Hunting Tulwar (Tulwar Shikargah)

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by mariusgmioc

A quite compelling argument that these tulwars with elaborately decorated blades were NOT actually used for hunting but were merely presentation swords is the condition of their edge.

All the blades of this kind that I have seen, as well as the examples presented here, do not show any traces of use and resharpening on their edges, but have the intact, original edge geometry.

I agree with this observation, in accord with the blades not being sharpened, but I cannot say that I have personally seen or handled these blades myself to concur. Mostly the suggestion that these were 'ceremonial' or diplomatic gifts in js my own opinion based on the cited material from references in my previous posts, as well as personal conversations with some of the authors of references on Indian arms who note that these were not for use in the hunt.

As I have tried to illustrate in previous posts, the use of animals in motif panels on blades in many cases were toward allegorical or metaphoric symbolism important culturally, not just representing hunting scenes.
As shown also previously, the themes changed in Lahore for example from animals and hunting with Mughal rule, to figures in Hindu deities with Rajput and Sikh takeover, but still in similar 'Persian' style.

The blades being decorated, again, as I noted earlier, the bestowal of highly ornate weapons was a keen distinction at durbars and welcoming events, and such weapons worn by courtiers signified status and regal approval (Paul, 1995).

In Europe, the custom of presenting elaborately decorated and sometimes ostentatious weapons as awards and for meritorious purposes to military officers is well known. As far as I have known, these were never carried into battle, let alone the regular dress swords worn by officers.

In European gentry, the hunting sword was often a fashionable item, which is why they have often been classified as 'court swords' (Dean, 1929). However the motifs vary and often were focused on talismanic and heraldic or regalia oriented themes.
Much as with durbars the hunt was typically associated with gathering and interacting of key figures where fashion and status were of utmost importance and weaponry was of course a means of signifying that.

With these kinds of arms, the themes and motifs are typically symbolic and decorative in my opinion, and not designs applied to a weapon to be specifically used for hunting. The themes were either toward cultural or perhaps even dynastic symbolism (Mughals) or religious as with the Hindi deities as noted. In many of the scenes depicted with animal vs. animal, these are possibly to be allegorically intended as certain animals have certain representations in ethnic cultures. In many cases, animals were trained, even to hunt, as with cheetahs in the Mughal courts.
The examples with elephants and humans tumbling obviously may represent mahouts and their matters with these, which ironically were often used in the hunt.

Tipu Sultan, who used the sobriquet, "The Tiger of Mysore", often was depicted allegorically as a fierce tiger, attacking and killing Europeans in various material work, and used 'bubris' (tiger stripes) to decorate most of his weaponry and uniforms etc.

In Persia the lion, and the mythical bird, the Simorgh, are used on blades in these stylings.

As always, the commercialism toward weaponry which seems to have originated in the Victorian period has severely clouded the history of these and many weapon forms.

[fernando]

The only part missing here is when decorated weapons, not being meant to the activity of hunting but a product of traditional culture applied in Indian swords since primordial times, were given at a contemporary (?) stage the name of "hunting (Shikargah) swords".
(Text extract and picture courtesy E. Jaiwant Paul, ARMS AND ARMOUR 2005).


.