A 19th century Afghan warrior’s opinion on European blades compared to his own

[Jim McDougall]

For me the understanding of metallurgical matters is perplexing, but what I have gathered on 'soft steel' is that it dulls and deforms quickly. This suggests that while Afghan swords described in the excerpt might have been deadly sharp, the durability sounds questionable.

I dont think wootz is part of the equation here, as the rank and file warriors would not have likely had swords with wootz blades. I am not sure that Afghans might likely see British or European blades as 'exotic' but as I noted, they did seem to have some affinity for blades with the 'Genoan' sickle marks.
One of the highly favored blade forms in the Deccan were the 'alemani' (German) examples.

The notion of 'exotica' however was very much favored by British officers during the Raj, and in the native cavalry regiments, they fashionably wore Indian style uniforms complete with turbans. In many cases they had regulation style hilts with Indian or Persian blades, while as shown previously there were many Indian swords with British or other blades.

It seems most of these exchanges had more to do with diplomatic and cultural exchanges rather than combat durability.

Regarding wootz, it does seem that the British made notable efforts to eliminate the materials, shops and all related to its production. Presumably this was due to its potential as a deadly weapon element. Much of this effort indeed contributed to the loss of the art of the forging of wootz in the early years of the British Raj.

Again, not sure of that impact of that concerning the Afghan swords, but seemed salient enough to mention.

[Sakalord364]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

For me the understanding of metallurgical matters is perplexing, but what I have gathered on 'soft steel' is that it dulls and deforms quickly. This suggests that while Afghan swords described in the excerpt might have been deadly sharp, the durability sounds questionable.

I dont think wootz is part of the equation here, as the rank and file warriors would not have likely had swords with wootz blades. I am not sure that Afghans might likely see British or European blades as 'exotic' but as I noted, they did seem to have some affinity for blades with the 'Genoan' sickle marks.
One of the highly favored blade forms in the Deccan were the 'alemani' (German) examples.

The notion of 'exotica' however was very much favored by British officers during the Raj, and in the native cavalry regiments, they fashionably wore Indian style uniforms complete with turbans. In many cases they had regulation style hilts with Indian or Persian blades, while as shown previously there were many Indian swords with British or other blades.

It seems most of these exchanges had more to do with diplomatic and cultural exchanges rather than combat durability.

Regarding wootz, it does seem that the British made notable efforts to eliminate the materials, shops and all related to its production. Presumably this was due to its potential as a deadly weapon element. Much of this effort indeed contributed to the loss of the art of the forging of wootz in the early years of the British Raj.

Again, not sure of that impact of that concerning the Afghan swords, but seemed salient enough to mention.

Here is another British Opinion on Afghan blades, by one British veteran. Did the British generally have the same opinion on Indian blades as well?


For what it’s worth I have seen Indian blades described by British as brittle, yet here the speaker explicitly states that Afghan blades were not brittle, though rather soft. It seems extolling the Deadliness of the blade and describing the blade as rather soft are common in these British descriptions of Afghan blades.

Also notice how he states the Afghan blade holds its edge, in spite of the softness of the steel

[Chris Tubman]

A Tulwar that I recently acquired.
Appears to have a shortened 20" 1796 Pattern light cavalry or M1811 “Blücher” blade.
Hilt shows remnants of silver inlay in a flower and foliage design and is stamped 4 P.I, probably 4th Punjab Infantry.

[Jim McDougall]

I think the references to brittle blades from India likely referred to wootz, which if improperly forged was indeed brittle. While many of the wootz blades were of course beautifully finished and impressive for the weapons of those of status, these were not necessarily used in combat.

Great entry Chris! nice example, and as discussed, the British M1796 light cavalry sabre blades were highly favored by Indian warriors, with notable use by Sikhs, but that extended to others as well. This example had had the blade considerably reduced, with very nice hilt likely for ranking figure.

[Chris Tubman]

The shortened Tulwar next to a M1811 “Blücher” for comparison.
The 4th Punjab Infantry were certainly a renowned regiment who amongst other actions were involved in the relief of Lucknow.

[Jim McDougall]

This is remarkable Chris!!! and the markings 4 P.I. are most telling, as you have noted for the unit 4th Punjab Infantry. Those singular markings unleash the 'story' of this tulwar, and its part in the incredibly complex and fascinating history of the British Raj in India.

As you have noted, this unit participated in the Relief of Lucknow in 1857, during the Indian Mutiny, one of the most historic events in this sector of Indian history. In this action the 4th were with the 93rd Highlanders.

I must thank you as you have piqued my interest in this history, which took me to a number of weapons which have been held for years in my collection, while I have studied in other areas. Your tulwar has totally rekindled my interest in returning to their incomplete documentation.

The 4th Punjab Infantry was formed in 1849, along with 9 other units, totaling five cavalry and five infantry, all becoming what comprised the Punjab Irregular Force in 1851.

Ironically, many of the components of these forces were Sikh, and had joined British forces at the end of the Anglo-Sikh war in 1849, along with Pathans from Afghanistan, and some Hindu's from southerly regions.

In 1849, the Kingdom of Punjab was annexed into British East India territory so the idea was to have native forces patrol these vast areas.

I have a cavalry saber by Mole, to the 21st cavalry (Dalys Horse) which was also part of this irregular force from 1849, but was not known by the 21st cavalry designator until 1903. This would seem to fall in place with these type sabers which seem to have become prevalent around late 1880s.

This unit was formed by Lt.H.Daly in 1849, and later became known as 'Daly's Horse' in the convention of the times recognizing the founders of the regiments.

Apparently both the 4th Punjab infantry and the 1st Punjab Cavalry (as Daly's Horse was known then) participated in the actions at Lucknow noted.

While I realize my saber was certainly not present in 1857 but later, yours might have been of that period.....despite the unit designator not being the same after 1851. On the frontiers these peculiarities did not change that quickly.

SIDE NOTE: These irregular units were known initially as the Transfrontier Brigade informally, and were the first military to adopt khaki (called drab) to align with the rugged regions they were situated in.

[Jim McDougall]

As noted in earlier posts, there was a propensity with the use of British M1796 blades in Indian tulwars, most noted during the Anglo-Sikh wars, when British cavalry found that the deadly tulwars used against them were actually old British blades honed razor sharp.

The convention seems to have continued in the Punjab regions after that, and other areas under East India Company dominion. I posted earlier a Mughal court type tulwar likely from Delhi mounted with an Osborn M1796 blade.

Also posted an Indian tulwar with steel Persian shamshir style hilt which also in this category of East India Company associated blade mountings, perhaps from Deccan, but at this point also the Punjab regions as well. This one has a British M1788 style blade. In the late 19th century, East India Company was contracting many blades of M1788 form to British makers. The foremost was Thomas Gill of Birmingham, but this blade is unmarked.
It is however decorated with koftgari which seems to align with the ad hoc ruling classes developing in the principalities in Punjabi areas housing the many mercenaries from Europe and Portugal.

One of these was Firingipura, outside Delhi during the reign of Shah Jahan with mostly French and other European mercenaries. There were Germans among these, and another of such 'foreign' principalities was situated in the Doab, north of Delhi.

While I had always focused on the use of the British blades in use, and thought perhaps these mounted in much more status oriented versions of tulwar might be diplomatically associated. I now see that perhaps the heirarchy of these foreign principalities might well be the solution to the examples I have.

With the example tulwar to the 4th Punjab Infantry, it would seem that the foreign blades circulating in these regions through the large numbers of European mercenaries in these times might account for the M1811 Blucher blade in this example.

As we see, a most historically pertinent example!!
Well done Chris!!!