I would like to say that it has been most intesting to see this debate/discussion unfold, and while there aeem to have been a degree of 'loggerheads' etc. everyone seems to have maintained a good level of courtesy in interaction. Most interesting is the nature of the weapons which are the focus here.
If I may add some thoughts and personal experience which though limited, might add a little perspective. I would clarify, as this is a 'discussion' in my view I do not take 'sides'
When I first acquired one of this long cylinder hilt Omani swords, it seems it was around 1994-5 , around the time Robert Elgood published "Arms and Armour of Arabia". At this time, these were still considered remarkably rare, and thier appearance was even rarer in catalogs or auctions. I recall that the admittedly 'wreck' of a 'kattara' I acquired was considered a bit of conquest in the limited collecting circles in which I was involved.
With Elgoods book, we knew of these forms, and the swords referred to in these threads as 'battle swords' from factions in Nizwa were must sought as rare early to even 'ancient' prototypes for the kattara. They were almost invariably misidentified accordingly, as medieval etc.
As has been often the case, in a short time more of the cylinder hilts began to occur in markets, and great excitement grew when several of the 'old' type kattara appeared.
As has been noted, Oman has not been a particularly open place to the west until relatively recent years. Presumably that degree of opening up allowed for more examples to enter collectibles venues.
It would seem to me that kattara, while certainly known of, in the 19th century, were not especially avaliable in the typical colonial 'tourist' and souvenier centers of North Africa, Arabia and Red Sea areas. What seems to be known of them, as seen with the references by Auguste Demmin (1867) and subsequently copied by Burton (1884), these cylinder hilts appear to have been regarded as from Zanzibar. That is reflected in these references in drawings, and while Oman itself was effectively 'closed', the bustling entrepot of Zanzibar was not, but it was a Sultanate of Oman. Clearly the Zanzibar attribution resulted, and most notably, the limited data regarding these weapons has remained largely stagnant until Elgood in 1994.
The ceremonial function of these cylindrical hilt swords is well established, but it would seem that thier use in form as battle swords in Muscati circumstances was also a case in degree in the 19th century. It also seems that they were worn in more ostentatious dress as a status symbol and mark of prestige by the burgeoning ranks of merchants from Oman (Muscat as I understand), while interior Nizwa maintained thier traditional forms.
It does not seem particularly remarkable that various trade blades from German and other sources would have entered Omani armouries, and that their armourers would have copied markings etc just as in other colonial or native settings.
That the cottage industry of commercially producing these swords not only for ceremonial purposes, but for tourist ('collecting') venues also does not seem remarkable.
It is clear that the early days of these becoming available in limited degree opened doors for the usual dealer opportunities, which became exploited in many cases as is typically the case with arms antiquities. I think the open look into these kinds of circumstances that has been revealed in these pages is wonderfully helpful to collectors, however I am not sure that these weapons as types can be categorically classified without individual evalution of each one on its own merits.
End of solilioquy