clunker saif?
 

Got an old battered sword at the local gun-sale,
No pictures yet, (Will have to read up on how to post them)
Somewhat crude hilt, with nuckle guard, and very rough horn 'pistol grip' handle
top quillon bent acutely forward, over the upper of two hooks, ...(like rings to protect a finger when over the cross )
These two 'hooks' have an extension, that stand out at right-angles to the blade.( to the right of blade)
Blade curved, central fuller, sharp false edge for maybe 6 inches, Round tip, but possibly broken off.
Blade very spring, But quite bent!!.....26 1/2 inches long.
Blade marked "Genoa".........but the 'N' is backwards!!.........so a faked mark.
also has 'eyelashes' all the way down to false edge on both sides.

Over-all condition is a bit crude and pitted, but rust must have been removed with an electric wire brush just for the sale!!
Is it worth posting a picture or two?
or has anyone seen this sort of thing before?

Thanks, Richard.

Pictures added!
 

Here are the pictures that go with my last post.
I would appreciate any light you may be able to shed on what we have here!!
Many thanks,
Richard.

Any time you want to get rid of that 'clunker', I'm sure you'll find someone to take it off your hands. That particular style of hilt belongs to a 'Nimcha'; a Berber sword, almost always seen with a European blade. It's also not uncommon to see tribal markings added to the blade at the time the hilt was attached, so you probably still have one on your sword, it's just been dressed up a bit. The odd quillions and the pseudo-pistol grip hilt are typical, though most I've seen are flat, without the projections rising perpendicular to the blade.

Even in rough shape like this it's nice to have as an example of type in your collection. Ones in decent shape tend to be quite pricey.

Nimcha
 

Thank you Sir, for the reply.
After posting the pictures, I did see a similar example in an old 1978 Arms and armour review.
Felt somewhat embarrased not knowing the correct name!
I have the odd question;
1,
Can you tell me what the projections perpendicular to the blade are for?
2,
Is it possible to give an approximate age to this sword?
3,
Does anyone know of a source of information about Nimchas?
(I don't like to be ignorant!!)
4,
Would it be possible for someone to PM me with a Very approximat value?

( Purchasing it at auction, in a lot with cleaning rods and a walking stick has me wondering if I robbed myself or not!)
Thank you for your time,
Richard.

I will tell you what little I know, and hopefully Jim or one of the other board members who is more knowledgable (and has access to references I do not!) can fill in any blanks (and correct any mistakes!)

1. The projections are, I believe, an additional knuckleguard. I have seen one of these where they arced across and formed a complete ring, but most are flat.

2. Most of these that I've seen date to the mid-1800s. There were a couple of weapons forms that seemed to evolve and disappear very quickly.

3. This is one where the people with reference books will have to help you out. What little I know I've gleaned here and there, but I don't have any good sources.

One thing you can do is go do Google Image Search and look up 'nimcha'. Click on any pictures that resemble your sword and if the page is still up you may find some information that way.

4. I'll PM you on this one.

5. Enter nimcha into this forum's search engine for previous threads on these swords . :D

Nimcha.
 

Thank you for the answers Fenris, and Rick.
Will delve into archives and see what I can unearth.

If anyone else has anything they can add, I would be most grateful.

I can think of lots of questions, but must discipline myself!.........and see if the answers are alredy here somewhere on this forum!!

Richard.

The only thing I can add is that in my very limited exposure to these swords and comparing this one to my example of this type of sayf/nimcha ; I have never seen those projecting lugs on the quillons before . :confused:

Thanks for reply, Rick.
I think I saw some when doing a search, that had a half-circle set-up, but not just projections.
I found the pic of yours, V. interesting!
Very similar hilt, Very different blade!
Did you find any more information re. the blade?

On mine may I ask "now what?"

is it OK to re-align the horn in the centre of the handle,?.......it looks like the original horn used was hollow, (as to be expected) and had a piece inserted, that has moved somehow.
What about the cracked/chipped end of handle, should I fix or leave alone?

And the wire-brush marks? dull it down? ?

Clean blade at all?.........w.o. removing pits of course!!

I know this is not an expensive sword, but still don't want to do the wrong thing.
Thanks,
Richard.

Hi Richard, no I haven't found any more information than that it's an old backsword blade; possibly English and possibly as old as the turn of the 18th century . That was about all I could discover about it .. so far . No one has been able to identify the mark on the blade . :confused:

As for doing any work on yours; were I you I'd just live with it for a while . :)

Correct me if I am wrong but I do not think is is incorrect to call this a saif. The term Saif is arabian for sword and usually used with curved blade swords.( A post from Artzi pointed out that this term may have come from Aramaic as it is also used in Hebrew for a straight rapier like sword ) While these Saif or Nimcha are usually attributed to Morroco they are also appearantly found in Zanzibar ( The Zanzibar saif that are a pretty much a type of 'nimcha' have the same basic grip but have a ring on theguard.). Of Interest I have seen one example of a sword with a Nimcha handle and a blade like a toukuba. In a thread with Jim about these he once wrote "It must be remembered that the commonly used term 'nimcha'* for the multi-quilloned Moroccan sabre is actually misapplied, and as in most cases in the Dar-al-Islam is locally considered a sa'if. These Moroccan swords with complex guards were known from at least the earlier 17th century in the Maghreb (which included the Moroccan littoral as far as Algeria)and the hilts are believed to have developed from early Italian sabres via Arab trade."

While we call these Nimcha Robert Elgood in his book "Arms & Armour of Arabia" noted that the literal Arabic term Nimcha ( Nimsha) denotes a 'short sword', which really does not fit these longer swords

A zanzibar sword
http://www.oriental-arms.com/photos/...00351/ph-0.jpg

A morrocan sword
http://www.oriental-arms.com/photos/...01835/ph-0.jpg

Please feel free to correct me if my impressions on this are wrong

Hi Richard,
Sorry to come in on this so late, apparantly I missed it :)

As has been noted, this is a Moroccan sa'if , more commonly termed by collectors a 'nimcha' (thanks very much Rhys Michael for the reference:).

Actually this is a most interesting example, and as I always implore, please leave it alone unless there is active rust. These weapons were often refurbished numerous times during thier working lives, and sometimes the work of the armorers is amateurish, making it difficult to discern these from the contrived workings of devious collector/dealers. I always feel better presuming the former, and analyzing the example with the state it is in.

The blade on this, clearly heavily worked over, appears to be a 19th century military sabre blade, with these markings added by an armorer attempting to duplicate other trade blade markings. Most fascinating is that the half circle (sickle marks) aligned along the blade as motif in linear fashion is seen only on Caucasian blades of the second half 19th c. and typically attributed to Chechen manufacture. The name stamped in the blade attempts to say 'Genoa', the blades which were associated with the origins on the familiar sickle marks which of course are well known seen back to back in a single pair, not used as motif as seen here.

This may well be a tribal piece from the Maghreb, the rounded tip on the blade may suggest further into the Sahara where of course, these are seen on takoubas. It seems most likely to be a late incarnation, probably into the early 20th c. While the 'nimcha' is typically considered more of a coastal weapon, in these later times, trade routes and heightened tribal and colonial activity certainly increased the diffusion of weapons.

All the best,
Jim

Jim,
I am confused: where does the info about linear arrangement of the "eyelash " sign being in any way characteristic of Caucasian blades come from?
All similar markings on Caucasian swords I've ever seen are either single or arranged as an opposing pair. Often, they were flanked by 3 dots on each side, locally called " little bees".
This mark is called Gurda ( or Gorda), the origin of which is uncertain and takes about 10 pages in the Askhabov's book " Chechen Weapons". They range from "Gora Da", ie "the possessor of might" in memory of a legendary nameless master from Ayttkhalloi, name of an aul (village) Gordali, name of a master from Gordaloi named Gorda, a word "gura da", ie " owner of a trap" ( teeth marks) or a shout " gurda" ( " I'll show you!") with which one master once allegedly cut his opponent in half.
Likely, the influence of a similar Genoese mark was involved. Genoese colonies on the Black Sea imported blades to Circassians.
I have yet to encounter a Caucasian blade with a linear orientation of multiple Gurda marks.
I would really appreciate a reference.

Hi Ariel,
The Ashkabov book is an excellent reference, and this is exactly where I saw illustrations of these blades, which I had actually seen on a Khevsur sword.
Interesting on the term 'gurda', which I have been under the impression simply is a term used to denote high quality or valued blade, and as you note the etymology is unclear.

The 'Kaldam' sword, apparantly referring generally to certain swords used by Chechens and Khevsurs, and noting the 'gurda' blades, is described in Ashkabov (p.75) and the illustration of the blade has the linear 'sickle' type half circles the length of the blade along the back. The same blade form, a straight, single edged blade with the same linear motif of these markings, is shown on p.114, as a blade from Ataghi (the example on extreme right).

While the use of these markings as motif is not addressed in the text, it does seem apparant that it did exist on this particular blade form. The Genoan marking, as you note, certainly was copied in many cases, and this did derive from those Genoan colonies. It is interesting how widely these blades were diffused by such trade.

Although it is difficult to see clearly in the illustrations, that these half circles are actually imitations of the toothed half circles, close examination as in the example I have seen did reveal that they indeed were.

Sorry for not specifying the reference. I have seen the same use of this half circle motif on at least one example of an unusual sword blade from India, and I will try to locate that reference. I think it was an auction catalog.

All the best,
Jim

Well, Much of this is a bit over my head, not having reference books on the subject.
I had been led to believe that Morrocan sa'ifs did not have ring-guards, whilst Zanzibar saifs did, so my logic figured as this had perpendicular projections (Like a chopped off ring guard) this must be a kind of Zanzibar sword.

Also, the Berber saifs/nimchas on the forum here are much different to this one, (no guard at all) Yet both appear to have been used by the Berber people?,
Could anyone enlighten me, and please, excuse my ignorance!

While my own knowledge is limited, keep in mind that when one speaks of 'Berber' and 'Moroccan', one is speaking of a number of different tribes, each with their own identity and preferences as to weapons. One might as well say 'Native American' and expect the Iroquois to be carrying the same weapons as the Apache.

Even within the same tribe there can be a huge variation of weapons. There have been a number of discussions of the flyssa on this board, yet it is a weapon that only appeared briefly in its most recognized form, from the early 1800s through the early 1900s, and that was just the Kayble. How many other variations were carried by the different tribes probably no one will ever know for certain.

I may be 'digging up' old ground but the 'guard' shape suggests 'Allah'.
Fist pic is 'Allah' , second is the symbol on its side to match hilt of the third picture.

Nicely spotted, David!

The Acehnese rencong has a bism'allah carved at the base of the blade, so this certainly has precedent. Your observation could be correct, but keep in mind that the form is also derived from one that had nothing to do with "allah". Could be an armourer's aethetic sense at work, adapting existing shapes to new meanings.

Emanuel

I think we are seeing things that are not there: kind of "Lady Mondegreen" reading.
Algerean Nimchas had only 2 langets ( or are they bent quillons?) , and Zanzibarean swords had in effect 2 langets and a ring. Both would absolutely preclude "reading" the configuration of the handguard as "Allah".
If we follow the same reasoning, European D-guards would stand for " Dominus" or " Deus", and Albanian Khandjars, with their diagonally incised handles would hint at " Virgo Maria" :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
For those not familiar with Lady Mondegreen, here is the link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondegreen

These are some really interesting observations!! :) and I think such constructive ideas are often very important in studying ethnographic weapons. One of my favorite quotes:
"...discovery consists of seeing what everybody has seen,
and thinking what nobody has thought".
-Albert von Szent-Gyorgy

Actually the very interesting hilt structure of these sa'if/ nimchas has been studied and discussed numerous times over the years. It would seem that many of the features, especially the distinctive quillon, guard arrangement evolved from early Italian swords, and these influences were carried by mostly trade interaction from about the late 15th c. onward. Study on this development was discussed by Anthony North in 1975 ( "A Late 15th c. Italian Sword", in 'The Connoisseur' Dec.1975).

Prior to this, the catalog of the collections of Charles Buttin (Rumilly, France, 1933) shows numerous examples of these sa'if, those with the distinct ring on the crossguard noted as 'Arab' without any reference to 'Zanzibar' attribution. I believe the Zanzibar association developed with its prominence as a trade center, and prevalence of furbishers and outfitters there who produced examples of earlier Arab swords with both trade and native blades there in the 19th c. It does seem that the ring guard has been established as typically found on these sa'if known to have come from Zanzibar, but they do not seem to have been necessarily indiginous prior to examples produced later in the 19th c. there.In the Buttin reference, examples of these sa'if without the ring guard and with the multiple downward quillons were invariably labelled Moroccan. Interestingly, I believe the ring guards are reflections also of early Italian swords, which often had these as the more complex guards developed.

While this material on the development of these hilts presents the results of existing and much earlier researches, I find the suggestions made most interesting and never discount the possibilities of the many ways key influences may have been selected.

All best regards,
Jim

It also never hurts to try and get inside the heads of those who made and used such weapons. There is little practical reason for such an ornate hilt that would not be equally served by a simpler design. so what was the aesthetic that attracted the weaponsmith? Perhaps an early artisan noticed the similarity between the basic design and the calligraphy for 'Allah'; perhaps it was away of avoiding producing weapons whose hilts were also the 'sign of the cross'. At this late date no one is likely to know for sure, but it never hurts to speculate so long as one remembers to keep an open mind and not become over-attached to any one theory, at least until such time as there is sufficient evidence to choose one in preference over others.

Well I'm still with you chaps, and find it all very fascinating!

Katana's observation appears to me very possible.

I do not know how many known examples of sa'ifs have a guard like this one.
The ones I have seen either have a 'D' ring, or 'quillons' that taper out and down, away from the blade, not curling in in the manner of a ring guard.

One observation I can make, is this sword is very handy, fast and very comfortable to hold, with the finger over the cross.
Held in this manner it really comes to life, Yet, the very few other examples of sa'ifs I have seen pictures of appear to pre-clude holding in this manner. (no-where for finger to go!)
The sword does appear to hav been held in this manner, as the sharp corner of the cross is worn down much smoother in the finger area.
I know these obsevations are pointless from an historical point of view, but it may help us understand this specific ring shaping.

I must thank all for sharing in this discussion!!

Best,
Richard.

If Jim's info about the Italian predecessors of these guards is correct ( and I tend always to believe him!), then the "Allah" theory becomes even less probable.

I agree that Italian and Allah don't really go together!

But as can be plainly seen, this is not an Italian style hilt. This in my mind does not mean that there are no Italian influences here.
The way I see it, An Italian hilt has certain merits, and these merits could have been incorporated into a locally manufactured hilt.

The Italian hilt has the advantage of being able to wrap the index finger over the cross, and still be protected by the ring.
If this was seen as an advantage and incorpoated in the hilt in question, then it is merely an incorporation of the Idea, and not incorporation of actual design.
The local design/style could have just been worked around the sound principles of the italian style..........Therefore the tight little knuckle-guard and "Allah" could be incorporated as well as anything else!

But then again What do I know?!!!

Jim... You may want to consider "Seiol" (сеиол is Cyrillic isn't it). ;)

It would seem they would have stamped "геноа" if they wanted Genoa. Just a gut feeling...

Thanks very much Ariel :) ! Much appreciated.

You are right Richard, this is not an Italian style hilt. It is a locally produced hilt with stylized influence believed to derive from early Italian hilts. As I had noted, the ring guards and developing complex quillon arrangements on many Italian hilts may be seen in rudimentary form in many of these sa'if hilts. The influence of these Italian hilts were diffused widely, typically via Venetian trade routes.

BSMStar,
I am not a linquist so I can only presume you are right that this word is not Cyrillic. However, in transcribing words or inscriptions on trade blades or native blades, spelling and letter form are typically anything but correct.
This can often be seen for example on even Solingen blades which sought to duplicate mottos or makers names from other countries. The spellings, letter forms etc. are often incorrect, and as native makers copied from the trade blades, the digression became even more acute.
My suggestion was that this interpretation on this blade simply attempted to mimic the 'Genoa' often seen on certain blades.

All best regards,
Jim

I fully agree. No Cyrillic here!!!
It is just a not very literate attempt to imitate foreign letters.
They also imitated Polish, German and Hungarian inscriptions with rather comic results, forged Solingen and Hungarian markings with very local flavor etc.
On the other hand, Europeans exported gazillions of sword blades inscribed "Fringia", a place that, to my knowledge, never existed ( correct me, please!). This was a corruption of Feringhi ( foreighner, European) just to convince the "locals" that they were buying a real import stuff! Come to think of it, not much difference between the two approaches :rolleyes:

I am not trying to assert what is right or wrong… just a consideration (although, the letters are legitimate Cyrillic letters).

Do an internet search for Seiol… it is a real word and a name.

Best regards,

Wayne

I see the resemblance, but for that matter it also resembles the sacred syllable "Om" (aum):
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...px-Aum.svg.png

One side Allah.....the otherside the sacred 'Om' :) Perhaps the maker of this hilt wanted to 'double the divine protection' for the owner :D

Well noted, Mark :)

Three clues...
 

Let me breach another possibility for the “Genoa” stamp.

Jim, you have pointed out that the sword may have been modified in the Caucus and/or the Chechen region… if so, that would place the sword in Mother Russia.

Being in Russia, it opens to possibility of Cyrillic letters. The backward “N” and the letter “л” (the letter lambda, you see it as the letter “A” without the cross bar) are a give-away. This is clue number one.

The theory that it is just simply to mislead and to look like the word Genoa (due to a Genoan connection) would not make sense if we were “Russian” and living in that region. There is a letter “A” in Cyrillic and I would have to assume that the last letter would have been an “A” and not “л” as it was stamped, if the word Genoa was intended. This is clue number two. Therefore, any local Russian would see the word Seiol and not Genoa. In order for the Genoa theory to work, we would have to assume that these swords were stamped for sale to the West. Only western eyes would be “mislead.”

Jim, you have also pointed out a time frame of the later 1800’s… these opens the possibility (building on your other points) that the sword may have survived the October Revolution (of 1918). This is clue number three. In the new Soviet State, no medals or formal award system existed until after the formation of the Federation (“local” medals started production but were still very difficult to obtain in the field). Decorations for valor in the battlefield usually consisted of items confiscated by the Red Army in the name of the people. Guns, swords, daggers, and even clothing were handed out as decorations, usually with hand written citations. It was not too unusual to have the persons name engraved or stamped on the item (depending on the importance of the recipient, availability to do the engraving and so on).

Therefore, I would like to suggest, there maybe other explanations for the “Genoa” stamp.

Best regards,

Wayne

Hi Wayne,
Extremely well written and thought out post responding to the Genoa markings and Caucasian trade blades!
Actually what I was suggesting, and apparantly could have worded better, was that this blade, of uncertain origin appears to have had motif and the 'Genoan' marking added, probably by a tribal armourer in the Maghreb.
The point that I was bringing up about the ' sickle mark' used in linear motif was known to occur on the blades from the Caucusus, and that this much more crudely done representation suggested that these blades must have been known to the armourer. The only other place I know of this linear motif with these sickle marks besides the Caucusus has been an example of sword in India, so it seemed most interesting to see it here in the Maghreb.

My note on the transcribing of words and lettering by armourers or blacksmiths on these refurbished blades simply was suggesting that the obvious errors were a result of being done by a person not able to read the language, and quite possibly illiterate even in thier own language. I'm sure that if I were trying to inscribe something in Cyrillic, the end result would probably even be worse than this !:) considering my limited knowledge of Russian.

Thank you for the outstanding and informative post concerning possibilities concerning these 'Genoan' markings and the very impressive deductive reasoning you present to support your observations ! My point could certainly have been presented more clearly, so my apologies for the wild goose chase! :)

All best regards,
Jim

Jim,
Re. the backwards 'N', I was looking at a rather nice Italian 18th century flint sporting gun recently, the lock was signed, And the 'N' was backwards!

Sooo, room for thought......

Jim, there is no reason to apologize… your points are well taken and I was just following up on them. My theory is no more correct than any other… I just chose to follow the three clues, 1. the location, 2. the language, and 3.the historical context… but my ideas are still just a theory.

Best regards,

Wayne

Wayne,
With all due respect, I can assure you with a 100% certainty that the inscription has nothing to do with Russian. This is a classic mis-representation of the Latin N, not Russian I. It is seen routinely on a multitude of Oriental blades attempting to imitate European origin. There is no place named Saiol in Russia to start with; there is Saiol in Spain and Sayol in Iran. Neither of these places are known for using Cyrillic. There is no word or name Saiol in Russian.
Furthermore, before 1918, any Russian word ending with a consonant had an additional letter Yat after the final consonant. You can see it here
http://www.omniglot.com/writing/cyrillic.htm
marked in red.
The presumed "Saiol" does not have it.
Please, can we consider it as an end of story? :)

Ariel,

I would total agree with you, except for the glaring letter lambda at the end of the word (it is not the letter A). Look at your link (look at the 10th century version letter L – I have seen this version of the letter L in WWII Soviet Documents). If we were just debating the Cyrillic “и,” then I would have to agree with you… but where are we seeing the letter A? It may be your opinion that this is not Cyrillic. For me, being a Soviet period collector, all of the letters fall in line with being Cyrillic. Jim has placed the sword in what would be the Russian empire… of course; then again you may be right… Seiol (сеиол) = Genoa (геноа). I will assume that you are the expert and that you are correct. I apology for voicing another option. Consider it the end of the story.

BSMstar,
Please try to understand...I am NOT placing this sword in the Russian empire, or anywhere other than the Maghreb!
What I have said is that the markings and motif appear to be 'native' attempts at duplicating the motif from blades I have seen from the Caucusus. I was noting that this suggested that the armourer IN THE MAGHREB who was working on this blade appeared to have knowledge of these Caucasian blades.
This was what was meant by 'wild goose chase' :) as you were pursuing this sword coming FROM the Caucusus, which it clearly is not.

I hope this will place this line of discussion back on the right track.

The discussion of Russian letters pertaining to this sword is desperately moot.

All the best,
Jim

My apologies Jim,

I was thinking a bit out loud, me thinks… I do not think the sword was made in Russia, I think this trade sword could have made its way in that direction. With the possible influences that you pointed out, I was trying to point out another possible “influence.” While the stamped letters could be anything or nothing… I was entertaining the notion that it could be something along that line of reasoning. When adding the clues, I vocalize your meaning more strongly than intended... again I apologize.


Ariel,

I am only stating an opinion that may have some validity (I have not said that anyone else is wrong)… if you believe that it is unlikely… I do not have a problem with that. :) Just give some supporting data that disproves my theory that these are Cyrillic letters. I would hate to dismiss outright, what may be a more interesting history with this sword.

To definitively prove the letters are not Cyrillic, one must know the history behind this specific sword (have a traceable and documented record of who has owned this sword and where they lived would leave no doubt).

Were North African trade swords being stamped with Cyrillic letters (out of North Africa)? If so, what test can one use to tell the difference North African Cyrillic like letters and true Cyrillic letters (how do we know that they did not travel to Russia where there is a large number of Islamic countries/states)?

Maybe if someone could post other examples of this exact stamp (that are known), since I am not familiar with this stamp being a common old “forgery.”

Best regards,

Wayne

Wayne,
I appreciate your inquisitiveness, but this is not Cyrillic: just a poor and worn out G that looks like C and A that lost (or never had) a horizontal bar. Not a Cyrillic L. And, please, remember the absolute need for a letter Yat (see my earlier post) that is not there. It is like a famous dog: the absense of barking was the decisive evidence...
Genoese blades were very popular in North Africa. Moroccans even had a straight-bladed Koummya named Genoui ( or Janwi, depending on transliteration) meaning "Genoese"
What you got here is a classic Moroccan Nimcha (or Saif, if one prefers it) with a Genoese or pseudo-Genoese blade . Many of those were made in Germany or Styria and just marked Genoa to uphold the tradition and the value: market analysis was used even then! Yes, shashka blades marked Genoa were made in Circassia and marked as such. But the blade of the Nimcha in question has nothing to do with shashkas: it has a vestigial Yelman, "Indian" ricasso ( most likely an imitation of European military sabers) and a single, centrally-located, narrowish and deep fuller. None of those are features of a Circassian or any other Caucasian or Transcaucasian shashka. We do not need to know the history of this particular sword: the blade tells us the entire story.
There were Caucasian blades in Arabia proper and you can see 2 here:
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=4137
See the difference?
I have a Nimcha with an old blade marked (very illegibly) O N I N I and sporting the markings of "eyelashes".
The bottom line: nice Moroccan Nimcha, definitely not a "clunker', but nothing unusual about it. Born and bred in North Africa :)

No problem Wayne! You are most definitely thinking :), and again, you are doing well at using deductive reasoning. In this case however, the sword is what it is, just as Ariel has very well explained.
There were indeed many trade blades that carried spurious 'Genoan' markings found throughout the Maghreb. What made this blade unusual is the linear sickle mark motif, and the backsword profile, and as again, Ariel has noted, has nothing to do with the slightly curved, shashka type blades often found with the Genoan mark.

All the best,
Jim