[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Hello Ibrahiim,
Thank you for reiterating some of the details we are discussing, and if I may clarify something as well for the benefit of those reading. This is not actually a debate as I perceive, but intended to be a constructive fact finding mission to discuss the plausibility of the ancestry of both swords we now have agreed to term the short battle kattara and the 'long' kattara to the mid 8th century.

Actually there is no reason to think that the Omani battle kattara of the shorter version did not exist in Oman in the 8th century, and that it was likely similar to those used by the Abbasids, which in turn were in the form of those of the Umayyads. The primary issue seems to be in determining the antiquity of the long kattara, which we are hoping to place concurrently present with the shorter version.

I spent some time going through "Islamic Swords and Swordsmiths" by the late Unsal Yucel (Istanbul, 2001, p.54), and he notes "...we may infer that the blades of the earliest Islamic swords were probably similar to the Umayyad and Abbasid swords in that they must also have been straight, double edged, blunt ended and without grooves". With this he is emphasizing that these were intended for chopping and slashing type cuts, and not for thrusting. There is unfortunately no mention of blade length nor variation of it. If I understand correctly, the longer version blades are to be considered with respect to the concept of the Razha in this period in Oman, so would not have been mentioned in this broader description of these blades.
In my opinion, the addition of grooves (fullers) was in these times the exception, as seems inferred here, and I would note that the name of the sword which became famed as one of the Prophet Muhammed's, and more so as that of the Imam Ali (whom he had presented it to) was Dhu al Fiqar. The interpretation of the name of this sword has been long debated and typically thought to mean having two points, however, it is now generally held that the wording means 'possessor of spines'...that is apparantly having two fullers in the blade.

Yucel discusses as well on p.54 that, "...unfortunately since virtually nothing is known of Umayyad and Abbasid hilts, quillon blocks and scabbards, it is not possible to make any deductions about the relationship between the fittings of the earliest Islamic swords and those of the Umayyad/Abbasid period".

Mr. Yucel, who served as head of the armoury section at the Topkapi Palace Museum , notes the work of Hans Stocklein who he states was the first scholar to study the Topkapi Museum collections ("Die Waffenschatze im Topkapu Sanayi Muzesi zu Istanbul ein Vorlanger Bericht" in Ars Islamica I, 1934, pp. 200-18). Yucel's text continues in discussing that the weapons in these collections have been mostly remounted and refurbished after being removed from Mamluk Egypt to Istanbul after its Ottoman conquest in 1453 and the Byzantine church of Hagia Eirene was converted into an arsenal.
While these modifications of course, in no way reduce the reverence and respect afforded these weapons, it does have effect on using them in determining the appearance they would have had in original context in the periods and attributions noted. Basically however, Yucel states that the blade attributions would be presumably as stated, despite modifications to dress in the later period.

This brings us to the question of the contemporary presence of both long and short blades in Oman in the 8th century. As noted, it seems that these blades were intended for chopping and slashing cuts, and of course, the shorter versions would have been for infantry style combat, particularly close quarters melee.
From what I have seen so far in reading, infantry were the primary forces in the warfare of these times in the 8th century in these armies. This would have been determinate in the type of swords used, and as the long blades would have been for cavalry or mounted combat, there would have been very small numbers it would seem of these long blades.
It seems that unclear Oman, had some sword blade producing, with some degree of export by caravan,but it does not seem that the limited number of long blades would have been sufficient for such export. In much more modern times,as noted, the term Yemen was broadly applied it would seem to refer to a realm more than a strategic geographic region, and as such it would be difficult to determine from early narratives, exactly which area swords and blades coming from Yemen might have been actually from. By the 19th century however, the long blades were already in place as previously discussed, and trade blade traffic was profoundly in place, especially in San'aa and with the British in Aden.

In looking into references in Yucel, I was also amazed that I had apparantly missed so much attention to the presence of gold filled holes in many of these blades, including of course those believed to be Umayyad and Abbasid. Apparantly, according to Yucel, these occur in numbers of one to seven dots, and often are placed strategically next to inscriptions or devotional passages as seen in a number of the plates. He claims these gold dots are to give the swordsman good luck, which is of course a simplified reference to the much more complex talismanic applications which may be present.
I would note that many of these swords were from Mamluk provenance before entering the Ottoman armouries, which may explain the presence of this affectation found on some swords in North African sphere, using usually copper filled holes. The placing of these often near the blade tip is in the same fashion seen on many of the blades in Topkapi, though they are often but one of numerous other dots on the blade.

The carrying of this interesting affectation through over a thousand years in these sword blades certainly hints at more powerful meanings than simply a good luck charm. It should be noted that as mentioned earlier, a gold nail was often hammered into Frankish blades in early times, actually around the time of the Abbasids, and that Frankish blades were indeed imported into the Dar al Islam. At this point a direct connection cannot be supported, but here it seemed worthy of note. Often the gold inlay, rather than a nail, was a cross or moon, and perhaps other devices. By later medieval times, the gold was replaced by latten (copper or brass) still gold colored metal, so the same symbolic effect was still rendered.


I hope these results from my foray into these references will be helpful as we consider more on continuing research into this fascinating topic.

All the very best,
Jim

Salaams Jim,
I agree that this indeed is a double edged discussion being both a debate and a fact finder. Any emotive input on my behalf is entirely accidental though I blame the computer network for firing my other previous reply into outer space never to return! Your reply is much appreciated and it is fascinating to see information rolling out from your big gun references. The late Unsal Yucel was one of the great masters.

What is missing from research on these matters is the doctrine upon update to his work since it was done almost 80 years ago and since then artefacts have appeared and are in his museum in Istanbul. Notably examples of Abbasid Swords..It is one such sword that I have compared favourably to the Omani Short Battle Sword in 11 different categories. Two crucial comparisons are the octagonal handle and the dot on the blade but the other 9 are also important.

I believe however that we are in more or less agreement that the Omani Short Battle Sword is in the 8th Century ballpark and from my viewpoint 751AD is a reasonable assessment of where it fits in that century, for now, pending new evidence. I believe that "rests the case' on the Omani Short at this time although I also think the reference of the Topkapi Abbasids Swords needs viewing by your experienced eye..I am certain that, had the late Unsal Yucel (and therefor Hans Stocklein) seen these exhibits they would examined them and have included them but at the time these exhibits were not available. Therefore, respectfully, it is also requested that we may have uncovered gems of information relevant to updating their brilliant work.

In terms of Umayyid examples however we have no known exhibits in any museum I know of although it would not be incorrect to suppose their swords were forerunners to the Abbasid and linked to a sword style generally called the Sword Of The Prophet though the precise style (since I think there are possibly 9 such variants) is somewhat unclear but accepting the forked tip version as Dhu al Fiqar ~ presented to the first Imam "Ali" . The reference to spines is usually taken as the two spikes on the tip though may refer additionally or in conjunction to the two fullers ? What is I believe quite important in our debate is the sense of a sword being handed on as the "baton" in honour of a relgious form.

I have been considering every country and situation surrounding the Omani timeframe being discussed here and ruling out dynasties which fall outside the parameters before and after the critical dates. Generally most neighboring countries (except the Abbasid in Iraq because they had a punitive garrison in Oman) fail that stress test, however, one other does not quite rule itself out. It is plausible that when Oman accepted the letter of invitation to accept Islam in Nizwa(see notes below) that they could have been handed a sword as well ! Here is your religion and here is a sword that if required will reinforce it !! Not the sword of the prophet but something similar, either with a handle already fitted or ...fitted by the Omanis later. The sword hilt being generally honorific to "Islam central" rather than Omans later adoption specifically for the Ibadi sect.

So there is within our debate something of a conundrum.. either way one could argue that we are in the right aproximate timeframe of 630 AD to 751 AD(not later than) and thus a far more accurate aproximation than ever considered previously.

Just to clarify that point; Oman accepted Islam at Nizwa by letter in 630 AD however it was a while later within 100 years that they modified their religious style to the sect of Ibadi Islam. Did the Omanis adopt a sword and hilt at the very beginning i.e. 630AD or later but not later than 751 AD ? (The later date being the elected date of the First Imam; Jalunda ibn Masoud) Did the sword appear because of the general acceptance of Islam and the letter in 630 AD or with Jabr Ibn Zayd who brought the technology with him from Iraq later? He died in 711 AD.

Almost as a note in the margin; I need also to mention an aspect of viewing Islamic architectural references to hilt shape since at the time not many Islamic archways, domes or minaraettes had actually been built and it would be incorrect to wheel out for example 12th century examples when it demands a current (8th C) or earlier reference... Islamic Art by David Talbot Rice 1975 revised edition page 30 is a better dated example of Abbasid Islamic archway work in Iraq of the 8th C. and before and lends weight to my Abbasid theory.

Your reference to dots on blades is interesting and is well backed up by powerful reference to the Turkish Masters doctrine. I think that is a remarkable find. The talismanic effect is agreeable with all our findings and single or multiple dots are now fully understood. The Abbasid Sword in the Topkapi has a dot as does the Omani Short Battle Sword in a variety of configurations and I have seen single and triples in various blade positions.

The Old Omani Long Kattara. I attribute this to the same period since it has the same hilt and because it is in the Funun. The blade is probably earlier and could be generally an arabian style or related to other earlier swords. Im afraid I can dive no deeper on this search since my references and therefor my oxygen have somewhat run out, however, my original statement (in fact all 4 statements) at my previous letter still stands and support on this issue, as has been agreed on the Omani Short Battle Sword, is sought.



I think we agree thatThe Omani Short Battle Sword has a sharp point and a rigid two edged blade capable of chopping action and thrust "gladius action" blade strike around an as yet undefined but logically large shield. On the other hand the Old Omani Long Kattara had the slash and snick blade with a round point ideal for cuts and fast action around a buckler (Terrs) shield. Neither sword is for mounted cavalry. The Omani terrain rules cavalry out. I would imagine the ideal weapon for cavalry at that time was the long spear or lance. I see both swords more in the dismounted infantry role. I see no reason why the numbers of long swords would be any greater or smaller than the short, in fact, a good 50/50 mix would have been quite formidable. I have however no idea of the Omani "battle order format" and whether they had lots of cavalry or not, however, I agree they would have had more infantry but with both swords spread throughout... more or less in equal numbers in what could be imagined as light and heavy infantry.

In terms of your reference regarding export and sword production; metalworking was advanced in the Nizwa area and mining was done considerably in the Megan region and elsewhere..though I dont believe a lot of export occured before the appearance of European blades. Thereafter I can see how there would be a lot of redundant Old Omani Long Kartara since they were being superceded by Euro Blades totally replacing the old weapons which would then have been up for export in large numbers.

If this general theory is acceptable and therefore also regarding the Old Omani Long Kattara then the follow-on, including the transmission to neighboring regions and the transition to Iconic form and thus the sword in the Wallace Collection etc. are logical. The transfer of euro blades onto the scene from the 17th Century is ironic in that like the Scotish Claymores which are actually German!! ~ Omani Kattaras are European!! (at least in view of their recent manufacture) It is also a notable time since it triggered the replacement and consequently export of Old Omani Kattara to neighboring regions where it froze but "morphed" later into what is now the Wallace Collection sword..

Whilst by no means the end of the story I think we have a solid foundation of reasoned research to underwrite our findings so far and underpin all of my "4 basic statements".


Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Notes on Oman; The Omanis were among the first people to embrace Islam.[18] The conversion of the Omanis is usually ascribed to Amr ibn al-As, who was sent by Muhammad around 630 AD to invite Jayfar and 'Abd, the joint rulers of Oman at that time, to accept the faith. In accepting Islam, Oman became an Ibadhi state, ruled by an elected leader, the Imam. During the early years of the Islamic mission, Oman played a major role in the Wars of Apostasy that occurred after the death of Muhammad, and also took part in the great Islamic conquests by land and sea in Iraq, Persia and beyond. Oman's most prominent role in this respect was through its extensive trading and seafaring activities in East Africa and the Far East, particularly during the 19th century, when it propagated Islam to many of East Africa's coastal regions, certain areas of Central Africa, India, Southeast Asia and China.

After its conversion to Islam, Oman was ruled by Umayyads between 661–750, Abbasids between 750–931, 932–933 and 934–967, Qarmatians between 931–932 and 933–934, Buyids between 967–1053, and the Seljuks of Kirman between 1053–1154.

By Ibrahiim ~ The dates are important because it is the brackets around the Abbasid period which are relevant since this is the Ibadi transitional period covering that sects adoption in Oman, leadership by Jabr Ibn Zayd and the fight with the Abbasid. 630 to 751 being key date parameters.

References:
A. Islamic Art by David Talbot Rice 1975 revised edition page page 30.
B. Topkapi Museum Abbasid Sword examples as at previous letter and viewable at website (search Topkapi Museum Abbasid Swords for pictures etc).