Tulwar handles on e-bay

[Jens Nordlunde]

Fernando/Ariel, very well done, and thank you very much for the translation.
It seems to me, that keeping the hilts and the blades apart, was a question, which Rainer Daehnhardt should have been digging a bit more into - a pity he didn't.
This 'habit' of keeping hilts and blade seperat, could be due to, how much the Maharaja trusted his employees, and the people he was ruling over.
I feel sure, that had it been general, people like Egerton, Hendley, Kipling and others, living there and commenting on armouries would have mentioned it, as the habit, as far as I know, is very far form the European way to do it - and so, such a habit, must have been very strange to them.

[ariel]

I am with you .

These missives were not intended to be a final, unassailable "truth".

The issue was raised as to the origin of this information, and here it is. Nothing more.
Each one here is free to accept the idea or to reject it. If additional sources become available, they should be presented here.


Going back, we may find potential explanations for the plethora of handles and the paucity of blades.
The absence of dish pommels is still a mystery.

[Travis Canaday]

Hello to all,

This is my first post and I would like to introduce myself and throw my hat into this conversation. Although my current knowledge is quite limited in regards to South Asian arms, my favorite swords are tulwars. I can thank Matt Easton for planting this seed and ebay for letting me get my hands on some of these swords with my rather meager budget.

As far as why are all these hilts without blades on ebay, I just assumed it is because of the old tradition in India of hilts and blades being easily interchangeable. While an old sword blade could be made into something useful quickly, an old hilt would just get tossed aside. In regards to this "epidemic" of tulwar hilts on ebay as Ariel refers to it; I think folks just realized rather than just let these old things rust away in the shed, some westerner will pay thirty bucks for it. I am referring to all these real antique, but junky (often broken) tulwar hilts on ebay. They don't seem to be doing the fake old stuff racket the way the Chinese do so often on ebay. These cheap hilts often have a missing disk and/or a broken langet.

In regards to all the missing disks on many of the hilts, it is simply because they are worn out old junk. I just bought a tulwar from an American seller with the disk missing from the hilt because I like the stout old blade that came with it. It definitely had a disk at one point (long ago), but these parts do seem to be the first part that breaks. I plan on replacing the hilt with a different one purchased on ebay from India. A really nice one which I will attach using a traditional Laksha based cutler's resin. Another tulwar I have is completely solid except for a wiggle in the disk. I think this is just a common problem with these mass produced "munitions" level hilts.

In the future I plan to post pictures of my tulwars and the re-hilting process to share and request knowledge and opinions.

Cheers!

[fernando]

Originally Posted by ariel

...These missives were not intended to be a final, unassailable "truth".
The issue was raised as to the origin of this information, and here it is. Nothing more.
Each one here is free to accept the idea or to reject it...

Exactly.
In fact, when i pasted my post reflecting Mr. Daehnhardt's narration on this subject, i saw no need to transcribe in the text a paragraph with my own comment on it, which was:
Naturaly this is a facultative situation, nobody has to beleive in it.

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showpo...5&postcount=19

Originally Posted by Jens Nordlunde

...It seems to me, that keeping the hilts and the blades apart, was a question, which Rainer Daehnhardt should have been digging a bit more into - a pity he didn't.
This 'habit' of keeping hilts and blade seperat, could be due to, how much the Maharaja trusted his employees, and the people he was ruling over...

Apparently there was nothing further to dig, at least as far as he was concerned, which i think he has put it in detail and very clear.

Originally Posted by Jens Nordlunde

I feel sure, that had it been general, people like Egerton, Hendley, Kipling and others, living there and commenting on armouries would have mentioned it, as the habit, as far as I know, is very far form the European way to do it - and so, such a habit, must have been very strange to them...

Also we may read that, in my checking with him about such particularity, he admitted that, the way he has put things in his book, might be seen as a general habit but, having to be precise, he assumed that, as far as he could assure, this occurred with a particular Raja, for the quoted reasons. If there were more sovereings acting with the same behaviour, who knows ? India is as large as a sub continent; perhaps too large for one to say he has seen it all.
But again ... we are all free to digest it or not .

[Mercenary]

Originally Posted by Jens Nordlunde

I feel sure, that had it been general, people like Egerton, Hendley, Kipling and others, living there and commenting on armouries would have mentioned it, as the habit, as far as I know, is very far form the European way to do it - and so, such a habit, must have been very strange to them.

Are you sure that Lord Egerton ever been in India?

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by Mercenary

Are you sure that Lord Egerton ever been in India?

HUH????

"...while in India Lord Egerton collected, studied and observed with the inspired interest of a student collector. The odd arms of India were fast becoming obsolete and he seized the opportunity to record all be could.."
from the foreward in his 1880 book.

Are you suggesting he was not?

[Mercenary]

"there was none available, nor any information about Indian weapons and their manufacture, except that which was to be found in books of travel, or in the noticed scattered through Oriental magazines" - in India in 1855?
Where was Lord Egerton? How long? Was he doing any research except through "books of travel" and "Oriental magazines"? I can not find anything about his life in India. I will try more...

[Jim McDougall]

Actually it is good to question our resources, and I like the notion of pursuing it together. So while you check further so will I, and it would be great if others out there might add their views and findings if they choose to join. I don't think anyone I know has the exposure to resources on Indian history that Jens has thoroughly perused through the many years Ive known him.
Meanwhile, might I know the source of the quote you cite on the paucity of material on Indian weapons c. 1855? I do not doubt that being the case, as in Great Britain's conquest and occupation of Indian regions with the advent of the East India Co., it seems the weapons were perceived more as curiosities and not seriously studied nor catalogued prior to Egerton's work.

Apparantly, according to the reference from Egerton's book, this was intended to be a catalog for collections at the museum at South Kensington.
It seems that some of the other subsequent references like Hendley, the items were observed at durbars and other major events in India.

[Mercenary]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Meanwhile, might I know the source of the quote you cite on the paucity of material on Indian weapons c. 1855?

It is in the beginning of the Introduction of his book: "When in 1855 I began to form a collection of arms in India I found the want of a book to assist me; there was none...".
In India in 1855 there was a lot of opportunities to collect not only collections of arms but a plenty very adequate information about it. I think he was not travelling across India for years ... to put it mildly.

[Jim McDougall]

Thank you Mercenary, and as you note, that is written by Lord Egerton in his book .
It does seem that Lord Wilbrahim Egerton (1832-1909) was a conservative politician in England and in the House of Commons 1858-1883.
As noted he did assemble his collection from 1855 through 1880, and it is now apparently in the Queens Park Art Gallery in Manchester.

As also noted, the situation for the collection and study of Indian arms and antiquities was dire in the 19th century, The museum (as it were) was primarily artifacts and various arms and curiosities crammed into areas and rooms next to East India House and library on Leadenhall St in South Kensington. It was more a warehouse accepting gifts and bequests and more stored than displayed. There was no particular order and a guidebook to London in 1851 described the place as squalid and crammed.

Coincidentally, the Great Exhibition of 1851 in London stirred new interest in India's culture in aspects such as material culture and ethnographica beyond the exotica seen in the old 'museum' which had been regarded as macabre and vulgar.

The holdings of the museum became essentially 'homeless' when East India House was demolished in 1863, and finally were placed in cramped quarters in the India office and by 1875 housed in rooms in South Kensington (now Victoria & Albert Museum). There had been misgivings however as England had become disenchanted with India, and the India office wished to dispose
of its collections, finally dissolving them and dispersing in 1879.*
* He notes this his introduction.


Robert Elgood (2004, p.11) notes the dearth of information on Indian arms in these times except the article by Walhouse ("The Old Tanjore Armoury" M.J.Walhouse, 'The Indian Antiquary' Aug. 1879, pp192-96) and that Walhouse had observed the removal of items there in 1863. He notes further that later arms writers such as Egerton (1880) and Holstein (1931) drew their information from this single source .

In the Egerton reprint of 1968, curiously the introduction written by the oriental armour sage H. Russell Robinson is the source in which it is stated , "...while in India", noting Egerton's enthusiasm and observation.
However, in the same publication, notes by Col. Yule describe his editing of the spellings and transliterations at the request of Lord Egerton, reveal that the Egerton's entries describing names of weapons and places they were from came from entries in the records of the INDIA MUSEUM.
Egerton himself notes that he was relying on collections in England in his study in his introduction.


When looking into Richard Burton's "Book of the Sword" (1884) I was surprised to find little mention of weapons of India, nor of Egerton, Walhouse other than some notes on metallurgy.

It would appear that Egerton's interest in Indian arms was more anomalous than realized, and at the time he compiled his venerable work, he indeed took from sources in the diminished and dispersing collections from this 'museum'. He also apparently relied on the Walhouse material and probably other items from journals such as The Indian Antiquary.

While he seems not to have actually gone to India, it does seem he had considerable contact with many who had, and it would seem accurately described notations in his sources. His compiled classifications and notes certainly have for the most part stood the test of time and profound new research over a century since.