[Iain]

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

Salaams Iain, Because I have looked long and hard at the components i.e. The Blade, The Hilt and the Scabbard and have decided that they are all correct for this style. Obviously the hilt needs little further discussion even though the quillons are broken off...The Scabbard is correct .... That leaves the blade.

There aren't any European marks on it like Solingen or other strikes and the 3 markings appear to be Islamic. The Lion, the circular stamp and the Star of Solomon being either makers, owners or locally applied. Even if the animal stamp/ engraving is after a European mark (perhaps the Passau wolf) it is clearly applied in Arabia.

I don't have the blade in hand so I'll refrain from comments regarding the origin of the blade. Suffice to say I'd consider it a wolf and of a style I've seen before.

Purchase date has nothing to do with age and so far as I can see this has little comparison to the dancing blade conundrum nor refits of that blade to other hilts...The entire business of dancing swords and hilt switching is almost totally unrelated to the Old Omani Battle Sword but naturally coming from Muttrah Souk it got my full attention from the fake/blade and hilt switchover angle. Quite literally in 1990 few people considered the older weapon and they could be got for almost nothing..

It is only in the last few years that people have realised their worth even though their provenance has been wrongly attributed down the ages as 16th, 10th, Portuguese and recently of the Saladin type. At Forum I believe we have placed this weapon correctly from the first Imam of Oman period of 751 a.d. and unchanged until today.

As I've mentioned in the past, the attributions to the 16th century, typically in an auction house setting relate to the specific item up for sale and are, on a piece by piece basis quite potentially correct.

I've also mentioned I think you use the 751 date a bit too often - unless you are seriously suggesting this particular example dates to that period. Otherwise let's not go back down the rabbit hole regarding the dating of the form.

The only other blade of note that I know of cross fitted to an Old Omani Battle Hilt is the Solingen example clearly stamped SOLINGEN crossed with an Old Omani Battle Sword hilt in Muttrah by a known hilt switch workshop a few years ago.. but that is well recorded here by me on Forum and I even know the current owner. There is a blade at #36 which is peculiar in that it seems to be a battle blade on a dancing hilt and though interesting it is still under revue though as soon as I can get to Rostaq I will attempt to solve that mystery..

Regarding the sword here; I know the store from which this weapon came and although it closed some years ago I have photographs of it and its owners who were well known. They had no reputation as hilt switchers. The owners of this weapon are also known to me.

Please advise if you think I am missing something here as amongst the Forums most esteemed members there are few with the expertise such as yours in this field and your knowledge is much admired.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

It's always good when you know some of the background on a piece although unfortunately that doesn't preclude the parts having been assembled at a later date than the origin of either the hilt or the blade. Still, if a physical inspection of the piece has left you confident of the parts that's a good thing. As I mentioned above, I haven't had it in hand and thus won't comment on that aspect.

I'll bow out for the time being of the thread, I'd say a hunt around regarding the blade marks (particularly the wolf) will give you a pretty good idea of the age of this piece and I wish you all the best in tracking them down. the variety present on this blade is interesting and some may have been applied at differing times.

Cheers,
Iain