generated considerable western speculation concerning thier use. It would seem that in many cases, such explanation may lie in symbolism rather than pragmatic application.

Concerning the measurements as presented in the book, and in the outstanding discussion and observations posted on this thread, I would like to add the following, which I found in the book "The Wonder that was India" by Arthur Basham ( London, 1954) on p.503:

8 yava (barleycorns)= 1 angula (fingers breadth, 3/4")
12 angulas = 1 vitasti (span, 9")

I recall some time ago researching the Khevsurs of the remote regions of the Caucusus in Georgia, and Richard Halliburton's observations on his visit to their secluded enclaves in the 1930's ("Seven League Boots"). He describes the popularity among the men of duelling, often as sport, but occasionally very deadly in matters of dispute. In the sporting event the warriors wore mail, helmets and fought with sword and buckler. If one participant was accidentally wounded, the wound was measured with barley seeds, and the compensation to be paid computed to be paid in cows by such measure.
There was considerable trade and contact with northern regions of India from early times, and many influences seem to have diffused from there. Possibly this rather ancient form of measuring was one of them?

In the importance of length and other important features discussed concerning the auspicious significance applied in these important swords, I am wondering how the use of 'phirangi' or foreign trade blades was viewed in them. Would the 'pratistha' ritual described by Elgood on p.105 be considered effective in imbuing the required transubstantiation (some word eh! ) or would these blades
have been considered less than acceptible?

Best regards,
Jim

[Jens Nordlunde]

Hi Rick,

Thanks for the link, interesting to read about the people living on the subcontinent so many years ago, and about their advanced knowledge.
The book is, as mentioned before, ’Nujum al-‘Ulum’ and here is what Robert Elgood writes about it. ‘This Bijapur manuscript dated 1570 in three places, is a well-written document that considers weapons’ lore, predominately Hindu.’
And a bit later something interesting. ‘Much of the information regarding the casting of horoscopes for the various types of weapons is omitted, being largely repetitious, though the author’s obsessive concern with planetary influences should be noted.’
It is well known that Indian weapons often were decorated with talismanic signs, but it is new to me, that they also made horoscopes for the different kind of weapons.
I think the term ‘sword’, here must refer to the blade without the hilt, but it is not quite clear.

Hi Jim,

Thanks for the nice words, and thanks for your research.
It is very interesting that you found this 8 yava (barleycorns)= 1 angula (fingers breadth, 3/4")
12 angulas = 1 vitasti (span, 9"), as we here have both the corns and the finger width, and what more is, it fits very well. ¾ inch by 4 fingers = 3 inch = 7.8 cm. Does it say from where the author Arthur Basham has these information’s?
I have tried to measure some tulwar hilts, and the room for the hand varies from 7 cm to 8 cm. This will give a firm, but not a strained grip.
In the notes to his book Elgood writes: ‘Agba’ (Arabic) = angul (Hindi) = angusht (Persian), all meaning a finger’s width. In south-east Asia the thumb width is used to measure keris blades to decide if they are auspicious.’

[Jim McDougall]

Hi Jens,
The references I found in Basham's book were in the appendix, and were presented without specific reference or footnotes. It is interesting to note in his introduction he thanks numerous institutions and individuals, including interestingly a Mr. P.Rawson! and the University of London School of Oriental and African Studies. Presumably the material was derived from the undoubted wealth of trade records and documents held in the library of that institution.

A few comments concerning the ongoing discussion about the notably small grip size on many Indian swords. There has been long standing debate and speculation about the established blade feature on Indian tulwar blades known as the 'Indian ricasso', which is the flat unsharpened section of the blade edge nearest the hilt. It has long been suggested that this feature was intended specifically for the placement of the swordsmans finger wrapped around the quillon to reinforce and better direct his cut impact. It seems that the use of the sword in Indian combat typically did not involve blade to blade contact, and parrying depended on the shield or guarding with the armored forearm. If armored gauntlets were worn by warriors, would the finger actually be jeapordized in combat situations where such blade to blade contact would not have been necessarily practiced?
In Italian swordsmanship, which eventually influenced considerably that of Europe, the placement of the finger wrapped around quillons was well established and directly effected the development of the hilt with finger guards and eventually the complex rapier hilt. It would seem that a number of influences from Italian edged weapons exist in the weapons and uses in India, as well of course as from many colonial powers via trade.

If the finger was not positioned in this manner, why would the tulwar blades consistantly display this ricasso feature?

Also, still wondering more on the use of trade blades on auspiciously qualified swords.

As always, lots more research to be done!!

All the best,
Jim

[Jim McDougall]

Ahah! Just found this item of interest in the files, from:
"A Late 15th Century Italian Sword" by Anthony North ("The Connoisseur, Dec. 1975, p.239):
Discussing Moroccan swords described in "Les Poignards et les Sabres Marocains" ( Hesperis, Tome XXVI, 1939, p.1), by Charles Buttin, Mr. North notes that "...the placing of the index finger around the base of the blade when holding the sword was a technique shown on a number of Spanish and Italian paintings. A striking feature of the sword which forms the subject of this article is the comparitively short grip. It can only be held satisfactorily if the grip is held by three fingers and a thumb, the last three fingers fitting into the recesses provided, the thumb supporting the top of the grip, and the forefinger placed around the base of the blade, a section being cut away from the edge to allow for this, hence the need for the ring guard to prevent the opponents blade injuring the exposed finger. The advantage of using the sword this way is that the point can be used as well as the edge".

I think this reference is interesting because as previously noted there were considerable contacts between these spheres via trade, particularly with the Portuguese as well as with Venice. Since the European weapons clearly had such impact on Indian weaponry , it would seem that fencing techniques would have been equally observed. Since the tulwar is used as mentioned primarily as a slashing weapon and parries were the business of the shield, the quillons on the tulwar are essentially vestigial. Therefore, it would seem that a gauntleted finger wrapped around the quillon would be quite likely.
The sword described in the North article is actually an Italian sabre that appears essentially identical in many ways, especially the hilt structure, to the nimcha of Morocco.

Possibly this information may be useful in further consideration on the hilt size of these Indian swords. It would be interesting also to consider whether the khanda with developed 'basket hilt' had equally small grips or hilt size, as this hilt typically carried straight European trade blades and its use was obviously entirely different than that employed with the tulwar. The example I have I can hold quite comfortably.

Best regards,
Jim

[Jens Nordlunde]

Hi Jim,
As you know from earlier mails I have written on the forum, I believe more in the 'eight grain, finger width' theory. As to the ricasso, I think it is still to be figured out, why some blades have one and why some don’t. There are also the miniatures to be taken in consideration, as they mostly shows many details.

Best regards

Jens

[Jim McDougall]

Hi Jens,
I agree the measurement value data seems to apply very well to some of the observations and it is good to have established that material for future reference in researching these swords.The question on the virtually characteristic 'ricasso' feature on tulwars certainly remains inconclusive and debated.
Best regards,
Jim

The issue concerning 'small hands' and the size of the grips on many tulwar hilts is discussed by E.Jaiwent Paul in "By My Sword and Shield" (p.76) where he notes that physical size of individuals in earlier times was indeed typically smaller. However, he also offers the following observation, "...many swordsmiths say that a small hilt which is a tight fit for the hand gives rise to a sense of 'josh', a term difficult to render in English, but which may be translated as a combination of aggression, fervour and recklessness".
I'm not sure I agree with this idea, but it seems worthy of note and I cant help but think this concept may align with that of 'one wearing ones shorts too tight'!

Returning to the 'ricasso' dilemma, I think the basic reference on this stems from "The Indian Sword" by Rawson, which observes;
"...there is one obvious point of difference between Persian and Indian blades which may be mentioned. No Persian blade is known to have a feature which may be called the Indian Ricasso. This is a short flattened section at the root of the edge, which is shouldered into the bevel of the edge. The reason for its existence may have been to safeguard the index finger, which art shows to have been sometimes hooked round the front quillon of the hilt in India".
(the footnote cites a personal communication from a B.W.Robinson of the metalwork dept. at the Victoria & Albert Museum as the source for this data).
It is interesting to note that Rawson specifically states that 'art' does show this practice being used, unfortunately no reference is given as to what 'art' is being cited.

This material from Rawson seems to have firmly placed this explanation for this virtually consistant feature of Indian tulwar blades in the lore of Indian arms. In the later work of G.N. Pant, "Indian Arms & Armour" , Dr.Pant does take exception to a number of statements and material in the work of both Rawson and the seminal work by Egerton, but surprisingly seems to concur with Rawsons notes on the 'ricasso'. Pant observes that the [Indian] ricasso is "...a square shaped space, generally of 2" is left blunt and unsharpened just below the tang, and is called ricasso (locally 'khajana'). This saves the fingers from being cut as some of them slip out of the quillons at the time of wielding. This feature is not found on the shamshirs but is invariably found on the tulwars". (p.31).
Here, once again, no specific reference is given to support these observations.

It would appear that Rawson was confident in the data concerning the hooked finger on the blade that he received from Mr. Robinson. As earlier posted, the article by Anthony North, also formerly of the Victoria & Albert, made note of the finger hooking practice in Italian and Spanish swordsmanship. Perhaps that established practice, noted as represented in European artwork, was recalled in evaluating the Indian swords...but Rawsons note as worded suggests the practice shown is in Indian artwork...but which...where?

It is noted in the North/Buttin material that with the finger hooking practice used in Italy and Spain, it was important to have finger guards to protect the finger. The drooping quillon is seen on many sword forms in these swords to provide such protection. I think here it is important to note the 'palouar', the Afghan version of the tulwar, which has such drooping quillons presumably to that end......and carries a pronounced ricasso.

Although I agree the idea of placing the index finger precariously outside the protection of the guard seems an inherently bad idea, it seems important to present the observations of established authorities on these swords and thier use, without really issuing conclusive statements. This material is presented simply as evidence that may be helpful in further discussion.

[Jens Nordlunde]

Hi Jim,

As I don’t know much about the ricasso, and especially not why it was used, I would prefer to wait discussing it till I know more. There are several possibilities, some more likely than others, but it will have to wait.

Jens