Salaams All Note to Library So as to be less confusing I will tend to only mention Omani Battle Swords on this thread... and use the other thread Kattara for comment http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showt...5&page=11&pp=30
for the inclusion of Sayf dancing sword and Kattara detail for now even though the paths of these swords pass in front of each other and are often mingled together. Where I refer to Mamluke Swords I mean Mamluke Swords in the Ottoman sense of sword as technology transfered down the ages thus likely to be Abasiid. i.e. Ottoman, Mamluke, Abasiid thus likely to have been used against the Oman in 751 a.d. by the Iraqi garrisons in Oman at the time suppressing Ibathi Islam.... and garrisoned in Buraimi.
We know in addition that the swords at picture 3 are Abassiid since similar variants appear in the Topkapi museum named as such. For a view of the Topkapi swords see picture 4 below.
A full comparison done at "Kattara for comments" http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showt...5&page=11&pp=30
#314 notes the following in the case of similarities with the weapons at 4.
1. Both are early two edged Islamic Arab Battle Swords.
2. Both blades have an integral tang with an added pommel or cap.
3. Both have three holes in the handle which is similarly constructed with rivets. The top hole apparently for a wrist strap.
4. Both weapons have quillons.
5. Both blades are wing shaped in cross section, thinning toward the tip.
6. Both blades culminate in a round/spatulate tip.
7. Both blades (though not all examples of the Omani sword) have the golden dot or dots on the blade. The dot in Islamic geometry is an important centre of the universe construct.
8. Both hilts are topped with a cap in the case of the Abbasid and an Islamic arch pommel culminating in a short spike on the Omani.
9. Neither blade has risers nor fullers though in much later blades fullers may appear.
10. Both blades are stiff and generally only slightly flexible.
11. Both handles are octagonal in cross section *
12. If the rounded tip concept is accepted; the style of fighting must have been "chop and slash" in both cases.
Now in comparing the Omani Battle Sword at picture 1 below with Picture 2s Sword all of the above
plus in terms of the hilt an almost identical style in two distinct sections with a pointed pommel (not attached to the tang) though variation in the cuff which is twice as big in the Mamluke version and the quillons blend in the Mamluke to form flanking strengtheners to the cuff.
I hope this brings this thread into line with the other threads with similar input... and slightly re-aligns the general theory about the Omani Battle Sword.
This falls into line timewise and insofar as the previous hypothesis on Omani Battle Swords changes nothing in the original but leaves open several routes on the following which will be spun off to other threads but placed here for reference;
1. How did the sword at picture 2 below influence Red Sea Swords introduced there by the Ottoman Empire ? If so when and where?
2. Did the long metalic hilt at picture 2 influence the Omani design of long hilt on the Sayf and Kattara. If so when?
3. Did this sword or the sword at picture 3/4 have any other Red Sea influence? If so when and where?
4. How does the Wallace sword fit in with this sword family if at all ?
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.
Note (It can be seen that the swords at both 3(Mamluke) and 4(Abasiid) are the same type.)