View Single Post
Old 5th June 2011, 12:26 PM   #53
Ibrahiim al Balooshi
Member
 
Ibrahiim al Balooshi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Buraimi Oman, on the border with the UAE
Posts: 4,408
Default Omani Swords ; Origins.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim McDougall
Once again, outstanding response Ibrahiim! and I like very much your itemized responses to the various lines of my post, the blue letters work well.

I am unclear on what is meant by your request of my acting for the forum though, as my input is simply my own opinions and observations based on my own research. As I understand our discussion here is meant to evaluate the possibilities for discovering the possible source for what we have agreed to term the 'short battle sword' as well as the development and relationship of the 'long' kattara to these apparantly considerable earlier swords. I always look forward to the input from all members who add valued observations and pertinant information.

We have I think really put together a good base point for our understanding of these swords, and the perspective on the Razha definitely adds fascinating dimension to the study as we continue looking into the possible typology and developmental aspects of them.

In reviewing "The Arts of the Muslim Knight" (Furusiyya Art Foundation, 1988), on p.79 (#43) one of these early 'short battle swords' is shown with characteristic hilt form with the fluted pommel, tubular grip, 'winged quillons' with bud type downturned quillon tips. The authors note, "...swords of this type were popular over a long period of time and thier documented associations suggest they are ultimately based on dhu'l-Faqar, the silver hilted sword of the Prophet. They represent a simplified version of the luxurious Nasrid swords of the 15th c.". Much as noted in Elgood ("Arms and Armour of Arabia" op.cit.) it seems agreed that while it is generally held these are from Oman, thier precise origin is uncertain.

A number of these are listed in various collections:
Askeri Muzesi, Istanbul , #2382 and #7620 (Alexander, 1985);
Topkapi Sarayi Muzesi, Istanbul, #1/2765 signed Muhammed ibn Ahmad 1842;
Wallace Collection, London, #1796
Metropolitan Museum of Art, N.Y. #1987.43

According to the Furusiyya references, these are believed perhaps from North Africa and of 15th c. while one of 18th c. is said to be associated with the Banu Ahmari.

I did discover that there are indeed a number of Umayyad swords of 7th to 8th c. in Topkapi Saray, though there seems to be some reservations on some of the dating, possibly referring to inscriptions as it seems it is agreed these are early ("Medieval Arab Arms" Abdel Rahman Zaky, in Elgood, 1980, p.203). In this work, the author notes the sword Samsana (the sharp one) which was one of the swords of the Prophet. This sword was said to have been with the legendary people of Ad, in Southern Arabia, and later was passed to Umayyad Caliphs; then to Bedouin chieftains, ultimately to Abbasid Caliph, at which point record of it is lost.

Returning to the Furusiyya reference, (p.79, #43 op.cit.) this example is shown as 17th-18th c. and it is noted that the presumably much earlier 'Nasrid' examples usually have downward dragonhead or lionhead tips, but the Mamluk or North African examples quillon tips are unrecognizably stylized or vegetal.

Here it is mentioned that 'other examples have no guard, but only a cuff on the base of the blade'. Perhaps these are the transitional form seen in the souk in Riyadh shown by Michael Blaylock (2009)? That may suggest the example in the souk is a much earlier 'long' type which has now lost the winged quillons, but retains the blade cuff, and contemporary to the 'short battle swords' which are agreed to be 17th century, and quite likely at this point attributable to as early as 14th by the earliest Arab miniatures depicting them.

Though these references do not move us more conclusively toward the earlier date of 10th c. for the battle sword, it does seem to bring the two hilts closer in being contemporary earlier.

On the shashka form hilts,I have seen shashkas actually in Jordanian context, and the Circassian presence in Ottoman forces presents good reason for these entering many regions under thier control. The Caucasian blades produced often entered Arabian regions in trade and were simply hilted as noted, being used by Bedouin tribes across the Arabian Peninsula and into the many regions where these tribes are active.

The short sabre blades which often have the karabela (hawk head) hilts most definitely have associations to maritime use, which of course would suggest thier presence more likely on the Arabian coastal areas. The shashka blades tend to be longer and more used by individuals mounted, the curved blade more attuned to the preferred 'draw cut'.

I really do appreciate the time you take in responding with this detailed discourse and explaining the many important factors involved in understanding the history of Oman. The search and more discussion continues

All the very best,
Jim
Salaams,



Salaams Jim, I have again opted for the answers in blue after your excellent comments :see below.


QUOTE=Jim McDougall]Once again, outstanding response Ibrahiim! and I like very much your itemized responses to the various lines of my post, the blue letters work well
.
Thank you your support is excellent.

I am unclear on what is meant by your request of my acting for the forum though, as my input is simply my own opinions and observations based on my own research. As I understand our discussion here is meant to evaluate the possibilities for discovering the possible source for what we have agreed to term the 'short battle sword' as well as the development and relationship of the 'long' kattara to these apparantly considerable earlier swords. I always look forward to the input from all members who add valued observations and pertinant information.

I imagine the forum as a wealth of knowledge from which authors of ethnological weapon expertise draw a lot upon for the information since it is live, current and very informative especially from experts such as yourself…I often find when reearching on the web that I get referred back to the forum site for references !

We have I think really put together a good base point for our understanding of these swords, and the perspective on the Razha definitely adds fascinating dimension to the study as we continue looking into the possible typology and developmental aspects of them.

Yes that has been interesting and there is another ancient dance form eminating from Salalah (Dhofar, Southern Oman) which uses the Khanjar in a performance called Bar-aa. That may be another story.

In reviewing "The Arts of the Muslim Knight" (Furusiyya Art Foundation, 1988), on p.79 (#43) one of these early 'short battle swords' is shown with characteristic hilt form with the fluted pommel, tubular grip, 'winged quillons' with bud type downturned quillon tips. The authors note, "...swords of this type were popular over a long period of time and thier documented associations suggest they are ultimately based on dhu'l-Faqar, the silver hilted sword of the Prophet. They represent a simplified version of the luxurious Nasrid swords of the 15th c.". Much as noted in Elgood ("Arms and Armour of Arabia" op.cit.) it seems agreed that while it is generally held these are from Oman, thier precise origin is uncertain

There is possibly some mythology surrounding the so called swords of the Prophet(PBOH) although they are incredible weapons and may have influenced swords, however, the time frame is a little cramped and I cannot see why it should cloud the issue. I think people are only too ready to place the swords into categories such as Sword of the Prophet(PBOH) and then the pitfall mistake of Spanish design, which is a massive diversion in my view.
Ummayid and Abbasid swords were similar as were Turkish ( In fact the royal palace guards working for the Abbasids in Iraq were Turks)
Making it all slide into a believable time frame often rules out certain formulas and we can only go on mathematical absolute proof rather like a good archeologist or forensic detective. The Ummayid time frame doesn’t fit… The Abbasid one does.

To me Nasrid swords are so far wide of the mark as to be non starters though they may have origins linked to dhul Faqar as may the Omani swords but of a separate branch (possibly).
.

A number of these are listed in various collections:
Askeri Muzesi, Istanbul , #2382 and #7620 (Alexander, 1985);
Topkapi Sarayi Muzesi, Istanbul, #1/2765 signed Muhammed ibn Ahmad 1842;
Wallace Collection, London, #1796
Metropolitan Museum of Art, N.Y. #1987.43


According to the Furusiyya references, these are believed perhaps from North Africa and of 15th c. while one of 18th c. is said to be associated with the Banu Ahmari.

I think that is al amari which would be an Omani reference but again very late: 18th Century? Ten centuries out. How can they be in the Funun if they are 18th Century?

Yes that is true however that is true for those references which I believe are correct but not complete. They omit the full facts about the Omani weapons and their origins linking the Ibadi Islamists around AD 751.

I did discover that there are indeed a number of Umayyad swords of 7th to 8th c. in Topkapi Saray, though there seems to be some reservations on some of the dating, possibly referring to inscriptions as it seems it is agreed these are early ("Medieval Arab Arms" Abdel Rahman Zaky, in Elgood, 1980, p.203). In this work, the author notes the sword Samsana (the sharp one) which was one of the swords of the Prophet. This sword was said to have been with the legendary people of Ad, in Southern Arabia, and later was passed to Umayyad Caliphs; then to Bedouin chieftains, ultimately to Abbasid Caliph, at which point record of it is lost.

It could be possible that Ummayid swords influenced the Abbasid Sword design (since Ummayid was the dynasty before) and even some influence to Omanis Swords at the time, however, the Ummayid time frame doesn’t fit. The Abbasid time frame does and the fact that they were garrisoned in Oman and operating against the Omani Ibadis (the first Omani Immam died at their hands in battle in the late 8thC)The fighting purely based on style of Islamic religion. The Omani Swords by then were Iconic Ibadi weapons.

Returning to the Furusiyya reference, (p.79, #43 op.cit.) this example is shown as 17th-18th c. and it is noted that the presumably much earlier 'Nasrid' examples usually have downward dragonhead or lionhead tips, but the Mamluk or North African examples quillon tips are unrecognizably stylized or vegetal

Nasrid is also miles too late and was one of the first casualties in my research. I call the Nasrid sword "Geographically Innert and Time Frame impossible".

The Nasrid dynasty or Banū Naṣr (Arabic: بنو نصر‎) was the last Moorish and Muslim dynasty in Spain. The Nasrid dynasty rose to power after the defeat of the Almohad dynasty in 1212 at the Battle of Las Navas de Tolosa. Twenty-three different emirs ruled Granada from the founding of the dynasty in 1232 by Muhammed I ibn Nasr until January 2, 1492, when Muhammad XII surrendered to the Christian Spanish kingdoms of Aragon and Castile. Today, the most visible evidence of the Nasrids is the Alhambra palace complex built under their rule. (500 to 700 years too late).


Here it is mentioned that 'other examples have no guard, but only a cuff on the base of the blade'. Perhaps these are the transitional form seen in the souk in Riyadh shown by Michael Blaylock (2009)? That may suggest the example in the souk is a much earlier 'long' type which has now lost the winged quillons, but retains the blade cuff, and contemporary to the 'short battle swords' which are agreed to be 17th century, and quite likely at this point attributable to as early as 14th by the earliest Arab miniatures depicting them

.

That is very interesting indeed. The Riyadh? Yemen Museum variants(Michael Blalocks) could also be described as such … The quillons are there but folded forward as part of the collar arrangement. It may be identical and the description of no guard is true though they coild easily have missed the collar and quillon incorporation as " no guard" in their description…That follows my argument that these are the original form of Omani Long Kattara. However I am totally at loggerheads with the dates 14th and 17th Century~ They are 8th Century.


Though these references do not move us more conclusively toward the earlier date of 10th c. for the battle sword, it does seem to bring the two hilts closer in being contemporary earlier
.
10th Century is too late. By then Oman was about to disintegrate into 2 warring factions. Ibadi Islam had been in place for over 2 centuries. The Razha had been drumming from 751 AD or slightly earlier if my supposition about the leader Jabr Ibn Zayd is allowed and Ibadi seat of control Nizwa was about to exert its rule of the Interior… The 10th Century doen't fit.

On the shashka form hilts,I have seen shashkas actually in Jordanian context, and the Circassian presence in Ottoman forces presents good reason for these entering many regions under thier control. The Caucasian blades produced often entered Arabian regions in trade and were simply hilted as noted, being used by Bedouin tribes across the Arabian Peninsula and into the many regions where these tribes are active

Agreed on shaska influence on other Omani weapons . However regarding the Omani Short and Katara Long ~The Ottoman empire is too late. Anyway they hardly ruled Oman though they thought they did on maps. Piri Reis did attack Muscat and expelled for a short period the Portuguese but 16th Century?; that is way too late.

I think there are a lot of weapons that could have entered Oman but didn’t. For example there are hundreds of Indian and Persian variant swords~ none came into use by Oman. Why? Mainly because Indianweapons were Hindu and even in the case of Muslim (Persia and later parts of India) weapons they weren’t the right style of Islam to be accepted.. However, the primary reason is that Oman adopted Islam before the Persians so they already had the Ibadi variant and they were happy to retain that. Once they had integrated these relgious inspired weapons into their tradition they were unmoveable.. They are still there today.


The short sabre blades which often have the karabela (hawk head) hilts most definitely have associations to maritime use, which of course would suggest thier presence more likely on the Arabian coastal areas. The shashka blades tend to be longer and more used by individuals mounted, the curved blade more attuned to the preferred 'draw cut'.

Agreed on shaska influence on other weapons later in Oman especially maritime via Yemen .

However as a note it doesn’t mean that the Kattara was not used on the coast… there were wide windows of influence when Oman was "one country" and both Ibadi weapons would have been used throughout. It seems clear to me that it was this coastal effect that eventually brought a change to the Long Kattara hilt.


When the two factions of coastal and interior war flared up as it did on several occasions the seat of Ibadi Islam was in Nizwa and it is there that the powerful traditions; "The Funun" etc eminate. No matter what the state of affairs between coastal / interior factions in Oman this tradition has been retained there in the interior through thick and thin... as a permanent tradition.

This is an Interior Omani weapons system timelocked frozen and stored in the national memory banks and wheeled out at every wedding and twice yearly at each Eid celebration..ad infinitum since about 751 A.D.


I really do appreciate the time you take in responding with this detailed discourse and explaining the many important factors involved in understanding the history of Oman. The search and more discussion continues

All the very best,
Jim[/QUOTE

Thank You very much.
Ibrahiim al Balooshi..

Last edited by Ibrahiim al Balooshi; 5th June 2011 at 12:42 PM. Reason: add on note
Ibrahiim al Balooshi is offline   Reply With Quote