Kattara for comments

[Iain]

Hi Ibrahiim,

The hypothesis is starting to sound pretty reasonable to me. Unfortunately in any type of historical research you are often not going to find absolute proof - although I certainly hope you do.

Cheers,

Iain

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by Iain

Hi Ibrahiim,

The hypothesis is starting to sound pretty reasonable to me. Unfortunately in any type of historical research you are often not going to find absolute proof - although I certainly hope you do.

Cheers,

Iain

Salaams Iain .. We have the weapon... we know who used it... but can we find out who made it and when?

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Salaams all,

Detail you cannot see at #25 on this thread is the style of hilt on the Sultan Bargash Old Omani Sayf however~ heres one~ From the Book by Richardson and Dorr; "The Craft Heritage of Oman" ~ Forum please note the identical style on the Royal Khanjar at the thread "The Omani Khanjar"#1 by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[Jim McDougall]

I have been away from this fascinating thread for a while, and spent the better part of yesterday rereading, checking sources and notes and trying to absorb the basic course of these amazing discussions. This thread has become almost 'textbook' in the serious study of an indiginous weapon form and it is outstanding to see these kinds of approaches to learning from these weapons. As we have been seeing there are several instances of focus on particular weapons in this depth, and while commending Ibrahiim on this with the kattara I would be remiss in not recognizing the amazing work done by Iain in his study of the takouba, which has now brought in the kaskara and joined by Chris.
What is so important about this is that we are virtually joining forces in these studies and recognizing the powerful connection between these weapons and thier place in the vast trade networks which are key in the development of these forms.

I would like to add a few of my own observations and perspectives in the case of the thread topic, and the kattara, and try to reestablish my understandings thus far.

I think we agree that the 'old form' of Omani sword (thank you Ibrahiim for the post with example with its silvered sheathing, the first I have seen!) is a quite old form which may reflect early types of hilt in interior Omani regions. While we can presume this style hilt may reflect Abbasid styles of the 8th century, if I understand correctly we are uncertain of the exact form used as hilts surviving are not extant and as far as I know there are no iconographic sources reflecting these hilts. It is well established that in virtually all cases as seen by the swords in Yucel, early blades survive but the mounts are almost always newer. Blades as we know were remounted and reused through many generations, while even larger numbers were probably recycled as steel was valuable.

By the latter 18th century, trade had as noted long fluorished in Oman with Muscat the key market for the Persian Gulf, and Sultan bin Ahmad allied with Great Britain in thier treaty in 1798, pledging to help protect British interests in India. Trade between Africa and Oman was active and the EIC established a trade station in the Gulf under their auspices.
I would point out that in this very time, England was having issues with the abundance of trade blades from Germany which was contested by the English makers. Many German blades began being diverted to other markets which included North Africa by the early years of the 19th century. This simply augmented already well established systems of trade blades headed there long before, but more blades undoubtedly entered the Red Sea trade and by there into Arabian networks.

The fact that it is difficult to find examples of trade blades in present times still extant in examples of these sayfs is not at all surprising, given the fact that these swords often ended up leaving the regions in trade or recycled as they became old and worn. With the advent of military campaigns, colonialism, and of course tourism, souveniers and collecting these have largely disappeared into other contexts. Even in the Sudan during the British campaigns of the 1880s, so many native weapons had been consumed by souvenier hunting that a cottage industry creating more began...many of the components for these 'native' weapons were produced in England!

Actually, despite what is found in examples in these modern times, the vestiges of the once present European examples and thier subsequent African produced counterparts certainly were at some point earlier there in some degree.
I am not sure that I can accept a sword hilt style which was established so distinctly that its form became incorporated into a religious icon and so much so that it remained unchanged for 1000 years. As we know over time styles and decoration on everything changes in most cases, even in degree with traditional items particularly in religious context, but even such symbolic instances change no matter how subtly.
We are also well aware of 'revival' styles in weaponry and atavistic application in many forms. The swords rehilted in Istanbul in the 16th century are presumed to reflect early styles of the most revered periods in early Islam.

We then consider the evolution of the cylindrical hilt which if I understand correctly developed around the 18th century and seems oriented primarily in coastal regions of Muscat. The Sultanate of Oman extended across Strait of Hormuz to Iran, regions now Pakistan (Baluchistan) and to the Zanzibar regions of SE Africa. While Portugal controlled many of these regions prior to 1650, to believe that they did not bring in European blades would not seem possible. The Omani not only were industrious merchants but maintained powerful naval control in the gulf. Ras al Khaimah had been a wealthy port since the 7th century, and trade with India and Africa extant throughout early times well into 18th century.
German blades became well established in India, North Africa, throughout Europe, the Caucusus and many regions worldwide, and by the 18th century virtually dominated most trade networks as far as that commodity. To think that Oman, one of the most powerful trade networks in many of these, would be impervious to the use of these blades is another suggestion I cannot accept.

I would point out also that the 'running wolf' mark had become so far from its origins in Passau as generally held by the late 16th century that it was used 'interpretively' by many blademaking centers, and adopted into native cultures application through later years. Its actual use in Solingen and Italy had waned by the latter 17th century, and ceased being used by then. The exceptions were use in England by Shotley Bridge makers, and the mid 18th century use by Samuel Harvey (with his initials). In the Caucusus the Chechen makers began using the marking in about the 18th century as the 'ters maymal'. At some point other native blade makers began copying the mark in North Africa as well. Much as with the well known dual crescent moons, these marks were intended to imbue magic into the blade, and seem to have been applied to that end. While price may be construed as a motive, the talismanic appeal is more than the quality/price allusion in my thinking.
These often indiscernable 'quadrapeds' are therefore essentially all interpretations of a stylized symbol whose application was never intended to be deceptive but to recall a long standing tradition in blades, from Europe into a number of other cultures.

I just wanted to reassert my views at this point and to reaffirm my understandings of this most fascinating discussion on the kattara/sayf.

[Iain]

Well said Jim, you managed to sum up my points with a lot more detail than I could have. Whether or not trade blades are present in the flexible sayfs encountered today, there is no doubt where the influence comes from. How the different, new, hilt style came into being is of course another question entirely...

Also very nice photo of the royal sayf Ibrahiim, fascinating to see that hilt style in a sayf!

[Jim McDougall]

Thank you very much Iain and as we have all agreed here, this is a fact finding mission to discover more on these swords of Oman....and I've still bveen at it, second day now going through all this stuff!!

I think I have another angle on why German blades (which seem to be the prevalent denomination) would have likely been widely used in various times.

Looking into "The Armies of the Caliphs" (Hugh Kennedy, 2001, p.173-175), there are some interesting references from the "al Suyuf wa Ajnasiha" (Swords and Thier Kinds, Ishaq al Kindi c.870AD). Al Kindi was commissioned by the Abbasid caliph Mu'tasim to complete this study.
These notes coupled with those of Friedrich Schwarzlose (Leipzig, 1888) who extracted sword terms etc. from early Arabian poetry, give some interesting insight into swords in Arabic tradition.

Many of the swords are called by names which reflect where they were produced such as Qala'i (believed Central Arabia but could be Iraq) ; Diyafi, from Iraq; Baylamani (from Yemen, possibly India); Mushrafi (Yemen or Syria).
Kennedy notes that the uncertainty of locations suggests these may have been terms for sword types rather than locations.
What is key here is that Yemen keeps predominating, and while it has been suggested that that name is colloquially applied to relatively vast area, I think it is more specific in this parlance and refers to southern Arabia.
Schwarzlose notes that swords from India were best, followed by those from Yemen made in Indian fashion "muhanned").
The references go further to say that the best swords were made in Yemen or Khurasan with lesser qualities from Kufa, Basra and at the lowest, Egypt.
It then notes Frankish (franjiya) swords but does not specify if imported or by type.

It is known that Frankish swords were exported into Andalusian Spain, but unclear whether to Arabia.

While these references are of course from the 9th century along with the Schwarzlose references which may include varying periods, the key point is that Yemen appears to have held high station in the sword production status.
Kennedy (op.cit.) notes that the most expensive swords were Yemeni, and that soldiers of the Abbasid period could easily afford Egyptian swords but that a Yemeni sword could cost up to 10 months salary. How long this esteemed reputation prevailed is hard to say, and clearly there was great variation in affordability for swords which likely continued on for centuries and following established traditions. It is noted in earlier discussions here that Yemen was a source for swords into Oman in more recent times as well, but there was another factor which may have presented more affordable blades some time before that...trade blades, mostly from Germany.
Elgood notes (p.16) that of the favored straight blades many good Genoese and Solingen blades from 16th century onward were exported to the Arab lands and India. He does note that the locally produced blades tended to be lighter in weight and the fullers more crudely drawn. This of course does favor notes by Ibrahiim toward the Omani blades over trade blades, in the case of the swords intended for the Razha. I believe that much as there are court and dress swords as opposed to combat swords, not all sayf/kattara were intended to perform Razha in the Funoon, and many were intended for regular wear.

Here I would note that not all Omani sayf/kattara must be in accord with the swords intended for the Razha, and Burton (1884) notes on these cylindrical hilted style broadswords "...is the usual shape worn by Arab gentlemen". This was observed by him in his visit to Zanzibar around 1858, and these swords are noted and illustrated in Demmin (1877) as well as Zanzibari. Burton goes on to say that these swords were for show, and quite unwieldy (he was of course a bit curmudgeonly and elitist as far as swordsmanship). I would imagine that the examples in Zanzibar carried even more of the trade blades from African sources from the Red Sea trade. Many of these blades also of course entered Yemen through Aden, and into the Hadhramaut as well as by sea back to Muscat.

I would imagine that the higher end blades were to ranking individuals, tribal leaders and wealthy merchants while trade blades were seen among the more plebian swords and rank and file. As local copying became more prevalent the marks long established among imported blades of earlier times were likely added as status or quality symbols for marketing as suggested.

The swords and heirloom blades of esteemed or high ranking individuals tend to be preserved, while lower every day weapons often do not fare as well. Most have already as mentioned earlier, gone into other contexts and are notably hard to find in our times, thus lacking as evidence to the earlier presence of these types of trade blades.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Thank you very much Iain and as we have all agreed here, this is a fact finding mission to discover more on these swords of Oman....and I've still bveen at it, second day now going through all this stuff!!

I think I have another angle on why German blades (which seem to be the prevalent denomination) would have likely been widely used in various times.

Looking into "The Armies of the Caliphs" (Hugh Kennedy, 2001, p.173-175), there are some interesting references from the "al Suyuf wa Ajnasiha" (Swords and Thier Kinds, Ishaq al Kindi c.870AD). Al Kindi was commissioned by the Abbasid caliph Mu'tasim to complete this study.
These notes coupled with those of Friedrich Schwarzlose (Leipzig, 1888) who extracted sword terms etc. from early Arabian poetry, give some interesting insight into swords in Arabic tradition.

Many of the swords are called by names which reflect where they were produced such as Qala'i (believed Central Arabia but could be Iraq) ; Diyafi, from Iraq; Baylamani (from Yemen, possibly India); Mushrafi (Yemen or Syria).
Kennedy notes that the uncertainty of locations suggests these may have been terms for sword types rather than locations.
What is key here is that Yemen keeps predominating, and while it has been suggested that that name is colloquially applied to relatively vast area, I think it is more specific in this parlance and refers to southern Arabia.
Schwarzlose notes that swords from India were best, followed by those from Yemen made in Indian fashion "muhanned").
The references go further to say that the best swords were made in Yemen or Khurasan with lesser qualities from Kufa, Basra and at the lowest, Egypt.
It then notes Frankish (franjiya) swords but does not specify if imported or by type.

It is known that Frankish swords were exported into Andalusian Spain, but unclear whether to Arabia.

While these references are of course from the 9th century along with the Schwarzlose references which may include varying periods, the key point is that Yemen appears to have held high station in the sword production status.
Kennedy (op.cit.) notes that the most expensive swords were Yemeni, and that soldiers of the Abbasid period could easily afford Egyptian swords but that a Yemeni sword could cost up to 10 months salary. How long this esteemed reputation prevailed is hard to say, and clearly there was great variation in affordability for swords which likely continued on for centuries and following established traditions. It is noted in earlier discussions here that Yemen was a source for swords into Oman in more recent times as well, but there was another factor which may have presented more affordable blades some time before that...trade blades, mostly from Germany.
Elgood notes (p.16) that of the favored straight blades many good Genoese and Solingen blades from 16th century onward were exported to the Arab lands and India. He does note that the locally produced blades tended to be lighter in weight and the fullers more crudely drawn. This of course does favor notes by Ibrahiim toward the Omani blades over trade blades, in the case of the swords intended for the Razha. I believe that much as there are court and dress swords as opposed to combat swords, not all sayf/kattara were intended to perform Razha in the Funoon, and many were intended for regular wear.

Here I would note that not all Omani sayf/kattara must be in accord with the swords intended for the Razha, and Burton (1884) notes on these cylindrical hilted style broadswords "...is the usual shape worn by Arab gentlemen". This was observed by him in his visit to Zanzibar around 1858, and these swords are noted and illustrated in Demmin (1877) as well as Zanzibari. Burton goes on to say that these swords were for show, and quite unwieldy (he was of course a bit curmudgeonly and elitist as far as swordsmanship). I would imagine that the examples in Zanzibar carried even more of the trade blades from African sources from the Red Sea trade. Many of these blades also of course entered Yemen through Aden, and into the Hadhramaut as well as by sea back to Muscat.

I would imagine that the higher end blades were to ranking individuals, tribal leaders and wealthy merchants while trade blades were seen among the more plebian swords and rank and file. As local copying became more prevalent the marks long established among imported blades of earlier times were likely added as status or quality symbols for marketing as suggested.

The swords and heirloom blades of esteemed or high ranking individuals tend to be preserved, while lower every day weapons often do not fare as well. Most have already as mentioned earlier, gone into other contexts and are notably hard to find in our times, thus lacking as evidence to the earlier presence of these types of trade blades.

Salaams Jim~ My last post ended on the note about the local name Sayf Yamani for the old stiff bladed Omani Sword and it may be that the Yemen hold clue to its manufacture or as you point out and we have seen before people pointing generally at Southern Arabia but actually meaning
part of Oman, Yemen and the Horn of Africa as one place. The Yemen were indeed famous for blade making and I consider that as a likely contender for early Sayf. Iraq for the same reasons.

I am not a great fan of Burton and I can show photos and sketches several Zanzibari dignatories in the 19th C wearing variously straight Sayf Yamani, Curved Kattara Omani, Shamshir also called Kattara and the Zanzibari Nimcha and or the Omani Khanjar.

The rest I need to look at in more detail ~

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

I have been away from this fascinating thread for a while, and spent the better part of yesterday rereading, checking sources and notes and trying to absorb the basic course of these amazing discussions. This thread has become almost 'textbook' in the serious study of an indiginous weapon form and it is outstanding to see these kinds of approaches to learning from these weapons. As we have been seeing there are several instances of focus on particular weapons in this depth, and while commending Ibrahiim on this with the kattara I would be remiss in not recognizing the amazing work done by Iain in his study of the takouba, which has now brought in the kaskara and joined by Chris.
What is so important about this is that we are virtually joining forces in these studies and recognizing the powerful connection between these weapons and thier place in the vast trade networks which are key in the development of these forms.

I would like to add a few of my own observations and perspectives in the case of the thread topic, and the kattara, and try to reestablish my understandings thus far.

I think we agree that the 'old form' of Omani sword (thank you Ibrahiim for the post with example with its silvered sheathing, the first I have seen!) is a quite old form which may reflect early types of hilt in interior Omani regions. While we can presume this style hilt may reflect Abbasid styles of the 8th century, if I understand correctly we are uncertain of the exact form used as hilts surviving are not extant and as far as I know there are no iconographic sources reflecting these hilts. It is well established that in virtually all cases as seen by the swords in Yucel, early blades survive but the mounts are almost always newer. Blades as we know were remounted and reused through many generations, while even larger numbers were probably recycled as steel was valuable.

By the latter 18th century, trade had as noted long fluorished in Oman with Muscat the key market for the Persian Gulf, and Sultan bin Ahmad allied with Great Britain in thier treaty in 1798, pledging to help protect British interests in India. Trade between Africa and Oman was active and the EIC established a trade station in the Gulf under their auspices.
I would point out that in this very time, England was having issues with the abundance of trade blades from Germany which was contested by the English makers. Many German blades began being diverted to other markets which included North Africa by the early years of the 19th century. This simply augmented already well established systems of trade blades headed there long before, but more blades undoubtedly entered the Red Sea trade and by there into Arabian networks.

The fact that it is difficult to find examples of trade blades in present times still extant in examples of these sayfs is not at all surprising, given the fact that these swords often ended up leaving the regions in trade or recycled as they became old and worn. With the advent of military campaigns, colonialism, and of course tourism, souveniers and collecting these have largely disappeared into other contexts. Even in the Sudan during the British campaigns of the 1880s, so many native weapons had been consumed by souvenier hunting that a cottage industry creating more began...many of the components for these 'native' weapons were produced in England!

Actually, despite what is found in examples in these modern times, the vestiges of the once present European examples and thier subsequent African produced counterparts certainly were at some point earlier there in some degree.
I am not sure that I can accept a sword hilt style which was established so distinctly that its form became incorporated into a religious icon and so much so that it remained unchanged for 1000 years. As we know over time styles and decoration on everything changes in most cases, even in degree with traditional items particularly in religious context, but even such symbolic instances change no matter how subtly.
We are also well aware of 'revival' styles in weaponry and atavistic application in many forms. The swords rehilted in Istanbul in the 16th century are presumed to reflect early styles of the most revered periods in early Islam.

We then consider the evolution of the cylindrical hilt which if I understand correctly developed around the 18th century and seems oriented primarily in coastal regions of Muscat. The Sultanate of Oman extended across Strait of Hormuz to Iran, regions now Pakistan (Baluchistan) and to the Zanzibar regions of SE Africa. While Portugal controlled many of these regions prior to 1650, to believe that they did not bring in European blades would not seem possible. The Omani not only were industrious merchants but maintained powerful naval control in the gulf. Ras al Khaimah had been a wealthy port since the 7th century, and trade with India and Africa extant throughout early times well into 18th century.
German blades became well established in India, North Africa, throughout Europe, the Caucusus and many regions worldwide, and by the 18th century virtually dominated most trade networks as far as that commodity. To think that Oman, one of the most powerful trade networks in many of these, would be impervious to the use of these blades is another suggestion I cannot accept.

I would point out also that the 'running wolf' mark had become so far from its origins in Passau as generally held by the late 16th century that it was used 'interpretively' by many blademaking centers, and adopted into native cultures application through later years. Its actual use in Solingen and Italy had waned by the latter 17th century, and ceased being used by then. The exceptions were use in England by Shotley Bridge makers, and the mid 18th century use by Samuel Harvey (with his initials). In the Caucusus the Chechen makers began using the marking in about the 18th century as the 'ters maymal'. At some point other native blade makers began copying the mark in North Africa as well. Much as with the well known dual crescent moons, these marks were intended to imbue magic into the blade, and seem to have been applied to that end. While price may be construed as a motive, the talismanic appeal is more than the quality/price allusion in my thinking.
These often indiscernable 'quadrapeds' are therefore essentially all interpretations of a stylized symbol whose application was never intended to be deceptive but to recall a long standing tradition in blades, from Europe into a number of other cultures.

I just wanted to reassert my views at this point and to reaffirm my understandings of this most fascinating discussion on the kattara/sayf.

Salaams Jim~ Thank you for your time and effort researching and ploughing through my posts... I hope this one finds you well on Route 66 . Your reply is, as ever, absolutely excellent.

"The straight sword is The Sayf/ The curved sword is Kattara".


I surround myself with antique maps of the region and a backdrop of 20 or 30 swords, daggers and old muskets in the hope of gleaning some support and inspiration so with a cup of Arabic coffee I set down my defence.. though of course bearing in mind that thanks to you and Iain and others this has become a Forum epic and hopefully an example as you say of cooperation in cracking this difficult problem.

As a preamble I just want to clarify that the ornate Sayf hilt was generated at about the same time as the Al Bu Saaiid dynasty started and in parallel with or shortly after the design of the Royal Khanjar; seen at my thread of that name. It can be seen on the drawing of Sultan Bargash much later in the late 19th C at # 25 just before he was deposed at Zanzibar by the British and exiled to St. Helena. The fancy design appears to follow and cover the old design (interestingly not replacing it) with added filigree etc etc. Therein is a clue to the long lasting and honorific nature of the beast.

The Omani Sayf.

Certainly no one has been able to pinpoint a 751AD Sayf therefore we rely upon the similarities between the Abbasid (Military Museum Istanbul) and what we think is the Omani Sayf compared and as outlined in my early post # 5.The hilt with turned down quillons and the Islamic geometry on Pommel and handle constructed in the same way as the Abbasid and heralded through the Funoon "the unwritten form" a pageant of music song and dance enacted down the ages to which the only similarity that I can think of in Western style is Ring a Ring of Roses( the enactment of the Black Death plague that swept through Europe" or November the 5th Guy Fawks. (Parliamentary Gunpowder Plot) and the Devonish Furry Dance. The tradition of Funoon made more powerful by it being linked absolutely to the style of religion (and therefore learning, history, psyche and all in Oman from 751 AD. The sword dance is a section on its own specific firstly to the Parade(Razha) and secondly the mimic fighting with 2 opponents (alyaalha). I wish that someone had written a book at the time about this performance describing the Terrs and Shield being used… but that was the point of the tradition…The unwritten form. It was enacted not just once or twice but every year at both religious festivals(Eid) the equivalent importance to Western Christmas and Easter and at every wedding and big public event "ad in finitum" until today. The sword used with the Terrs buckler shield was the Old Omani Battle Sayf… The "Sayf wa Terrs"

Your note quote "The swords rehilted in Istanbul in the 16th century are presumed to reflect early styles of the most revered periods in early Islam." unquote Scholars tend to tread lightly on this note and I agree that it is tenuous… especially when trying to decide on the style of the Sword of the Prophet and when those were actually produced whether original around 630 AD or later honorific productions. Good examples of early blade form at The Military Museum Istanbul at ….Military Museum Pictures by Erlikhan #11 bottom two photos which compare well with the early Omani Sayf in eleven categories. This sword came to the Othmanlis via The Mamluke and hence the Abbasids(in Oman in the 8th C.) who probably took it from the Greek form.

As you point out quote ~ "in virtually all cases as seen by the swords in Yucel, early blades survive but the mounts are almost always newer". Unquote: emphasis in Omans case on "almost always".

People perceive Oman then as an open book however it was not at all open despite the illusion that Muscat and Sohar were burgeoning with international trade and freedom of ideas and thought… Oman was a peculiar half open half shut (at best) environment essentially split in half lengthways with a coastal belt and an interior often at war with each other and with 2 capitals. It was more or less, on and off, 2 different countries for hundreds of years. Before 1970 it was like stepping back 1000 years or more..They still used abu futtila …Slavery only 10 or 15 years before that was "normal routine." There were no roads, hospitals, clinics, proper doctors, nurses or schools…There was no electricity or piped water. The entire place in western terms was like somewhere totally mediaeval Arabia.
It had been that way for centuries.
Against that backdrop I urge you to consider the remoteness of Oman and within that the reluctance for changing something that worked pretty well and as Antony North points out in his Islamic Arms publication how weapons froze for incredibly long periods and in this case since with the old Sayf I believe from 751 AD to the 18th C and on through the 19th and early 20th !

The second and important reason for swallowing that theory is because of the link to the Ibathi style and linking this to my earlier paragraph on the Funoon Tradition. This after all was the weapon(with terrs) that freed Oman and heralded in the new religion. It was therefore heraldic by definition though the publication on Heraldic Symbols insist on marked shields (or flags) as the only way to show this. I argue that in the same way the cross formed by the western knights swords were both defensive and religious by definition so too is the heraldic nature of the hilt of the Old Omani Sayf. Islamic shaped pommel and octagonal grip with turned down quillons.
In essence it was not only traditional but heraldic thereby doubly frozen into the Omani system and psyche.

Treatise with everyone. Oman was expert at playing both ends off against the middle especially with the French and British. The situation for placing a political and trade envoy into Muscat was a hilarious helter skelter of yes you can no you can't with both sides (French and British) unable to do so until the turn of the 20th Century! This was complicated not least by the Napoleonic wars and the situation of British controlled India and the sub ownership of Zanzibar up to its subsequent break up in the late 19th C. This was the period leading through the Great Game involving Afghanistan Persia et al. Oman played a game of see saw with all interested parties and all were frustrated until very late in the proceedings. For a bewildering walk through of events read Dr. Sheikh Sultan bin Qasimi "The French and British in the Indian Ocean" during those three centuries 17, 18 and 19. In those days this letter would take a month to get to Bombay India, Bushire or Zanzibar and two months to return so that events superceded letter content and everything changed all the time thereby outdating decisions taken by both sides in a ridiculous timetable of blundering inefficiency.

Your well made points on trade blades are agreed as therein lies the puzzle.

The Portuguese. The evolution of the cylindrical hilt. Caucas Blades.

The Portuguese entered the Indian Ocean in late 15th C in search of Slaves Gold Silver and Mercenaries. Unable to find the fabled land of Prester John they eventually recruited Indian fighters with Indian weapons to do their bidding. Their style of political and religious fervor at the time led to atrocities up and down the length and breadth of the Indian ocean and in Oman they sacked Sohar with the same vigour. For whatever reasons they hated Muslims and to consider why Oman did not adopt Portuguese weapons that should rank highly. ( plus their Indian mercenaries used a lot of Indian weapons) I have had a few examples of Portuguese swords in the rapier style from that period now given to friends and I await their pictures but they are typical Portuguese with script down the blades belonging to Count such and such etc also seen in museums here but not the Omani type at all… totally different. The Portuguese legacy in Oman is in the Portuguese built fortresses Mirani, Jelali and Sohar Forts in architecture but not in bladed weapons.

The reasons why are probably threefold..viz;
1. The Omanis hated them.
2. The weapons were not to their style and either too complicated or in fact Indian.
3. They already had a weapon system so why fix it if it wasn’t broke?

As a glaring example of Omani indifference to foreign styles they had been doing business and trade with India for centuries. Earlier, Sohar, was the biggest port on the planet. Whilst style of dress jewellery and architecture was influenced by India on the coast nothing permeated the interior and no weapons of Indian extraction (except gunpowder weapons) entered the equation. The Omanis had been staring at Indian blades for centuries much longer than any other system… Omanis even settled in Goa and on the Malibar coast and Indian people on the Oman coast. There are, however, no blade influences except the other way round ie Khanjar Omani to Khanjar Indian. Oman did via the design of the Royal Khanjar adopt an Indian style hilt over an Omani one… nothing else.

The Shotley Bridge Swords. Thank you for pointing out the SH mark with the Running Fox… Whilst the link with the Solingen or Passau Woolf is not lost on me the animal is different ~ Fox form as opposed to Woolf. At the same time I agree that Woolf marks on a blade would be construed as Talismanic i.e. protecting the user from the evil rabid Woolf which roamed here but in so being put on a blade that automatically pushed a little more quality therefore value onto the price.

The evolution of the cylindrical hilt. Actually a flat cylindrical form, which, if dissected has a cuff, a grip and a pommel. The shape is arched. It often has a hole for a wrist strap in the pommel. No Quillons. It has all the attributes of the former hilt except quillons… and the obvious difference to long shape needed for a long blade.

Quote "We then consider the evolution of the cylindrical hilt which if I understand correctly developed around the 18th century and seems oriented primarily in coastal regions of Muscat" Unquote.

I can find no reason why it was developed in Muscat as opposed to say the interior at Nizwa. Nizwa was the seat of Ibathi teachings therefore would it not be at Ibathi central where a new system developed? Where Muscat was concerned it is plausible that ship styled weapons in the long and shorter curved variety influenced Omani weaponry such as the Persian Shamshir and the Zanzibar variant or curved swords that somehow all became called Kattara in Oman. The long curved Kattara has the identical hilt to the Long Sayf.. Did they appear at the same time? We seem to assume the straight came first and the hilt transferred to the curved as it entered use...Maybe.

Caucaz blades I agree on all things including their appearance on Red Sea, Zanzibar and Yemen variants and used on the Oman coast on dhows etc. I don’t know if they affect the straight Omani Sayf.. not in my opinion.

In conclusion I suggest that the Short Omani Battle Sword Sayf eminates from the 751AD date as noted but that the changeover to the Long Flexible Sayf though not yet proven is perhaps as outlined below and at #208;

The hypothesis looks a bit like this ~ Oman had an old battle sword but in about the 18thC another sword style caught their attention; perhaps the Mamluke derivative coming down the Red Sea used in Yemen (Omans southern neighbour and or Algeria and Saudia etc)~Perhaps the Old Sword had outlived its purpose and became redundant because no one could make them anymore or gunpowder had made them redundant. Thus it entered the arena and was modified for flexibility and lightness and given the long hilt treatment.

The question as to a European Trade Blade import or influence on the flexible long Sayf is still unknown.
The fact regarding the local name for the old Sayf as Sayf Yamani gnaws away in the background..

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

Salaams all,

Detail you cannot see at #25 on this thread is the style of hilt on the Sultan Bargash Old Omani Sayf however~ heres one~ From the Book by Richardson and Dorr; "The Craft Heritage of Oman" ~ Forum please note the identical style on the Royal Khanjar at the thread "The Omani Khanjar"#1 by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Salaams All ~ Note to Library; "The Al Bu Saidi Dynasty" start date of circa 1744 was previously considered as a possible start date on the sa'idiyyah hilt; royal khanjar and royal old omani battle sword iconic hilt. This is wide of the actual mark since it seems that the likely designer was the wife of the ruler who was in power from 1806 (though there were 2 shared years previous) to 1856. ~ Sultan Said's second wife Binti Irich Mirza who was Persian and also called "Sheherazade" and it appears she designed the hilt. That puts the design date at no earlier than the marriage in about 1850.
Thus the dates of both hilts are revised to Circa 1850.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

[Iain]

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

Salaams All ~ Note to Library; "The Al Bu Saidi Dynasty" start date of circa 1744 was previously considered as a possible start date on the sa'idiyyah hilt; royal khanjar and royal old omani battle sword iconic hilt. This is wide of the actual mark since it seems that the likely designer was the wife of the ruler who was in power from 1806 (though there were 2 shared years previous) to 1856. ~ Sultan Said's second wife Binti Irich Mirza who was Persian and also called "Sheherazade" and it appears she designed the hilt. That puts the design date at no earlier than the marriage in about 1850.
Thus the dates of both hilts are revised to Circa 1850.

Regards,
Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Interesting, can I ask why it is assumed the designer was the wife?

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Salaams Iain ~This is almost impossible to prove beyond doubt therefor I begin by saying that ~"It is said that"~ It seems she(Sheherazad) was bored with the usual khanjar form and using her Persian design ideas created what I can only describe as an Indo Persian hilt. Detail is scant since this lady seems to have run off with her lover back to Persia(aprox 1832) and when she was married only seemed interested in gallavanting about like a wild thing horseriding and so forth.(seems reasonable to me!) The Sultan(Bin Sayf) meanwhile went on to sire something like 36 children with other wives (none with her) though it looks like nearer 50 or 60, however, 36 survived his death in 1856

Regards Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Note~ (Sayyid) Said bin Sultan Al-Said (Arabic: سعيد بن سلطان‎, Sa‘id bin Sulṭān) (June 5, 1797 - October 19, 1856) was Sultan of Muscat and Oman from November 20, 1804 to June 4, 1856. He became joint ruler of the country along with his brother Salim on the death of their father, Sultan bin Ahmad, in 1804. Said deprived his brother of joint rule on September 14, 1806.

In 1837, he conquered the town of Mombasa, Kenya. In 1840, Said bin Sultan moved his capital from Muscat, Oman, to Stone Town, Zanzibar. In 1840, he sent a ship to the United States in an attempt to establish a trading relationship.

Upon Said's death in 1856, his realm was divided: his third son, Thuwaini bin Said, became the Sultan of Muscat and Oman; and his sixth son, Sayyid Majid bin Said, became the Sultan of Zanzibar.

The National Museum of Oman in Muscat still houses numerous items of silverware and other possessions that belonged to Said.

[Iain]

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

Salaams Iain ~This is almost impossible to prove beyond doubt therefor I begin by saying that ~"It is said that"~ It seems she(Sheherazad) was bored with the usual khanjar form and using her Persian design ideas created what I can only describe as an Indo Persian hilt. Detail is scant since this lady seems to have run off with her lover back to Persia(aprox 1832) and when she was married only seemed interested in gallavanting about like a wild thing horseriding and so forth.(seems reasonable to me!) The Sultan(Bin Sayf) meanwhile went on to sire something like 36 children with other wives (none with her) though it looks like nearer 50 or 60, however, 36 survived his death in 1856

Regards Ibrahiim al Balooshi.

Thanks for the clarification Ibrahiim. So this is basically one of those "legend has it" type of things?