Indian Tulwar with Rare Hand Guard

Edward F · 23rd June 2019, 04:37 PM

Does this show a timeline on hilts,Maybe I think in the early swords you can see changes over 2 or 3 hundred years.depending on the type of use the sword would have the hilt would change.Their are not that many half guard swords around so they may have come from a single area or just made for very few that wanted half guard protection or the just didn't the the rub of full guard on their hip.

ariel · 23rd June 2019, 07:44 PM

I agree with Jim: there were 2 main tendencies with Indian handles: one purely local/tribal, and we indeed have major difficulties pinpointing their places of origin, and another, with merging of local variants with influences from another culture. IMHO, Tulwar with a side guard belongs to the latter. I have some of those, too. Again, pure IMHO, the most logical place for such collision would be Deccan.

Your archaic ones likely belong to the third group that is almost unique and where Rawson might have been correct: local progression of Old Indian into full-blown Khanda form. The D- guard of the latter was likely influenced by the European examples, but the solid shield-like guard might have been a completion of the archaic double-wing construction

I an skating on a very, very thin ice here, but the advantage of this Forum is our ability to express half-baked preliminary ideas and adjust them according to critical comments. Our entries here are not a real book, where everything needs to be researched to the minute comma.

Jim McDougall · 24th June 2019, 03:05 AM

Very well said Ariel, and thank you.

In the photos you have shown Edward, the first two are what are regarded as 'ancient' forms of 'khanda' which correspond to forms seen in iconographic sources, and existed in a spectrum of similar forms over many centuries.
The 'winged' guard as described was a commonly known feature.

In the next photo (left) is the tulwar of discussion, which has the raised half guard and seems plausibly influenced by such features found on some 'chilanum' daggers, a knife typically regarded as Deccani. This broad area of influence covers roughly the entire central band of the Subcontinent. These broad regions are most dynamic through diversity of cultures, religious and tribal, as well as the incursion of foreign trade and colonial factions.

Next (right) is the 'Hindu basket hilt' which is essentially a khanda which derives from the ancient form, but is believed to have the wide guard extended to complete a hand guard up to the pommel. This is generally held to have evolved from European influence post 1600 and with Marathas, filtering into Rajput and Sikh use as well.

Next is another of these. Then another of the 'ancient' indiginous khanda forms.

The next two are tulwars (Indo Persian hilt) the one on the left is Mughal and open hilt, which I personally regard as 'court' type weapons, usually highly decorated and with no extended guarded hilt features. Naturally there is nothing to preclude actual combat use or other........but Rajput and Sikh used usually hand guard forms.
These are seen on the right photo.

It was once declared in Stone (1934) that the katar (transverse grip) puch dagger was an exclusively Hindu weapon. That assessment was quickly discounted by the many Mughal examples known.

Your note on personal preferences due to issues with some hilt features for on reason or another is certainly a matter of incidence, but not a cause for alteration of a hilt feature in general. These kinds of things took place in European settings with some military sword types (British 1796 disc hilts cut down due to uniform chafing), but Indian weaponry was hardly regulation, and varied in often wide degree.

As Ariel has well noted, here we are a discussion forum, and we are free to express ideas, observations, and examination of examples where we all expect critical comments. Quite frankly I much appreciate your open expression and thought through comments, and always appreciate anyone ready to take on the daunting challenges of classifying Indian arms.
We are all learning together, and helping each other do so.
Thanks for the great input.

RAMBA · 24th June 2019, 12:53 PM

Some similarity/influence in the pierced and beaded guard type on this 17th C Khanda.

Early Hindu Khanda
17th century
Patissa, India
Very rare sword type
Pierced guard

C - Swords and Antique Weapons - Gavin Nugent.

23rd June 2019, 04:37 PM	#1
Edward F Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 54	Does this show a timeline on hilts,Maybe I think in the early swords you can see changes over 2 or 3 hundred years.depending on the type of use the sword would have the hilt would change.Their are not that many half guard swords around so they may have come from a single area or just made for very few that wanted half guard protection or the just didn't the the rub of full guard on their hip. Attached Images

24th June 2019, 12:53 PM	#4
RAMBA Member Join Date: Apr 2019 Posts: 98	Some similarity/influence in the pierced and beaded guard type on this 17th C Khanda. Early Hindu Khanda 17th century Patissa, India Very rare sword type Pierced guard C - Swords and Antique Weapons - Gavin Nugent. Attached Images

23rd June 2019, 07:44 PM	#2
ariel Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ann Arbor, MI Posts: 5,503	I agree with Jim: there were 2 main tendencies with Indian handles: one purely local/tribal, and we indeed have major difficulties pinpointing their places of origin, and another, with merging of local variants with influences from another culture. IMHO, Tulwar with a side guard belongs to the latter. I have some of those, too. Again, pure IMHO, the most logical place for such collision would be Deccan. Your archaic ones likely belong to the third group that is almost unique and where Rawson might have been correct: local progression of Old Indian into full-blown Khanda form. The D- guard of the latter was likely influenced by the European examples, but the solid shield-like guard might have been a completion of the archaic double-wing construction I an skating on a very, very thin ice here, but the advantage of this Forum is our ability to express half-baked preliminary ideas and adjust them according to critical comments. Our entries here are not a real book, where everything needs to be researched to the minute comma.

24th June 2019, 03:05 AM	#3
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 9,785	Very well said Ariel, and thank you. In the photos you have shown Edward, the first two are what are regarded as 'ancient' forms of 'khanda' which correspond to forms seen in iconographic sources, and existed in a spectrum of similar forms over many centuries. The 'winged' guard as described was a commonly known feature. In the next photo (left) is the tulwar of discussion, which has the raised half guard and seems plausibly influenced by such features found on some 'chilanum' daggers, a knife typically regarded as Deccani. This broad area of influence covers roughly the entire central band of the Subcontinent. These broad regions are most dynamic through diversity of cultures, religious and tribal, as well as the incursion of foreign trade and colonial factions. Next (right) is the 'Hindu basket hilt' which is essentially a khanda which derives from the ancient form, but is believed to have the wide guard extended to complete a hand guard up to the pommel. This is generally held to have evolved from European influence post 1600 and with Marathas, filtering into Rajput and Sikh use as well. Next is another of these. Then another of the 'ancient' indiginous khanda forms. The next two are tulwars (Indo Persian hilt) the one on the left is Mughal and open hilt, which I personally regard as 'court' type weapons, usually highly decorated and with no extended guarded hilt features. Naturally there is nothing to preclude actual combat use or other........but Rajput and Sikh used usually hand guard forms. These are seen on the right photo. It was once declared in Stone (1934) that the katar (transverse grip) puch dagger was an exclusively Hindu weapon. That assessment was quickly discounted by the many Mughal examples known. Your note on personal preferences due to issues with some hilt features for on reason or another is certainly a matter of incidence, but not a cause for alteration of a hilt feature in general. These kinds of things took place in European settings with some military sword types (British 1796 disc hilts cut down due to uniform chafing), but Indian weaponry was hardly regulation, and varied in often wide degree. As Ariel has well noted, here we are a discussion forum, and we are free to express ideas, observations, and examination of examples where we all expect critical comments. Quite frankly I much appreciate your open expression and thought through comments, and always appreciate anyone ready to take on the daunting challenges of classifying Indian arms. We are all learning together, and helping each other do so. Thanks for the great input.