Zanzibari (?) Saif for Comment

[TVV]

Here is another Zanzibari saif, and while the discussion so far has focused on the hilts, the blades are also interesting. In this case the blade is single edged and almost straight, with 4 shallow fullers - three narrow ones by the back and another wider one just below them. The seller, who is a member of this forum and quite knowledgeable, thought it was perhaps Indian made in imitation of European blades. Looking at it, I am wondering if it could have been from the Caucasus, originally from a shashka? Elgood in his book on Arab arms mentions that following the Russian conquest of the Caucasus and during the Circassian diaspora a number of shashka blades ended up in Southern Arabia.

What is interesting about this hilt type is that it appears with all kinds of blades - some have broadsword blades, others have hanger type blades, this could be from a Shashka (or made in India), and so on - there does not seem to be a particular tendency when it comes to the blade. Meanwhile, the older boradswords, aka saif Yamani and the newer broadswords with conical hilts tend to have fairly similar blades in terms of overall shape. The kattaras with their curved blades are a little more varied, but then the Southern Yemeni swords with metal hilts, which were probably produced in Hyderabad tend to have almost the same blades. So why the huge variety for this particular hilt type?

[Jim McDougall]

That is an extremely well placed question, which has come up many times.I think the explanation is in degree as complex, but in the short version.....it is trade that is the conduit which brought the diffusion of blades. As these blades traveled through the vast network of Arab routes they ended up mounted in the hilt forms favored in the entrepots where they were received.

Ibrahiim has carried out profound field research on these and many of the weapons of Oman and Zanzibar, which has proven to be the 'X-factor' in the distribution of many forms of weapons through the 'Arab' sphere. In point of fact, the venerable catalog of Charles Buttin (1933) shows a number of these 'nimcha' but refers to them as 'Arab' ...not specifying Zanzibar as their source. While there have been some which had hilts with motif attributed to Zanzibar, the bulk of these swords with their peculiar characteristics seem to have a vast spectrum of blades used in them, and are not known to be from Zanzibar itself.

The reason for this is that Zanzibar itself was a bustling trade center with traders from many countries represented, and being an Omani Sultanate, the Arab trade routes of course prevailed here. It is the networks of trade which brought blades from many sources together, and were further amalgamated with those in other entrepots before finally settling in one, where they were hllted as required.

As Robert Elgood did well note, there were blades from the Caucusus which probably were coupled with the much favored 'Magyar' blades from sources which produced them for Hungary.
This blade does seem to have the character of one of those blades, which indeed did often find use in shashkas.
The trade ports in the Black Sea of course networked with Ottoman trade, which in turn entered routes which included Arab trade contact. There were also blades out of the Malabar coast in India in some degree.

I think this very interesting blade may well be from Caucasian sources but corresponds to some European blades, i.e. Solingen, which they copied as well, so difficult to say for sure. As noted, what is curious is that these Arab swords are likely to be mounted indiscriminately with broadsword blades in some cases, but those seem more common in the 'Maghrebi' variety.

[TVV]

Jim,

Thank you for the thorough response. In Buttin's plate XXX, a I find it interesting that while the vast majority of weapons are clearly Arab in form, for example the khanjars/jambiya, in the top two corners there are a few nimchas (safe to call them that based on blade characteristics) with hilts, which are generally associated with Algeria. On the same plate one can also observe a few Syrian kindjals, which further demonstrate the Caucasus influence in Arabia in the late 19th century.

On the subject of Caucasus weapons, the best author and expert currently, at least in my opinion, is Kirill Rivkin. I am yet to start reading his book on Caucasus Arms, as I am still finishing his work on the development of the Eastern Saber, but he mentions that the shashka arose as a lighter, shorter version of the earlier sabers as a result of the requirements of mountain warfare and skirmishes, characterized by long distance sniping and rapid close quarters melees. Therefore one did not really need a long and curved saber, but a shorter, straighter blade, easier to deploy and maneuver during hand to hand fighting.

In the sword I posted above, the blade is indeed shorter and almost straight. There are however no marks on it whatsoever. We know that Caucasians assigned a huge importance to markings, and even had blade terminology based on the markings present - Gurda, Abbas Mirza, Ters Maimal, Kaldam, etc. I have to believe markings were important in Oman and its colonies as well, based on the blades that clearly show local attempts at copying them, as found on the conical hilt Omani saifs and kattaras. So it seems a little bizarre that this blade, with three narrow fullers and one wider one, mimicking earlier Eastern European blades, would be left unmarked.

Regards,
Teodor