As Peter has said, it is a common perception that these were fighting swords as the hilt form was shared by the lighter dance (Razha) forms LOOKED the same as the many examples which DID have heavy,(and of course forged) blades.
The hilt form had been created in the early 19th century by the sultan Said the Great who did so for the purpose of dynastic symbolism in the ceremonies as well as other key alterations in the khanjhar daggers and other regalia items. The elements of these items did reflect traditionally those of the arms of the past, as noted by Peter.
The point is that these unique open cylindrical hilts were keenly recognizable as Omani, and became popularly worn with notably substantial European blades (a status symbol in themselves) as swords of office, status and prestigious accoutrements. These were often highly embellished in that accord and worn officials, merchants and of course slave factors, and of course were often present on the expeditions into Africa from the Omani Sultanate in Zanzibar.
This is why the famed British explorer noted these swords as 'worn by Arab gentlemen' in his "Book of the Sword" (1884) and both he and his contemporary August Demmin (1877) commented on failing to understand how these might be wielded effectively (with European swordsmanship in mind of course).
Still, it remains that while the TWO types of these open hilt Omani sayf appeared the same visually, the examples worn by 'gentlemen' in status oriented aplomb COULD have been used defensively in some degree if no alternative.
This is much in the same analogy noted by Grendolino with Europeans wearing fancy court swords, which were for 'show' in the same way. While most had 'similar' appearances to the swords with similar hilts which were actually epee's indeed used in dueling and defensive swordplay, the 'court' swords would not serve well in combat circumstances.
Again, the small sword itself was indeed worn by officers, and used as required.
Their effectiveness is well shown in the case of Lt. Maynard in his foray to capture Blackbeard the pirate in 1718. In the heat of combat, the blade of Lt. Maynards smallsword was broken as he tried to fight with it.
As Peter has well noted, the key weapons used against foe in Africa were firearms, the khanjhar (obviously close quarters) and in some cases in more fixed combat, cannon when at hand.
African tribes (with few exceptions) did not use swords as weapons, with their key weapons spears and axes mostly, some arrows in cases.
Much in the same way as these Omani weapons are described, the sword was most often held symbolically in African tribal situations.
As another analogy, the American Indian tribes are often shown with swords, obviously acquired through various means and of various forms. In most cases these were symbolic of power, and typically held by chiefs or important warriors only. There were several exceptions where swords were notably present and used by warriors, but these are rare exceptions. The notion that Indians used swords because there are images of them holding swords are much in the same presumption of certain sword types used because they are pictured held by tribal figures.
|