Omani Sayf/Saif

[Jim McDougall]

Beautifully explained Ed, as always.
From what I know of swords, flexibility in blades has its degree of importance, and of course a well known display of high quality was in being able to bend the blade into a deep curve and have it return true at release of tension.

However, this was not the case in all blades as might be expected, and clearly their intended manner of use would be the key factor in its acceptability.

Well described on the dress of the sword, and its image as an accoutrement of status, office and wealth in with the wearer (great analogy of the Texas BBQ pistol!!! ). While these often notably decorated examples were worn by these figures as the dynastic symbol of the regime and personal augmentation, they were with notably sound trade blades as a rule.

In my opinion, the blade shown here in the OP while simple, seems to have a version of the Passau/Solingen running wolf, which may well be the mark as used on Caucasian blades. These 'wolf marks (ters maymal) are more an interpretation of the well known Solingen variations of these, and it is known that Caucasian blades were much favored in Arab trade.
This blade would be considered prestigious and regarded as well placed in a weapon of status.

We cannot say these long conical hilted sayf were not used in combat as required, it would be difficult to assert that, and they may have been in some degree. What is suggested is that these were not intended as a battle weapon specifically to arm a warrior in battle conditions. With the prevalent use of firearms of course, it was not a primary weapon in any case.

The main contention is that the very light, highly flexible blades which seem to have been made expressly for simple versions of these type swords used in the dancing were not used in combative situations. This is of course quite separate from those made with sturdy trade blades for the prestigious swords worn by Omani gentlemen.

It does not seem that the disparity between these two separate types of these Omani long swords should be such a point of contention.

[Edster]

Well said Jim and informative as well. I think the flexible/bendy blades may have resulted from almost random consequences of the blade making process, i.e. the coming together of good steel, adequate quenching and proper tempering. It is difficult to get all three processes to coming together even most of the time given the simple facilities available to say the smiths in Kassala. I noted an experienced blade maker apparently air quenching a blade and then tempering it in water in a channel iron tray. Certainly not the way it's done on Forged in Fire.

In the "presentation of self" part I wanted to consider the sword as an Object rather than the Subject. As collectors and students of weapons we see the sword as the Subject made & used within an ethnographic context. But in its original context it is a cultural Object. The blade (imported or locally made) is a product that made by a Person, decorated & accessorized by other Persons, selected and used & worn by another Person and perhaps held dear by Others mainly within the initial cultural context. In several forum commentators, including your analysis, we get into the cultural context and this is the frontier of a more complete understanding.

Best,
Ed

[kronckew]

Forged in Fire is an interesting show, but do not think that making blades under time & material constraints to pass their extreme tests and their reasons for rejection has anything to do with reality of sword making.


p.s. - I recall the approach of the Zulus to Rorke's Drift in the film 'Zulu' they beat their shields with their Iklwa hilts and sounded in their hundreds like a train. The Romans did this too, to intimidate their soon-to-be dead victims. When they actually formed up and advanced to the battle, they did it in silence* - even more unnerving.
*- they did of course use trumpet commands, which the men obeyed instantly - in silence.

[Edster]

Yep, both the "reality show" Forged in Fire and the film Zulu are/were scripted and edited productions that sacrifices reality to tell good stories. For me FIF uses the cooking show format to simulate reality. Zulu is a favorite, but I wouldn't have wanted to be one of the "live action" camera or sound men on the battlefield to get an accurate reality.

Best,
Ed

[kronckew]

Originally Posted by Edster

Yep, both the "reality show" Forged in Fire and the film Zulu are/were scripted and edited productions that sacrifice reality to tell good stories. For me FIF uses the cooking show format to simulate reality. Zulu is a favourite, but I wouldn't have wanted to be one of the "live action" camera or sound men on the battlefield to get an accurate reality.

Best,
Ed

Zulu numbers in the movie were not very many. They 'augmented' distant hilltop shots by having 2 real Zulus, additionally carrying another 6 cutout cardboard Zulus nailed to a board. I did like the movie 'gladiator' use of the Zulu chant recording just before the Germans attacked in the early battle. Actually, the movie's whole Rourke's Drift layout was not as real, and in the real battle most Zulu were killed at over 300-600 yards. Dead zulus in the movie were resurrected for later shots. There was no drunk preacher or soldier either. I hear the Zulu warriors had a great time making the movie.

[kai]

Hello Ed,

Allow me to go back to your observation:

I think the flexible/bendy blades may have resulted from almost random consequences of the blade making process, i.e. the coming together of good steel, adequate quenching and proper tempering. It is difficult to get all three processes to coming together even most of the time given the simple facilities available to say the smiths in Kassala. I noted an experienced blade maker apparently air quenching a blade and then tempering it in water in a channel iron tray.

Could you please describe in more detail what the process was exactly?

Certainly quenching is generally done with steel even if there are lots of traditional approaches. Tempering is way more difficult to achieve consistent results with and often skipped in many cultures. It certainly can't be done in water - that must have been the quenching.

Quenching in air is only possible with some modern high alloy steels. If there was some time spent between the forge and dipping into the water for tempering, it may have been for de-risking the process and/or not going for maximum hardness. Both can make sense in an artisan setting (and the strategy chosen may be heavily dependent on experience with the specific type of steel available and being worked on). Some steels can be pretty forgiving and reach reasonable hardness with a range of conditions while others need to treated exactly right to obtain any decent quench.

Regards,
Kai

[Edster]

Hello Kai,

My "instantaneous" image of the smith putting the blade in the water tray is an over 30 year old memory. As a "visual thinker" I am confident of what I saw, but the "frames" before and after didn't register, but I just assumed he was doing a part of a heat treat process. I wish I had paid more attention to the entire process or had asked more questions. Not all the swords the group of smiths there were "bendy" and I assumed that the bendy ones were the result an unplanned result of the combination the parent steel and the quench and temper. Sorry I can't really answer your question.

Best,
Ed