How to id a European kaskara blade?

Jim McDougall · 2nd January 2012, 01:53 AM

Chris and Iain, thank you so much for these straightforward observations and for the great explanations along with them. It is great to engage in these kinds of discussions where we exchange views and ideas regardless of polarity, as it is a total learning experience.
I must say that after reviewing earlier posts, notes and rereading through Briggs I am compelled to agree that these two kaskara may very well be much earlier in the 20th century. It seems likely the clearly more recently refurbished example is of the same blade type as the heavily aged one, the elliptical one third blade length channel from blade root is similar on both though I dont believe exact.
What steers me away from European origin for these blades is the lack of forte block. In looking at some other examples of blades which were apparantly of Solingen origin and intended for export such as those by Clauberg and Peres, these typical had such ricasso blocks and were marked. There were likely however blades unmarked, but I believe would have been configured similarly.

I am glad the patinated blade is shown with tang exposed, and this blade has the same aperture and shape as the Peres type blades. What is puzzling of course is that there is no block ricasso, so it seems we may presume native make for these. The same type fuller appears on the unusually hilted swords apparantly from Tunisian Berber regions.

I think we may look toward blades entering North Africa post Khalifa and during the Condominium. While it seems doubtful that any weapons producing in occupied Sudan of course was unlikely, however Darfur and these regions remained loosely outside British control with Ali Dinar emplaced as the sultan and the region essentially autonomous.These regions were very much as a frontier and more associated with Saharan and Berber tribal activity than with the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan as I have understood. There were even Tuareg factions as far as El Fasher, and it would seem contact through Tunisian regions Berbers might well have brought blades in .

In those Tunisian regions the Senussi Brotherhood was quite prevalent, a Sufi following to which Ali Dinar also belonged. The Senussi were in the years toward WWI apparantly aligning with Ottomans and the Germans in the developing Great War. This development was key in the final situation for Ali Dinar who was declared outlaw by the British and killed by them in 1916.
It would seem that in this period, blades may well have been coming in through Tunis and through Berber and Senussi headed Darfur and adjacent regions. It would seem that native bladesmiths may have duplicated blades and possibly adapted interpretations of German markings.

It seems these might be from this period to the years following, and probably produced in remote regions outside the controlled regions in Anglo-Egyptian Sudan. I am not sure how much we should rely on the crossguards on the refurbished examples as these were so often refurbished, and often parts may have been interchanged. The obviously intact well aged example though may give a good view of early guards. In Ed Hunleys work, he notes that guards were fabricated in four pieces pre-1940 when the single piece forged guards were developed.

The 'comet' mark seems to be copied almost perfectly on the rehilted blade from that on the aged and worn one (note even the two 'jots' in the orb).
In Briggs (p.81) he notes that Nickel had suggested this may have been some stylized image of the 'flaming grenade' from the 'doll' figure of Peter Mumm and used by Weyersbergs in the 19th century. I can see the similarity to the fly image from the doll and the Milanese mark, but cannot see even a Picasso like potential with these 'comet' figures.

The only comet used by German makers was that of the Schimmelberg group mid 19th c and later which has a star type symbol with crescent like 'tail' and 6 other stars......this does not have the separated tail which is implied by these geometric devices.

It should be noted that these geometric devices were found on the blades of Tuareg chiefs from the Tuareg rebellion in 1916-17 and had apparantly been in use for some time. As noted the Tuareg factions did have contact with Darfur as well as into the regions into Libya and Tunisia as previously mentioned, and perhaps this symbol cross diffused into 'kaskara' parlance via that venue.

Mefidk · 2nd January 2012, 03:54 PM

Thanks for the further input Jim - the marking is a puzzle is it not!

My feeling about the figures you show is that whilst the marks are not perfectly represented, 3 of 4 are clearly very similar to the original they are supposed to be copied from, but our focus mark is really a stretch. Given that the other examples we have of this mark are all relatively similar, would we expect that the artist messed the original up so badly but that everyone else could copy his work so well? So I'm with you on this, not even picasso would produce representation of the fly mark like this. The long vertical marks (staff) are also on all the examples I've seen so far, which does not bear any similarity to any of the European stamps - so I'm inclined to think this mark represents something else.

Poking around in the forum threads I came accross this one: http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=11950

In this thread RDGAC posted four kaskara from his museum collection, one of which both bears the 'comet', similar fuller and size of blade and has an identical cross-guard to my rusty example. Unfortunately this one was precisely the one that did not come with any guarantee of date collected

But if it was as suggested in the early to mid 1880s, then we have an example of the mark on a kaskara with a date comensurate with Briggs' takouba example.

I wonder if RDGAC has dug up any more information since this thread, it would be extremely useful?

Looking at the hilts on both my swords - the croc grip kaskara has an almost identical guard to RDG examples 1 & 2, but none of these look like they are formed from four parts (no X, although his No3 example does have one), so I wonder if that can be used as a reliable benchmark for dating? As Iain noted the croc kaskara guard is of high quality and does appear to me to be old. Incidentaly one of the RDG swords also has the iron peg clearly visible that was not used on my rusty sword's hilt, hence why I think the grip was perhaps replaced at some time.

Chris

Iain · 2nd January 2012, 09:09 PM

Typed this up in the train today but hadn't seen Chris' last post (excellent points to be sure!), still I'll post these few musings...

This is developing into a fascinating discussion! Not just about these two swords but as always, back to the all pervasive questions of trade, regional politics, steel and marks.
To focus for a minute on the two sword that are the subject of this thread, in my opinion the well aged blade is likely 19th and here is why:

a. The tang is formed particularly well

b. It has likely been rehilted and has thus done some time in the field (note Chris' excellent observation about the unused tang hole)

c. The patina (dark patina) is consistent with some age.

d. The form and execution of the fuller is smoother and has much smoother edges than the croc sword.

Is it a European blade? I am not sure. I agree ricassos are a pretty surefire way to identify the trade blades, but does it rule out anything without a ricasso? Again, I am simply not sure. As usual we have a small body of evidence and incomplete records to go on. This particular blade strikes me as something of above average quality. Granted I am only going on photos, but sometimes I just have a feeling. I have seen a few other (notably Kull) blades that don't have a ricasso block... So I'm just not sure.

Touching briefly on the mark, first, thanks to Jim for nudging my memory with the scan from Briggs! Seen in this context the origin from the "fly" and the two marks labeled as figure B I think there is something of a rude progression there. Regarding the age and ethnic attribution of the mark... I am always hesitant of taking some pretty sparse data (a few captured takouba in the early 1900s) and trying to read a lot into it, much as I liked to just for the sake of some structure! I am then leary of IDing this as a firstly Tuareg mark that transmitted to Darfur. Maybe it was, or maybe it went the other way. This is the maddening thing about marks, applied locally they give almost no trail based on blades or mounts to say who first started using them first. For example looking through Morel's essay did not turn up the mark and he was fairly comprehensive in his studies and examined quite a few examples. That leads me to think this mark was perhaps not particulary common on takouba, but we do see it popping up a lot on kaskara! The short version is I don't know but I'm getting really, really curious.

Mefidk · 3rd January 2012, 06:30 AM

sorry in all the excitement about the rusty blade I failed to point this out (and I now see the pictures were not clear), but the croc kaskara does indeed have a ricasso - can we therefore assume this one is a trade blade?

Attached a better picture

I'm not sure if it will help this discussion but I could start another thread with images of the other pieces than came with these two and Iains takouba (when I have photos of them all). Unfortunately I know nothing more than they all came up for sale in the same auction lot.

Iain · 3rd January 2012, 02:13 PM

I have to admit I'm struggling to make out the ricasso but that might just be the angle and the overhang of the guard. Right now I just think I'm seeing the end of the fuller? Most likely I'm just blind though.

Just a quick note, that as this is the current kaskara thread going on the forum, might be a good place to put this short article I ran across today. Some interesting terminology at the end.

http://news.sudanvisiondaily.com/det...?rsnpid=203766

Mefidk · 3rd January 2012, 03:10 PM

No your not going blind, it is really difficult to see, bad picture.

The fuller also has me confused - it is poorly done, and it actually extends into the ricasso which looks to have been all but ground away leaving only very faint marks on both sides of the blade. Not knowing enough about trade blades I wonder if any came without a fuller and possibly some enterprising bladesmith corrected the 'mistake'? That would explain the incongruity between blade quality and the messy fuller.
I will try to replace the picture with one using incident light to bring it out the ricasso marks - then again I might be wishfully seeing things that turn out to be trickily placed horizontal scratches

Iain · 3rd January 2012, 03:22 PM

Looking forward to the better picture, but I think I see it now, was looking in the wrong area.

Looking again I can clearly see the thick, squared off edge and were it slopes and lookes like it has been ground down. Unless I am going blind

I'm pretty sure I see little squared off corners on the top and bottom surface of the blade there, right on the edge.

2nd January 2012, 01:53 AM	#1
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,281	Chris and Iain, thank you so much for these straightforward observations and for the great explanations along with them. It is great to engage in these kinds of discussions where we exchange views and ideas regardless of polarity, as it is a total learning experience. I must say that after reviewing earlier posts, notes and rereading through Briggs I am compelled to agree that these two kaskara may very well be much earlier in the 20th century. It seems likely the clearly more recently refurbished example is of the same blade type as the heavily aged one, the elliptical one third blade length channel from blade root is similar on both though I dont believe exact. What steers me away from European origin for these blades is the lack of forte block. In looking at some other examples of blades which were apparantly of Solingen origin and intended for export such as those by Clauberg and Peres, these typical had such ricasso blocks and were marked. There were likely however blades unmarked, but I believe would have been configured similarly. I am glad the patinated blade is shown with tang exposed, and this blade has the same aperture and shape as the Peres type blades. What is puzzling of course is that there is no block ricasso, so it seems we may presume native make for these. The same type fuller appears on the unusually hilted swords apparantly from Tunisian Berber regions. I think we may look toward blades entering North Africa post Khalifa and during the Condominium. While it seems doubtful that any weapons producing in occupied Sudan of course was unlikely, however Darfur and these regions remained loosely outside British control with Ali Dinar emplaced as the sultan and the region essentially autonomous.These regions were very much as a frontier and more associated with Saharan and Berber tribal activity than with the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan as I have understood. There were even Tuareg factions as far as El Fasher, and it would seem contact through Tunisian regions Berbers might well have brought blades in . In those Tunisian regions the Senussi Brotherhood was quite prevalent, a Sufi following to which Ali Dinar also belonged. The Senussi were in the years toward WWI apparantly aligning with Ottomans and the Germans in the developing Great War. This development was key in the final situation for Ali Dinar who was declared outlaw by the British and killed by them in 1916. It would seem that in this period, blades may well have been coming in through Tunis and through Berber and Senussi headed Darfur and adjacent regions. It would seem that native bladesmiths may have duplicated blades and possibly adapted interpretations of German markings. It seems these might be from this period to the years following, and probably produced in remote regions outside the controlled regions in Anglo-Egyptian Sudan. I am not sure how much we should rely on the crossguards on the refurbished examples as these were so often refurbished, and often parts may have been interchanged. The obviously intact well aged example though may give a good view of early guards. In Ed Hunleys work, he notes that guards were fabricated in four pieces pre-1940 when the single piece forged guards were developed. The 'comet' mark seems to be copied almost perfectly on the rehilted blade from that on the aged and worn one (note even the two 'jots' in the orb). In Briggs (p.81) he notes that Nickel had suggested this may have been some stylized image of the 'flaming grenade' from the 'doll' figure of Peter Mumm and used by Weyersbergs in the 19th century. I can see the similarity to the fly image from the doll and the Milanese mark, but cannot see even a Picasso like potential with these 'comet' figures. The only comet used by German makers was that of the Schimmelberg group mid 19th c and later which has a star type symbol with crescent like 'tail' and 6 other stars......this does not have the separated tail which is implied by these geometric devices. It should be noted that these geometric devices were found on the blades of Tuareg chiefs from the Tuareg rebellion in 1916-17 and had apparantly been in use for some time. As noted the Tuareg factions did have contact with Darfur as well as into the regions into Libya and Tunisia as previously mentioned, and perhaps this symbol cross diffused into 'kaskara' parlance via that venue. Attached Images

3rd January 2012, 06:30 AM	#4
Mefidk Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Denmark Posts: 157	sorry in all the excitement about the rusty blade I failed to point this out (and I now see the pictures were not clear), but the croc kaskara does indeed have a ricasso - can we therefore assume this one is a trade blade? Attached a better picture I'm not sure if it will help this discussion but I could start another thread with images of the other pieces than came with these two and Iains takouba (when I have photos of them all). Unfortunately I know nothing more than they all came up for sale in the same auction lot. Attached Images Last edited by Mefidk; 3rd January 2012 at 03:46 PM. Reason: improved image

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

2nd January 2012, 03:54 PM	#2
Mefidk Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Denmark Posts: 157	Thanks for the further input Jim - the marking is a puzzle is it not! My feeling about the figures you show is that whilst the marks are not perfectly represented, 3 of 4 are clearly very similar to the original they are supposed to be copied from, but our focus mark is really a stretch. Given that the other examples we have of this mark are all relatively similar, would we expect that the artist messed the original up so badly but that everyone else could copy his work so well? So I'm with you on this, not even picasso would produce representation of the fly mark like this. The long vertical marks (staff) are also on all the examples I've seen so far, which does not bear any similarity to any of the European stamps - so I'm inclined to think this mark represents something else. Poking around in the forum threads I came accross this one: http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=11950 In this thread RDGAC posted four kaskara from his museum collection, one of which both bears the 'comet', similar fuller and size of blade and has an identical cross-guard to my rusty example. Unfortunately this one was precisely the one that did not come with any guarantee of date collected But if it was as suggested in the early to mid 1880s, then we have an example of the mark on a kaskara with a date comensurate with Briggs' takouba example. I wonder if RDGAC has dug up any more information since this thread, it would be extremely useful? Looking at the hilts on both my swords - the croc grip kaskara has an almost identical guard to RDG examples 1 & 2, but none of these look like they are formed from four parts (no X, although his No3 example does have one), so I wonder if that can be used as a reliable benchmark for dating? As Iain noted the croc kaskara guard is of high quality and does appear to me to be old. Incidentaly one of the RDG swords also has the iron peg clearly visible that was not used on my rusty sword's hilt, hence why I think the grip was perhaps replaced at some time. Chris

2nd January 2012, 09:09 PM	#3
Iain Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Olomouc Posts: 1,717	Typed this up in the train today but hadn't seen Chris' last post (excellent points to be sure!), still I'll post these few musings... This is developing into a fascinating discussion! Not just about these two swords but as always, back to the all pervasive questions of trade, regional politics, steel and marks. To focus for a minute on the two sword that are the subject of this thread, in my opinion the well aged blade is likely 19th and here is why: a. The tang is formed particularly well b. It has likely been rehilted and has thus done some time in the field (note Chris' excellent observation about the unused tang hole) c. The patina (dark patina) is consistent with some age. d. The form and execution of the fuller is smoother and has much smoother edges than the croc sword. Is it a European blade? I am not sure. I agree ricassos are a pretty surefire way to identify the trade blades, but does it rule out anything without a ricasso? Again, I am simply not sure. As usual we have a small body of evidence and incomplete records to go on. This particular blade strikes me as something of above average quality. Granted I am only going on photos, but sometimes I just have a feeling. I have seen a few other (notably Kull) blades that don't have a ricasso block... So I'm just not sure. Touching briefly on the mark, first, thanks to Jim for nudging my memory with the scan from Briggs! Seen in this context the origin from the "fly" and the two marks labeled as figure B I think there is something of a rude progression there. Regarding the age and ethnic attribution of the mark... I am always hesitant of taking some pretty sparse data (a few captured takouba in the early 1900s) and trying to read a lot into it, much as I liked to just for the sake of some structure! I am then leary of IDing this as a firstly Tuareg mark that transmitted to Darfur. Maybe it was, or maybe it went the other way. This is the maddening thing about marks, applied locally they give almost no trail based on blades or mounts to say who first started using them first. For example looking through Morel's essay did not turn up the mark and he was fairly comprehensive in his studies and examined quite a few examples. That leads me to think this mark was perhaps not particulary common on takouba, but we do see it popping up a lot on kaskara! The short version is I don't know but I'm getting really, really curious.

3rd January 2012, 02:13 PM	#5
Iain Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Olomouc Posts: 1,717	I have to admit I'm struggling to make out the ricasso but that might just be the angle and the overhang of the guard. Right now I just think I'm seeing the end of the fuller? Most likely I'm just blind though. Just a quick note, that as this is the current kaskara thread going on the forum, might be a good place to put this short article I ran across today. Some interesting terminology at the end. http://news.sudanvisiondaily.com/det...?rsnpid=203766

3rd January 2012, 03:10 PM	#6
Mefidk Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Denmark Posts: 157	No your not going blind, it is really difficult to see, bad picture. The fuller also has me confused - it is poorly done, and it actually extends into the ricasso which looks to have been all but ground away leaving only very faint marks on both sides of the blade. Not knowing enough about trade blades I wonder if any came without a fuller and possibly some enterprising bladesmith corrected the 'mistake'? That would explain the incongruity between blade quality and the messy fuller. I will try to replace the picture with one using incident light to bring it out the ricasso marks - then again I might be wishfully seeing things that turn out to be trickily placed horizontal scratches

3rd January 2012, 03:22 PM	#7
Iain Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Olomouc Posts: 1,717	Looking forward to the better picture, but I think I see it now, was looking in the wrong area. Looking again I can clearly see the thick, squared off edge and were it slopes and lookes like it has been ground down. Unless I am going blind I'm pretty sure I see little squared off corners on the top and bottom surface of the blade there, right on the edge.