I would definitely agree that Ruel’s hypothesis may have a lot of merit.
It would make very little sense that a large, militarily powerful and rich state like Egypt would not have its own weapon industry.
The question, however, is somewhat different: did post-Mamluk Egypt produce its own patterns that were truly indigenous and different from the Ottoman? Just like Motan, I do not know of any.
On the other hand, some “Ottoman” kilijes from 18-19 centuries carry decorative elements traditionally attributable to Syria, a former Mamluk domain and even at that time governed by Egypt. Astvatsaturian in her book «Turkish Arms” shows a classical Turkish Pala belonging to Prince Mstislavski ( 16 century) signed “Qasym the Egyptian from Cairo”. Recently, a gorgeous Kilij was sold on an internet auction: it was inscribed as a gift from Muhammad Ali Pasha to a British functionary and dated early 19 century. Most likely, it must have been of a local Egyptian manufacture.
The situation must have been similar to the weapons from the Balkans: local manufacture but Turkish patterns.
On the other hand, we can turn the tables 180 degrees: Mamluks, even prior to their defeat at the hands of Ottoman Turks, had swords that are in fact classic kilijes. It might be possible to suggest that the Turkish ones are just reproductions of the Egyptian Mamluk examples , and that what we call Ottoman kilij/pala is in fact an indigenous Egyptian sword.
|