KASKARA for comments
 

Picked this up recently purely on the grounds that it was so decorative . It is quite small being a total length of only 76 cm , though the blade is a normal width at 4 cm. There is no sign that the blade has ever been sharpened and perhaps unusually the entire hilt including the crossguard is covered with reptile skin. I was wondering what I have here . Ideas that crossed my mind were ... a child's sword , or one of those pieces meant for sale to Europeans in the immediate post Battle of Omdurman period , or perhaps something much more modern .

In my opinion this is a pre Omdurman but post Mahdi item, and these kaskara were likely presented to tribal chieftains of conscripted groups from regions outside Sudan. This is suggested by the more elaborate thuluth and other motif etched on the blade. These were largely intended as symbols of rank and status and not intended as weapons.

Despite the claims that so much 'souvenier' stuff was produced after Omdurman for occupying forces, and often noting these crocodile covered scabbards etc. ...swords with this attention were not among them. We know that many thuluth etched weapons and crocodile hide elements were found on battlefields in these campaigns.

The smaller size it seems was for the convenience of wear as these were often worn in mounts over the shoulder and under the arm. Mounted chiefs often had larger kaskara attached to the saddle and under their leg, much as the traditional 'tuck' in earlier European times, and as British cavalry often had their swords in the latter 19th c.

Well Jim .... I am pleased you have said that , I had always been led to believe the same since my earliest days of collecting in the late 1960s ... but ones confidence can take a battering from the storm of info engulfing us from the net . I have owned ( and still do ) several swords of this type , but I thought this was a particularly nice example of its type. I do agree as well that it was never intended as a fighting sword , and is akin to the elaborately decorated status symbol weapons that were seen throughout Islamic Africa in the 19th C . I attach a picture of an example of onesuch from my collection .... sorry about the poor pictures the light is tricky in my hall .

Redline, it appears our collecting and enthusiasm in these endeavors pretty much parallel chronologically!!! For me it was early 60s, and full bore by the 80s. I have been involved in North African swords for about the past 35 years but only loosely. In fact I think most I have learned has been here on these pages, as well as some independent research as recently as last summer.
Most of what I have discovered in the true history of these arms is quite different than what is generally held in the cursory attention of far too much literature. The truth is pretty much buried in obscure narratives and records which have been overlooked for far too long.

Thank you for sharing these excellent examples!!!

Thanks Jim , always appreciate your opinion .

You bet!
In my opinion most of these thuluth covered weapons were either produced or imported and decorated at Omdurman during the Khalifa's time (1885-98). These thuluth (script) etchings were essentially couplets which were repetitive into an almost Arabesque motif as an invocation/imbuement.
There are accounts of the considerable weaponry retrieved at Omdurman, many with such decoration as well as crocodile and lizard skin (as on your hilt) mounts.

In many cases these weapons were to the chiefs or key figures in the many slave oriented elements of these forces, conscripted in other regions and often using their favored weapon forms. The throwing knives and other unusual forms not indigenous to Sudan are often among these.

The polearms with huge (almost ace of spades looking) blade covered in thuluth were often used by these key figures in units for formation of troops, much like a unit guidon, and termed 'alem'.

This is extremely interesting Jim , one never stops learning . Much appreciated . I saw many interesting examples last year at the Topkapi Palace museum of alem , yet did not make the Sudan connection at the time ... but now you have pointed this out , it makes sense of some of the items in my collection thus decorated and yet clearly not usable as weapons .

The Mahdi situation is extremely interesting not least in the big battle at Omdurman where the tribal infantry of the Mahdi forces ran into a wall of lead from the new British machine guns...and the massed gunfire of the Martini Henry. It was amazing that the flags they were waving were believed to protect them from harm as were the clothes they wore and probably the talisman effect of their
profusely decorated weapons. :shrug:

Excellent illustrations Ibrahiim! and well noted about the talismanic properties of weapons as well as the flags. There are considerable details and intriguing descriptions of these properties which truly add dimension to the appreciation of these, however perhaps too much to add here.

... and of course the 8,000 British troops were armed with the magazine fed Lee Metford rifle ..

You are right; the majority of British troops had the Lee Metford and or the Lee Enfield. With the earlier ammunition this may still have caused obscuring of targets through smoke . For a general impression of weaponry I site http://obscurebattles.blogspot.com/2...rman-1898.html where it states Quote''

Firepower.
Firepower was clearly in the allied camp. The Anglo-Egyptian army was equipped with the latest in artillery, small arms, and ammunition. Some historians have armed the British infantry in the Sudan with the Lee-Metford magazine-fed, bolt-action rifle. While this was still a black-powder weapon (meaning it would have enshrouded a firing line in choking smoke), it had a max range of 1,800 yards, a ten round magazine, adjustable sites and was capable of laying down an incredible amount of fire on a distant mass target like 17,000 Dervishes. My own research has indicated that most of the crack infantry (in which I'd count the regiments present at Omdurman, like the Grenadier Guards) were already being given the smokeless-powder version of this rifle, the Lee-Enfield, which was to become the standard British infantry weapon until the 1950s.

Martini Henry. The Egyptian and Sudanese troops were armed with the older Martini-Henry (the infamous rifle of Isandhalwana legend), a single shot breechloader using black powder ammunition (which would have obscured the target from a firing line after just a few rounds). However, by 1898 the Martini was a rugged, reliable weapon with a max range comparable to the Lee-Metford and a rate of fire of 12 rpm. While the Dervishes were able to get closer to the Egyptians and Sudanese regiments than they were to the British, they were still stopped dead at several hundred yards. One lone, old man carrying a flag was said to have staggered to within potato-chucking distance of MacDonald's brigade, only to have been shot down clutching his flag, bless his heart.

Maxim Machine Guns.Then we have to consider the dozens of Maxim machine guns on the allied side. The Maxim was a breakthrough in machine gun design, which had, from the Gatling to the mitrailleuse, been prone to jamming at the worst possible time. But the Maxim, water-cooled and belt-fed with a single barrel, was far more reliable. It put out a rate of fire of 550 rpm, so that a couple of men manning one could be worth a whole company. These guns, and other water-cooled versions based on its original design, would also be widely used during the First World War by all sides, and were still in wide use during the Second World War.

Artillery. The allies also enjoyed an overwhelming advantage in artillery. The 52 guns in the army and on the gunboats were quick-firing, extremely accurate out to over 3,000 yards, and lobbed a high-explosive lyddite shell that had more destructive force than anything seen in prior wars. These guns were also a staple of the wars of the early and mid-twentieth century. So what we have in the allied force that faced the Ansar at Omdurman was essentially a fully modern army, armed with everything the armies had in WWI except airplanes and tanks.''Unquote.

A good history and development detail can be seen at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxim_gun whilst below shows the weapon and its inventor; American-British inventor Hiram Stevens Maxim in 1883.

The Charge of The 21st. (Charge of 21st Wm Barnes Wollen 1898.)
 

To give some idea of the graphic nature of business at Omdurman ~ :shrug:

I dont know , but the smokeless 303 cartridge was introduced in the British Army in 1891 so it seems probable to me that it was widespread by 1898 , however with the 17,000 Egyptians firing blackpowder cartridges , I am sure it would soon have become a fog of war !

Mk4 hollow point bullets from the DumDum factory made their first appearance here... A devastating round.

The order of Battle was as you say ...or put by one account as; ...The battle took place at Kerreri, 11 kilometres (6.8 mi) north of Omdurman. Kitchener commanded a force of 8,000 British regulars and a mixed force of 17,000 Sudanese and Egyptian troops. He arrayed his force in an arc around the village of Egeiga, close to the bank of the Nile, where a twelve gunboat flotilla waited in support, facing a wide, flat plain with hills rising to the left and right. The British and Egyptian cavalry were placed on either flank.

Abdullah's followers, calling themselves the Ansar and known to the British as the Dervishes, numbered around 50,000, including some 3,000 cavalry. They were split into five groups—a force of 8,000 under Osman Azrak was arrayed directly opposite the British, in a shallow arc along a mile (1.6 km) of a low ridge leading onto the plain, and the other Mahdist forces were initially concealed from Kitchener's force. Abdullah al-Taashi and 17,000 men were concealed behind the Surgham Hills to the west and rear of Osman Azrak's force, with 20,000 more positioned to the north-west, close to the front behind the Kerreri hills, commanded by Ali-Wad-Helu and Sheikh ed-Din. A final force of around 8,000 was gathered on the slope on the right flank of Azrak's force.

To help bring the thread back on track...although I have enjoyed the Omdurman episode ... I found a video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVw1Ky_21Is worth viewing. The Kaskara.

Very interesting Ibrahiim, thank you.

Whatever happens, we have got
The Maxim gun, and they have not.

around the same time period, the spanish-american war, the battle of san juan hill saw the americans facing the well trained and experienced spanish dug in on the heights, who had ' modern' mausers and maxim (spandau version) machine guns as well as support from breech loading artillery. the american rough riders had inferior krag rifles, and four .30 gatling guns (700rpm), supported by old fashioned bagged black powder cannon. the spanish lost.

Whatever happens, we have got
Teddy Rooseveldt, and they have not.

...well yes indeed to 'quote' that most 'English' of writers and satirists Joseph Hilaire Pierre René Belloc . Oddly enough my daughter's hero is Teddy Roosevelt .
My favourite Sudan inspired verse however is Newbolts :
The sand of the desert is sodden red,—
Red with the wreck of a square that broke; —
The Gatling's jammed and the Colonel dead,
And the regiment blind with dust and smoke.
The river of death has brimmed his banks,
And England's far, and Honour a name,
But the voice of a schoolboy rallies the ranks:
'Play up! play up! and play the game! '
...although the reference to the Gatling gun is incorrect , it was a Gardner gun.

the gardner: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_17ij6cntgI

Nice !

While the scabbard is most definitely crocodile hide (looks to be side of lower back). The hide on the handle and guard is most likely monitor lizard (probably from the neck and leg of a Savannah monitor).

Yes I agree ... I thought perhaps Nile monitor (Varanus niloticus) or desert monitor, (Varanus griseus)

This one, which is very similar, has a date on it.

looks like 1298 hijiri, or 1881 in our reckoning. that would fit the UK's involvement in the sudan.

thank you for posting

Interestingly the panel containing the date on Eftihis ' example is almost identical except for the date ... here are close ups of mine for comparison ... is this a date on mine ? I cant decipher the 'numbers' .

could be, the numerals look a bit odd tho. may be just an illiterate etcher.

arabic is read right to left, except for numbers, which are read left to right.

could be 1229 with a backwards 9. which is 1813/14 in our calendar

here's a chart

Thanks ... but that seems a very early date doesnt it ?

I think Wayne is right, most likely a workman not quite literate or overly skilled in this work on the date. The kaskara as such and in these mounts were not really in use until around mid 1880s, and certainly not in early 19th century. If that date is correct, then it is more plausible this is a commemorative date, and quite possible given the character of this etched work and style.

Thanks for that Jim , that seems a real possibility