Quite a price for a Kattara

Lee · 8th October 2010, 11:04 AM

Well, yes, I guess I can see a protokattara in this. Thank you for bringing it to my attention; it is always interesting to see medieval and immediate post-medieval Islamic swords. I am aware of the examples in the Topkapi museums complex as well as some of those in the Askeri (military) museum in Istanbul (often ex Alexandria) and an occasional scattered published example here and there. But, is anyone aware of an accessible work laying out the variations and chronologies of Islamic medieval swords?

Michael Blalock · 8th October 2010, 02:41 PM

I'm thinking this sword is 19th century as I think are the swords in the following photos. I know there is a lot of ambiguity about when this type of Omani sword appeared but Sotheby's attribution of 16th century is extremely early though it certainly seems to have paid off.

Jim McDougall · 8th October 2010, 07:23 PM

Most interesting, and yet another stunning example of the kinds of staggering prices that seem to reflect a trend in auctions of arms and armour over the past about two years. My instincts would suggest that increased wealth in certain cultures in graduated degree as a result of geo economic issues might be supporting interest in antiquities as investments. However, I would think that buying these at such inflated prices would suggest more of a bubble than secure investment.

I dont personally participate in or deal with auctions as I have not collected in years, however it seems to me there are certain dynamics involved that are outside the perameters I used to know. I would not suggest foul play necessarily in any particular case, but do know that such things do happen.

Regarding this interesting sword, it is of a type that is indeed classified as 'rare' for lack of a better term, as they are certainly well represented in many collections, and are by no means unknown. It is often presumed by many that these are extremely rare, which may have lent to this high price, and an empassioned collector with such means might have exuberantly fallen to that impression.

What begs question is why is this identified as 16th century, and what would make it worth such an exorbitant price? I have never known a reputable house such as Sothebys to misrepresent items, certainly not intentionally, though things do happen. There is a makers name here Abdallah ibn Ghabish, perhaps there is something in that to declare this sword as this important.
If it is something that can firmly attribute this sword to 16th century, it is important indeed.

Elgood addresses these curious hilts in his "Arms and Armour of Arabia" (pp.17-18, figs. 2.13 and 2.15), where he describes them as usually classified as Omani, and notes that thier date cannot be accurately determined. Even the Omani attribution is questioned, and Persian origins suggested ,there is mention of a shamshir khwabandan (=broadsword) but clear substantiation inconclusive. It seems most likely these may derive from Omani outposts, and are typically thought of as 17th-18th century from the German and European blades found in original examples.

In the latter 18th and through the 19th at some point, the drooping quillons were eliminated bringing the well known cylindrical guardless hilt.

At a Sothebys sale in London, (24 April 1991, #1113) , a similar hilt of bronze was sold and was catalogued as early Arab sword 12-14th century, which Elgood (op.cit.) notes there did not appear to be grounds for such dating, and that gold metal covering stripped much as with most of these found.
Perhaps that precedent may have lent to the hubris of this sword, or possibly the medieval appearance suggesting the Nasrid forms of hilt.

There are certainly numerous reasons which plausibly could have motivated a buyer to purchase this sword at such a lofty sum, but more and more it seems weapons are attaining incredible prices. Maybe our empassioned hobby might be a lucrative venture more so than previously imagined

All the best,
Jim

Lee · 11th October 2010, 09:01 PM

Many valid points, Jim, as usual. I think it also boosts prices when such items are sold in an 'Art' sale as opposed to 'Arms & Armour.'

I have found and continue to find kattara blades to be very difficult to date with any confidence. I suspect that these swords, remaining 'in use,' could have been subjected to regular re-hiltings and re-embellishments.

I would have thought a few of those you picture, Michael, may be a bit older than 19th century. But I have seen so very few of these; I really do appreciate your sharing these examples.

Readers may also wish to follow the Sothebys' link and to navigate to the next two lots.

Ibrahiim al Balooshi · 27th March 2011, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lee

Many valid points, Jim, as usual. I think it also boosts prices when such items are sold in an 'Art' sale as opposed to 'Arms & Armour.'

I have found and continue to find kattara blades to be very difficult to date with any confidence. I suspect that these swords, remaining 'in use,' could have been subjected to regular re-hiltings and re-embellishments.

I would have thought a few of those you picture, Michael, may be a bit older than 19th century. But I have seen so very few of these; I really do appreciate your sharing these examples.

Readers may also wish to follow the Sothebys' link and to navigate to the next two lots.

I followed the Sothebys item very closely... and I was also stunned to see the price. I must have handled half a dozen of these variants in my time . I had a good look at that one and discovered it was a wootz blade and had an inscription in the pommel which would have been the owner or the maker.No one has cracked this one yet. It just seems to have appeared sometime out of the blue! Similar relatives appear to be Persian perhaps from the Greek and or Roman short. For sure if it is as old as they now suspect... 10th century? then it is certain to be up the value scale. In terms of quantity left in Oman my estimate is their could be 10 left dotted around .. though I do know a collector with 24 ! and another with 18. I have to say the 2 that I have may not be wootz but I ve not cleaned the blades yet..
In my view they arent kattara since the blade is completely different with a predominant wing cross section and not flexible like the Omani Long Kattara. The hilt is totally different compared to the cylindrical Long. The technique for fighting is different altogether from the Long because the blade is short(a lot of the Shorts Ive seen are about 30 inch total length. Its a hacking weapon.. for up close work , like the Roman short...or like a 2 edged cutlass / short claymore.. and the shield therefor must also have been different to the Buckler(terrs) and must have been big... Heavy infantry as opposed to light speedy nip in slash and snick which is the technique for the Omani Kattara ... Therefor if the weapon is structured differently and used very differently its not a Kattara. I would suggest that this short variant came in early from Persia and was the weapon of choice for fortress or strong point guards up until the Omani conquest of Zanzibar (1652) which then became a conduit for African swords into Arabia. Thereafter I can envisage a tried and tested sword living on as a fortress weapon in Oman well into the 19th century..and other infantry employing the newer Kattara.
The question as to how the Kattara evolved is also interesting... Did it evolve from the Omani Short? Or did it evolve from the influence of African weapons ? Or Both ? OR~ Did it evolve entirely separately ?
May I just leave that as an open note and request forum input (so I dont bore everybody!)

8th October 2010, 07:23 PM	#3
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,285	Most interesting, and yet another stunning example of the kinds of staggering prices that seem to reflect a trend in auctions of arms and armour over the past about two years. My instincts would suggest that increased wealth in certain cultures in graduated degree as a result of geo economic issues might be supporting interest in antiquities as investments. However, I would think that buying these at such inflated prices would suggest more of a bubble than secure investment. I dont personally participate in or deal with auctions as I have not collected in years, however it seems to me there are certain dynamics involved that are outside the perameters I used to know. I would not suggest foul play necessarily in any particular case, but do know that such things do happen. Regarding this interesting sword, it is of a type that is indeed classified as 'rare' for lack of a better term, as they are certainly well represented in many collections, and are by no means unknown. It is often presumed by many that these are extremely rare, which may have lent to this high price, and an empassioned collector with such means might have exuberantly fallen to that impression. What begs question is why is this identified as 16th century, and what would make it worth such an exorbitant price? I have never known a reputable house such as Sothebys to misrepresent items, certainly not intentionally, though things do happen. There is a makers name here Abdallah ibn Ghabish, perhaps there is something in that to declare this sword as this important. If it is something that can firmly attribute this sword to 16th century, it is important indeed. Elgood addresses these curious hilts in his "Arms and Armour of Arabia" (pp.17-18, figs. 2.13 and 2.15), where he describes them as usually classified as Omani, and notes that thier date cannot be accurately determined. Even the Omani attribution is questioned, and Persian origins suggested ,there is mention of a shamshir khwabandan (=broadsword) but clear substantiation inconclusive. It seems most likely these may derive from Omani outposts, and are typically thought of as 17th-18th century from the German and European blades found in original examples. In the latter 18th and through the 19th at some point, the drooping quillons were eliminated bringing the well known cylindrical guardless hilt. At a Sothebys sale in London, (24 April 1991, #1113) , a similar hilt of bronze was sold and was catalogued as early Arab sword 12-14th century, which Elgood (op.cit.) notes there did not appear to be grounds for such dating, and that gold metal covering stripped much as with most of these found. Perhaps that precedent may have lent to the hubris of this sword, or possibly the medieval appearance suggesting the Nasrid forms of hilt. There are certainly numerous reasons which plausibly could have motivated a buyer to purchase this sword at such a lofty sum, but more and more it seems weapons are attaining incredible prices. Maybe our empassioned hobby might be a lucrative venture more so than previously imagined All the best, Jim Last edited by Jim McDougall; 9th October 2010 at 04:26 PM.

8th October 2010, 11:04 AM	#1
Lee EAAF Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Upstate New York, USA Posts: 937	Always nice to see another example Well, yes, I guess I can see a protokattara in this. Thank you for bringing it to my attention; it is always interesting to see medieval and immediate post-medieval Islamic swords. I am aware of the examples in the Topkapi museums complex as well as some of those in the Askeri (military) museum in Istanbul (often ex Alexandria) and an occasional scattered published example here and there. But, is anyone aware of an accessible work laying out the variations and chronologies of Islamic medieval swords?

11th October 2010, 09:01 PM	#4
Lee EAAF Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Upstate New York, USA Posts: 937	Many valid points, Jim, as usual. I think it also boosts prices when such items are sold in an 'Art' sale as opposed to 'Arms & Armour.' I have found and continue to find kattara blades to be very difficult to date with any confidence. I suspect that these swords, remaining 'in use,' could have been subjected to regular re-hiltings and re-embellishments. I would have thought a few of those you picture, Michael, may be a bit older than 19th century. But I have seen so very few of these; I really do appreciate your sharing these examples. Readers may also wish to follow the Sothebys' link and to navigate to the next two lots.