[Jim McDougall]

Thank you very much Iain and as we have all agreed here, this is a fact finding mission to discover more on these swords of Oman....and I've still bveen at it, second day now going through all this stuff!!

I think I have another angle on why German blades (which seem to be the prevalent denomination) would have likely been widely used in various times.

Looking into "The Armies of the Caliphs" (Hugh Kennedy, 2001, p.173-175), there are some interesting references from the "al Suyuf wa Ajnasiha" (Swords and Thier Kinds, Ishaq al Kindi c.870AD). Al Kindi was commissioned by the Abbasid caliph Mu'tasim to complete this study.
These notes coupled with those of Friedrich Schwarzlose (Leipzig, 1888) who extracted sword terms etc. from early Arabian poetry, give some interesting insight into swords in Arabic tradition.

Many of the swords are called by names which reflect where they were produced such as Qala'i (believed Central Arabia but could be Iraq) ; Diyafi, from Iraq; Baylamani (from Yemen, possibly India); Mushrafi (Yemen or Syria).
Kennedy notes that the uncertainty of locations suggests these may have been terms for sword types rather than locations.
What is key here is that Yemen keeps predominating, and while it has been suggested that that name is colloquially applied to relatively vast area, I think it is more specific in this parlance and refers to southern Arabia.
Schwarzlose notes that swords from India were best, followed by those from Yemen made in Indian fashion "muhanned").
The references go further to say that the best swords were made in Yemen or Khurasan with lesser qualities from Kufa, Basra and at the lowest, Egypt.
It then notes Frankish (franjiya) swords but does not specify if imported or by type.

It is known that Frankish swords were exported into Andalusian Spain, but unclear whether to Arabia.

While these references are of course from the 9th century along with the Schwarzlose references which may include varying periods, the key point is that Yemen appears to have held high station in the sword production status.
Kennedy (op.cit.) notes that the most expensive swords were Yemeni, and that soldiers of the Abbasid period could easily afford Egyptian swords but that a Yemeni sword could cost up to 10 months salary. How long this esteemed reputation prevailed is hard to say, and clearly there was great variation in affordability for swords which likely continued on for centuries and following established traditions. It is noted in earlier discussions here that Yemen was a source for swords into Oman in more recent times as well, but there was another factor which may have presented more affordable blades some time before that...trade blades, mostly from Germany.
Elgood notes (p.16) that of the favored straight blades many good Genoese and Solingen blades from 16th century onward were exported to the Arab lands and India. He does note that the locally produced blades tended to be lighter in weight and the fullers more crudely drawn. This of course does favor notes by Ibrahiim toward the Omani blades over trade blades, in the case of the swords intended for the Razha. I believe that much as there are court and dress swords as opposed to combat swords, not all sayf/kattara were intended to perform Razha in the Funoon, and many were intended for regular wear.

Here I would note that not all Omani sayf/kattara must be in accord with the swords intended for the Razha, and Burton (1884) notes on these cylindrical hilted style broadswords "...is the usual shape worn by Arab gentlemen". This was observed by him in his visit to Zanzibar around 1858, and these swords are noted and illustrated in Demmin (1877) as well as Zanzibari. Burton goes on to say that these swords were for show, and quite unwieldy (he was of course a bit curmudgeonly and elitist as far as swordsmanship). I would imagine that the examples in Zanzibar carried even more of the trade blades from African sources from the Red Sea trade. Many of these blades also of course entered Yemen through Aden, and into the Hadhramaut as well as by sea back to Muscat.

I would imagine that the higher end blades were to ranking individuals, tribal leaders and wealthy merchants while trade blades were seen among the more plebian swords and rank and file. As local copying became more prevalent the marks long established among imported blades of earlier times were likely added as status or quality symbols for marketing as suggested.

The swords and heirloom blades of esteemed or high ranking individuals tend to be preserved, while lower every day weapons often do not fare as well. Most have already as mentioned earlier, gone into other contexts and are notably hard to find in our times, thus lacking as evidence to the earlier presence of these types of trade blades.