Firangi

[Kubur]

Originally Posted by ariel

I am showing my Firangi. It has a complete handle, even with fully preserved finial, and the leather on the grip is virtually congealed.
I think it is a REAL Firangi, because it has what I think is an old European blade.

Hi Ariel,

I have two questions about REAL firangi.

Is it because it has an European (foreign) blade? If yes, then half of the Indian swords are real firangi.

Or is it because the sword has his complete (typical) basket hilt and an European straight blade? If yes, then you are caught to the "name game" and "collector trap" like all of us...

[David R]

Thanks for showing off such a nice sword, for some reason we don't see many around.

I was at one Militaria fair and a dealer had a box full of these style hilts, I bought a number of them off him. Most of them battered and mutilated, some better than others, and I still have the best two of the bunch.

I think the "problem" with the European bladed ones is that the blades are often taken out, and then fitted up with Western hilts to sell as original 16th and 17th century rapiers and basket hilts.

The same is also done with good 1796 light cavalry blades in Tulwar hilts.......

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by David R

Thanks for showing off such a nice sword, for some reason we don't see many around.

I was at one Militaria fair and a dealer had a box full of these style hilts, I bought a number of them off him. Most of them battered and mutilated, some better than others, and I still have the best two of the bunch.

I think the "problem" with the European bladed ones is that the blades are often taken out, and then fitted up with Western hilts to sell as original 16th and 17th century rapiers and basket hilts.

The same is also done with good 1796 light cavalry blades in Tulwar hilts.......

These are excellent observations in my opinion, and the constant refurbishing and re-assembly of hilts, whether contemporary in working life of the weapons, or more modern production of industrious sellers is hard to say.

We know that the movement of blades in trade networks has been a most standard commodity, and so much so that viable identification of a weapon is complicated and typically relies mostly on hilt style.

The note on removal of European blades from ethnographic weapons is well placed, and Oakeshott commented on how many 'kaskara' from Sudan in early 20th c. were dismantled to have such blades remounted in European medieval style hilts for obvious reasons.

I have seen many Indian tulwars sporting British blades, and authentically as it was noted by Nolan (famed for his part in Light Brigade charge) that the British were intrigued by the effectively deadly use of sabers by Indian warriors in Sikh wars. They were horrified when they discovered that the blades were actually from earlier British M1796 sabers, but honed to razor sharpness and held in wood scabbards.

Thus the penchant for European and often British blades ( despite some derisive regard for British ones) was well established in India, with German blades most preferred. Much of the attraction seems to have been status oriented, particularly obvious with rapier blades, which of course were designed for sword play not characteristic of Indian versions (the thrust was not much favored in India).

The trade and use of blades, regardless of original source, was vaguely defined at best, and alliances, agreements (?) and exchange could not be accurately observed. Commodities, including blades, often exchanged through various entrepots and intermediaries making distinct attribution difficult if not nearly impossible.

I would say the markings on the Indian 'firangi' in the OP, which is what I would consider a handsome example, resemble many of the combinations used on North Italian blades, and these were produced for schiavona and other swords typically like this in early 17th c. +
The application of the 'star' by Indian artisans would typically not be added to the familiar 'eyelash'/'sickle mark, but was well known on true Italian blades (see Boccia & Coelho, "Armi Bianchi Italiene").

The term 'firangi' , as well 'beaten to death' by collectors, is simply the term used to describe a European(or foreign) blade in an Indian hilt form.
This style sword shown in OP was the 'Hindu basket hilt' which derived from the old Indian sword known dialectically as 'khanda'.

Technically even tulwars with European or British blades might be considered 'firangi'. However, even the term tulwar is a broad term used not only to describe the familiar Indo-Persian hilt version, but 'shamshir' hilted versions or even actual shamshirs in Indian context. In the British Raj, regulation British sabers for native regiments were called tulwars!

[fernando]

Just trying to defend my Dame .
For those not within the picture, saltpeter is a nuclear component of gunpowder ...


.

[Kubur]

Originally Posted by fernando

Just trying to defend my Dame .
For those not within the picture, saltpeter is a nuclear component of gunpowder ...


.

Hi Fernando,

This is very interesting.
I wonder if they changed the term of their agreement after 1498...

then a bit later

In 1504, the Venetians, who shared common interests with the Mamluks in the spice trade and desired to eliminate the Portuguese challenge if possible, sent envoy Francesco Teldi to Cairo.[4] Teldi tried to find a level of cooperation between the two realms, encouraging the Mamluks to block Portuguese navigations.[4] The Venetians claimed they could not intervene directly, and encouraged the Mamluk Sultan Qansuh al-Ghuri to take action by getting into contact with Indian princes at Cochin and Cananor to entice them not to trade with the Portuguese, and the Sultans of Calicut and Cambay to fight against them.[4] Some sort of alliance was thus concluded between the Venetians and the Mamluks against the Portuguese.[5] There were claims, voiced during the War of the League of Cambrai, that the Venetians had supplied the Mamluks with weapons and skilled shipwrights.[1]

The Mamluks however had little inclination for naval operations: "The war against the Portuguese, being mainly a naval war, was entirely alien to the Mamluk and little to his taste. The navy and everything connected with it was despised by the land-minded Mamluk horsemen".[6]

The Mamluks again attempted to secure the help of the Venetians against the Portuguese, and they did intervene by pleading their case with the Pope.[9]

The Venetians, who had been at peace with the Ottomans since the signature of the 1503 Peace Treaty by Andrea Gritti after the Ottoman–Venetian War, continued to secure peace with the Ottomans, and renewed their peace treaty in 1511, leading them to encourage the Ottomans to participate on the Mamluk side in the conflict against the Portuguese.[13]
Venetian embassy to the Mamluk Governor in Damascus in 1511, workshop of Giovanni Bellini.

The rapprochement was such that Venice authorized Ottoman provisioning in its Mediterranean ports such as Cyprus.[13] Venice also requested Ottoman support in the War of the League of Cambrai, but in vain.[13]

A Mamluk-Venetian commercial treaty was signed by the ambassador to Cairo Domenico Trevisan in 1513.[13] After that point however, and the reverses of the Mamluks and the Persians against the Ottomans, Venice increasingly favoured a rapprochement with the Ottoman Empire.[13]

[Jim McDougall]

Aside from the detail on Venetian/Portuguese trade, and the dreaded saltpetre which is of course pretty fascinating, I wanted to add a note on the 'sickle marks;.
Just to add to the conundrums here on terms, blade origins etc....I would point out that these paired and typically dentated arcs with triple dots at each end....were not necessarily Genoese.....
They became associated with Genoa as it was a major trade/export center where blades were exported, though many of these blades came from other North Italian centers as well.

These appeared in variation and in multiples as well.

What is interesting here with the detail on the trade issues is to see just how extraordinarily important the historical context is with the study of these arms.
It is great to see the deeper and overall view of what was going on in these regions in these times.

[ariel]

Kubur,
One must always remember that strategical political alliances usually take second seats to commercial machinations. Even in your example, the reason why Venice sought military help from Mamluks was ... spice trade. I do not think we know for sure whether the blade of my Firangi was made in Venice, Genoa , Ferrara or some other Italian sword- making place. Popular markings were forged all over. But even if the Doges banned selling of swords to the Portuguese, any Venetian or some other master was free to sell them to the Genoese, and what happened to them from that moment on was nobody’s business.

Even now, industries world- wide deliver forbidden goodies to countries under strict embargoes. All they need to do it is to sell them to some intermediary for an artificially inflated price and who will then recoup the “loss” by charging the final buyer extra. That’s all.

Money talks, bulls..t walks.

On top of that, see Elgood’s chapter in the “Sultans of the South” in which he cites Tome Pires who in 1514, just 4 years after Portuguese capture of Goa, reported importation of Venetian goods there, including swords. This is as direct evidence as one can find.