Very old ? Zulu Assegai

Ron Anderson · 8th September 2010, 07:28 AM

The fact that that area has not got its own clearly identifiable type of sword is odd. The sword is so universal one would expect to find it everywhere. And it is common elsewhere in Africa.

However, the fact remains that tribal groups in South Africa seemed to buck that trend. Unless I'm wrong and someone can point to the kinds of swords that were carried in South African areas at the time.

Just a little to the north, the Shona have their own swords and daggers, instantly recognisable.

But I suspect the assegai was quite possibly the first hand-to-hand type edged weapon used among the Nguni.

As I understand it, life before Shaka was considerably less violent. While there were wars, differences were settled with comparatively little bloodshed. Shaka effectively changed that and ushered in a period of extreme violence throughout the region (a kind of holocaust known as the difaqane). The assegai played a very big part in that, as did Shaka's complete social re-engineering of the tribes who fell under his influence.

He wasn't simply a military strategist. Under him, society was completely re-structured to support his wars. It was a revolution, and changed everything in Nguni society - from marriage contracts to wealth alotment. And it transformed the entire sub-continent.

In this respect, he truly was a 'Black Napoleon'. South Africa would never be the same again. There is still a 7 million strong 'Zulu' nation there, and such a group never really existed before Shaka.

Tim Simmons · 8th September 2010, 08:57 AM

Ron thanks for the clear thought. This link has the only "ZulU" sword I have ever seen. Ron's information is very helpful. The sword in the link is an exception and really a royal piece. It is interesting that it does not take the form of Shona swords. Also it is hard to see European infuence?

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...+zulu+interest

katana · 8th September 2010, 01:44 PM

Hi Ron,
thank you for 'expanding' the topic , I was thinking Shaka 'onwards' ....when thinking Zulu. I did not consider the use of swords in SA pre-Shaka. So thanks for clarifying this. I have read, as you have stated, that inter tribal conflict (pre-Shaka) had 'guide-lines' by which the victors were fairly quickly known, limiting 'blood shed' to a minimum.

I also read that Shaka's earliest battles were won extremely easily because he had disregarded the 'rules' and completely 'overwhelmed' his opponents with the savagery of his troops. He literaly had changed the 'protocols' of war without his 'enemy' knowing the new rules.....almost 'shock and awe'....

Perhaps, then, you are right, that the knobkerrie was the short range weapon of choice in these earlier conflicts .....maybe the sword was considered too deadly

. An interesting parallel was the use of the throwing knife in the Congo. In the 17th C the then King of the Kuba tribe banned its use as it was too savage.

The Iklwa was often described as having a 'sword-like' blade and the link Tim posted (thanks Tim

) is extremely interesting.
The sword shown has an Iklwa shaped/profiled blade on, effectively, a very short shaft. I am not suggesting that this is a cut down Iklwa though, as the handle has a flared 'pommel end'. But, this does demonstrate that the Zulu were 'aware' that the Iklwa could be utilised/modified into a short sword...but choose not to. I can only assume that as a spear it better suited the skill, tactics and function required by the tribesmen.

The blade on this sword seems to be approx. 18" long .....I believe the medal above is the standard 1 1/4" diameter and have used this to 'scale' the blade

Kind Regards David

.

Ron Anderson · 9th September 2010, 02:26 AM

Hi Tim and David

Tim, thanks for showing that sword. Very interesting. I'd agree with David that it seems to be a modification of the Iklwa. It does look like a long spear blade on a short handle (kind of like a straight-bladed Shotel actually, in its proportions).

I think that Tim nailed it on the head with the European influence, specifically British influence, looking at the timeline. In the early 1800s contact between Nguni and Europeans was minimal. By 1879, of course, there was a significant contact as the Zulu encountered first Boers, then British, moving inland.

The Boers never fought with swords. However, the British certainly did and the Zulu will have had plenty of opportunity to see cavalry and infantry regulation swords in action at close quarters.

Of course, 1879 is more than a half century after Shaka. Dingaan, Mpande and then Cetshwayo came to power and, by that time, the Zulu had certainly started wising up to the new European threat.

Fact is, by the battle of Isandlwana, Zulu would use captured firearms when possible. So why not adopt and adapt to the sword?

This makes sense.

Of course, it was still rare as hen's teeth. As you say, Tim, this is probably virtually a one-off. I've never seen any others.

Ron Anderson · 9th September 2010, 11:22 AM

Tim, another whimsical thought in relation to your comment that this sword may have been a chief's sword or somesuch. Interestingly, only British officers (in infantry and rifle regiments) carried swords. It requires a bit of imagination and some license, but I wonder if it's too much of a stretch to say it might have also been adopted as a symbol of rank, following the English example.

As I say, a bit of whimsy. Who knows.

8th September 2010, 01:44 PM	#3
katana Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Kent Posts: 2,658	Hi Ron, thank you for 'expanding' the topic , I was thinking Shaka 'onwards' ....when thinking Zulu. I did not consider the use of swords in SA pre-Shaka. So thanks for clarifying this. I have read, as you have stated, that inter tribal conflict (pre-Shaka) had 'guide-lines' by which the victors were fairly quickly known, limiting 'blood shed' to a minimum. I also read that Shaka's earliest battles were won extremely easily because he had disregarded the 'rules' and completely 'overwhelmed' his opponents with the savagery of his troops. He literaly had changed the 'protocols' of war without his 'enemy' knowing the new rules.....almost 'shock and awe'.... Perhaps, then, you are right, that the knobkerrie was the short range weapon of choice in these earlier conflicts .....maybe the sword was considered too deadly . An interesting parallel was the use of the throwing knife in the Congo. In the 17th C the then King of the Kuba tribe banned its use as it was too savage. The Iklwa was often described as having a 'sword-like' blade and the link Tim posted (thanks Tim ) is extremely interesting. The sword shown has an Iklwa shaped/profiled blade on, effectively, a very short shaft. I am not suggesting that this is a cut down Iklwa though, as the handle has a flared 'pommel end'. But, this does demonstrate that the Zulu were 'aware' that the Iklwa could be utilised/modified into a short sword...but choose not to. I can only assume that as a spear it better suited the skill, tactics and function required by the tribesmen. The blade on this sword seems to be approx. 18" long .....I believe the medal above is the standard 1 1/4" diameter and have used this to 'scale' the blade Kind Regards David . Attached Images

8th September 2010, 07:28 AM	#1
Ron Anderson Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Sydney Australia Posts: 228	The fact that that area has not got its own clearly identifiable type of sword is odd. The sword is so universal one would expect to find it everywhere. And it is common elsewhere in Africa. However, the fact remains that tribal groups in South Africa seemed to buck that trend. Unless I'm wrong and someone can point to the kinds of swords that were carried in South African areas at the time. Just a little to the north, the Shona have their own swords and daggers, instantly recognisable. But I suspect the assegai was quite possibly the first hand-to-hand type edged weapon used among the Nguni. As I understand it, life before Shaka was considerably less violent. While there were wars, differences were settled with comparatively little bloodshed. Shaka effectively changed that and ushered in a period of extreme violence throughout the region (a kind of holocaust known as the difaqane). The assegai played a very big part in that, as did Shaka's complete social re-engineering of the tribes who fell under his influence. He wasn't simply a military strategist. Under him, society was completely re-structured to support his wars. It was a revolution, and changed everything in Nguni society - from marriage contracts to wealth alotment. And it transformed the entire sub-continent. In this respect, he truly was a 'Black Napoleon'. South Africa would never be the same again. There is still a 7 million strong 'Zulu' nation there, and such a group never really existed before Shaka.

8th September 2010, 08:57 AM	#2
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,844	Ron thanks for the clear thought. This link has the only "ZulU" sword I have ever seen. Ron's information is very helpful. The sword in the link is an exception and really a royal piece. It is interesting that it does not take the form of Shona swords. Also it is hard to see European infuence? http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...+zulu+interest

9th September 2010, 02:26 AM	#4
Ron Anderson Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Sydney Australia Posts: 228	Hi Tim and David Tim, thanks for showing that sword. Very interesting. I'd agree with David that it seems to be a modification of the Iklwa. It does look like a long spear blade on a short handle (kind of like a straight-bladed Shotel actually, in its proportions). I think that Tim nailed it on the head with the European influence, specifically British influence, looking at the timeline. In the early 1800s contact between Nguni and Europeans was minimal. By 1879, of course, there was a significant contact as the Zulu encountered first Boers, then British, moving inland. The Boers never fought with swords. However, the British certainly did and the Zulu will have had plenty of opportunity to see cavalry and infantry regulation swords in action at close quarters. Of course, 1879 is more than a half century after Shaka. Dingaan, Mpande and then Cetshwayo came to power and, by that time, the Zulu had certainly started wising up to the new European threat. Fact is, by the battle of Isandlwana, Zulu would use captured firearms when possible. So why not adopt and adapt to the sword? This makes sense. Of course, it was still rare as hen's teeth. As you say, Tim, this is probably virtually a one-off. I've never seen any others.

9th September 2010, 11:22 AM	#5
Ron Anderson Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Sydney Australia Posts: 228	Tim, another whimsical thought in relation to your comment that this sword may have been a chief's sword or somesuch. Interestingly, only British officers (in infantry and rifle regiments) carried swords. It requires a bit of imagination and some license, but I wonder if it's too much of a stretch to say it might have also been adopted as a symbol of rank, following the English example. As I say, a bit of whimsy. Who knows.