an Afghan pulwar sword -translation if possible...

Kubur · 13th June 2021, 08:58 PM

Well guys
I friendly but strongly disagree with you.
Maybe the blade is older, but the hilt and the scabbard are late 19th c.
Please look at Mahrat's book, p. 152-167, the same hilts with same quillons.

For some readers, I'm aware that some forum members criticized the book of my Russian friend.
I know that some forum members will not consider what I write because they know better.
But some forum members are following my posts and I will write for them first.
Even if Mahrat’s book is not perfect, even if some of you spotted some mistakes.
First, nobody is perfect, and my respect will always go first to the people who do something, for example a book on Afghan weapons.
As far I know it is the only monograph on this topic, so even not perfect it is a reference, maybe not The reference but a reference, the only one devoted to this topic.
Like Kozo’s book on Balkans knives is not perfect (see my previous post), it is a reference for Balkan knives.
In short, honest and good researchers will mention Mahrat’s book, like Tirri’s or other book. It is maybe not what you like but the book is there.
If some of you think they can do better, please write a book, I’ll buy it.
��
Kubur

PS: My comments are not adressed to the previous posts/authors but connected to previous discussions and posts about the same topic.

Jim McDougall · 13th June 2021, 10:28 PM

Kubur,
Thank you for the kind words, and well placed on the book by Dima, who is a very close friend of mine for years now, I am proud to say. I knew when he was writing the book, and had the opportunity to help with some of the material used. His book is EXCELLENT! and cannot be mentioned in the same context as Tirri's, which is a different story, a different kind of book.

Please understand, and I must reiterate, I do not doubt the scabbard is 19th c. nor the hilt, most likely the hilt is newer and is unusual in the type of piercings, the narrow set of the quillons, etc. The blade is certainly 19th c. as well and as noted probably Rajasthani...........the 'sickle' marks are of unusual nature and seem later, perhaps early 20th.
I will have to get my copy of the book, not at hand at the moment.

Please erase the word 'modern' from my comments as it is the source of too much consternation. The sword is late 19th into early 20th, with a older scabbard, and the blade N. Indian mid 19th.

These paluoars were no longer heavily used by the 1880s, except in remote tribal environs. The inscription on the blade suggests a genuinely tribal context, and may well have been a diplomatic presentation as often the case with traditional ethnic forms.

Regarding again the book, of course there will always be disagreements, it is inevitable, but as far as I'm concerned, I admire anyone having the courage to publish......there will always be critics. As I was once told by a well known author, "...just write Jim, tell the people what they need to know...and dont worry about the critics...most of them never lift a pencil.....just write!".

ariel · 16th June 2021, 05:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

The inscription on the blade suggests a genuinely tribal context, and may well have been a diplomatic presentation as often the case with traditional ethnic forms.

We need Kwiatek.

francantolin · 16th June 2021, 03:39 PM

Hello all,
Glad if Kwiatek can help !!

I post other picture about what I found in my internet ''hunt'' for pulwars with similar hilt and scabbard,
found two,
I think, 18th century is exagerated by the auction house
( and the blade is different and made of wootz )
but I put the picture because they wrote to compare the almost similar hilt, to have a look on this book:

Indian and Oriental Armour by Lord Egerton of Tatton,
Plate III, sword no 7
Somebody has got this book perhaps ??

Kind Regards

kwiatek · 17th June 2021, 11:32 PM

I cannot make sense of this as Arabic or Persian, though there are Arabic/Persian words in it. The first words look like

عمل شاه محمود

'amal-i shah mahmud

'Work of Shah Mahmud'

and the last word is اول

awwal

'first'

What comes in between I can't help you with I'm afraid!

francantolin · 18th June 2021, 10:39 AM

Hello Kwiatek,
Thank you for time and help !!

Kubur · 20th June 2021, 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by francantolin

Indian and Oriental Armour by Lord Egerton of Tatton,
Plate III, sword no 7
Somebody has got this book perhaps ??

francantolin · 22nd June 2021, 08:28 PM

Shazaam

Thank you !!!

16th June 2021, 03:39 PM	#4
francantolin Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Posts: 905	Hello all, Glad if Kwiatek can help !! I post other picture about what I found in my internet ''hunt'' for pulwars with similar hilt and scabbard, found two, I think, 18th century is exagerated by the auction house ( and the blade is different and made of wootz ) but I put the picture because they wrote to compare the almost similar hilt, to have a look on this book: Indian and Oriental Armour by Lord Egerton of Tatton, Plate III, sword no 7 Somebody has got this book perhaps ?? Kind Regards Attached Images

13th June 2021, 08:58 PM	#1
Kubur Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 2,145	Well guys I friendly but strongly disagree with you. Maybe the blade is older, but the hilt and the scabbard are late 19th c. Please look at Mahrat's book, p. 152-167, the same hilts with same quillons. For some readers, I'm aware that some forum members criticized the book of my Russian friend. I know that some forum members will not consider what I write because they know better. But some forum members are following my posts and I will write for them first. Even if Mahrat’s book is not perfect, even if some of you spotted some mistakes. First, nobody is perfect, and my respect will always go first to the people who do something, for example a book on Afghan weapons. As far I know it is the only monograph on this topic, so even not perfect it is a reference, maybe not The reference but a reference, the only one devoted to this topic. Like Kozo’s book on Balkans knives is not perfect (see my previous post), it is a reference for Balkan knives. In short, honest and good researchers will mention Mahrat’s book, like Tirri’s or other book. It is maybe not what you like but the book is there. If some of you think they can do better, please write a book, I’ll buy it. �� Kubur PS: My comments are not adressed to the previous posts/authors but connected to previous discussions and posts about the same topic.

13th June 2021, 10:28 PM	#2
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,194	Kubur, Thank you for the kind words, and well placed on the book by Dima, who is a very close friend of mine for years now, I am proud to say. I knew when he was writing the book, and had the opportunity to help with some of the material used. His book is EXCELLENT! and cannot be mentioned in the same context as Tirri's, which is a different story, a different kind of book. Please understand, and I must reiterate, I do not doubt the scabbard is 19th c. nor the hilt, most likely the hilt is newer and is unusual in the type of piercings, the narrow set of the quillons, etc. The blade is certainly 19th c. as well and as noted probably Rajasthani...........the 'sickle' marks are of unusual nature and seem later, perhaps early 20th. I will have to get my copy of the book, not at hand at the moment. Please erase the word 'modern' from my comments as it is the source of too much consternation. The sword is late 19th into early 20th, with a older scabbard, and the blade N. Indian mid 19th. These paluoars were no longer heavily used by the 1880s, except in remote tribal environs. The inscription on the blade suggests a genuinely tribal context, and may well have been a diplomatic presentation as often the case with traditional ethnic forms. Regarding again the book, of course there will always be disagreements, it is inevitable, but as far as I'm concerned, I admire anyone having the courage to publish......there will always be critics. As I was once told by a well known author, "...just write Jim, tell the people what they need to know...and dont worry about the critics...most of them never lift a pencil.....just write!".

17th June 2021, 11:32 PM	#5
kwiatek Member Join Date: May 2019 Posts: 153	I cannot make sense of this as Arabic or Persian, though there are Arabic/Persian words in it. The first words look like عمل شاه محمود 'amal-i shah mahmud 'Work of Shah Mahmud' and the last word is اول awwal 'first' What comes in between I can't help you with I'm afraid!

18th June 2021, 10:39 AM	#6
francantolin Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Posts: 905	Hello Kwiatek, Thank you for time and help !!

22nd June 2021, 08:28 PM	#8
francantolin Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Posts: 905	Shazaam Thank you !!!