How old is this Tulwar?

[Pukka Bundook]

Apologies, double post!

[Jim McDougall]

VERY well said Richard!
Trying to itemize swords of India, especially the tulwar, is pretty much futile and really does require a great deal of research and knowledge of India's history to attempt specific classifications with any degree of viability.

As pointed out, there were many variations and options which existed contemporarily and also as well noted, swords were almost consistently remounted, as common with many ethnographic swords.
The replacement of scabbards is pretty much standard, as the materials were generally less durable of course and did not last through the longer working lives of the blades.

Rajasthan is sort of like the 'Texas' of India, it is huge, and the many centers of sword making were in these regions of India. Here were typically the shops producing hilts as well, and these often went to other locations, where they were decorated in the locally favored fashion, for example to Lucknow where enameling was prevalent etc.

With this tulwar, it is of course safe to say it is 19th century as this is the time when these examples became popularly known through the British Raj.
There was still much activity in hilt making, as well as blade making along with importing of them.
The blade here appears to be Indian, most likely from Rajasthan, and I would say safely mid to latter 19th c. It is not of the styling of European saber blades earlier nor of contemporary 19th c. European forms, though it reflects influence.

The hilt is of a number of Rajasthani types but I think these open hilt with close in quillons were typically Mughal (though here I am probably generalizing). The reason I say that is that the Rajput and Sikh examples seem to have more substantial elements (knuckleguard, larger pommel dish) and less 'decoration' (again generalizng).

Obviously those comments are subject to the countless exceptions which exist in tulwars, which were diversely used over much of India for centuries.

PS
Gonzo I am inclined to agree with your excellent observation on the hilt, I think it is older than the blade (or at least not original to it) and seems to be more of the type I have usually regarded as 'court' or official type which typically have less substantial blades.

[Norman McCormick]

The blades I have seen of this kind have been curved a bit more or less, but never to an extreme. The yelman can be more or less pronounced. They have no fuller or only a broad single one. They are all broad and heavy blades, and they are 17th or early 18th century blades.

Jens

Hi,
The above is a comment on the particular blade in these photographs. I have another late 18thC Tulwar which also has a thick and heavy blade without fullers.
Regards,
Norman.

[mahratt]

Late 19th century ordinary tulwar
Scabbard - early 20th century

[Gonzoadler]

Thanks for your help and explanations.
Of course it's good to do an own research in the forum, but sometimes it is helpful to ask other collectors, especially if you are not that experienced in the topic. Often you get some additional information, like in this case.
It is my second Tulwar (my first was a very simple one) and for that it's not bad, I think.

Regards

[Jim McDougall]

To reiterate more on the case for the classification of tulwars attempting to establish regional characteristics, much of which was popularized by Dr. G.Pant in "Indian Arms & Armor" (1980):
The impression is that the hilt forms reflect locally favored types which he names and illustrates, however, as can be seen by a map of the huge state of Rajasthan. most of these terms come from places in the geographic boundaries of that state.

The silver inlay which appears to remain on this hilt suggests a style of inlay which was created in the Bidri regions of Rajasthan. The style was widely copied and diffused to the point some arms were classified 'Bidri'.

The term 'katti' is a term for knife (if I recall) in the Kanada language used iin western India by Coorg's.
The term 'Sirohi' is often regarding the highly favored blades from this region for quality, but cannot be defined by any particular characteristic I know of.

Other terms like Mewari, Udapuri (actually same region) reflect an industrial center in Rajasthan where considerable production of hilts and swords took place.

To classify tulwars by ethicity or cultural denominators is equally difficult as Rajputs, Sikhs, Jains and Mughals all used them without particular favor to any one of these hilt styles. Blades were constantly traded, and diffused throughout sword hilting centers and arsenals.

Bikaner (in Rajasthan) is one of the few arsenals whose markings are well established on blades (stippled letters or numbers), and where huge volume of Indian arms have been found.

Tulwars were used of course in Sind to the north,northeast, in Punjab (traditional domain of the Sikhs)north, and in Lucknow, Delhi and other key locations of the Mughal empire to north, northeast.
The Rajputs were primarily situated in Rajasthan.

So decoration and certain motif and styling along with certain hilt elements can be used in some degree with tulwar identification, much as these are considered in degree for period, remembering that these hilts typically may have been produced somewhere in the vast Rajasthan region.

Naturally these are simply my own overviews from my own experience in the study of these, and I am certain there are likely different views as well as probably errors, so I welcome any input concerning my comments.

[Gonzoadler]

@Jim McDougall
Unfortunately I have no additions to your comments, but they are really interesting and informative.
Do you can recommend some literature concerning Indian arms?