Quote:
|
Originally Posted by katana
I have often suggested that Sudan had strong trading affiliations with India. There seems to be a number of Indo-Persian inspired weapons in the Madhist armoury during the uprising. Or perhaps some Indian muslims joined the Madhist 'cause' .... Although the hilt seems to be of recent manufacture (AFAIK brass Tulwar hilts tend to be dated late 19th C onwards) The idea of a 'genuine' Tulwar hilted Kaskara/Takouba of the Madhist period seems extremely likely.....well to me anyway  
Regards David |
Hi David,
Sudan indeed had commercial contacts indirectly with India through the Red Sea trade, and of course the British had key trade interests with the opening of the Suez canal which supported thier trade ports in Egypt. It was quite international with even Anglo French agreements there. Much of the trade was of course under the auspices of diplomatic arrangement with the Ottomans who of course were key in trade ports extensively.The Mahdists uprisings derived from the corruption and religious issues with the Turks, and the jihad proclaimed by the Mahdi to restore religious purity.
The British were protecting thier economic interests in Egypt by supporting Egypts Khedive, and had been active in Darfur and the Anglo Egyptian Sudan nominally, with thier attempts to curtail the slave trade in much of these areas somewhat successful. With lack of support and resources and the Sudanese army in shambles, they had decided to withdraw from Sudan.
This led to the disaster at Khartoum and rise of power in the Mahdiya.
Without really going into the complexity of all this, I just wanted to try to understand some of it myself
The Mahdi probably did attract a lot of attention from Muslims elsewhere,
but while it did bring in recruits from contiguous regions, there were also large elements of other Islamic factions which chose not to participate.
One example would be the Senussi Brotherhood of Eastern Sahara regions and Central Darfur who resisted being brought into the Mahdist forces.
This does not say that on individual basis some could not have moved accordingly, but no large scale participation seems evident. It also brings to mind the fact that many ascetic and mendicant orders seem to me to have been pacifists, yet the mention of militant dervishes is seen in a number of references. The term 'dervish' seems to apply more to these mystic and ascetic figures, while the Mahdist forces were termed Ansar (=helper).
The Senussi Order was widespread through Morocco, Turkey, Syria and the Hejaz as well as India, but in these areas existed only as a smaller almost fraternal type Order without significant political presence. It does not seem likely that these would have come to join with Mahdist forces, but again, it can not be said that absolutely no Muslims from India would have gone to the Sudan, it just seems unlikely in any numbers.
I would point out in support of Indian presence in the Sudan, there were troops from the Indian Army there with the British at Suakin who helped hold that position after the fall of Khartoum in 1885. Obviously this does not pertain to this weapon, but is mentioned simply to support the contact between India and Sudan via the British.
As far as the weapons of Indian form present in the Mahdist armouries, the 'haladie' or double bladed weapon similar to the Rajput madu comes to mind (it is termed the Syrian knife in Stone) and the khanjhar daggers which are a form of janbiyya. It has often surprised me that the tulwar hilt really never seemed to appear among Sudanese weapons, while even yataghans occasionally did. It seems that some weapons forms arrived in Sudan from Egypt including the huge bladed spearhead (alam) and the axes and maces, of Mamluk style.
Most of this is simply trying to determine whether a tulwar hilt sword with thuluth covered blade might have been present in Sudan during the Mahdiyah. In looking at this particular example, which is far more modern than that period, I think it is possible to be an interpretative production presuming that they were.
The brass tulwar hilt seems to have prevailed more to the sultanates in the Deccan and in the south of India and likely into the 18th century. The use of gold metal whether or not brass seems to align with Hindu beliefs, as described in Robert Elgood's "Hindu Arms and Ritual", although they are certainly not unknown elsewhere.
This example has a crudely cast brass hilt which is largely an impression of the hilt form with the random stamping overrall intended to recall some of the diaper patterns seen on tulwars in earlier times. There were cast brass tulwar hilts produced in some degree for Native regiments in India I believe, but I dont believe like this in style.
The blade seems simply sheet steel blank with beveled rather than sharp edges, and in profile similar to the kaskara blades. I do hope I have not overlooked any fullering, but to me there are none apparant.
As always David, it is great to compare thoughts with you and to learn more on these interesting topics! Thanks for always adding them to keep things interesting, and bringing in the perspective.
All the best,
Jim